This makes me pretty angry

[TJay74]

IIRC it is called the Castle Doctrine in Flordia, alot of states have it, I think it is pretty much the same as our Stand Your Ground law

Actually Oklahoma patterned our SYG law off of Florida's law due to the success Florida saw with their law.

 

[BIG_MIKE2005]

WOW, just read from another forum & a member who is local to this event that 3 of the teenage girls who were involved have been on the news with their parents claiming they are the victims & the kids were just innocently waiting on a ride & it was the couples fault.

Never ceases to amaze me how utterly blind some people are to how their kids can act when mommy & daddy arent around. Its like its unbelievable to them that their kids could do any wrong. Or they know they did wrong but will still defend them to their fullest.

 

[JWE]

WOW, just read from another forum & a member who is local to this event that 3 of the teenage girls who were involved have been on the news with their parents claiming they are the victims & the kids were just innocently waiting on a ride & it was the couples fault.

Never ceases to amaze me how utterly blind some people are to how their kids can act when mommy & daddy arent around. Its like its unbelievable to them that their kids could do any wrong. Or they know they did wrong but will still defend them to their fullest.

Those brats sure know how to pull the wool over mommy's and daddy's eyes.

 

[Kingmarine]

WOW, just read from another forum & a member who is local to this event that 3 of the teenage girls who were involved have been on the news with their parents claiming they are the victims & the kids were just innocently waiting on a ride & it was the couples fault.

Never ceases to amaze me how utterly blind some people are to how their kids can act when mommy & daddy arent around. Its like its unbelievable to them that their kids could do any wrong. Or they know they did wrong but will still defend them to their fullest.

I know some kids who are younger, but act just like that. They steal my kids toys if not checked and all kinds of stuff, but around their mom they are total angels.

 

[BIG_MIKE2005]

I guess I'm stuck in the wrong generation. I was by no means a angel kid, I did my fair share of bad stuff & I still remember it all. I remember how sneaky I was & I'm smart enough to know my kids will eventually try some things but I watch them like a hawk as well. I know when they are lying & I know when they are guilty. I love them but I will not shelter them from justice if they do wrong. Otherwise I'm teaching them its ok to do & no severe punishment will come for their actions.

I just should have been born back in the 60's, LOL

 

[Glocktogo]

WOW, just read from another forum & a member who is local to this event that 3 of the teenage girls who were involved have been on the news with their parents claiming they are the victims & the kids were just innocently waiting on a ride & it was the couples fault.

Never ceases to amaze me how utterly blind some people are to how their kids can act when mommy & daddy aren't around. Its like its unbelievable to them that their kids could do any wrong. Or they know they did wrong but will still defend them to their fullest.

Isn't that pretty much always the way it is? Even when their rotten to the core kids wind up on a slab or in prison for killing someone, they're just just an innocent little angel!

 

[Werewolf]

I cannot get the article to pull up, but in Oklahoma, if you are facing a disparity of force, then yes, you are justified in using deadly force.

I have been told disparity of force is man on woman, man on child, or multiple attackers on anyone.

Cite?

I was taught in my CCW course by an attorney that OK does not directly recognize disparity of force as a justifiable use of deadly force.

One must fear for their life, and the assailants must have the intent, opportunity and means to commit severe or lethal harm before one may use deadly force against them (exception to that being the SDA laws).

In a case where a 100 teens are coming after you common sense would seem to be that yeah your life is threatened but how would you prove that the one that got shot and died met the criteria; especially if the unlucky one to get hit was 14 and a girl for example? Might be pretty tough to do. Shooting into a mob? Interesting legal question. Maybe one of our resident barristers can weigh in on this.

That marine was in a really difficult situation. He and his wife were extremely lucky.

 

[BluRaySS]

300 bystanders and they did nothing to help...... nice.

 

[TJay74]

Cite?

I was taught in my CCW course by an attorney that OK does not directly recognize disparity of force as a justifiable use of deadly force.

One must fear for their life, and the assailants must have the intent, opportunity and means to commit severe or lethal harm before one may use deadly force against them (exception to that being the SDA laws).

In a case where a 100 teens are coming after you common sense would seem to be that yeah your life is threatened but how would you prove that the one that got shot and died met the criteria; especially if the unlucky one to get hit was 14 and a girl for example? Might be pretty tough to do. Shooting into a mob? Interesting legal question. Maybe one of our resident barristers can weigh in on this.

That marine was in a really difficult situation. He and his wife were extremely lucky.

While your trainer may of have said that, the actual wording the SYG act is worded for your home or on your property (ie car, bike, 4 wheeler or such)

Being out in public is a whole new aspect and or area, if someone approaces you and is showing intent to do harm then I would say you can assume they are going to do great bodily harm to you and or your companion and you would be justified in defending yourself using force up to and including lethal force.

Sorry, while the attorneys that teach those course mean well, they also expect people to use common sense when in certain situations.

So once again 15 on 2 and people are hitting me and or my wife then I am not going to be nice and offer them a lollipop, I am going to present what I feel like I need to in order to make the threat stop and or go away.

 

[gillman7]

Cite?

I was taught in my CCW course by an attorney that OK does not directly recognize disparity of force as a justifiable use of deadly force.

One must fear for their life, and the assailants must have the intent, opportunity and means to commit severe or lethal harm before one may use deadly force against them (exception to that being the SDA laws).

In a case where a 100 teens are coming after you common sense would seem to be that yeah your life is threatened but how would you prove that the one that got shot and died met the criteria; especially if the unlucky one to get hit was 14 and a girl for example? Might be pretty tough to do. Shooting into a mob? Interesting legal question. Maybe one of our resident barristers can weigh in on this.

That marine was in a really difficult situation. He and his wife were extremely lucky.

As I stated, could not read the article, OP just said several against one, that is what I posted from.

OK SYG law says you have know duty to retreat in any lawful place, and can resist with reasonable force. That is to say that you cannot shoot someone for calling you a name, or even punching you. There has to be a fear of serious bodily injury, or death. Disparity of force is the defining factor. Disparity can be shown if you are medically limited versus your attacker, for example an elderly person in a walker against a 20 something agressor, a man as the agressor to a woman, or several combatants against a single victim.

Basic common sense. No you don't fire into a crowd of kids, if you are in fear, it is identified. As Rusty said, first order of business is stay alive. Lawyers are great for looking for loopholes and slanting the circumstances to promote their clients view. Personally, I have seen more disinformation posted from "what the lawyer in my CCW class" said than anything else. They always seem to conflict. They are blamed from "If you pull the gun, you have to kill them", to "You can't find the words disparity of force, so don't shoot anyone until they shoot first" mentality.

I really have an issue with people focusing on when we can shoot, rather than weighing the implications of every round that leaves the gun. Killing or shooting someone should always be a last resort, and a first reaction of when your life is threatened.