Q re the right of deadly self defense

[JDay]

Pretty much. Deadly force is an option to stop/prevent a rape, too.

Deadly force is a legal option to stop any felony in progress.

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE
TITLE 8. OF CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
CHAPTER 1. HOMICIDE

197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was the assailant or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed; or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.


198. A bare fear of the commission of any of the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 197, to prevent which homicide may be lawfully committed, is not sufficient to justify it. But the circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person, and the party killing must have acted under the influence of such fears alone.


198.5. Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family orhousehold, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.
As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury.

[mroels]

I kind of agree with professorhard. If i'm walking down the street with my wife and some banger grabs her rear, he will lose his hand. Sexual assault of any kind is unacceptable, and if someone is stupid enough to do it in front of other people is probably crazy. I fear crazy people with my life, and I will act with a level of aggression that some people might consider too harsh. But after all the aggression of your actions will dictate your success. I mean if a guy does this to a girl in front of the girl's significant other then it has nothing to do with sex really, it's just a indirect provocation.

Then there is no right to shoot. No articulated threat to life means that a shoot would be homicide, or manslaughter.

However, would I draw a gun in this scenario? No. Guy lays a hand on my wife, I lay my hands on his. I might not have the right to shoot but I still have the right to defend my wife's person. And if I don't then call me a criminal.

Honestly, I'm not trying to be a internet tough guy. In fact I was in this situation not too long ago. Granted the guys weren't gang banger types, but rather college jocks. Guys were following us down the street, whistling and crap like that. We ignored them, they closed the distance. One of them tried to pass on my wife's side and kind of swatted her breast. I did not hesitate to act. My wife immediately called 911. Result 2-1 in my favor..not meaning I had buddies but rather faced three off them, incapacitated 2 before the 3rd knocked me out from behind. Two guys I got both needed medical treatment for injuries. They wanted to press charges but cops advised them against it telling them that just because they got hurt worse than me didn't mean they were in the right. I had a bad concussion for a week.

Do I realise that I probably escalated things worse than if I would've just said something like "c'mon guys that's my wife" and kept moving, sure. But at some point you have to take a stand. This isn't about pride or anything like that...but when common decency is gone and my family's violated like that there is no reasonable explanation for me to not act. However, that being said had I killed one or more of them with my hands, seeing as to how it was a 3-1 fight my legal stand point would have been much better than if I had drawn a gun and had to shoot.

Sad thing is, would they have drawn a gun, seeing as how upstanding citizens in CA can't ccw, I would've been dead like the husband in the OP.

[Brooke]

Tough call, but if you carry a CCW license you should already know the answer to the question.

No CCW here, and not likely in Sonoma County. Just curious about a situation I see as more common that a straight armed attack.

It's just hard to know what Mr. Toste (the vic in SR) could have done.

Brooke, is it possible for you to be a dick? Just curious.

You mean, to the thugs?

[MT1]

So for those that have not caught on yet - he was shot and killed by the gangbangers after he verbally protested them accosting the women in his group - might want to think real hard about what constitutes a real threat.

[Brooke]

So for those that have not caught on yet - he was shot and killed by the gangbangers after he verbally protested them accosting the women in his group - might want to think real hard about what constitutes a real threat.

Thanks. Sorry for not being clearer. Well put.

[Greg-Dawg]

Brooke, take a self-defense handgun course and get back to your question.

There's nothing like first hand experience, than inquiring from Internet gurus.

[berto]

So for those that have not caught on yet - he was shot and killed by the gangbangers after he verbally protested them accosting the women in his group - might want to think real hard about what constitutes a real threat.

Truth. 3-1 (as an example, not a magic number) with fists can get you seriously injured or killed. There were groups of thugs that would hang out in North Beach in SF and harass couples that walked by. The cowards would grope the woman to provoke her man into a fight in which they would inflict serious damage on the guy.

3-1 might be a questionable shoot against unarmed victims(to the shooters knowledge) sure to be called choir boys after the fact but brandishing with the willingness to fire if one of the thugs reaches may be the best course of action in some circumstances. It's a tough situation to be in and can be unavoidable.

[vwynn]

Bust out a nice surefire light n blind them while you and your lady run away.

Living in California.. you should know that California laws are more likely never in your favor.


Fist fight against a group of thugs? If your not Bruce lee... u'de prolly wake up in the hospital..

Shoot gangbangers? If anything they will shoot back as well seeing how its a group and their "Homie" just got "capped" by a "foo".

[nobs11]

I hope your just being an internet tough guy here
your wife deserves to not have you be in jail for murder

Wait, you mean you won't put holes in people for looking at your wife?

Couldn't have said it better.

The law is very clear about what is and is not justifiable homicide.

All these guys who say stuff like "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6," you might be better off dying than have your family's possessions taken away, your wife and kids on the street and you in jail for a really long time with your best friend bubba. Maybe you should try to sell rap videos.

[Warhawk014]

I hope this is an OK place to post this. People here talk about the CCW classes, and I was wondering in particular what the CCW classes teaching on this issue is. The general fact pattern is based on an incident an incident in Santa Rosa a couple of years ago - and that may get tried in a couple more ... ::rollseyes::

The scene is a garage across the street from a hip hop club (in Santa Rosa? I know ...) where gang bangers hang out. Two guys and three women park and walk toward the club. Several GB-looking guys start harrassing the women and end up groping one.

The first question is at what point, if any, do the two guys have the right to shoot? Remenber, they are "only" being harrassed. There is no threat to life here, as far as they know.

The second question goes to tactics. At what point, if any, do you draw a weapon to deter intimidating behavior? Obviously, it seems to me, you don't want to threaten deadly force if you're not prepared to deliver. Also, it risks elevating an intimidating situation into a deadly one.

(Just so you know, during the actual altercation one of the thugs shot and killed one of the men, who had been warding off the groping of his wife.)

It seems a tough call, legally ... Maybe I'm wrong ...

you cannot use deadly force to fight off intimidation or butt grabbing. taunting, teasing, name calling, bad behavior etc....
but as soon as the threat of Great Bodily Injury exists you can use deadly force to protect yourself and your party.

if they are just being turd bags then walk away. if it continues thencall the police. but as soon as it escalates, i.e. a weapon is brandished by the thugs then the threat of GBI exists and you can use deadly force to defend yourself.

weapons = crowbar, lead pipe, baseball bat, knife, gun. anything that can be used to cause great bodily injury.

deadly force can also be used to prevent rape, because rape itself causes great bodily injury. but the bad guy has to be in the process of attempting to rape, not just groping as the OP stated.

[Brooke]

Brooke, take a self-defense handgun course and get back to your question.

There's nothing like first hand experience, than inquiring from Internet gurus.

I plan to take a course, and I trust that's what you mean by "first hand experience". It's as close as I'd like to get ...

My question originally asked for input from people who had taken the course.

Oh, one more thing I remembered about the Santa Rosa incident. Two of the 'bangers were father and son. Nice, huh?

[JDay]

seeing as to how it was a 3-1 fight my legal stand point would have been much better than if I had drawn a gun and had to shoot.

3-1 should be more than enough to justify use of deadly force since they can easily cause you great bodily harm or death. One of my dads cop buddies told me years ago that if two or more people came at him in a threatening manner he was authorized to shoot to kill until the numbers are even under some CA gang law. Don't know if this was true or not though but it makes sense.

[mroels]

3-1 should be more than enough to justify use of deadly force since they can easily cause you great bodily harm or death. One of my dads cop buddies told me years ago that if two or more people came at him in a threatening manner he was authorized to shoot to kill until the numbers are even under some CA gang law. Don't know if this was true or not though but it makes sense.

It should be more than enough to justify the use of deadly force. But most likely pulling out a loaded weapons, in the eyes of the CA justice system the odds would probably change from 3-1 to 3-10 (unless you have hi-caps from before 2000, then the odds would even be worse.) And just because a cop is authorized to do so, and will probably be considered justified, an ordinary citizen would probably be considered differently.

Besides how do you prove or convince that the 3 were going to cause great bodily harm or death. The media will probably portray them as three disenfranchised youths poor and hungry, who just wanted to take the pack of gum out of my pockets for their dinner. And I will be the military trained stone cold killer gun nut.

But as said before; better judged by 12 than carried by 6. And before anyone says how about your wife getting stuck with bills. I have legal insurance, no mortgage, low monthly bills that she could cover. And she can remarry if I get stuck in jail for a long time...i'd understand, but I doubt she will...at least I protected my loved ones.

[mroels]

Bust out a nice surefire light n blind them while you and your lady run away.

Living in California.. you should know that California laws are more likely never in your favor.


Fist fight against a group of thugs? If your not Bruce lee... u'de prolly wake up in the hospital..

Shoot gangbangers? If anything they will shoot back as well seeing how its a group and their "Homie" just got "capped" by a "foo".

Only way i'd run it if i knew that was the only way for my wife to get to safety. Otherwise I will stand my ground, and she runs fine by herself. And like i said before this has nothing to do with pride but rather a matter of principle. IMHO there are a few sacred things in my life that I will defend to the fullest extent and won't ever back down;
1) Family, you violate my family I will violate you.
2) Home; this is my personal sanctuary and no one has the right to invade that sanctuary without my(or family's) express permission.
3)Work; this is my financial sanctuary that secures the first two and no one may damage this sanctuary. And i'm obviously not talking about getting fired but rather about people who try to endanger my work environment and therefore cost me money.

These three things make up my livelyhood; joy, home, security. And no one gets to threaten that.

[leelaw]

One of my dads cop buddies told me years ago that if two or more people came at him in a threatening manner he was authorized to shoot to kill until the numbers are even under some CA gang law. Don't know if this was true or not though but it makes sense.

You were lied to.

Another person and I could be approaching an officer in a threatening manner (yelling at him) and if he shot at or upon either of us just for that, he'd be 100% in the wrong. Numbers and "threatening" are not enough to shoot. This goes for citizens, and for LE. There is no element of the law relating to street gangs that allows to shoot someone simply because they're threatening and in greater numbers than one.