Pro-active Defense?

[red5angel]

In the midst of Ryu and berserkers arguing I picked up on something berserker said and I am curious what the rest of you gusy might think?

If you get jumped on the street, the general answer has to been to try to get away if possible. However, as a martial artist, could it potentially be our responsibilty to do something abotu this person right there and then, in the hopes they don't harm another later on? It sounds weird I know but I would like ot hear others views.
To put some perspective on it from my point of view, if I or my loved one were attacked I would aim to kill if I could.

[Shaolin-Do]

Completely depends on the situation....
Say Im by myself, walking the streets and Im attacked by a band of 3 or 4 16 year olds. Im gonna do my best to beat the hell out of all of them, I cant run for sh!t. :)

Say I get attacked by 4 20 yr olds similar to me in size, Id run. After I broke one of their legs... :)
2 vs. 1, Ill take my chances. If Im with a loved one, wouldnt aim to kill but would aim to maim. If they have a weapon, I doubt Id try and take my chances. unless I had a weapon too.
:)

[Laughing Cow]

R5A.

I would never aim to kill or similar unless it is totally unavoidable.

Even if I know that I would go free, I wuld still have to deal everyday with the fact that I took a life.

Cheers.

[old jong]

The first responsability is of your acts. Unless you and the "jumper" both sign a waiver before!... (...!)We are not justice crusader (http://www.iowalink.com/users/kbar/silvbow3.jpg) and the first responsability is to obey the law.

Berserker trolled again and you took the bait. ;)

[red5angel]

LC, I don't have a problem with taking the life of someone who threatens mine. I feel if you decide you want to hurt me in some way or hurt someone I love then you deserve what you get. I don't know your intentions and I will not take the chance. Like the old cliche says, it's your word against a dead mans.

[Shaolin-Do]

I felt real bad when I shot a bird with a bb gun in middle school. Cant imagine how Id feel if I killed a person. You dont just affect them... regardless of who they were, chances are there were a couple good people who cared a great deal about them... the immediate effect isnt the only one.

[Judge Pen]

You won't have a duty to take out a criminal to protect an unforeseen third-party that they may attack later on. You may use reasonable force to defend a third-party in the same way you could defend yourself . . . that is if a reasonable person would believe that the person is confronted with an imminent risk of harm. In the situation that you described there is no imminent risk yet.

[red5angel]

In the situation that you described there is no imminent risk yet.

What situation judge pen? I never outlined any details, for a reason...

[Ryu]

The problem with the whole "beserker" incident (:D ) is that what's being discussed is not reality in our society.

What that means is this.

Killing someone might be a necessity. In order to prove it is a necessity, you have to have, beyond a shadow of a doubt, mountains of evidence in your favor.

People who throw the word "killing" around don't really know what the act constitutes in terms of law and society, emotion and mental anguish, physical drain and yes, moral and ethical issues as well.

This is why you get weirdos who chalk killing up to "easy as pie," "go for the kill!" etc. etc.
It's fantasy.
Have you ever killed someone? Who found out about it? Was there law involved? Did you go to court? Did you hide the body? Are you on the run?

These "killin' the bad guys" fantasies are a bit silly.
No one should WANT to kill anyone... but if you need to do it because you have to stop the person from killing you or someone else (even in a prison environment) then you do it.
This is why I'm a supporter of the Death Penalty. Some people just can't "be" in society anymore.

To answer your question about pre-emptive defense.

That is the ONLY defense. If you know something is going to happen, and there's no way to get out of it...attack first. And make that first attack completely take out your opponent.
YOUR survival is what is important.

However, reality is complicated, so you've got to make sure the situation warrants that kind of response.
Legal issues are INCREDIBLY prevelant in any self-defense situation.

All the "it's better to be judged by 12, than carried by six" stuff is also silly because people don't study situations or quiz their minds about just what constitutes "lethal force" in their state, jurisdiction, whatever.

Instead you get people who think they'll "go for the kill" without ever having trained in situational judgment, adrenal management, legal issues, emotional aspects of such behavior, flight or fight syndrome, etc.

In order to be "seen" by the courts as someone who truly was DEFENDING himself, then you have to understand that your mentality or the things you say, or your attitudes will GREATLY effect your chances of surviving a court setting.

Any lawyer who places your "kill em all!" attitude in plain view of the jury will crucify you in court.

Real life deals with what's real. And to me, the "kill the bad guys!" stuff isn't real. It's fantasy.

This obviously doesn't mean that you don't fight to kill if you have to.....but it does mean that you better be **** sure what situations warrant you "having" to kill someone.

Look at the whole thing with Alex Gong.

Fantasy my friends...it's not "Batman adventures."

So Red, to answer you question..... It does depend.

Can you prove that killing a criminal in that situation, at that time, during that moment, was not "murder"?
Are you legally justified to get rid of the threat to yourself with death?
Can you prove this person would go on to hurt others? Does it warrant death?

These are all real questions. Nothing political or PC at all....it's reality. :rolleyes:

Well I hope that gives you an idea what my thoughts are on these subjects.

Take care all

Ryu

[old jong]

The idea was: Deciding to do something bad to him in case he harms somebody else in the future.

[norther practitioner]

Good post ryu...

I used to think that I'd be able to get out of most situations, but unfortunately that is a personal dillusion that I feal was shared by too many. Now I don't think that I'd "fight" in as many situations as in the past. It is more of a thing, what if I get killed, or if I kill this person accidentaly, or on perpose.. I'm not confident in my ability to quickly assess that situation and come out with a decision that I could live or die by, let alone someone else. Trust me if someone thows a punch and I can't just turn and run, I'll fight, but if I can just walk away, it just seems like a safer option to me now....

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by red5angel
If you get jumped on the street, the general answer has to been to try to get away if possible. However, as a martial artist, could it potentially be our responsibilty to do something abotu this person right there and then, in the hopes they don't harm another later on?

I took this to mean that you were jumped and could get away without harming the attacker. I thought you were wondering if we, as martial artists, had a duty to take the guy out to prevent future attacks.

If he were attacking other people you would not have a duty to defend them, but you may be justified in doing so. There are "Good Samaritan" laws in some states, but I don't think those require you to put yourself in harms way for the aid of another. Anyone know different?

[red5angel]

good post Ryu....

The only good samaritan laws I am aware of in Minnesota have to pertain with responding to someone in a an emergency, a medical emergency. It may however cover other areas as well.

[Judge Pen]

I have heard of some good samaritan laws that also require one to report a crime or call 911 wen they witness one occuring a la' Seinfeld's last episode.

[FatherDog]

Originally posted by Ryu
The problem with the whole "beserker" incident (:D ) is that what's being discussed is not reality in our society.

I think the main problem with the whole "beserker" incident is that beserker ate a bit too much paint as a child.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by red5angel
LC, I don't have a problem with taking the life of someone who threatens mine.

That's easy to say until you have to do it...

[Laughing Cow]

Sevenstar.

You beat me to it.

Taking a life is easy takes only a second or a fraction to do so (squeeze of a trigger, etc.)

Living with it afterwards is not.

Also remember that taking a life in a war and in civillian life is diferent.

I know many Vets that are still affected by incidents that happened during their service.

[Shaolin-Do]

Just playin Devils advocate here lc, agree with you wholley, cept that many GIs killed civilians while in war... making them one in the same... My neighbor being a perfect example of post vietnam alcoholic stereotypes..... kinda sad really...

Edit: my bad, just re-read your post. It is different, to an extent. Only difference is you dont know exactly why you are fighting the guy you are, you just know hes from somewhere else and deserves to die...

[TonyM.]

Post Vietnam alcoholics are almost always people whom have never been or were truck drivers or clerks in RVN. Myself and the other combat vets I know from the army and marines are reasonably well adjusted. Disclaimer: I was nuts before I went.;)
Experience has shown me that the people that express a lot of false bravado and willingness to kill are the ones that drop their weapons and run in a firefight. The smart squad leaders privately tell these blowhards that if they run they will be shot. Regardless of the circumstances, that trigger feels like it has a 500 pd. pull when your weapon is pointing at a live human being and you know he was given pretty much the same instructions and reason for fighting as you. Many people freeze and won't even fire in an attack. Some will fire without aiming. Regardless of the circumstances, you will feel tremendous guilt for shooting another human being. This is universal amongst human beings. Those that don't are refered to as liers or sociopaths.

[shaolinboxer]

"However, as a martial artist, could it potentially be our responsibilty to do something abotu this person right there and then, in the hopes they don't harm another later on?"

This a classic question. Here is a classic (but modern) response well worth reading.

http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/ellis_amdur.html