Victim in Pasco hate crime had gun, decided not to use it

[texanjoker]

Anyone remember the guys going around firing paintball guns at people and filming it? The sad fact is I would probably have returned fire. They "pop" and really hurt and if I saw a red splat where I was hurting I would count myself dead and return fire. A pellet gun on the other hand is, or at least can be, a lethal weapon; ask the mafia.

I would not want to use lethal force on somebody with a paint ball. IF one were to use lethal force against a paintball marker, you better able to clearly articulate why you did. We carried the pepperballs (harder then normal paint balls and full of pepper spray in a powder). The company guarantees that they are non lethal if you use their equipment which is their expensive paint ball launcher. It is no different then a store bought marker, just you pay a lot more for the guarantee of it being non lethal. I have shot many a crook with these and nobody ever required anything more then a wash down of the pepper powder.
<SNIP>

If you're not familiar with the case I cited, there were teenagers in the Plano area (IIRC) that were rolling around at night in their car. They would see a jogger or somebody walking home and pull up next to them at night, open fire while recording the action. Having seen the videos it was a significant "pop", "pop", "pop" and the victims doubling over in pain. So let me ask, if with your experience, a car load of teenagers pull up next to you at night stick the barrel of a weapon out the window and open fire at you. Are you going to wait and see if you survive the hits (and yes I have been hit with paint balls in and out of padding, and have had significant bruising with padding) or even wait to get hit before you decide to defend yourself? I bet if one of the victims had killed one of the miscreants, the video alone would have exonerated them.

I would have to have that happen to know how I would respond. It would come down to what I thought was happening at the time, and what fear or lack of fear I might be facing. If I believed it was a gun, then lethal force could be used. If I knew it was a paint ball, I would not. I do not personally believe being shot at or with a paint ball warrants using lethal force. To me paint ball and gun fire do not sound the same. I have played paint ball and we trained with it a lot working k9s. I have also been shot at by criminals and to me they are very different sounds. We had a series like that before as well. It was a pain. In CA law it was merely a battery, and not even a bookable offense in jail. Everybody was glad when they finally caught the kids.

[Dave2]

If you're not familiar with the case I cited, there were teenagers in the Plano area (IIRC) that were rolling around at night in their car. They would see a jogger or somebody walking home and pull up next to them at night, open fire while recording the action. Having seen the videos it was a significant "pop", "pop", "pop" and the victims doubling over in pain. So let me ask, if with your experience, a car load of teenagers pull up next to you at night stick the barrel of a weapon out the window and open fire at you. Are you going to wait and see if you survive the hits (and yes I have been hit with paint balls in and out of padding, and have had significant bruising with padding) or even wait to get hit before you decide to defend yourself? I bet if one of the victims had killed one of the miscreants, the video alone would have exonerated them.

Geez, what is that, "suicide by youtube"? Just when you think they can't get any dumber...

[VMI77]

Just making sure I have this correct...in Texas, a pellet gun would be considered a deadly weapon?

I dunno', HP. At that time of night/morning and in that setting, a gun is a gun.....

That's the thing.... a lot of pellet guns look like a real firearm, even fairly up close. And even if you were to take the time to squint at the muzzle to try and see what it was, under duress how many of us would be able to tell the difference at a quick glance between a .22" aperture and a .177" aperture? I'm not waiting to find out. I'm not even waiting to see what comes out if he shoots first. I'm not going to give him the opportunity to shoot first.

That pellet gun is a threat of deadly force, whether or not it is actually deadly. The law permits me to respond with deadly force. I will.

Code: Select all

TPC § 9.01.  DEFINITIONS.  In this chapter:
(1)  .....
(2)  .....
(3)  "Deadly force" means force that is intended or known by the actor to cause, or in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing, death or serious bodily injury.

Code: Select all

§ 1.07. DEFINITIONS.  (a) In this code:                                     
      (1)  .....
      (2)  .....
      (3)  .....
      (4)  .....
      (5)  .....                           
      (6)  .....
      (7)  .....
      (8)  "Bodily injury" means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.

A pellet gun is fully capable of producing physical pain, blindness, surgical intervention, and even death. Pull one on somebody in order to coerce them by means of a threat of deadly force, or by actually pulling the trigger which IS deadly force, and nobody will have the right to blame you if you take that person out. I'm not havin' any of it. Pull a pellet gun on me, and I will shoot at you. With luck, you'll live. At least I'll call 911 and ask for an ambulance for you, which is more than you would have done for me.

No pity from me on this.

Uhhhhh.....how would I know that .17 barrel wouldn't be expelling something like this: http://www.hornady.com/store/17-HMR

[Purplehood]

The CHL made the right choice for himself. Fortunately it did not turn out any worse than it did.
I am glad that he chose discretion. It proves to the members of the CHL-choir that not all of us are madmen/women looking for an opportunity to shoot.

[texanjoker]

If you're not familiar with the case I cited, there were teenagers in the Plano area (IIRC) that were rolling around at night in their car. They would see a jogger or somebody walking home and pull up next to them at night, open fire while recording the action. Having seen the videos it was a significant "pop", "pop", "pop" and the victims doubling over in pain. So let me ask, if with your experience, a car load of teenagers pull up next to you at night stick the barrel of a weapon out the window and open fire at you. Are you going to wait and see if you survive the hits (and yes I have been hit with paint balls in and out of padding, and have had significant bruising with padding) or even wait to get hit before you decide to defend yourself? I bet if one of the victims had killed one of the miscreants, the video alone would have exonerated them.

Geez, what is that, "suicide by youtube"? Just when you think they can't get any dumber...

I realize it was at night. When I took the TX chl that guy said you can pretty much shoot anybody at night in TX and used graffiti as an example. We debated that heavily because I disagree with that type of statement as it could get somebody into legal trouble. I stand by my statement above. W/O being in that position, and not knowing what your feelings are at that exact moment in time, you do not know whether you would be fearing for your safety, perceive that as a gun, ect. Nobody knows if they can even use deadly force until faced with it the first time as well. Just because you can possibly shoot somebody, you have to live with it. I am not going to knowingly shoot somebody with a paint ball because I personally do not consider that a lethal threat. If I had shot every person that I could have in police work over the past 20 years I'd be a mass murderer. I pray to God I, nor any of my partners or anybody in here is ever in that position as described in this case.

[G26ster]

I realize it was at night. When I took the TX chl that guy said you can pretty much shoot anybody at night in TX and used graffiti as an example. We debated that heavily because I disagree with that type of statement as it could get somebody into legal trouble. I stand by my statement above. W/O being in that position, and not knowing what your feelings are at that exact moment in time, you do not know whether you would be fearing for your safety, perceive that as a gun, ect. Nobody knows if they can even use deadly force until faced with it the first time as well. Just because you can possibly shoot somebody, you have to live with it. I am not going to knowingly shoot somebody with a paint ball because I personally do not consider that a lethal threat. If I had shot every person that I could have in police work over the past 20 years I'd be a mass murderer. I pray to God I, nor any of my partners or anybody in here is ever in that position as described in this case.

The CHL made the right choice for himself. Fortunately it did not turn out any worse than it did.
I am glad that he chose discretion. It proves to the members of the CHL-choir that not all of us are madmen/women looking for an opportunity to shoot.

[Dragonfighter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZZ9PpXFHjQ

[recaffeination]

The CHL made the right choice for himself. Fortunately it did not turn out any worse than it did.
I am glad that he chose discretion. It proves to the members of the CHL-choir that not all of us are madmen/women looking for an opportunity to shoot.

It could have turned out much worse but it seems he realized it was an airgun and made the decision not to use his firearm. Maybe he figured the risk was better than ending up like Zimmerman.

[goose]

The CHL made the right choice for himself. Fortunately it did not turn out any worse than it did.

Agreed.

I probably would have chosen to shoot for fear of what escalation would take place if I was incapacitated. He was lucky that the bad guy only wanted to use his CO2 pistol. And that the BBs hadn't hit an eye, temple, etc. That same bad guy could have stomped him into the ground and removed his ability to fight back later. Even if I knew it was a CO2 pistol, I think I would have drawn and if I wasn't looking at the back of a fleeing person when the sights got lined up it might have ended differently.

It is tough to decide if someone else should shoot more or shoot less. I fear having to make that call. I hope my fear keeps me thinking and mentally exercising.

[threoh8]

Just making sure I have this correct...in Texas, a pellet gun would be considered a deadly weapon?

Pellet guns can be used to hurt or kill:

http://www.khou.com/news/crime/Charges- ... 89011.html

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/9186324/

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/05/22/ ... ommate-18/

[Laneman]

A pellet gun can definitely kill a person. A friend of mine had nuisance whitetail deer eating his shrubs on his neighborhood front lawn. One night he took out his one pump German pellet gun like an earlier poster mentioned. A large whitetail buck was on his lawn eating a shrub. He planned to sting it with the pellet gun so it would go away. When he shot it in the thick part of the neck, it laid over and died on his lawn. Didn't even run. I have no doubt that deadly force would have been justified in this case (not against the deer, against the dude with the pellet gun ).

[cdalgo79]

When I was 9 years old I was shot by a. 177 Cal pellet. It lodged 1/8" from my brain
I los!t my left eye and now have a prosthetic. Dr said 1 foot closer or 1 more pumping would
have been dead.