[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles

Title: Pittsburgh Murder Conviction Shows Why Being Afraid Doesn’t Make It Self-Defense
Source: Bearing Arms
URL Source: https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/ ... conviction-illustrates-hammer/
Published: Jan 28, 2018
Author: Tom Knighton
Post Date: 2018-01-30 05:35:58 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1224
Comments: 24

When you talk about self-defense shooting, the phrase “I was in fear of my life” gets thrown around a lot. Some will even try and argue that you can use that argument to justify almost any shooting, that as long as you can say you were scared then a jury will let you off the hook.

Which, of course, is complete and total bovine excrement.

Don’t believe me? Tell it to this guy.

A ride-share van passenger convicted of murder in the shooting death of a man outside a Pittsburgh club has been sentenced to 15 to 30 years in prison.

Thirty-eight-year-old Derek Vasos testified that he was “scared to death” when he shot 28-year-old Donald Ketter Jr. early on Feb. 5 outside the Carrick Literary Club. He said Ketter appeared to be in a rage and seemed to have something in his hands. At Thursday’s sentencing, the judge said that Ketter posed no danger.

If he was “scared to death,” why was he convicted?

Well, the story is sparse, but it appears that the fear was all in Vasos’s head.

But Judge Cashman discounted those claims.

“There was no danger you were in. You weren’t going to suffer serious bodily injury or death,” the judge said.

At trial, testimony showed that Vasos had gotten into an Uber after leaving the after-hours Carrick Lit Club early in the morning of Feb. 5.

As the Uber was pulling away on Copperfield Avenue, its path was blocked by Mr. Ketter, who was standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic.

Vasos, who was sitting in the Uber’s front, passenger seat, honked the car’s horn, but Mr. Ketter didn’t move.

Vasos testified that Mr. Ketter appeared to be in a rage, took off his belt and wrapped it around his hand in what he interpreted as a threat. As Mr. Ketter approached Vasos’ window, Vasos said he pulled out his legally possessed gun and fired once out of fear. He then fled in the Uber, eventually turning himself in hours later.

The fact that Vasos left the scene probably didn’t help his case.

However, the real deciding factor was probably the fact that, as things stood, the worst he was going to get was a butt whooping. In almost no state are you justified in using lethal force to stop a butt whooping.

Vasos may well have been terrified. I’m not going to dispute that.

However, for lethal force to be justified, it needs to pass the reasonable man test. Would a reasonable man believe there is a threat of serious bodily harm or even death. While I don’t want to get in a scrap with an enraged guy who has wrapped his fist in a belt, that doesn’t justify an armed response in and of itself.

At least, that’s what the jury found.

This is an important thing to keep in mind when you’re talking about an armed response. You need to understand what may or may not be considered justification for lethal force. Just saying you’re scared isn’t enough, nor should it be.

 


Poster Comment:

Different rules apply for cops.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Deckard (#0)

Different rules apply for cops.

They certainly seem to, and I cannot support the distinction made in their favor.

Vicomte13  posted on  2018-01-30   6:48:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Different rules apply for cops.

They certainly seem to, and I cannot support the distinction made in their favor.

The definition of seem: “Give the impression of being something.””

Rather than making a decision on an impression, would it be better to have a thorough grasp of the various facts before deciding not to support something?

Some would think so …

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   9:09:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Deckard (#0)

In almost no state are you justified in using lethal force to stop a butt whooping.

How do we know this maniac was going to stop with a butt whooping?

The guy was "in a rage" and "standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic". He took off his belt (a lethal weapon) and approached the car.

Unless you started the fight, why should any armed individual have to tolerate a butt whooping? Bad ruling.

misterwhite  posted on  2018-01-30   10:01:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Deckard (#0)

When you talk about self-defense shooting, the phrase “I was in fear of my life” gets thrown around a lot. Some will even try and argue that you can use that argument to justify almost any shooting, that as long as you can say you were scared then a jury will let you off the hook.

I was with ya until I read the story.

The guy was INSIDE a car when he shot out the window to hit the guy that he THOUGHT was GOING to harm him.

He had the option of keeping his window rolled up and just driving away.

Granted,he,as well as everyone else should have a reasonable expectation he can leave a bar at night and not be attacked,but it ain't like he was cornered in an alley.

It's really pretty basic,if you don't HAVE to shoot,you DON'T shoot.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-01-30   10:13:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Gatlin (#2)

Rather than making a decision on an impression, would it be better to have a thorough grasp of the various facts before deciding not to support something?

Some would think so …

No. We live in a complex world, and we only have the time to be really good and deeply informed about the things that we are directly engaged with in our lives: our jobs, our families, etc.

Nevertheless, as citizens and voters, we have absolute power over the way the country is run. WE, not the professionals, are the ultimate deciders, through our votes.

It is therefore incumbent on the professionals who depend on us: our financial support, our voting support and our goodwill, to do everything possible to inform us, and to serve us in the way that we wish to be served.

In particular, it is incumbent on them to practice good public relations, to make it such that we have confidence in what they are doing. This is done in a variety of ways, but it is THEIR responsibility to make the effort and put on the show to satisfy US.

It is NOT our responsibility to withhold our judgment, withhold exercising our power as the sovereign: voters, taxpayers - until we have all of the facts. That would mean, in effect, that we simply stayed home, did not vote, did not force change when we don't like the appearance of something, because we can never be as well informed as the insiders.

However, we, not the professionals, are the insiders, and we decide, based on imperfect knowledge. It's THEIR job to keep us happy by what they generally do, to sell and promote themselves.

When they permit themselves a pattern of crappy conduct that becomes so pervasive that we take note and start turning against them, THEY have the problem, and THEY need to police themselves and clean up their act and stop having even the APPEARANCE of impropriety.

We do not have the time, the inclination or the duty to be perfectly informed, but we do have the absolute power to determine what the law will be, what budgets will be, who will be favored and who will be cut off.

That is democracy in a republic.

So no, it is not our job to be perfectly or deeply informed. It's the job of the police to behave in such a manner that they are not constantly coming before the public as killers, dog-killers, corrupt criminals and 'roid raging scumbags. They have to do a much better job of policing themselves. We don't have to do anything more than we are doing. We, not they, are the sovereign. They serve us, and they had better please us, or eventually we will turn on them politically and start prosecuting them, cutting them way back, etc., as is our right.

It should not be all that hard for the cops to police themselves. They are not doing a good job of that right now, and they had better start in a hurry, or it's going to be more and more miserable to be a cop, because the public will turn on them - and we're they're boss, not the other way around. Look how the public just creamed the professional politicians of both parties by electing Trump. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton really believed themselves entitled to power because of family, insider status, connections. They were both broken and disgraced by a public who were tired of them. We live in a democracy - in the end, the people rule.

Vicomte13  posted on  2018-01-30   10:13:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Gatlin (#2)

Rather than making a decision on an impression, would it be better to have a thorough grasp of the various facts before deciding not to support something?

Some would think so …

Give it up. There is not a day that goes by without a cop shooting somebody and walking away from it free,where a "citizen" without a badge would have been arrested and sent to trial.

It's the judicial system,like every other system ever created,looking out for itself.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-01-30   10:15:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: misterwhite (#3)

The guy was "in a rage" and "standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic". He took off his belt (a lethal weapon) and approached the car.

And the shooter was inside the car,shooting out the window.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-01-30   10:16:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Vicomte13 (#5)

Rather than making a decision on an impression, would it be better to have a thorough grasp of the various facts before deciding ...

No. We live in a complex world, and we only have the time to be really good and deeply informed about the things that we are directly engaged with in our lives: our jobs, our families, etc.

/..../

We do not have the time, the inclination or the duty to be perfectly informed ...

Impression is defined as an idea or feeling about something or someone, especially one formed without conscious thought or on the basis of little evidence.

I would not feel comfortable and therefore I would not make a decision without conscious thought or on the basis of little evidence. If called upon to do so, I could express and “opinion” and I would clearly state that it was an opinion.

Thank you for responding to my post …

I will leave you with this:

Confucius said:

Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated.
Perhaps the same can be said about the world….we insist on making it complex.

A. Lee Martinez, In the Company of Ogres:

I believe it was the great ogre philosopher Gary who observed that complexity is, generally speaking, an illusion of conscious desire. All things exist in as simple a form as necessity dictates. When a thing is labeled 'complex,' that's just a roundabout way of saying you're not observant enough to understand it.

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   14:25:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: sneakypete (#6) (Edited)

Give it up. ...

Okay....since you said so.

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   14:33:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: sneakypete (#7) (Edited)

The guy was "in a rage" and "standing in the middle of the street blocking traffic". He took off his belt (a lethal weapon) and approached the car.
As Mr. Ketter approached Vasos’ window, Vasos said he pulled out his legally possessed gun and fired once out of fear.
And the shooter was inside the car,shooting out the window.
Uh, let’s see how being inside the car with the window rolled up protects someone from rage.

Sitting in a car with the window rolled up is no protection, the man in this video had a baton….the man in the article had a belt with a buckle that would do the same thing …

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   14:48:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Gatlin (#10) (Edited)

Sitting in a car with the window rolled up is no protection,

It is if the car is running. He is shielded and can just put the car in gear and drive off.

You NEVER kill anyone as long as there are any other options available to you.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-01-30   15:02:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: sneakypete (#11)

It is if the car is running. He is shielded and can just put the car in gear and drive off.

You NEVER kill anyone as long as there are any other options available to you.

Bullshit.

I have just PROVEN to you with videos that a car window is NO shield.

Furthermore, the article stated traffic was BLOCKED so the Uber driver was not able to JUST put the car in gear and drive off.

You should NEVER make assumptions when all the facts are not available to you. Which brings me back to the point I was making on another post when you jumped in off my topic …

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   15:22:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Gatlin (#12)

Bullshit.

I have just PROVEN to you with videos that a car window is NO shield.

Are you retarded,or just a drunken coward?

You must live your life in constant terror if you are in a running vehicle and are still afraid of a man coming at you with a belt wrapped around his hand,like a cast member of a NYC musical.

You just drive away,dumbass!

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-01-30   18:51:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: sneakypete (#11)

It is if the car is running. He is shielded and can just put the car in gear and drive off.

This assumes he was truly shielded. He was certainly reasonably shielded, but that assumes all the guy had was a fist wrapped in a belt. If he had a gun instead or in addition, then obviously a rolled up window would do no good.

To that end, this seems to have been his undoing:

Vasos testified that Mr. Ketter appeared to be in a rage, took off his belt and wrapped it around his hand in what he interpreted as a threat.

He admitted in court he knew the guy had a fist wrapped in a belt, ergo, that he had no gun in at least that hand. It seems he had no way to legitimize in court any fear that the guy had a gun.

Of course if he said the guy reached f or his waistband that may have gotten him off as it gets cops off all the time, it works well as that's the natural place for any person's hand to be more often than not.

You NEVER kill anyone as long as there are any other options available to you.

A good rule. But yes, in spite of what I said, the case does show a double standard between cops and civs. Cops are no doubt well versed in the importance of articulating a true fear of getting killed, whereas civs are not.

Pinguinite  posted on  2018-01-30   19:51:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: sneakypete (#13) (Edited)

You just drive away,dumbass!

He COULDN'T DRIVE AWAY you stupid asshole....traffic was "blocked."

Read the article.

You always have an answer for everything....it's too bad that one cannot be rigtht sometime.

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   20:02:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: sneakypete (#15) (Edited)

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.” The victim fell and and was kicked until someone intervened to help. The attacker was later arrested on the charge of “assault with a dangerous weapon. The weapon”….police said, was the "belt buckle.

Here is different case where five men attacked three people “with a with a belt buckle on Georgia Avenue in Northwest DC.” The beating was so brutal, investigators said the two male victims were taken to the hospital.

So, don’t say a car window is “shield, don’t say a car can drive away when traffic is “blocked” and never say that a belt with a buckle cannot when used to attack someone and will not be a dangerous “felony assault.”

I’m done here….I am convinced that you are dumber than Deckard and I shall waste no more time with you. Believe whatever in the Hell you wish to …

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-30   20:51:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Gatlin (#16)

I’m done here….I am convinced that you are dumber than Deckard and I shall waste no more time with you. Believe whatever in the Hell you wish to …

Most of all I believe you get wood at the thought of shooting someone to death.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-01-30   21:19:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: sneakypete (#17) (Edited)

No, but I do get continually amazed at your narrow-minded ignorance.

I repeat for your stupidity....READ VERY SLOWLY....you may use your finger to follow the words:

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.” The victim fell and and was kicked until someone intervened to help. The attacker was later arrested on the charge of “assault with a dangerous weapon. The weapon”….police said, was the "belt buckle.

So, don’t say a car window is “shield, don’t say a car can drive away when traffic is “blocked” and never say that a belt with a buckle cannot when used to attack someone and will not be a dangerous “felony assault.”

Gatlin  posted on  2018-01-31   8:41:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Gatlin (#18)

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.” The victim fell and and was kicked until someone intervened to help. The attacker was later arrested on the charge of “assault with a dangerous weapon. The weapon”….police said, was the "belt buckle.

So, don’t say a car window is “shield, don’t say a car can drive away when traffic is “blocked” and never say that a belt with a buckle cannot when used to attack someone and will not be a dangerous “felony assault.”

I think you are just so scared you need to remain locked in your house and have everything delivered to you.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-02-01   7:13:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: sneakypete (#19) (Edited)

I think you are just so scared you need to remain locked in your house and have everything delivered to you.

You are free to say that, but don’t you ever again say a car window is “shield, don’t say a car can drive away when traffic is “blocked” and never say that a belt with a buckle cannot when used to attack someone and will not be a dangerous “felony assault.”

Since ...

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.” The victim fell and and was kicked until someone intervened to help. The attacker was later arrested on the charge of “assault with a dangerous weapon. The weapon”….police said, was the "belt buckle.

Gatlin  posted on  2018-02-01   7:58:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Gatlin (#20)

You are free to say that, but don’t you ever again say a car window is “shield, don’t say a car can drive away when traffic is “blocked” and never say that a belt with a buckle cannot when used to attack someone and will not be a dangerous “felony assault.”

Since ...

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.”

I think you should just stay at home and cower with fear so no belt buckle can launch a sneak attack on you when you're not looking.

Unless of course you are handicapped in some way and unable to defend yourself.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-02-01   11:16:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: sneakypete (#21)

You are free to say that, but don’t you ever again say a car window is “shield, don’t say a car can drive away when traffic is “blocked” and never say that a belt with a buckle cannot when used to attack someone and will not be a dangerous “felony assault.”

Since ...

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.”

Gatlin  posted on  2018-02-01   12:30:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Gatlin (#22)

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.”

None of that means anything to me because if someone approached me like that and started to bust out my car window,I'd go after his ass. Belt buckle ain't shit if you don't let him hit you with it.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-02-01   12:52:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: sneakypete (#23)

I have shown you with two videos where a car window Is no “shield.” I then called to your attention where it stated in the article that traffic was “blocked” and the Uber driver could not “drive away.” Now I will now show you here where a man was attacked and assaulted with a “belt buckle.”

None of that means anything to me because if someone approached me like that and started to bust out my car window,I'd go after his ass. Belt buckle ain't shit if you don't let him hit you with it.

Pete, to be perfectly frank….I really don’t give a shit what you SAY you would do, because the discussion here was never about what you would do. The discussion was always about the individual in the vehicle.

In that regard and after considering your comments….I took everything that you said …

  • The individual in the vehicle had the car window to protect him.
  • The vehicle would have been placed in gear and driven away.
  • And the belt (with buckle) was no threatening weapon.
… and proved with videos and actual law case history where you were wrong.

That’s all I set out to do….that’s what I did it….now I will move on.

Gatlin  posted on  2018-02-01   14:52:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com