Pro-Israel veteran arrested in Massachusetts after shooting pro-Palestine assailant that instigated the fight.

[Dilli GaHoot Galoot]

2 minutes ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

 

This discussion has little or nothing to do with “states rights” !  It has to do with criminal law and First and Second Amendment rights!

States have the right to define criminal law as they see fit, and not all states will use the same standard.   

Please don't twist that into me supporting the attacker, I don't.   But on a whole bunch of issues state laws will differ and what is the law  in OR TX or MAS  may not be the same in any other state

[Blackwater 53393]

7 minutes ago, Dilli GaHoot Galoot said:

States have the right to define criminal law as they see fit, and not all states will use the same standard.   

Please don't twist that into me supporting the attacker, I don't.   But on a whole bunch of issues state laws will differ and what is the law  in OR TX or MAS  may not be the same in any other state

Just to be clear. States have the right to define criminal behavior WITHIN the guidelines of the U.S. Constitution!!  They CANNOT criminalize Constitutionally protected rights.  The right to free speech and assembly, (First Amendment) and the right to keep and bear arms, (Second Amendment) including the right to protect one’s self.

 

No one has questioned the right of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to set standards within that framework.  The discussion has been about whether the man who was attacked had crossed any threshold that would preclude him from claiming self defense.

[Dilli GaHoot Galoot]

13 minutes ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

 The discussion has been about whether the man who was attacked had crossed any threshold that would preclude him from claiming self defense.

 

Right, I got that part, but (and serious question here) wouldn't that threshold depend on MAS law, which *might* have different standards than other states? 

 

[Blackwater 53393]

1 minute ago, Dilli GaHoot Galoot said:

 

Right, I got that part, but (and serious question here) wouldn't that threshold depend on MAS law, which *might* have different standards than other states? 

 

Part of what we were discussing and found that he had apparently not crossed any recognizable threshold within Mass. law.

[John Kloehr]

1 hour ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

Part of what we were discussing and found that he had apparently not crossed any recognizable threshold within Mass. law.

He did bring a firearm to a political demonstration. I think it is a good thing he did, but this is a common restriction in many states.

 

Not going to look it up again, but did look yesterday. Massatooshits (love it!) does have that law. He was not charged with this violation.

 

Will be interesting tension in court. Agree the assailant had no cause to attack due to any verbal provocation short of immediate credible threat of death or serious bodily injury. Also one can not claim self defense if they provoked an attack. Massatooshits also has duty to retreat in public.

 

Contrast with Tennessee law, one can not escalate and one can not claim self defense if they consent to an altercation. Consent can be withdrawn, escalation can not. Also Castle Doctrine and Stand your Ground apply here.

 

If I get the chance, I''ll try to look at a full video of the event. Until then, I can not comment much further.

[Subdeacon Joe]

From the link on page 2 to 9260,

 

"B. USE OF DEADLY FORCE
If the defendant (used deadly force, which is force intended or likely
to cause death or great bodily harm) (or) (used a dangerous weapon in a
manner intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm), the
Commonwealth must prove one of the following three things beyond a
reasonable doubt:
First, that the defendant did not reasonably and actually believe that
he (she) was in immediate danger of great bodily harm or death;

 

Having an assailant charge across a busy street,  tackle you and choke you should be sufficient to show reasonable belief of danger of death or serious injury. 

 

or
Second, that the defendant did not do everything reasonable in the
circumstances to avoid physical combat before resorting to force;

 

Being suddenly attacked and taken to the ground pretty much eliminated any reasonable any chance of avoiding contact. 

 

or
Third, that the defendant used more force to defend himself (herself)
than was reasonably necessary in the circumstances.
 

Being visiously attacked, choked, and taken to the ground by a deranged and violent stranger calls for strong and immediate measures.   He struggled briefly to try to free himself and only when he was unable to do so did he resort to deadly force.  

[Chantry]

Been away at the NY State match, so I'm late to the discussion.

 

Some of you live in free states and not the very blue states of MA, RI & CT.  If you shoot someone you are almost certainly going to be arrested and probably charged unless the facts are 100% in your favor.  It has nothing to do with common sense, facts or the law.  

 

I am not at all surprised the shooter was arrested and charged.  Here is a thread from a shooting website with mostly New England posters and most of them are not surprised either.  I will note that i did not read all 26 pages of the thread.  https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/police-respond-to-report-of-shooting-at-pro-israeli-protest-in-newton.479957/

 

I watched the video, that there were 2 people and the victim again the Pro Palestine protester is not going to help the defense.  We'll see what the coming days bring regarding this issue.

 

As an aside, MA has or is trying to pass a law that any non-resident of MA that comes into the state to attend a shooting match MUST register their guns with the state BEFORE entering the state.  Some more from the Mass legislature that has already been signed into law: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2024/Chapter135

[Texas Jack Black]

3 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

Part of what we were discussing and found that he had apparently not crossed any recognizable threshold within Mass. law.

 I did not say he did not cross any threshold I said it looks like he was de escalating But, the courts will decide if he acted in self defense.

 

Crazy Mass. laws about what  qualifies as self defense .The 2nd recognizes the right to self protection, The states determine what actually qualifies as self defense.