| scot... | Need to punish the aggressors. |
| lora... | The person who caused the confrontation that required self defense should be held accountable. Everyone has the right to protect themselves. The perpetrator should be put in prison for life or the death penalty. |
| pete... | The police would be held accountable if they were to shoot an innocent bystander |
| hbag... | Depends on the circumstances. If a jury finds they acted reasonably than yes. If three bystanders are shot than no. |
| milt... | Charge them with a lesser crime, but charge them. They should be liable in civil courts for the damage they have done, however unintentional. Our shamefully weak gun laws lead to this being an issue. |
| john... | It depends. Was the level of action warranted. |
| bjmo... | If you are shooting a gun then you have full responsibility for the outcome! |
| mona... | If you carry a gun there should be practice requirements to limit a human life cut short and thought of as collateral damage. |
| mdul... | It depends on the context. Imagine a case where someone claims they felt threatened and starting shooting wildly, killing and wounding numerous bystanders. Then imagine a case where a person is attacked and fires his weapon to protect himself but a single missed shot travels across the street and through a window striking someone in their home. The cases are different and must be considered as such. |
| rick... | Depends on the circumstance. Must prove they were truly threatened with physical harm and there was no other option (like running away) and the shooter’s actions before the shooting did not provoke the incident. |
| vict... | Clarification is needed - did the person defending themselves take all reasonable precautions not to hurt or kill an innocent bystander? |
| lkdn... | Courts can decide. |
| perm... | All blame should be laid at the feet of the aggressor/criminal. If criminals would be tried and jailed, not simply slapped on the hand and released to re-offend, less innocents would be harmed. No guns do not equal no crime; it only guarantees that criminals will be able to offend without fear of the victim defending himself or herself. Legally armed citizens are safter citizens. |
| mary... | If you’re going to carry a lethal weapon, you’re responsible for what happens with it. |
| jvan... | Depends entirely on details of the shooter's ability and handling of weapon |
| fish... | Stop letting your rights be eroded over a tiny fraction of accidental murders. Estimated at 50-100 deaths each year. |
| hayd... | If you carry, you should know the rule, be aware of your surroundings, "know your target and what's behind it." If you cannot use a fire arm to protect yourself from a direct threat without being a threat to the general public, you should NOT carry. |
| miah... | Should they just allow themselves to be killed? Sucks that bystander is killed but the fault lies on the attacker. That’s their murder. |
| serg... | I am pro 2nd amendment, own several firearms, and lawful carry concealed. However, in a situation where my life is being endangered, it will be MY responsibility to ensure that I have a clear line of fire and that I will not endanger anyone down range of my intended target. |
| mell... | If you choose to carry a firearm you should be held accountable for any and all deaths, if don’t know how to use it appropriately then don’t carry it |
| pjpa... | Intent vs recklessness |
| john... | The aggressor should be liable. Self-defense is a primal right. |
| iris... | they should be charged with recklessness not intent |
| lkre... | I think it depends on each case separately. Accidents happen. Also intent should be considered. |
| aber... | It needs to be thoroughly evaluated on a case-by-case basis. |
| mcsp... | Based on circumstances. If it’s a bunch of gang bangers, you probably should not hold them harmless for shooting at each other and hurting innocent folks. |
| stub... | Not black/white issue. Needs context! |
| jjai... | In Michigan, you have to go through training to carry concealed. Anyone who is untrained and careless in the operation of their weapon (or car) should be held accountable for the injury or death of others. |
| kari... | The bystander death should be credited to aggressor not self defender |
| teki... | depends on the circumstances |
| fcse... | It would be a lesser charge if your bullet accidentally hit a person you didn’t intend to but there are consequences for shooting your gun at someone. I have survived 82 years without owning a gun and some of those years were in urban neighborhoods. This country is nuts about guns. |
| swif... | If you’re going to shoot a gun, you better damn well know what you’re doing!!! 😡 |
| 80le... | There should be accountability - always. |
| thos... | At least to some extent. Just like many other killings and/or accidents have legal ramifications so should the killing of an inocent bystander. Is it really excusable if you harm someone besides the "threat" without disregard to others in the vicinity? |
| zach... | When one uses a weapon to intentionally defend themselves, they should be proficient and skilled enough in the use of the weapon to not then harm all of those around them. If they are not skilled enough to use the weapon aligned with their supposed purpose of self defense then I believe they have acted recklessly. Also I fear that the guns presence becomes the go-to problem solving method over deescalating situations without adding violence, and that is rather disappointing |
| lind... | Manslaughter at the very least? |
| jeff... | We have way too many gins now and a lack of meaningful background checks and gun controls. |
| yary... | I don’t think I should die at the hands of a criminal because someone else might die coincidentally to my survival. |
| juni... | The original aggressor should be held responsible. If the person didn’t have to defend themselves then the entire incident never occurs. |
| luck... | If you're carrying a weapon, you're responsible for knowing how to shoot it. Not only should an innocent bystander be protected, but allowing the shooter to get away with it opens a whole new door of people "accidentally" shooting people they wanted to harm anyway. |
| lee.... | The individual who CAUSED someone one should be held criminally responsible for ANY damages caused. Same as a driver waiting in the getaway car is held responsible for anyone killed by his partners while they robbing a bank / store / home invasion. The root cause of why the defensive action were required is because of the threat from the criminal. |
| tubi... | only an irresponsible asshole would think otherwise. |
| tenn... | they should have civil responsibility |
| chri... | US gun leniency stands as a singular anomaly among all democratic nations. |
| brad... | Hold the one who is self-defending liable based on what? On the fact that they were forced to defend themselves through no fault of their own? |
| mama... | I think the innicent victims death should be blamed on the attacker. |
| tadd... | The criminal should be held responsible nothing would have happened |
| g_ri... | Case by case basis. |
| bian... | If you're gonna carry your gun in public you need to be a better shot. People shouldn't suffer for other's negligent training |
| ewco... | If it is ruled self defense against attacker then gun rights should be taken away and gun owner should be on probation for 5 years. Probation violation for gun should be jail time. |
| jade... | An eye for an eye! |
| kimb... | If you carry a gun and choose to use a gun in self-defense, then you are responsible for anyone you injure while discharging said gun. |
| allw... | Bad guns for civilians |
| jame... | Why must things be labeled without ALL the FACTS. Each case would clearly have its own set of circumstances. Please stop asking such incredibly broad sweeping questions and expecting some gainful result. The CRIMINAL perpitrating ANY harm or crime is at FAULT. That is the only fact that can be concluded here and until that stops happening US citizens should have the right to defend themselves. |
| gary... | Depends on the facts |
| absh... | The perpetrator that caused the self defense act should be held responsible |
| tuck... | It depends on circumstances |
| wave... | Civil responsible yes, criminal no. That would be considered accidental obviously. |
| mend... | I think it would have to depend on the circumstances and how justified the shooting was relative to the danger perceived |
| becc... | If someone closes to use a gun they need to be properly trained and understand the consequences that may follow. Negligence is not a defense when lives and livelihoods are at stake. |
| marn... | You should not have a gun in the first place and if you do have one have proper training. Better even, try to diffuse the situation instead of becoming trigger happy. |
| ent.... | The right to bear arms and a right to defend oneself should come with the responsibility to not harm innocent others. |
| blik... | OK .... 60% respondents are wrapped in a bubble. You can't imagine yourself being assaulted and fearing "death or serious personal injury" and having a Natural Right to use deadly force to defend yourself. Given that the odds of hitting a vital organ in a dynamic, high adrenaline life-or-death place and time are quite low, the odds of an innocent bystander suffering a fatal wound are extremely low. Self-defense is not a crime; the unfortunate circumstance resulting from it is also not a crime. |
| micr... | It is your choice to opt for weapons instead of pressuring politicians to eg restrict guns from attackers -- but if you cause damage to lives and property, it is still you doing it. |
| brig... | The question to without the slightest nuance. the default answer should be no. But there will be times when the circumstances might suggest that negligent homicide, manslaughter, criminal neglect or other comparatively minor criminal charges would be appropriate. Of course there is always civil liability as well for simple negligence, which might serve an important societal purpose. Most civil litigation addresses some form of negligence in a setting where there is no criminal activity. |
| tdhu... | Someone who accidentally kills a bystander while using a weapon to defend themselves against an unjust perpetrator should be held liable for the death of the bystander, but the classification of the killing and the penalty for it should be much less than it would be for the unjust attacker. Criminal penalties should take into account the circumstances surrounding the act. The law should never be applied in a blind manner and sentencing, even more so, should take mitigating factors into account. For society to function properly, the application of laws and sentencing ought to be rational and reasonable. It’s a matter of justice for the mistaken victim’s loved ones as well as justice for the person who makes a mistake while defending themselves or while defending others. Compassion is needed on both sides. The unjust attacker is the one who should be given the harshest punishment if he or she survives such an ordeal. |
| cwbr... | Civil negligence liability |
| john... | Too many variables as to this question |
| alex... | The person they were defending against should be charged. |
| alta... | Rule 4 requires the shooter to Positively identify the target and what lies beyond. We are all responsible for reckless driving and this is no different. |
| miss... | That would depend on the totality of the circumstances. This isn’t a blanket question of yes or no in the real world. |
| tass... | I’m for gun-rights, so go ahead and defend yourself but if (you’re not an on-duty cop and) you can’t control how you use your firearm then you killed an innocent person and criminal responsibility is a consequence of that lack of ability. For a judge or a law to dismiss that is basically giving the green light to live without consequences. Terrible state of affairs /: |
| imap... | To look at this very traumatic experience through the eyes of a black and white law would be an injustice. I don’t think we would be serving justice for any of the people involved in these horrifying events if we made a law stating “always ““never“… |
| marg... | It depends on the facts. The shooter has to have an objectively sound belief that death is imminent without the defense. |
| cger... | Democrats refusal to punish or hold criminals accountable has led to a hell hole dystopia previously reserved to fictional horror movies. It has emboldened criminals to set fire to, attack, and maim innocents. Keep voting Democrat Dummies. |
| nanc... | A person carrying a firearm has to be very careful and understand that there will be consequences if they are not. |
| ewfr... | They are in control of the weapon, they are responsible for handling it with care and not causing collateral damage |
| nanc... | It depends on the degree of negligence involved. |
| pman... | Yes - most situations don’t call for use of force like that |
| d.e.... | Shooters must must always know their target and what is around or beyond the target. A shooter owns every bullet that comes out of their weapon. Innocent bystanders' deaths are inexcusable. If a shooter cannot shoot accurately, they should not carry a gun. |
| dako... | No, Why are the criminals on the street in the first place. Both of the Charlotte NC train men who stabbed their victims had long, long rap sheets. Liberal judges, and Democratic AG’s release these pieces of shit back onto our streets. 3 strikes and you are out of here. Citizenship taken away and your farmed out to a foreign country never to return. |
| isth... | Someone has to be responsible for the innocent death. If payment is not jail time, who is responsible for the loss revenue the innocent bystanders family will now miss since the dead bystander cannot financially pay for his/her children/dependents? |
| gjba... | A gun owner must accept the liability or their decision. |
| mlee... | It’s a responsibility the shooter needs to take, when they make the choice to carry. |
| stin... | Blame should be placed on the attacker and any financial compensation or otherwise needs to come from the person who incited the violence in the first place. |
| atli... | And all guns and gun carriers should be licensed. |
| creo... | Don’t you know that if you were not born it wouldn’t matter! |
| bren... | I think they should be held responsible but not criminaly. |
| bjef... | This requires the background. Was it a drug dealer fighting with another drug dealer? Then yes. If they hadn't been involved with criminal activity, they probably wouldn't have been targeted. If they are a normal person fighting back against someone trying to rob them, then no: unless they had made no attempt to become proficient with the weapon they purchased, or wasn't the possessor of a concealed carry permit. |
| emwa... | All individuals that carry and use firearms must not only be licensed (to include appropriate background checks) but also pass a rigorous training course on how to use firearms and avoid killing bystanders. Otherwise, if they kill a bystander and didn’t take and pass the course, they should be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. |
| jgse... | I think that the only time it is excusable to kill an innocent bystander in self defense is if the bystander would also be in danger from the shooter, such as a mass shooting incident. |
| rayd... | Shouldn’t have a gun if you can’t shoot straight. |
| jnim... | They should be held accountable in some fashion, but I don't criminally may be to harsh. |
| aunt... | They need to be held accountable for their recklessness as it is still a death no matter how unintentional - manslaughter? |
| mike... | Depends on the circumstances. If the shooter is grossly negligent in their defense, then yes. If the bystander is killed as the shooter defends themself without recklessness, then no, the shooter should not be criminally held. |
| mbhi... | If you use a gun use it safely!! |
| kold... | We have moved to the term "self-defense" when discussing gun matters, when we should be using the term, "people killing." Self-defense is not what people do, it's the excuse they use for doing it. Semi-auto pistols and assault weapons are not designed for self-defense. They are designed for killing people. If we let people-killers get away with killing innocents, we are abandoning the Constitutional rights of the living. |
