Good Samaritan??

[gerhard1]

Here is an interesting question that originally came from the KSCCW board.

The question is, just how far should you go with your firearm to help a stranger out? Should you intervene in a mass shooting, for example? One poster was sharply critical of the man who intervened in the recent Texas shooting, saying that by the time the man acted the incident was over and there was no reason to shoot. Another has said in the event of a shooting at a shopping mall for example, that rather than take the shooter out he will go home. Interacting with the court system is his concern, and he doesn't carry to be a hero.

These are two of those on the Kansas board There are others who say they will intervene of they have to but I haven't seen anyone with a hero complex

My old gunsmith in Seattle had a good way of thinking. He told me that if he were caught in an armed robbery of a retail store and the bad guy had not started shooting, that he would not intervene. If the bad guy took the money out of the till and left, he would do nothing. About the only way he would have started shooting is if the bad guy started first, or the customers were being herded into the back room. Otherwise, his sole response would be to be as good a witness as he could.

This lesson has always stayed with me.

If I am someplace where a mass shooting event takes place then I'd probably intervene, as my limited mobility would hamper my ability to flee. Besides, can I ethically turn my back if an obviously innocent party is in mortal danger?

What do the fine folks on this forum think? When would you intervene?

Anyone care to take this one on?

 

[Catt57]

I tend to agree with the gunsmith. Unless bodily harm or imprisonment is imminent it's best to play it cool. But once that line is crossed all bets are off..

 

[DMaddox76]

Definitely a lot to ponder. There are so many variables or scenarios to consider.

A big box store, lots of people, lots of ways to hide or to get out
A McDonalds, small, sitting at a booth or table with a front row seat to what's about to happen.
A mall, you hear shots at the far end or are they in the next store over. Is the guy I see with a gun a good guy or bad?
If I see a guy with a gun, do I wait until he shoots someone that looks innocent or shoot immediately not knowing.
Who is with me? Am I alone or with my wife, my handicapped son, maybe my grandkids?

I was in law enforcement and my instinct would be to go towards the shooting, but now....I know this may sound
callous, but I think in most cases, I will leave if I can or take up a defensive position if I can't, especially if I am not alone. I sure don't want anyone shooting at me thinking I am the bad guy while I am running through the mall trying to find the bad guy.

Something could happen at anytime, or not at all. Everyone is going to react differently. For me, it's keeping
my head on a swivel, trusting my gut instincts, trusting my firearm and my ability to use it and pray for the best.

 

[TopWater]

Definitely a lot to ponder. There are so many variables or scenarios to consider.

A big box store, lots of people, lots of ways to hide or to get out
A McDonalds, small, sitting at a booth or table with a front row seat to what's about to happen.
A mall, you hear shots at the far end or are they in the next store over. Is the guy I see with a gun a good guy or bad?
If I see a guy with a gun, do I wait until he shoots someone that looks innocent or shoot immediately not knowing.
Who is with me? Am I alone or with my wife, my handicapped son, maybe my grandkids?

I was in law enforcement and my instinct would be to go towards the shooting, but now....I know this may sound
callous, but I think in most cases, I will leave if I can or take up a defensive position if I can't, especially if I am not alone. I sure don't want anyone shooting at me thinking I am the bad guy while I am running through the mall trying to find the bad guy.

Something could happen at anytime, or not at all. Everyone is going to react differently. For me, it's keeping
my head on a swivel, trusting my gut instincts, trusting my firearm and my ability to use it and pray for the best.

Definitely a lot to ponder. There are so many variables or scenarios to consider.

A big box store, lots of people, lots of ways to hide or to get out
A McDonalds, small, sitting at a booth or table with a front row seat to what's about to happen.
A mall, you hear shots at the far end or are they in the next store over. Is the guy I see with a gun a good guy or bad?
If I see a guy with a gun, do I wait until he shoots someone that looks innocent or shoot immediately not knowing.
Who is with me? Am I alone or with my wife, my handicapped son, maybe my grandkids?

I was in law enforcement and my instinct would be to go towards the shooting, but now....I know this may sound
callous, but I think in most cases, I will leave if I can or take up a defensive position if I can't, especially if I am not alone. I sure don't want anyone shooting at me thinking I am the bad guy while I am running through the mall trying to find the bad guy.

Something could happen at anytime, or not at all. Everyone is going to react differently. For me, it's keeping
my head on a swivel, trusting my gut instincts, trusting my firearm and my ability to use it and pray for the best.

I concur with your assessment, the firearm I carry is primarily for me and family protection. Most of us would intervene if possible to prevent innocent people from being killed, but you need to choose your moments wisely, be vigilant and aware of your surroundings. The element of surprise is your best friend. Watch this short video of a good citizen doing what most CC people would, and you’re right the police have shot citizens trying to help because that’s who they saw first firing a gun.

 

[DMaddox76]

Very good video! Thanks for sharing. I think it dovetails right in with the topic. No doubt the man
in the video was brave, but he did not think before acting.

My duty is to me and mine. Only IF I can identify the correct target, only IF I have a clear shot at said target, only IF I do not put my family in harms way and only IF I can put rounds downrange without fear of hitting someone else, will I engage. That's a lot of boxes to check off before acting, which is why I think the way I do.

Everyone has a right to defend themselves. Not many exercise that right (or they live in a state that won't let them). They rely on the police or whatever security is around to protect them. The question that we, who do opt to defend ourselves must ask is, "does that obligate us to defend others too".

For some of us, that answer is - no. As I said in the last post, I am sorry if that seems callous, but that is my strategy.
Yours should be what works for you.

 

[Alan]

Here is an interesting question that originally came from the KSCCW board.

The question is, just how far should you go with your firearm to help a stranger out? Should you intervene in a mass shooting, for example? One poster was sharply critical of the man who intervened in the recent Texas shooting, saying that by the time the man acted the incident was over and there was no reason to shoot. Another has said in the event of a shooting at a shopping mall for example, that rather than take the shooter out he will go home. Interacting with the court system is his concern, and he doesn't carry to be a hero.

These are two of those on the Kansas board There are others who say they will intervene of they have to but I haven't seen anyone with a hero complex

My old gunsmith in Seattle had a good way of thinking. He told me that if he were caught in an armed robbery of a retail store and the bad guy had not started shooting, that he would not intervene. If the bad guy took the money out of the till and left, he would do nothing. About the only way he would have started shooting is if the bad guy started first, or the customers were being herded into the back room. Otherwise, his sole response would be to be as good a witness as he could.

This lesson has always stayed with me.

If I am someplace where a mass shooting event takes place then I'd probably intervene, as my limited mobility would hamper my ability to flee. Besides, can I ethically turn my back if an obviously innocent party is in mortal danger?

What do the fine folks on this forum think? When would you intervene?

Anyone care to take this one on?

Generally, it comes down to an immediate, unavoidable threat to innocent life. Otherwise, staying out and being a good witness is often the safer, wiser role...

 

[cp1969]

It may very well be the "safer wiser role" but how do you live with yourself later? There you stood, armed, and didn't do a thing to save a life.

Ask yourself how YOU would feel about an armed and licensed citizen who MIGHT have been able to save the life of YOUR loved one but instead chose the "safer, wiser role" and did nothing but watch?

 

[DMaddox76]

It may very well be the "safer wiser role" but how do you live with yourself later? There you stood, armed, and didn't do a thing to save a life.

Ask yourself how YOU would feel about an armed and licensed citizen who MIGHT have been able to save the life of YOUR loved one but instead chose the "safer, wiser role" and did nothing but watch?

Sorry this is so long, but again, it explains why I say what I say about "checking my boxes".

All valid points. Some have the plan to seek out the bad guy and take him out. Great. That is THEIR plan. I wish them luck. It didn't work out to well for the guy in the video above. My question still stands, "As a CCL holder, am I OBLIGATED to protect anyone else?" My answer is still - no.

As to your second question, I would be mad as hell, at the person who killed my loved one.

From the LegalClarity website:

Kansas has a stand-your-ground law. Under K.S.A. 21-5222, you can use force — including deadly force — to defend yourself or someone else without any obligation to retreat first. The law applies wherever you have a legal right to be. Deadly force is justified when you reasonably believe it’s necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm.<a>11</a>

A separate statute, K.S.A. 21-5223, extends the same no-retreat principle specifically to defending your home, workplace, or occupied vehicle against unlawful entry or attack.<a>12</a>

If your use of force was justified under either of those statutes, K.S.A. 21-5231 makes you immune from criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits. That immunity isn’t automatic — law enforcement can still investigate, and a prosecutor can still file charges if probable cause exists. But the immunity provision means that if you acted within the law, the legal system is supposed to leave you alone, not just acquit you after dragging you through a trial.


To me, the "Stand your ground law" means I can stay put and I don't have to retreat. I don't read that as being able to go after someone. This is the part about checking MY boxes. I am not going to go looking for a shooter. If that is what someone else wants to do, and that's their plan, then by all means, do it.

I just talked with Cindy at the Kansas Attorney Generals Office and she said that someone with a concealed carry license is not obligated to defend other people. If the shooter is right in front of you and you must defend yourself, then yes. If you go looking for the shooter, then you lose qualified immunity.

Edit to add: I am not saying my way is right or wrong. Just saying it's my way.

 

[gerhard1]

Sorry this is so long, but again, it explains why I say what I say about "checking my boxes".

All valid points. Some have the plan to seek out the bad guy and take him out. Great. That is THEIR plan. I wish them luck. It didn't work out to well for the guy in the video above. My question still stands, "As a CCL holder, am I OBLIGATED to protect anyone else?" My answer is still - no.

As to your second question, I would be mad as hell, at the person who killed my loved one.

From the LegalClarity website:

Kansas has a stand-your-ground law. Under K.S.A. 21-5222, you can use force — including deadly force — to defend yourself or someone else without any obligation to retreat first. The law applies wherever you have a legal right to be. Deadly force is justified when you reasonably believe it’s necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm.<a>11</a>

A separate statute, K.S.A. 21-5223, extends the same no-retreat principle specifically to defending your home, workplace, or occupied vehicle against unlawful entry or attack.<a>12</a>

If your use of force was justified under either of those statutes, K.S.A. 21-5231 makes you immune from criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits. That immunity isn’t automatic — law enforcement can still investigate, and a prosecutor can still file charges if probable cause exists. But the immunity provision means that if you acted within the law, the legal system is supposed to leave you alone, not just acquit you after dragging you through a trial.


To me, the "Stand your ground law" means I can stay put and I don't have to retreat. I don't read that as being able to go after someone. This is the part about checking MY boxes. I am not going to go looking for a shooter. If that is what someone else wants to do, and that's their plan, then by all means, do it.

I just talked with Cindy at the Kansas Attorney Generals Office and she said that someone with a concealed carry license is not obligated to defend other people. If the shooter is right in front of you and you must defend yourself, then yes. If you go looking for the shooter, then you lose qualified immunity.

Edit to add: I am not saying my way is right or wrong. Just saying it's my way.

What you say makes much sense and I agree with you in general. In my case, limited mobility is an issue and I question whether or not I am ABLE to retreat in most cases. Of course, I have both WalMart and amazon delivery which greatly reduces my risk of being in harm's way. I rarely go out and when I do, it is only to the Dollar store or to Casey's, due to the fact that my wife's condition makes it such that she can't be left alone for more than a few minutes.

In general, my intention in the OP was to generate a fair amount of thinking, and in that, as evidenced by the posts in this thread, I believe I have succeeded.