Cops in a shootout - help? Not help?

Lol. No.

Good luck not getting shot by the storm of officers he most likely called over the radio.

Good luck not getting in the way.

Good luck having them want you to “help”

Good luck actually being helpful.

For some cringe watch this video. This is probably best case (cop yells at you). Worst case you are dead
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-MRV230C44M


Don't you know who I am? lol.
 
Imagine living your life worrying about the one in a hundred millionth odds chance that you'll be put in such a situation.
a lot of gun owners (mostly new ones it seems) have a whole spank bank of imaginary hero scenarios they fap to. Normal gun owners think of finding ways to avoid shooting people.
 
No brainer. I hightail it as far away as possible.

My firearm defends myself and my family. When it does, I probably lose it forever. That’s a big enough risk for me and mine; the world I live in makes it unsafe for me to risk that for anyone else.

The hypothetical cop has every conceivable advantage in this world, regarding the use of deadly force. He’s certainly got a lot more advantages than I do. So he’s welcome to use all those advantages in defense of his life. I support him going all-out to defend himself. I wish he felt the same about me, but he probably doesn’t.
 
Imagine living your life worrying about the one in a hundred millionth odds chance that you'll be put in such a situation.

Aren't you the dude with NVG's and all sorts of tactical gear? I mean, the one in a hundred million odds you'd ever need that, I can't imagine how you're living your life! 🤣

Pretty sure a hypothetical on a forum doesn't mean everyone who asks or responds is living their lives in fear of that exact hypothetical scenario. But I suppose you never know.
 
here in MA, laws make in impossible for anyone to use a firearm unless in a personal immediate life threatening situation, so no.
 
here in MA, laws make in impossible for anyone to use a firearm unless in a personal immediate life threatening situation, so no.
It was my understanding you could intervene if someone else was reasonably likely to suffer grievous bodily harm and/or death (and was legally entitled to be where they were).
 
I’m absolutely not getting involved, there are way too many variables that could get me shot by the cop that needed help or arriving officers.
 
It was my understanding you could intervene if someone else was reasonably likely to suffer grievous bodily harm and/or death (and was legally entitled to be where they were).
huh?

Massachusetts is a duty to retreat state, which means that you cannot use deadly force even in self-defense if you can reasonably avoid harm by retreating (such as running away). If, however, you are cornered, or otherwise unable to retreat, you are legally allowed to use deadly force if your life is threatened.


good luck dealing with that in court.
 
huh?

Massachusetts is a duty to retreat state, which means that you cannot use deadly force even in self-defense if you can reasonably avoid harm by retreating (such as running away). If, however, you are cornered, or otherwise unable to retreat, you are legally allowed to use deadly force if your life is threatened.


good luck dealing with that in court.
In defense of others, one can theoretically act based on their ability to retreat. For example, though you could run away, you can act in defense of someone whose wheelchair had been knocked over.
 
huh?

Massachusetts is a duty to retreat state, which means that you cannot use deadly force even in self-defense if you can reasonably avoid harm by retreating (such as running away). If, however, you are cornered, or otherwise unable to retreat, you are legally allowed to use deadly force if your life is threatened.


good luck dealing with that in court.
huh?
from Mass.gov:
Therefore, a person may use reasonable force when that is necessary to help another person, if it reasonably appears that the person being aided is in a situation where the law would allow him to act in self-defense himself. If there is any evidence in this case that the defendant may have been coming to the aid of another person, you must find the defendant not guilty unless the Commonwealth proves beyond a reasonable doubt at least one of the following two things:
First: That a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would not have believed that his (her) use of force was necessary in order to protect
[third party] ; or
Second: That to a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would not have believed that [third party] was justified in using such force in his (her) own self-defense.

How is a cop in a shootout not acting in reasonable self-defense, and that by you using a firearm are not using a justified amount of force?
 
huh?
from Mass.gov:
Therefore, a person may use reasonable force when that is necessary to help another person, if it reasonably appears that the person being aided is in a situation where the law would allow him to act in self-defense himself. If there is any evidence in this case that the defendant may have been coming to the aid of another person, you must find the defendant not guilty unless the Commonwealth proves beyond a reasonable doubt at least one of the following two things:
First: That a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would not have believed that his (her) use of force was necessary in order to protect
[third party] ; or
Second: That to a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would not have believed that [third party] was justified in using such force in his (her) own self-defense.

How is a cop in a shootout not acting in reasonable self-defense, and that by you using a firearm are not using a justified amount of force?
... other than e.g. a no knock raid at the wrong address, of course.
 
In defense of others, one can theoretically act based on their ability to retreat. For example, though you could run away, you can act in defense of someone whose wheelchair had been knocked over.
i think in the practical application it will cost an enormous amount of $ spent on legal representation. laws are intentionally contradictive, but, a 'retreat' doctrine will always take preference in the liberal court.
 
i think in the practical application it will cost an enormous amount of $ spent on legal representation. laws are intentionally contradictive, but, a 'retreat' doctrine will always take preference in the liberal court.
This may be true. Which is why so many are saying they'd never intervene except for their own loved ones. I'm not offering advice, only clarifying about the legal principles at work.
 
Been thinking. Fictitious scenario:

You happen to be in a place when a police- involved shooting breaks out. It appears the cop is alone and engaged with a perp(?) who might or might not have a tactical advantage. You have a clear drop on the "bad" guy. Your intervention could save cop's life. For simplicity lets assume the situation is such that collateral damage is very very unlikely.

Do you engage? Do you look/ run the other way? Do you pull your phone and call 911 and/ or start recording?

I know there is no right or wrong answer here, but what would _YOU_ do?
Lot of responses op, lot of opinions.

So, what would_you_do?
 
Back
Top Bottom