First Aid after an encounter

[DaveB]

CC

Religion has nothing to do with the discussion, it is therefore irrelevant. If you want to help someone that just tried to kill your 9 year old daughter, you are a better man than I am. We're also not talking about shooting an unconscious person, we are talking about an aggressive assailant.

Everything I said is relevant, right or wrong, you will lose everything you own if you have to shoot someone in self defense. Especially if you are not wealthy, like most of us here. As far as free defense, he is going to have at least one attorney given to him, and If I can't afford an attorney, more than likely I am going to get someone fresh out of school that hates guns to begin with. And because I am the one that shot the guy, the DA is automatically going to make me the guilty party before it ever gets to court.

I am also quite sure that I am going to have more things on my mind than giving aid to the enemy right after I have to shoot.

As far as "subjective theory of value", I guess I'm not understanding what it has to do with anything. I will sell every thing I own to protect me and keep my family from losing a husband/father if that is what it takes. Who wouldn't? And yes, if you can afford a better attorney than the other side, you have a much better chance of not losing your freedom. I'm sure that the jury is going to feel so much better about you trying to save the life of the thug, after all, you are the one that shot him for the selfish act of living.

[Dan W]

I am curious just how the Nebraska "Good Samaritan" laws would protect those acting in self defense if after the threat is stopped they choose to render first aid.

25-21,186. Emergency care at scene of emergency; persons relieved of civil liability, when.

No person who renders emergency care at the scene of an accident or other emergency gratuitously, shall be held liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or omission by such person in rendering the emergency care or as a result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for medical treatment or care for the injured person.
Source:Laws 1961, c. 110, § 1, p. 349; Laws 1971, LB 458, § 1; R.S.1943, (1979), § 25-1152.

Annotations

    This section does not apply to a police officer responding to the scene of an automobile accident because his conduct was not gratuitous. Drake v. Drake, 260 Neb. 530, 618 N.W.2d 650 (2000).

 

[unfy]

Hmmmm

Less aggresive discussion towards each other would be nice .  Points can be made (and have been nicely by all involved) without getting too argumentive hehehe.  You both are making good points btw.

This section does not apply to a police officer responding to the scene of an automobile accident because his conduct was not gratuitous.

By shooting the other guy, am i no longer there gratuitous ?

If I watch someone shoot a bad guy and then render first aid --- i can see good samaritan law coming into effect.  If I pulled the trigger... I dunno ?

[y0diggity]

Wow. I have to say this is truly an amazing discussion. Both sides have been represented tremendously. As a new CCW holder, it's brought to bear a lot of new questions for me. I do realize that the moment my gun comes into play in any way whatsoever, my life will never be the same, but to consider a topic like this makes it an even more complex situation.
I'm glad it was brought up and I hope you all continue to research and discuss it further as it's very educational to a newbie like myself to find out more about law as well as what some of you, more veteran, CCW holders think.

[armed and humorous]

Tough call both on the legal and ethical fronts.  My opinion:  if you have stopped the threat, and the perpetrator is still alive, rendering first aid might be the best option both legally and morally.  On the other hand, if the SOB just killed or wounded someone close to me before I brought him down, it would be difficult to stop shooting before my ammo was gone, threat or no threat.

[CitizenClark]

Hmmmm

Less aggresive discussion towards each other would be nice .  Points can be made (and have been nicely by all involved) without getting too argumentive hehehe.

Point taken. My bad.

  You both are making good points btw.


By shooting the other guy, am i no longer there gratuitous ?

If I watch someone shoot a bad guy and then render first aid --- i can see good samaritan law coming into effect.  If I pulled the trigger... I dunno ?

I haven't done any research on this area of the law, so this is just me shooting from the hip, but I wouldn't think it would make a huge difference, assuming that the shoot was a lawful exercise of defensive deadly force.

Generally speaking, as a member of the public I don't owe anyone a duty to render aid to them unless I have voluntarily assumed that duty. However, if I were to unlawfully come along and shove you off of a bridge, I might then have a duty to fish you out, to mitigate the effects of the injury that I've caused you. Likewise, if I shoot a person unlawfully, it is sure might help me if I can show later that I immediately acted to mitigate the harm from my bad act. I think this is why people here are instinctively saying, "Whoa, I'm not going to render aid because then it looks like I think I did something wrong and have to make up for it." I get that, and it is a valid concern.

What I am saying is that rendering first aid is probably going to help you if you are defending against criminal charges, because it would support the inference that you weren't "out to kill this guy," but shot him in defense and switched modes once defense was no longer necessary. If it was a legitimate shoot, I don't think there is any duty--as a matter of justice--to provide aid. I just think it could help you avoid criminal charges, which to me is the more important issue. Rendering first aid to a person you just shot might support the inference that you thought you made a mistake, but it could also support the inference that you are a good person who bore no malice in your heart towards your attacker.