The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 55

Thread: purely hypothetical

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,879

    Default purely hypothetical

    This is not meant to be political, racist or sexist. Please keep this in mind as the discussion progresses.

    Two people are having a fight. They are throwing punches, kicking, elbowing, ETC. One eventually begins to gain the upper hand. The person on the losing end happens to be carrying a weapon. At what point are they justified in using it?

    Would they be justified if the person winning the fight was a relative of yours?-Paul
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  2. #2
    Senior Member BonMallari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    LV/CenTex/Idaho
    Posts
    12,854

    Default

    here is my opinion on your hypothetical...if you get into a fight you are in it to win it or you have no business fighting....once a weapon is drawn the stakes just got raised....

    of course if you pull a weapon on Chuck Norris you will die....

    there is one thing you left out of your hypothetical....WHO STARTED THE FIGHT
    All my Exes live in Texas

    Quote Originally Posted by lanse brown View Post
    A few things that I learned still ring true. "Lanse when you get a gift, say thank you and walk away. When you get a screwing walk away. You are going to get a lot more screwings than gifts"

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BonMallari View Post
    here is my opinion on your hypothetical...if you get into a fight you are in it to win it or you have no business fighting....once a weapon is drawn the stakes just got raised....

    of course if you pull a weapon on Chuck Norris you will die....

    there is one thing you left out of your hypothetical....WHO STARTED THE FIGHT
    I didn't think that really mattered, but for the purposes of discussion consider both scenarios. -Paul
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  4. #4
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    This is not meant to be political, racist or sexist. Please keep this in mind as the discussion progresses.

    Two people are having a fight. They are throwing punches, kicking, elbowing, ETC. One eventually begins to gain the upper hand. The person on the losing end happens to be carrying a weapon. At what point are they justified in using it?

    Would they be justified if the person winning the fight was a relative of yours?-Paul
    It would depend on the race of each (ask Jesse and Al).
    I guess it would depend on what the laws were in the state that this occurred.
    If laws are violated, your "hypothetical" is incomplete.

    Like I said in an earlier thread, Holder is using the event as an attack on "Castle Doctrine," "Stand Your Ground" and gun ownership in general.

  5. #5
    Senior Member copterdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NW IL
    Posts
    2,507

    Default

    If mutual combatants are engaged in a fight, which one is "winning" has nothing to do with whether or not it's justifiable as self defense to apply deadly force.

    There is a difference between mutual combat and battery.

    Just because someone is getting beat up, doesn't mean that they are a willing combatant.
    Just because someone is fighting back, doesn't mean that they are a willing combatant.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    This is not meant to be political, racist or sexist. Please keep this in mind as the discussion progresses.

    Two people are having a fight. They are throwing punches, kicking, elbowing, ETC. One eventually begins to gain the upper hand. The person on the losing end happens to be carrying a weapon. At what point are they justified in using it?

    Would they be justified if the person winning the fight was a relative of yours?-Paul
    Paul, let me expand of Bonm's point. I find a person hunting on my farm and inform him that he is not allowed to hunt on my farm. Instead of leaving as I request, he refuses and an argument ensues. I find myself in a fight and wind up shooting him. Do you think it matters whether I am black and he is white or vise versa? Would you expect me to be charged? Would YOU charge me?

    Now same scenario but the person shoots me. Would you expect the person to be charged? Would YOU charge the person? Same scenario but different circumstances. Now what are YOUR thoughts. I think you know what mine are.

    Your hypothetical is about the same as a basketball player making a goal and the end of a game from half court. Now who do you think won the game?
    Last edited by caryalsobrook; 07-18-2013 at 10:20 AM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member copterdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NW IL
    Posts
    2,507

    Default

    And it really doesn't matter who's action(s) "started it" either.

    Some states have laws against provocation.
    But, provocation doesn't authorize the provoked to apply deadly force either.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    428

    Default

    what part of the country to do folks live in where fights happen all the time? Fighting is low class and ignorant. We should stop acting like fighting is cool, and throwing a punch makes you a man. I will never throw a punch at anybody for any reason. If a punch is thrown at me, well, I am a CWP holder and I just got assaulted, try to figure how this is going to end.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,319

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    This is not meant to be political, racist or sexist. Please keep this in mind as the discussion progresses.

    Two people are having a fight. They are throwing punches, kicking, elbowing, ETC. One eventually begins to gain the upper hand. The person on the losing end happens to be carrying a weapon. At what point are they justified in using it?

    It might be meaningless who started the fight. Is the person who threw the first blow necessarily always the one who "started the fight?" Or could a verbal threat, "I'm going to kill you," be enough to say that person started the fight?

    At what point does one of the fighters believe that his life is at risk? As an example, is one fighter choking the other and the one being choked believes that the choking will be fatal? If the one being choked has the weapon, at what point is he justified in using it? If the one being choked does not have the weapon, I think the question is moot. He's going to be the dead guy in the end.


    Would they be justified if the person winning the fight was a relative of yours?-Paul
    Is it not possible for any family to have a slimeball in their group? I haven't seen any in my own family ... some grumpy or opinionated, but none violent. I had an alcoholic uncle who could get very mean when drinking. When drunk, it's possible he could have provoked someone to the point of killing him. My family is very large (my mother was one of 12 children), so there are members of my family that I barely know.

    I would think that knowing whether the character of the individuals would be pertinent to knowing the guilt or innocence. There are some people who have a short fuse. There are some people who do not react well under stress. If we can use a defense of "irrestible impulse" or "crime of passion", how would fear for your life differ greatly from that? Is extreme fear comparable to temporary insanity? None of us is immune from having a stupid moment even when we're not under severe stress.

    So, I have no answer to such a vague scenario. The devil is in the details. It doesn't matter what the ethnic origins of the fighters are. It IS their character that counts.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Daniel J Simoens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    DePere, WI
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    back in the day, fights were over when one person went to the ground.
    That's my boy "Blue"!!!! Flyin High in the Passenger Side x Katie May of Belgrade

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •