Ocho and/or Tree ----- Quick legal Question

El OchoCinco said:
Does the law say you have to take it?

But you dont get to kill someone just because they punched you in a bar. Sorry.... that is not how the law works. If someone is punching you in a bar you dont automatically get to pull out a knife and stab them repeatedly. You can use equal force if reasonable or perhaps force to save yourself such as grabbing an item and hitting the person so that you can escape.

Also if you kill someone in a bar fight you will be arrested if you instigated the fight, continued the fight without fleeing when safe to do so, or escalated the encounter. If you are punched silly I doubnt you can defend yourself anyway. But if you get up and go stab the person in the neck and kill him....get ready for a trial.

As for what you never heard of:

Article 35 of the New York Penal Law Code explains when individuals are “justified” to use physical or deadly force to defend themselves or others. New York Penal Law 35.15 states that you can use physical force when and to the extent, you reasonably believe such to be necessary to defend yourself, or another individual from what you believe to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by another individual. However, a person may only use deadly physical force in limited circumstances. For instance, if an individual reasonably believes that another person is committing or trying to commit a kidnapping, forcible criminal sexual act, forcible rape, or robbery, they may use deadly physical force.

New York is governed by the concept of “Duty to retreat” and the “Castle Doctrine.” The duty to retreat concept means that before a person acts in self-defense, they should take reasonable steps to mitigate the risk of harm. Generally, the duty to retreat concept requires that an individual only uses force as a last resort.

Deadly physical force which is the type of force that is capable of causing a serious physical injury or death is not permitted unless a person reasonable believes that deadly physical force is being used or is about to be used on himself, herself or a third person. Even in such a situation however, the law imposes on a person a duty to retreat before he or she can resort to using deadly physical force if they can retreat with complete safety.
More...
Glad I live in a state that lets me defend myself. With deadly force if needed.
 
Arnie said:
Glad I live in a state that lets me defend myself. With deadly force if needed.
More...


good luck thinking you know state law then.... next time a guy pushes you in a bar and takes a swing and you stab him in the heart, let me know where to send the cigarettes you will need in prison to not get raped.

If someone is punching you in a bar fight, you dont automatically get to pull out a gun and shoot them. Go read your state laws and read some cases on bar fights ended up with guys in prison. Even if you punch back in self defense and knock the guys head into the bar corner and crack his head and he dies, you coudl be arrested.

Virginia:

Generally the rule is that a person may only use the “necessary” amount of force to protect themselves. So, for instance, if the threat to you falls into the “bodily harm” category but your reaction is “deadly force,” this is not justified, even if you are acting in self-defense.

Washington

Deadly force may only be used in self-defense if the defendant reasonably believes he or she is threatened with death or great personal injury. State v. Walden, 131 Wn.2d 469 (1997). A person cannot use deadly force in self-defense unless he has a reasonable and good-faith belief that, from an objective standpoint, deadly force was necessary. State v. Bell, 60 Wn.App,. 561 (1993).

N.C.

Deadly force may only be used if you reasonably believe that action is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm or in lawful defense of another. If someone is vandalizing your car, you cannot shoot them with a gun. If a 100 pound boy tries to punch a 200 pound man, the larger man cannot stab the boy with a knife. It may be a different story if the 200 pound man tries to attack the 100 pound boy.
 
Virginia's self defense laws provide that a non-aggressor is justified in using force against another person if (1) he reasonably believes (2) that the force is necessary (3) to protect himself from imminent use of unlawful force by the other person.1

Although not codified by statute, Virginia case law supports a version of the castle doctrine, providing that under certain circumstances, a person may use deadly force against someone entering his home.2

Virginia also has a "no retreat" or more commonly know as a "stand your ground" law, which means you are not required to "retreat", in other words try to escape, prior to using self defense, under certain circumstances.3

Self defense can provide a legal basis as a defense in cases, in part, involving:

  • Murder
  • Assault and Battery
  • Malicious Wounding
  • Unlawful Wounding
 
Arnie said:
Virginia's self defense laws provide that a non-aggressor is justified in using force against another person if (1) he reasonably believes (2) that the force is necessary (3) to protect himself from imminent use of unlawful force by the other person.1

Although not codified by statute, Virginia case law supports a version of the castle doctrine, providing that under certain circumstances, a person may use deadly force against someone entering his home.2

Virginia also has a "no retreat" or more commonly know as a "stand your ground" law, which means you are not required to "retreat", in other words try to escape, prior to using self defense, under certain circumstances.3

Self defense can provide a legal basis as a defense in cases, in part, involving:

  • Murder
  • Assault and Battery
  • Malicious Wounding
  • Unlawful Wounding
More...


Castle doctrine is not the issue here as we are not discussing protecting your home. ALmost every state allows deadly force to protect your home so not an issue. You claimed that in a bar fight you can kill the guy punching you.

You also did not cite the whole law:. WIth all due respect try to include as much as possible.

A person may only use deadly force if there was a present danger of great bodily injury. Words alone are not sufficient to justify the use of deadly force.13

For instance if you were defending yourself from someone trying to commit:
  • A murder
  • A malicious wounding
  • Or a rape
In Virginia, a person is only allowed to use the amount of force necessary to repel the force used against him.14

This rule requires that the force used must be proportional to the harm threatened. Excessive force is not protected. Therefore, when threatened with a non-deadly attack, a person is not justified in using deadly force to repel the attack.
 
Continuing with the thread title here, another question Tree / Ocho.

OK this one is REALLY hypothetical, but just for discussion sake.

Didn't one of the gun manufactures get sued pretty bad because they said their ads inspired kids to buy assault rifles? Or something like that? Anyway, and again, this is like pure theoretical discussion stuff, but I have been seeing advertisements for Dodge Challengers, or whatever that souped up model they make is, and albeit there is fine print that no one can read saying "professional driver on closed course" etc.... these ads really sensationalize driving like a madman.

What makes me bring this up, 2 incidents. On Sunday I was on the interstate and witnessed a chase. Cop had his radar out, I saw him as passed, and then the next thing I know this Charger goes screaming by me. I'm like, ok, this should be good. Here comes the cop. This f'ing charger had to be doing 130 and he was running. Good looking car. The cop, well you know thats what they live for... a good chase. Dude in the Charger does a 4 way lane change and screams up an off-ramp. Cop followed. I'm not big enough rubber-necker to get off and see what happened, but I assume the cop got him eventually.

The second incident was yesterday, last night. I saw a huge wreck being cleaned up. It was ugly. I would be not surprised if there was a fatality in the one car. The other car... you guessed it. A brand new Charger.

My question... if people can sue the gun folks for ads that allegedly inspire undesirable actions, could the family of that (perhaps) fatality, if they had a sh*t-hot lawyer... could they sue Chrysler? And actually have a chance at a win? I mean watch one of those ads. They're all about road rage type driving. It implies a mindset in a way, like all good advertising does.

Just thought it an interesting question.
I see our bodega guy got off.
Thats good.
 
El OchoCinco said:
Got to admit I am not caring or following twitter fiasco...
Musk wanting to buy twitter is a cluster fuck and I would dump tesla shares if he proceeds because there is nothing between tesla and twitter at all and he can either run both shittily or take care of one while the other runs into the ground (he is not a hands off guy).

Also I have not ready anything about the agreement between the parties.

What a lawyer tells a newspaper about what he belives is meaningless and should not be relied on for a legal opinion. We dont know what the document between Musk and Twitter says or what escape clauses exists or penalties. So I will happily sit this one out.
More...
Although bit on the long side it is all covered here by Patrick Boyle:-

 
Hey tree or ocho,
Another quick question.

In a trial, (the actual trial phase, not the jury selection) are the lawyers allowed to query the members of the jury about something. Even something mundane?

For example, say I'm the defense attorney out there doing my thing and as a great lawyer I have a plan for where I'm going with this, but I look over at the jury box and say: "Mr Smith (he's juror #5)... do you by any chance know the final score of the Knicks game last night?"

Is that allowed?
Asking a juror a question?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top