Those of us who can carry should carry whenever possible. Especially during these times of increased street violence. A July 4th incident at a Kroger grocery store in Columbus, Ohio illustrates why. A video showed an incident in which a mob accosted an armed individual. When the gun owner tried to de-escalate by escaping, one aggressor in particular responded by smashing the car’s windows.
At that point, with three windows broken out and a man wielding a metal club, the driver used his car as a deadly weapon against the primary aggressor. And yes, with a judicious application of horsepower, the driver sent the portly aggressor sliding across the asphalt as if lubricated by lard.
Here’s the video. Not safe for work because of language, violence and a sprinkling of male butt nudity.
In order for deadly force to be justified in most states, three factors must generally exist.
First, Ability: Does the attacker have the power or capability to immediately kill or grievously injure an innocent person?
Second, Opportunity: Is the attacker close enough to use that ability to kill or inflict injury right away?
Third, Jeopardy: Does the perpetrator intend to carry out a potentially deadly attack? In other words, would a reasonable and prudent person believe you, as the victim, are in jeopardy of death or great bodily harm?
In the Columbus Kroger incident, until the attacker began breaking out windows with his metal club, a conservative approach would suggest that deadly force isn’t yet justified. Specifically, a skeptical prosecutor could argue that the windows provided some degree of protection against the attack. At least enough for the victim to escape.
No doubt some would probably argue the verbal threats and the mob’s actions, coupled with the big guy wielding a metal club would satisfy the law’s requirements for the justifiable use of force. The Kroger altercation is still being investigated by police.
However, more and more prosecutors have won their elections with George Soros’ money. These prosecutors tend to have a very soft-on-crime approach to prosecutions, except when it comes to clear cases of self-defense against the criminal element. And that goes double for the law-abiding gun owners of the world.
As such, prudence requires the good guys to show exceptional restraint or they may face expensive legal fees fighting off a malicious prosecution.
In this case, once the big guy started swinging his metal club, smashing the car’s windows, responding officers and investigators can clearly identify him as the aggressor. And after using his club to break out not just one, but three windows, even the most skeptical juror would probably see that the use of deadly force was justified and appropriate.
Obviously, avoid confrontation whenever possible. But if attacked in one’s vehicle and the bad guys have the ability, opportunity and you are in jeopardy, you must act to save yourself, whether it’s with a firearm or with the car itself.
Then, your very next action after escaping the immediate scene should be to call 911 to report the attack. Generally speaking, whichever party calls 911 first is oftentimes considered to be the victim by responding officers. At least until credible evidence shows otherwise.