When am I NOT responsible for shooting a bystander?

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

I don't know that the immunity statute would apply to missingvthe bad guy and nailing an innocent bystander. Maybe it would. Maybe not.

I'm pretty sure that the armed citizen would NOT be strictly liable for the unintended harm to the bystander. It would be evaluated on the negligence standard.

1- duty of care owed to that victim.
2- breach of that duty.
3- factual cause of damages (this is easy--yes).
4- proximate cause (the harm was foreseeable AND the shooter's choice to take the shot was unreasonable.)

 

[mgonza]

If it was a crowd and I was close enough to engage, I would attempt to run as close as I could to the shooter and provide a double tap to the head if I can get behind it. If I am not close enough I would be running away. The potential damage to innocent lives from my gun is not worth it to me.

 

[Foxtrot Sierra]

Chiming in as a CCW licensee and former first responder who's been in some scary situations... but I'm no lawyer (okay, that little disclaimer is out of the way). As a father and a husband, in the OP's situation (or any, really), my first duty is to protect my family and myself. If my family were there with me, unless directly targeted, my first act is to get them and myself away from harm. If alone, the answer is still the same, because my first duty is to return to them unharmed. However, if directly targeted, all bets are off and I would like to think that I would not hesitate to engage the assailant (hopefully, smartly, using cover and other tactics, if available) in family/self-defense. If a bystander were hit by one of my bullets, I would fully expect to be held liable for it, and I'm sure it would take a huge mental, emotional, and financial toll.

Now that the brain answer is out of the way, here is the heart answer. I have taken an oath to serve the needs of others, and have done so at times to the sacrifice of personal health and/or family. If a huge number of people are being "mowed down" by an assailant and I am there and able to try and stop the crime, I cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt, that I would not try to do so against the best interest of personal well-being. We are all human, and such a decision will be answered by what lies at the core of our beliefs, values, and who we are as a human being. I may have to answer to a jury, and to a higher power, but I would hope that someone would take heart in the meaning of my actions that day. Unfortunately, the great many of us, myself included, cannot predict how we would act in a ****iation such as this.

As for the person who wrote about the 21 foot rule, that was the minimum distance and associated time required for an armed, but not drawn, individual to respond to an attacker. I don't believe one can generalize using that when speaking to running up and trying to stop an assailant with a weapon already drawn and being used. However, if proximity allows, use all of the tools at your disposal to your advantage, even those attached to your body (hands and feet).

 

[rosewood]

Manslaughter charges at the least. Vigilantism is not acceptable in today's society, there have been several folks arrested recently trying to "help" the police.

If you are handgun range, run him down and body slam the shooter. AKA the 21 ft rule.


IMHO, YMMV.

That 21ft rule only works if he hasn't drawn yet. If he has the gun pointed, it is 0 feet.

 

[summer44]

The question should be, should i shoot and not " will i be held accountable"

I would not shoot if I thought I would harm innocent people. I would have to be pretty damn sure my bullet would reach the intended target. You don't have the right to shoot or kill innocent people to save yourself, your loved ones or others even on accident. After all what if your loved ones are the innocent people and someone else is the good guy trying to take out the bad guy. Would you then feel the good guy needed to be held accountable? What if you kill someone's baby trying to get the bad guy and then later find out the bad guy was down to his last bullet. I am not saying I wouldn't take a shot to save my wife, children or grandchildren. I am just saying You need to be reasonable sure your skill level is up to par and you can apply it under stress. Think of all the deer hunters who are adequate shots with a rifle and then can't make a clean shot on a deer because of the excitement. Because you can hit paper on the range doesn't mean you can understande stress...

 

[nduffey]

There is a lot to consider:
1. There will be legal costs regardless of criminal charges or not. Think medical, insurance, personal, and maybe even criminal lawyer fees. GA does recognize a citizens right to use force in defense of himself and those around him. It does not recognize the right to harm other people who are not harming you. Accidents happen, the courts know it and even if there is a criminal trial, conviction would not be likely. Don't be shocked if you do get charged criminally though. Even when a law enforcement officer shoots someone in the course of his duties and its clearly justified, most district attorneys will convene a grand jury and present the facts. I have seen it done many times. Don't be shocked if the same happens to you.
2. The arriving LEO's likely will not know who the good guy is, but there is a great chance they now know there is more than one shooter and may have your clothing description relayed to them. In a situation like that, multiple people will call 911 and 911 will be updating the officers via radio constantly. It only takes seconds for them to know what you are wearing and your last known location. Be prepared for an intense couple of seconds and make sure your hands are empty and exposed when they arrive. You have the right to remain silent and don't have to say one word, but be dang sure you are listening to every word they say like your life depended on it.
3. If you have to deploy your weapon and use it, its been a bad day already regardless.

 

[BobcatMan]

2 things i feel important if you did have to take action is good sights that you are accurate with and have practiced different distances and a bullet that will not overpenetrate. the first 2 rounds in my barrel and mag are max expanders. Reason being when i shot them into a tote full of water they were caught easily and fell to the bottom of the tote. I did the same test with HST and Rangers and they went clear thru the water and both sides and into a tree the water was atleast 18inches across, not a true fbi gel test but it was good enough to show me, plus the max expanders open up wicked, no shrapnel 100% weight retention and im sure would do plenty of damage. I like the rangers to follow my to max expanders. I think the barnes solid copper HP or some powerball etc also have rounds that dont penetrate too much. i would imagine an hst or ranger would zip clear thru unless it hit some consideral bone.

 

[summer44]

don't hesitate. Run that gun. Train train train. If you tag a bystander after doing everything you can, so be it. Collateral damage happens in gunfights we do our best to mitigate it. I can tell you this; If you're being shot at you should be returning fire. We run these scenarios so often that when it comes time for business everyone's scared ****less to get their gun in the fight.
Try not to let emotions penetrate too deeply into the act of killing another man. I also believe this society has tried to convince us we should all feel sad and have a disability after we kill someone or watch someone die. just my 2 cents. Not a lawyer, but have had my fair share of gunfights.

So you are saying if you tag a four year old bc you missed the bad guy, so be it, you think that is acceptable? What collateral damage is acceptable on the battlefield isn't acceptable in a civilian setting. If killing another human justified or not doesn't have some kind of emotional impact, id say that's a sigh of a sociopath.

 

[atljetmech]

Yes, just start spraying and praying....maybe you'll hit the perp!
Everyone will understand you did your best under the circumstances and all will be well.

 

[spavent]

JUST HOPE THERE ARE 12 ODTERS ON THE JURY.LOL

Actually just need ONE committed ODT'er... that's willing to sit there and say not guilty til the end of time. Can you say Deadlock.