WOman sees man with gun, so runs over him with her car. Police won't charge her

[Little-Acorn]

Apples and oranges. Seat belts and insurance are required by law. I don't have a choice, so how I feel about it is irrelevant (and if I had my druthers I wouldn't).

On the other hand feeling like you need a gun just to go out, I mean where do you live -- West New York New Jersey? That's just one step removed from not going out at all. Sure you're within your rights; I just wonder what you must see in the world around you that that kind of approach would be necessary. Don't think I'd ever want to live in a world like that.

Carrying a gun on my person is like carrying a spare tire in the trunk of my car.

I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit.

Carrying a spare tire?

I can't even imagine what that world looks like.

I believe you.

 

[Vox]

You sure about that?

No. Actually I'd go with somebody else's entry of "vehicular homicide" or "vehicular assault". That's what I was trying to think of. But "deadly weapon" doesn't fit because a car is not a weapon just because fatal accidents happen. People die in plane crashes and amusement park rides; doesn't make them "weapons".

After your clarification I agree. deadly weapon doesn't fit anything can be a deadly weapon.

and anything ( even a fist) can be considered a deadly weapon. a vehicle is a weapon and is considered such under certain laws:


In some states, if you hit someone with a vehicle it can be classified as an assault with a deadly weapon in which the vehicle itself becomes the weapon.

Assault with a Weapon Laws | Damians Law


here are some interesting cases from Ohio where a spit became a deadly weapon .:
DEADLY WEAPONS

some are pretty ridiculous as a toy pistol, for example, but a car is definitely a deadly weapon.
Texas:
http://www.bakers-legal-pages.com/cca/notes/01/010717-000.htm

 

[Vox]

what let me guess you ate fruit loops for breakfast a 3000 lb car is a weapon....people are dying from car crashes as I write this. they are drunk, texting, on cell phones, speeding, eating a cheese burger, or getting a B.J. they are doing everything except driving the car....

No it isn't. A car is a transportation vehicle. The charge would be more along the lines of "reckless endangerment with a motor vehicle". But you can't pretend a car is designed to kill people. Therefore "assault with a deadly weapon" does not apply.

People have been charged with and convicted of assault with a deadly weapon using a car! Do you EVER get tired of looking THIS ******* STUPID?!

yes you are RIGHT.

(You have to remember who you are talking to, though. it's pogo )

Some states clearly consider a vehicle to be a deadly weapon.

by PA crimes code it can definitely be:

Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Title 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2301. Definitions.

"Deadly Weapon." Any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or serious bodily injury, or any other device or instrumentality which, in the manner in which it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or serious bodily injury. (effective June 6, 1973)


http://philadelphiacriminaldefense.blogspot.com/2009/05/can-car-be-deadly-weapon.html
I am charged with assault in state court in Pennsylvania for running over a pedestrian with my car. My lawyer tells me that two types of assault require the District Attorney to show that I used a deadly weapon in committing the assault. I had no weapon on me, i.e. gun, knife, etc., but she says that my car is the weapon. Is this true?

Yes. Your lawyer is absolutely correct. You can be charged with Aggravated Assault as felony of the second degree if you either intentionally or knowing caused bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon. Also you can be charged with Simple Assault as a misdemeanor of the second degree if you negligently cause bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon.

The Superior Court and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania have both held that a car can be the deadly weapon for the purpose of a conviction for assault as stated above.

 

[Missourian]

Apples and oranges. Seat belts and insurance are required by law. I don't have a choice, so how I feel about it is irrelevant (and if I had my druthers I wouldn't).

On the other hand feeling like you need a gun just to go out, I mean where do you live -- West New York New Jersey? That's just one step removed from not going out at all. Sure you're within your rights; I just wonder what you must see in the world around you that that kind of approach would be necessary. Don't think I'd ever want to live in a world like that.

Carrying a gun on my person is like carrying a spare tire in the trunk of my car.

I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit. I can't even imagine what that world looks like. Or if you're in that hell, why you don't move. That's why I call it a paranoia problem.

Doesn't seem drastic to me at all.

What's an extra 17 ounces every day?

Just watch the news.

Bad people do bad things to good people every day.

I think it's strange that more good people don't take advantage of the ability to protect themselves.

 

[Pogo]

Carrying a gun on my person is like carrying a spare tire in the trunk of my car.

I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit. I can't even imagine what that world looks like. Or if you're in that hell, why you don't move. That's why I call it a paranoia problem.

Doesn't seem drastic to me at all.

What's an extra 17 ounces every day?

Just watch the news.

Bad people do bad things to good people every day.

I think it's strange that more good people don't take advantage of the ability to protect themselves.

"Watch the news"?? Hehe, no thanks. I don't care for horror movies either. I deal in the real.

And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, the only time in my life I've ever been threatened with firearm violence was by police (if that's who they were - they never IDed themselves). And if I had been carrying at the time and drew on them in self defense, I'd be dead now.

 

[BobPlumb]

No it isn't. A car is a transportation vehicle. The charge would be more along the lines of "reckless endangerment with a motor vehicle". But you can't pretend a car is designed to kill people. Therefore "assault with a deadly weapon" does not apply.

You sure about that?

No. Actually I'd go with somebody else's entry of "vehicular homicide" or "vehicular assault". That's what I was trying to think of. But "deadly weapon" doesn't fit because a car is not a weapon just because fatal accidents happen. People die in plane crashes and amusement park rides; doesn't make them "weapons".

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

 

[Pogo]

You sure about that?

No. Actually I'd go with somebody else's entry of "vehicular homicide" or "vehicular assault". That's what I was trying to think of. But "deadly weapon" doesn't fit because a car is not a weapon just because fatal accidents happen. People die in plane crashes and amusement park rides; doesn't make them "weapons".

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

You're playing with words. Not funny. Planes are flying machines.

By this stretch, water could be a deadly weapon, when in the form of an icicle. Or in the hands of a waterboarder.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Apples and oranges. Seat belts and insurance are required by law. I don't have a choice, so how I feel about it is irrelevant (and if I had my druthers I wouldn't).

On the other hand feeling like you need a gun just to go out, I mean where do you live -- West New York New Jersey? That's just one step removed from not going out at all. Sure you're within your rights; I just wonder what you must see in the world around you that that kind of approach would be necessary. Don't think I'd ever want to live in a world like that.

Carrying a gun on my person is like carrying a spare tire in the trunk of my car.

I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit. I can't even imagine what that world looks like. Or if you're in that hell, why you don't move. That's why I call it a paranoia problem.

It's a world of being prepared, not much to get overly excited about really. Seeing people carry guns isn't all that scary.

Remember this? "The best defense from a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"...or car in this case.

I'm as pro gun as you can get, that doesn't mean I think people should be free to use them against others for criminal purposes. Now if the woman was just driving along and saw a guy with a gun and ran him over she should be put in prison for murder. In this case it would appear we had a guy with a fake gun up to no good and the lady did what she could to stop him. I have no complaints here.

 

[Vox]

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

ANYTHING can be a deadly weapon if decided as such by a court.

a vehicle is clearly a deadly weapon in the state of Pennsylvania, where the op incident occurred.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

You sure about that?

No. Actually I'd go with somebody else's entry of "vehicular homicide" or "vehicular assault". That's what I was trying to think of. But "deadly weapon" doesn't fit because a car is not a weapon just because fatal accidents happen. People die in plane crashes and amusement park rides; doesn't make them "weapons".

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

Anything can be a deadly weapon depending on the *sshole wielding it's intentions. Planes also save lives if you would care to look at that angle. The device isn't the problem it's what's in the persons head and their intentions are for using that item.

 

[Pogo]

Carrying a gun on my person is like carrying a spare tire in the trunk of my car.

I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit. I can't even imagine what that world looks like. Or if you're in that hell, why you don't move. That's why I call it a paranoia problem.

It's a world of being prepared, not much to get overly excited about really. Seeing people carry guns isn't all that scary.

Remember this? "The best defense from a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"...or car in this case.

I'm as pro gun as you can get, that doesn't mean I think people should be free to use them against others for criminal purposes. Now if the woman was just driving along and saw a guy with a gun and ran him over she should be put in prison for murder. In this case it would appear we had a guy with a fake gun up to no good and the lady did what she could to stop him. I have no complaints here.

Yeah I've heard that statement before. I have my own wording: "the answer to gun violence is ..... more guns!

Or as a wiser wag put it, "like trying to put out a fire by dousing it with gasoline". I mean, think about it.

 

[Pogo]

No. Actually I'd go with somebody else's entry of "vehicular homicide" or "vehicular assault". That's what I was trying to think of. But "deadly weapon" doesn't fit because a car is not a weapon just because fatal accidents happen. People die in plane crashes and amusement park rides; doesn't make them "weapons".

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

Anything can be a deadly weapon depending on the *sshole wielding it's intentions. Planes also save lives if you would care to look at that angle. The device isn't the problem it's what's in the persons head and their intentions are for using that item.

Seems to me that would be the verb.

"Assault with a deadly weapon" means an attack that took place with an instrument whose use could be deadly. The instrument itself is deadly.

"Vehicular homicide" means that a murder was committed using a motor vehicle. The vehicle is neutral; the action is the homicide.

 

[Vox]

No. Actually I'd go with somebody else's entry of "vehicular homicide" or "vehicular assault". That's what I was trying to think of. But "deadly weapon" doesn't fit because a car is not a weapon just because fatal accidents happen. People die in plane crashes and amusement park rides; doesn't make them "weapons".

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

Anything can be a deadly weapon depending on the *sshole wielding it's intentions. Planes also save lives if you would care to look at that angle. The device isn't the problem it's what's in the persons head and their intentions are for using that item.

exactly. in the state of Ohio a SPIT became a deadly weapon :
State v. Price, 162 Ohio App. 3d 677, 2005-Ohio-4150 -- Defendant, knowing he was HIV positive and had hepatitis, spit in an officer's face. On a felonious assault count the court concludes appellant's knowledge of his illness meant he knew his spit was a deadly weapon. This, combined with his approach to spit in the officer's face, supported conviction.
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/5/2005/2005-ohio-4150.pdf

 

[Pogo]

Planes aren't deadly weapons? Does 9-11 ring a bell.

Anything can be a deadly weapon depending on the *sshole wielding it's intentions. Planes also save lives if you would care to look at that angle. The device isn't the problem it's what's in the persons head and their intentions are for using that item.

exactly. in the state of Ohio a SPIT became a deadly weapon :
State v. Price, 162 Ohio App. 3d 677, 2005-Ohio-4150 -- Defendant, knowing he was HIV positive and had hepatitis, spit in an officer's face. On a felonious assault count the court concludes appellant's knowledge of his illness meant he knew his spit was a deadly weapon. This, combined with his approach to spit in the officer's face, supported conviction.
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/5/2005/2005-ohio-4150.pdf

Whatever. Again that's legalese playing loosely with language.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit. I can't even imagine what that world looks like. Or if you're in that hell, why you don't move. That's why I call it a paranoia problem.

It's a world of being prepared, not much to get overly excited about really. Seeing people carry guns isn't all that scary.

Remember this? "The best defense from a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"...or car in this case.

I'm as pro gun as you can get, that doesn't mean I think people should be free to use them against others for criminal purposes. Now if the woman was just driving along and saw a guy with a gun and ran him over she should be put in prison for murder. In this case it would appear we had a guy with a fake gun up to no good and the lady did what she could to stop him. I have no complaints here.

Yeah I've heard that statement before. I have my own wording: "the answer to gun violence is ..... more guns!

Or as a wiser wag put it, "like trying to put out a fire by dousing it with gasoline". I mean, think about it.

Actually I think you do need to think about but with a more realistic mind.

First of all our criminal element represents approximately 1% of our population yet does 98% of the crime. They aren't going to be disarmed in their activities regardless of laws you pass. If they can't get a gun they use a bat, a knife, a sword or even an airsoft gun. Anything to get the advantage over their chosen victim. But they have the advantage of surprise along with that intimidation of having a weapon you don't. Normal people don't have that advantage of surprise against them. Therefore being prepared for any event is the most logical conclusion a person could make, and that means arming yourself at all times.

Defenseless citizens have no recourse and therefor are at the whim of the criminal element when they arrive with superior weaponry. The absolute best defensive weapon a good citizen can have on hand is a gun. It not only counter acts the criminals highest power weapon it trumps anything the less than intelligent criminal can round up.

More guns in good peoples hands are not adding gas to the fire, it's adding fire extinguisher's to counter the fire starters.

 

[Vox]

Anything can be a deadly weapon depending on the *sshole wielding it's intentions. Planes also save lives if you would care to look at that angle. The device isn't the problem it's what's in the persons head and their intentions are for using that item.

exactly. in the state of Ohio a SPIT became a deadly weapon :
State v. Price, 162 Ohio App. 3d 677, 2005-Ohio-4150 -- Defendant, knowing he was HIV positive and had hepatitis, spit in an officer's face. On a felonious assault count the court concludes appellant's knowledge of his illness meant he knew his spit was a deadly weapon. This, combined with his approach to spit in the officer's face, supported conviction.
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/docs/pdf/5/2005/2005-ohio-4150.pdf

Whatever. Again that's legalese playing loosely with language.

for dumbasses like yourself anything more complicated than libtard propaganda is too damn hard

 

[OriginalShroom]

This woman needs to be arrested and the case taken to court for the facts to be laid out.

She should be charged with attempted Murder along with several lesser charges including charges due to the fact that he had an ear cut off due to her actions.

I carry a gun with me every day. I have a gun with reach nearly 24/7. Yet I would never consider pulling my gun and shooting someone unless I knew for a "Fact" and was not assuming, that they were doing something wrong.

Simply carrying a gun in public is not illegal in an Open Carry or Consitutional Carry State.

 

[Missourian]

Of course you hope you won't need it. No question there.

I just wonder what kind of world you guys see out there that would bring you to that drastic of a habit. I can't even imagine what that world looks like. Or if you're in that hell, why you don't move. That's why I call it a paranoia problem.

Doesn't seem drastic to me at all.

What's an extra 17 ounces every day?

Just watch the news.

Bad people do bad things to good people every day.

I think it's strange that more good people don't take advantage of the ability to protect themselves.

"Watch the news"?? Hehe, no thanks. I don't care for horror movies either. I deal in the real.

And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, the only time in my life I've ever been threatened with firearm violence was by police (if that's who they were - they never IDed themselves). And if I had been carrying at the time and drew on them in self defense, I'd be dead now.

You don't watch the news?

Do you read the local paper?

That's the start of the day almost every day for me, watch the news when I get up, listen to the news in the bathroom during the three S's, read the paper with breakfast.

 

[Pogo]

It's a world of being prepared, not much to get overly excited about really. Seeing people carry guns isn't all that scary.

Remember this? "The best defense from a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"...or car in this case.

I'm as pro gun as you can get, that doesn't mean I think people should be free to use them against others for criminal purposes. Now if the woman was just driving along and saw a guy with a gun and ran him over she should be put in prison for murder. In this case it would appear we had a guy with a fake gun up to no good and the lady did what she could to stop him. I have no complaints here.

Yeah I've heard that statement before. I have my own wording: "the answer to gun violence is ..... more guns!

Or as a wiser wag put it, "like trying to put out a fire by dousing it with gasoline". I mean, think about it.

Actually I think you do need to think about but with a more realistic mind.

First of all our criminal element represents approximately 1% of our population yet does 98% of the crime. They aren't going to be disarmed in their activities regardless of laws you pass. If they can't get a gun they use a bat, a knife, a sword or even an airsoft gun. Anything to get the advantage over their chosen victim. But they have the advantage of surprise along with that intimidation of having a weapon you don't. Normal people don't have that advantage of surprise against them. Therefore being prepared for any event is the most logical conclusion a person could make, and that means arming yourself at all times.

Defenseless citizens have no recourse and therefor are at the whim of the criminal element when they arrive with superior weaponry. The absolute best defensive weapon a good citizen can have on hand is a gun. It not only counter acts the criminals highest power weapon it trumps anything the less than intelligent criminal can round up.

More guns in good peoples hands are not adding gas to the fire, it's adding fire extinguisher's to counter the fire starters.

I'm afraid that analogy doesn't work. You'd need something like an anti-gun -- a device which would render nearby guns useless. Then you'd have an analogical fire extinguisher.

-- which is kind of a fascinating idea; I'm tempted to poll the site on a question like, "if you could walk around with either a gun or an anti-gun, which would you choose?"

But fighting guns with more guns is just escalation, not equalization. Wouldn't matter what the weapon was; if everyone walked around with a knife, then everyone would have the means and opportunity to stab someone. All they would need would be motive. And they probably wouldn't have to wait long. At the root of all this is the culture of violence and the value of might-makes-right, but we'll have to leave it there lest we wend off topic.

 

[Pogo]

Doesn't seem drastic to me at all.

What's an extra 17 ounces every day?

Just watch the news.

Bad people do bad things to good people every day.

I think it's strange that more good people don't take advantage of the ability to protect themselves.

"Watch the news"?? Hehe, no thanks. I don't care for horror movies either. I deal in the real.

And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, the only time in my life I've ever been threatened with firearm violence was by police (if that's who they were - they never IDed themselves). And if I had been carrying at the time and drew on them in self defense, I'd be dead now.

You don't watch the news?

Do you read the local paper?

That's the start of the day almost every day for me, watch the news when I get up, listen to the news in the bathroom during the three S's, read the paper with breakfast.

OK I'm kind of speaking broadly there. I should specify: I don't watch commercial news, i.e. the standard if-it-bleeds-it-leads mass media bullshit, because I know it's tailored to maximize audience, and therefore will skew itself toward mayhem and riots and fires and death and depravity above all else, and that's not the real world. Certainly not the one I see with my own senses.

And really never in the morning.