Robbery

I searched the forum before posting this and could not find any information answering my questions so if this has been discussed I apologize.

I was reading the Colorado statutes regarding deadly physical force and wanted others thoughts and opinions regarding these questions.

Am I reading the statutes right when I say if I am in a bank, store, or gas station and someone walks in with a gun points it at the store employee and says "give me all your money right now" I am justified in shooting and killing the person committing the robbery even if the gun is not pointed at me?

Let's also say I am walking down the street and see someone pointing a gun at another person trying to rob them, am I justified in using deadly force to help that person even though the gun is not pointed at me if I choose?

Last time I asked "what if" type of questions I was told that If I went though any decent CCW class these questions should have already been answered. These questions were in fact answered in my CCW class but I am looking for more information, thoughts and clarification.




"18-1-704 Use Of Physical Force In Defense Of A Person
1. Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person is justified in using physical force
upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other
person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for that purpose. 2. Deadly physical force may be used only if a person reasonably believes a lesser degree of force is inadequate and:
(a.) The actor has reasonable ground to believe, and does believe, that he or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving great bodily injury; or (b.) The other person is using or reasonably appears about to use physical force against an
occupant of a dwelling or business establishment while committing or attempting to commit burglary as defined in sections 18-4-202 to 18-4-204; or (c.) The other person is committing or reasonably appears about to commit kidnapping as defined
in section 18-3-301 or 18-3-302, robbery as defined in section 18-4-301 or 18-4-302, sexual assault as set forth in section 18-3-402 or 18-3-403 as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, or assault as
defined in sections 18-3-202 or 18-3-203."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dusty Johnson

"18-1-704 Use Of Physical Force In Defense Of A Person
1. Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person is justified in using physical force
upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other
person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for that purpose. 2. Deadly physical force may be used only if a person reasonably believes a lesser degree of force is inadequate and:
(a.) The actor has reasonable ground to believe, and does believe, that he or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving great bodily injury; or (b.) The other person is using or reasonably appears about to use physical force against an
occupant of a dwelling or business establishment while committing or attempting to commit burglary as defined in sections 18-4-202 to 18-4-204; or (c.) The other person is committing or reasonably appears about to commit kidnapping as defined
in section 18-3-301 or 18-3-302, robbery as defined in section 18-4-301 or 18-4-302, sexual assault as set forth in section 18-3-402 or 18-3-403 as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, or assault as
defined in sections 18-3-202 or 18-3-203."

---

I thought I would get fancy this time, I always get impressed when everyone else highlights and uses italics in certain areas and responses...

A gun is a deadly weapon, if someone points it at you and you are afraid for your life you can justifiably say that I thought I was going to be killed and therefore shot that person. I would also say the highlighted portion answers that question about the bank teller...

Get an attorney...Even if I am in a justifiable shooting, I am still getting one

Also this is the only law or one of the only laws that is written with "Great Bodily Injury" rather than just "bodily injury" or "Serious Bodily Injury." The courts have ruled that "Great Bodily Injury" was meant to be "Serious Bodily Injury" or SBI. You can look up the definitions of both in the same place you got 18-1-704...if not let me know

For me personally, I only want to get involved if more violent. Shots were fired, or physical harm has been witnessed. (punch, kick, hit with gun) Otherwise, everyone comply and let them go on their way.

I've witnessed a few assaults against others, and have been a good witness, but it has been a real pain in the rear with the courts and my time. To up the ante by displaying and using a weapon when nothing more has been done than "scare" tactics by the aggressor.

Similar scenario was given in our CCW class, and if the aggressor pointed the gun at a child in this "What If", then things have changed a little for me to do something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gnihcraes

For me personally, I only want to get involved if more violent. Shots were fired, or physical harm has been witnessed. (punch, kick, hit with gun) Otherwise, everyone comply and let them go on their way.

I've witnessed a few assaults against others, and have been a good witness, but it has been a real pain in the rear with the courts and my time. To up the ante by displaying and using a weapon when nothing more has been done than "scare" tactics by the aggressor.

Similar scenario was given in our CCW class, and if the aggressor pointed the gun at a child in this "What If", then things have changed a little for me to do something.

---

I personally think this is EXCELLENT. Having an outline of what you plan on doing if you are in certain situations will help you be better prepared. For me, before I was a cop and had my CCW, I had something very similar. Not that I am a lawyer, but deal with legal matters on a daily basis now, I have upped my response if I see something to "big" in my eyes. When off duty cops get involved in "little things" i just want to punch them...be a good witness, why are you getting involved in ridiculousness?

I agree. Unless the situation escalates to use of force by the thug, I'm not going to draw. If it does happen, I'm shooting to stop the threat, not to kill them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridge

I agree. Unless the situation escalates to use of force by the thug, I'm not going to draw. If it does happen, I'm shooting to stop the threat, not to kill them.

---

Shooting to stop the threat IS shooting to kill. NEVER shoot to wound. This is like rule #-1.

A wounded individual is still a threat. The only reliable way to stop a threat is to shoot vital areas. Also, claiming you were shooting to wound says to a jury that you did not see them as a serious threat.

But saying you are shooting to kill will get you ripped to shreds by a liberal DA.

You shoot to wound, and if they continue to pose a threat, you continue to shoot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridge

But saying you are shooting to kill will get you ripped to shreds by a liberal DA.

You shoot to wound, and if they continue to pose a threat, you continue to shoot.

---

Your life was in danger, thus you shot to stop the threat.

Shooting to wound is saying you were aiming for legs/arms/whatever, which shows a severe disregard for the threat you were facing as well as others around you.

And, again, he said "SHOOT TO STOP THE THREAT" not to kill. Killing is just a consequence of that intent. And i am not a coroner, so i cant make the call if some one is dead anyway.

More importantly, if you are in mortal peril, and you really needed to pull your weapon and shoot, who gives a fuck about a DA? You LIVED. Everything else is manageable.

If you have the time or the inclination to worry about how a jury will react, then you probably didn't need to get to gun play.

Saying you're shooting to wound is like saying you're going to shoot the gun out of the guy's hand. It's delusional.

You shoot COM, which has a nasty side effect of death, but it has the highest possibility of stopping a threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeusExMachina

Saying you're shooting to wound is like saying you're going to shoot the gun out of the guy's hand. It's delusional.

You shoot COM, which has a nasty side effect of death, but it has the highest possibility of stopping a threat.

---

Pretty much my take on the matter. Make your shots count and never say you wanted to kill the bg.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graves

Pretty much my take on the matter. Make your shots count and never say you wanted to kill the bg.

---

Yeah. I have no opinion on whether he lives or not, but shooting for the arms/legs is probably going to get you in more trouble with the jury as well as have a worse chance of stopping the person.

First and foremost, the law - above all else, is entirely about DEFINITIONS.

Thus "Serious Bodily Injury" means something, specifically from CRS:

"...at the time it was inflicted or later, involves a substantial risk of death, serious permanent disfigurement, protracted loss or impairment of any body part or breaks, fractures or burns of the second or third degree. Serious bodily is distinguished from bodily injury, defined in C.R.S. ¤ 18-901(c), in that bodily injury requires only "physical pain, illness or any impairment of physical or mental condition."

So, it's very very hard to describe your fear of "serious bodily injury" except that while a 2 inch knife might not REASONABLY be able to kill someone under all circumstances, it is inarguably capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.

The biggest problem most people run into is in TALKING after an incident. Remember you'll be judged by the "reasonable person" theory, would another reasonable person in the same exact circumstances have perceived what you perceive as a threat to YOUR PARTICULAR safety. It might be unreasonable for me, for instance, to shoot someone who was punching me in the face repeatedly, but for a 90 year old woman to shoot someone under the same circumstances would be reasonable for her. It wouldn't be reasonable for me to fear for my life because of a few punches, but for an elderly person - it would be. So not all circumstances will result in the same decision being made to prosecute.

The test is simple, the person or persons must be in your presence (directly observable by you) and they must present a DIRECT threat to either you, or someone who is also in your direct vicinity.

So to answer your questions, by direct inference...

1. Yes you could shoot the robber. You could SEE him point the gun and you believed his use of force was imminent, and it was directed at someone who was also in your presence. It's not necessary to wait until he shoots first.

2. Yes you would be, but unlike the store robbery where you heard him demand money - you might want to make sure it's not someone who is defending their own life who happens to be a CCW holder like you, or an undercover cop, etc... Best to seek cover or concealment and get more information, like the guy pointing the gun and demanding money.

The key issues are whether or not the other person was using UNLAWFUL force against another, and whether another reasonable person would have believed the same thing. It's why regular citizens are generally limited to reacting to situations that actually occur in front of them, as opposed to a cop who might be operating under information that did not occur in front of them.

All that being said, I got constant crap from the "situation" instructors at my academy for ALWAYS drilling the bad guy who was wielding a gun. Got major crap for shooting the academy director when he came out of a tent with a glock pointing at my face. Their statement was, "Hey, he was just a drunk guy who didn't know who you were". That being said, it didn't change my reasoning one bit - I wont hesitate, point a gun at someone without a damn good reason that I can perceive at that moment and the gun will rise, aim and shoot right after I yell at you to drop your weapon. Tests have shown I can do this in 1.5 seconds, wish I were faster (some guys are). I dont' believe in giving ANY bad guy a "chance", or risking the life of an innocent because I fear prosecution. If you're well-off enough, your money should be in a trust - which makes your finances pretty bullet proof.

Ridge never said he'd shoot to "wound."

So when those two guys jumped me in the parking garage, and were stomping on my face while I laid on the concrete, and you came along with a gun, how many of you would have shot them?

My once beautiful teeth are now broken by the way. 4 of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

So when those two guys jumped me in the parking garage, and were stomping on my face while I laid on the concrete, and you came along with a gun, how many of you would have shot them?

My once beautiful teeth are now broken by the way. 4 of them.

---

With a VERY high chance of having to shoot somebody on a total stranger's behalf, I'd likely turn the other cheek. Sorry bro, maybe if you had a nice rack. [Coffee]

They probably would have ran if a gun was pulled. I lived anyway.

*Probably because the girl they were with called some other friends who came and stopped them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

They probably would have ran if a gun was pulled.

---

Best case right there but I wouldn't count on it.

If i saw people stomping on some ones head, i am seeing lethal force being applied.
Which means i get to teach some one how to blow little red bubbles out of a hole in their shirt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridge

You shoot to wound, and if they continue to pose a threat, you continue to shoot.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

Ridge never said he'd shoot to "wound."

---

Personally, i shoot to tickle....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FireMoth

Personally, i shoot to tickle....

---

[ROFL1] Good luck tickling anyone with the two pistols that I fondled on Friday.

Personally, I would not normally consider involving myself in such a situation, unless there was imminent danger of death. I am not a cop, am not paid to be someone else's security, and lack the cloak of authority to act that a sworn peace officer carries (along with the cadre of city attorneys). What I would do is observe, be as good a witness as possible, and do what I could to alert the police. Should the situation change, and I perceived a significant risk of serious bodily injury or death to myself or another person, I would take whatever action was necessary to stop the threat. If that means the assailant fails to survive, that's an unfortunate, but necessary, consequence.

Blunt force trauma to the head is lethal force. End of ****ing story. How the **** do you think people were killing each other for thousands of years of human history BEFORE the last 200 brought the convenience of guns?

Its disturbing to me that someones brains might be being beaten out their nose and people here would actually stop to think about if the lawyer they have on retainer can cover them for acting.
And i thought i was a cold mother fucker.

I'm sure it will be a great consolation to some ones kid or spouse or parent that when the chips were down...
You pulled out your camera phone, and were a 'good witness'.
Undoubtedly they will thank you for the brave observations you made that grant them with the privilege of changing the diapers of the person that no longer knows their names for the rest of their short, miserable, and financially draining lives.

The assailant made their choice when they brought their foot down on some ones head. And I'd still do them the decency of a quick end.

Some things are worth going to jail for.

A brutal ass stomping would qualify as "imminent danger", but I would hate to be the guy that shot someone that was fighting back after being threatened with a knife. A felonious assault is an entirely different situation than a stand up fist fight. Also, stopping the threat does not always mean ventilating someone. If I feel like I can stop the threat without anyone having to be seriously injured (including myself), I will certainly leave that option on the table.

Well, put. I thought we were addressing the situation Irving presented. I woudl say that if some one is on the ground being stomped, regardless of if they earned it or not, its no longer self defense on the part of the person doing the stomping.
I would announce my intent to shoot, and let them have a couple of heart beats to decide if they want the third nostril before i oblige them.

It can be slippery, but i still feel strongly that i would take immediate action. And have before.
I took down an active shooter a few years ago, luckily on only the threat of force. Not surprisingly, the people he was shooting at had designs on stomping his guts out as soon as i had him prone'd out.
They got the same introduction to my side arm he did, because he became my responsibility at that point.

And before you ask, i was not working in a sworn officer or official capacity. I was a contract boy, that happened to be there at the time.
Had things gone a different way, and i did have to shoot, i woudl not have regretted my actions, regardless of the outcome.

Stomping someone's face while they're on the ground isn't "fighting back"...

I don't think anyone is suggesting: 1) See guy getting beat 2) draw 3) shoot. Probably a verbal attempt to stop the situation should be in there between 1&2 and 2&3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeusExMachina

...Probably a verbal attempt to stop the situation should be in there between 1&2 and 2&3.

---

One would be foolish not to, of course.

When else will you get that kind of opportunity to try out your 'tough guy' lines? ;)

... i'm just glad no one ever recorded the shit i said on the street...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FireMoth

One would be foolish not to, of course.

When else will you get that kind of opportunity to try out your 'tough guy' lines? ;)

... i'm just glad no one ever recorded the shit i said on the street...

---

[Robocop]Drop it![/Robocop]

*Pulls gun, drops pants
"Who wants a mustache ride??!!!"

Just my opinion, but if nobody's gotten hurt yet, and it's just a robbery, I'm inclined to stay out of it and just be as ready to act as possible. I'm not a LEO, and have no obligation to fight criminals. But if a shot's been fired, someone's getting pistol whipped, or the BG appears ready and willing to hurt someone, it's a different story. Depends totally on the situation to me. If somebody pulls a gun and hollers "this is a stickup" in a 7-11, I have no reason to immediately act unless I feel in danger myself or I think someone else is in danger.

FWIW - Many, many years ago back in OK I was in just such a situation, but unarmed and no CCW permit. In that case, both store clerks were between me and the BG, so firing wouldn't have been an option anyway. He had a little .25 auto, and just wanted the cash, a 6-pack and a quick getaway. I know every situation is different, but I have to think of that one first.

It wouldn't be "brave observations" it would more probably be "HEROIC observations"

Aint the MSM taught you anything?

Dues, he didn't say that until after you accused him of saying that. I still submit that saying, "I shoot to stop the threat" is different than, "I shoot to wound."

You can wound someone by calling their mother fat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

Dues, he didn't say that until after you accused him of saying that. I still submit that saying, "I shoot to stop the threat" is different than, "I shoot to wound."

You can wound someone by calling their mother fat.

---

Unfortunately I don't have mind control powers, so what he said is what he said. I just helped with the clarification.

You don't shoot to wound someone by calling their mother fat...

Dude, back off. i got some lethal fucking 'yo momma' jokes...

Anyway, i read ridge's post. i saw what Deus saw.

So, bad call ridge. Suggested correction: Deus.
Thread progresses

Fine. I submit.

Rondog, when you were in the convenience store, did you actually see the gun that they robber had?

If someone (bad guy/aggressor) is actually holding a gun in their hand, I consider everyone's life in the vicinity in danger. If someone just walks in and lifts up their shirt or something, that is different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

Fine. I submit.

Rondog, when you were in the convenience store, did you actually see the gun that they robber had?

If someone (bad guy/aggressor) is actually holding a gun in their hand, I consider everyone's life in the vicinity in danger. If someone just walks in and lifts up their shirt or something, that is different.

---

Yeah, I saw it. He pointed it right at me. I didn't realize what was going on and started to leave the store, when he hollered "get your ass back in here!" at me. I turned around with a WTF? look on my dumbass, and this guy was pointing this dinky little .25 at me. I hustled right back in and doo-dah'd over to the magazine rack, turned my back to him so he wouldn't feel threatened by me, and thumbed through some rag while he did his thing and split.

The store was setup with an "island" right in the center of the place, with two registers and two clerks to handle customers on both sides of it. He was on one side and I was on the other, about 10-15 ft. away from the counter, the two clerks were inside the island, between me and him. There was no way to fire on him in that situation, even if I'd been armed and permitted. And he harmed nobody, so drawing wouldn't have been wise anyway, plus he was looking right at all three of us.

This was probably around 1978-79 or so. There was a rare and very heavy ice storm that night, it was slicker than shit outside. He was on foot so he got smooth away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irving

...
If someone (bad guy/aggressor) is actually holding a gun in their hand, I consider everyone's life in the vicinity in danger. ...

---

Agreed. I think that is a logical force assessment. I just worry that people forget that other things than guns can kill when they are judging potential lethality

I'd probably do some things that others here wouldn't, but I don't want to post it.