Here is the problem, the law says that you can only act to defend family and those with whom you have a close personal relationship.
I came across this at an attorneys website;
Can Deadly Force be Used if Defense of Others?
Using deadly force to defend others is justifiable as long as the defendant reasonably believed that the force was necessary in that situation. If the circumstances were of a simple assault then using deadly force would not be justified. So, depending on the circumstances using deadly force may or may not be justifiable. In other cases using deadly force is acceptable.
For the law of defense of others, following conditions must be met though not without limitations
- There should be some relationships between the defendant and the person he was defending,
- The defendant was not the one who provoked the fight or started the attack,
- The respondent’s knowledge will be used as the basis of the decision. For instance, if it later comes out that the aggressor was actually a serial killer, but the defendant was not aware at the time, then the new knowledge would not be used as a defense.
- If the defendant were in the process of committing crime at the time of the incident, then the defense would not apply if force was used to aid another person to resist arrest
Here is the section of law I was looking for. . .
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
(1) When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person.
(2) When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous, or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein.
(3) When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a spouse, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he or she was the assailant or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed.
(4) When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
I realize it is not clearly stated, frankly, this remind me of how long ago it was since I was at the academy, or in a sworn position. I suspect I am looking at the wrong section. However, while INAL, if you can not show a prior relationship with the person you are defending, you have a very weak defense.
Again, INAL, however If you attempt to help another, don’t start with Gun. That said, it it turns into a situation of the defense of your person, then you are on more stable ground.
**###### Added ###### **
This is a place where I would like to hear from some of the USCCA Attorneys