From: gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: how self-defense != vigilanteeism
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:41:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Just thought some of you folks might benefit from my verbiage on a thread
about a female student being assaulted here at Ga Tech.
I do try to avoid reference to lethal force, especially in a collegiate
environment where *clearly* it would be illegal for me to have
a lethal weapon such as a big knife or a firearm.

In <71139@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt0178a@prism.gatech.EDU (Jim Burns) writes:
>in article <70751@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gt1111a@prism.gatech.EDU (Vincent Fox) says:
>> care of them.  It has been true for all of human history that *you* have
>> primary responsibility for your own health.  Hiring other people to 
>> guarantee your safety is usually an expensive and uncertain substitute.

>And then they accuse you of vigilantism. Or is it only in the movies that
>neighborhood patrol groups get hassled by the police? What's involved in
>safely & legally taking the law into your own hands?

Every beat cop I've ever talked to is all for the idea of the citizen
taking measures to protect themselves. Politically appointed police
commissioners and lawyers however have different ideas. Crime stats
reflect this in that most self-defense cases raise no ripples other
than the officer filling out the report. A much smaller number of questionable
self-defense cases on which charges are brought do make the news, thus
leaving the false impression that self-defense will automatically mean you
will be in some kind of legal trouble.

A vigilante is someone who hunts down, judges, and carries out sentence
on an alleged criminal after the fact. As in the victim tells a relative
that so-and-so did thus-and-such. Said relative hunts down the accused
well after the incident and beats them up say. This is clearly vigilante
behavior. Dealing with an immediate threat to your person is clearly
*not* vigilante behaviour since you are responding to, not initiating,
violent actions. Legal code generally recognizes it in the sense that
the law has to prove that assailant no longer posed a threat to you.
If you (or LAPD) have tied and subdued your assailant, and then start
raining blows on them anyway, you might have some legal worries.
Defending yourself in no way makes you a vigilante, at least according
to my dictionary or Georgia legal code as practiced.

You are the only one on the scene, and if force is necessary to make an
escape, force is good. The primary objective though in self-defense is
not to wreak vengeance upon your assailants, but rather to terminate
the encounter. This typically involves at very minimum, making it
immediately apparent to the attacker that *you* are not easy prey by, for
example, shouting at them angrily. Make their job as hard as possible.
It is quite wrongly common knowledge that one should submit to a 
mugging for example. 25% percent of people who submit peacefully
are injured *anyway*. People who resist in some fashion are at less
risk of injury according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report.  I would note that,
based on the story we read, after the young lady recently kicked the
rapist in the groin, he suddenly remembered another appointment.

There are I believe self-defense classes here and elsewhere that
cover this in detail. Someone else should comment on what
specfically Georgia Tech offers (OPTIONS course I assume?), and
I seem to recall that GTPD holds informational sessions. 

I *do not* wish to advocate that anyone spend a lot of time learning martial
arts or learning about weapons (although they are fun). A good self-defense
course will show you how to use your existing strengths against their
weaknesses, and also help to drill into you just how vulnerable you really
are so that you are a little more cautious.  Hearing about how someone else
was attacked doesn't really sink in very deep. Getting knocked on your butt a
few times in practice runs on the other hand does teach you how easy it is to
get dead if you aren't careful. Often the most valuable thing you learn in any
such course is not particular disarms or tricks, but just to be more aware
and careful all the time and not just sometimes. The paralyzing fear people
often have on a first encounter with crime is also dulled somewhat by having
"been through it" in practice to some small degree.

On a more personal note, one of my Tae Kwon Do instructors years ago told me:
"Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six."
"You're the one on the spot boys and girls. Worry too much about the civil
 rights of your assailant, how it will look in tomorrow's news, or how icky
 it is to have to hit someone, and you may end up contemplating these things
 from the here-after."
(paraphrased from memory)

Anyway that's my opinion on the issue, your mileage may vary :-)
-- 
The War on Drugs is just part of the War on the US Constitution.