When carrying can put you in a no win situation? (moved from GATE) [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : When carrying can put you in a no win situation? (moved from GATE)


Kage505
02-12-2012, 00:31
First off this is my first post here, I decided to get more involved with the shooting community after I purchased my first glock (m19 3rd gen) for concealed carry. Anyway my question comes from the experiences of a friend who thankfully was able to deescalate the situation before anything happened. The situation is you are confronted by a big mean crazy possibly tweaking BG. The catch is he is completely unarmed except for his out of control temper. You are carrying your ccw of choice which brings us to the point of this post. If this guy rushes you and you present your weapon, issue a warning etc. can you legally fire? If you don't he takes your gun away and shoots you and we possibly have an active shooter on our hands, or even beats you to death. Even though I'm decently skilled at hand to hand I wouldn't want to engage in a fight because I have a responsibility to keep my weapon out of the hands of said bg. Also something might preclude me from retreating like a girlfriend/wife/child being with me. Personally, if I presented and that didn't stop him, I'm shooting, especially if someone I have a responsibility to protect is with me. What would you do? Would I be in serious trouble for shooting an "unarmed" man? I've looked everywhere for an answer but this seems to be a murky subject. Lets second guess ourselves now so we don't have to later.

PrecisionRifleman
02-12-2012, 00:34
Were you in fear for your life or would be for anyone with you? Sounds like you were afraid your firearm would possibly be taken away by a nutso? If you are legitimately in fear for your life then it is justified. You will still have to convince a jury either way. Were any life threatening comments made or anything to that degree?

cowboy1964
02-12-2012, 00:59
Learn what your state law says about the legal use of deadly force in self-defense. Not trying to be a smart aleck, but that's what's going to come into play.

FireGuy
02-12-2012, 01:16
The previous poster gave the correct short answer for you question. The long answer depends on where you live. My advice is to find a class on concealed carry in your area.

BobbyT
02-12-2012, 01:18
The phrase to consider here is "disparity of force".

"big mean crazy possibly tweaking BG" certainly fulfills that category, unless you're twice his size. If you're with women or children and he comes towards you (them), that seems pretty clear cut as well.

Misty02
02-12-2012, 07:45
As others have stated, you need to know and understand your stateís law first. Some require retreat before engaging the BG. Often, if youíre not allowed to use deadly force (shooting the person), it is probable you are also not allowed to use the threat of deadly force (drawing on them). Read those statutes carefully! Which state are you in? Perhaps others in your state can chime in and further elaborate.

We should all be as well versed in the law of our state as we possibly can. Being armed for the purpose of self-defense and defense of our loved ones is likely to be among the biggest/toughest choice weíve made in our life; at least it was for me. Among the many risks we have consciously accepted is the possibility of ending up in prison for the remainder of life. It could happen, even if we do everything right.

Do all your research into the laws now so know how far you can or cannot go. However, at the time you are faced with serious bodily harm or death, the only thing that should be present in your mind is the survival of your loved ones and yours. There are people worth risking the unimaginable for; that is the reason many of us carry.

Allowing myself to enter a situation where I can be overpowered by a BG and they taking my weapon is definitely not within my plan of action.


.

SouthernBoyVA
02-12-2012, 08:05
Were you in fear for your life or would be for anyone with you? Sounds like you were afraid your firearm would possibly be taken away by a nutso? If you are legitimately in fear for your life then it is justified. You will still have to convince a jury either way. Were any life threatening comments made or anything to that degree?

In my state, you needn't be in fear of your life. Serious bodily harm is sufficient for a deadly force response.

SouthernBoyVA
02-12-2012, 08:05
Learn what your state law says about the legal use of deadly force in self-defense. Not trying to be a smart aleck, but that's what's going to come into play.

THIS !

Absolutely dead on correct.

HexHead
02-12-2012, 08:35
In my state, you needn't be in fear of your life. Serious bodily harm is sufficient for a deadly force response.

This.

And presenting your gun to "scare him" can be considered brandishing. You could be the one to end up in jail and lose your permit.

SouthernBoyVA
02-12-2012, 09:55
This.

And presenting your gun to "scare him" can be considered brandishing. You could be the one to end up in jail and lose your permit.

That is true which is why that in the event you pull your firearm and the perp(s) take off running, you want to be the first to call 911 and report the incident so your story is the first one on record. Such a situation would not constitute brandishing were you to do this and received such a response by perp(s).

PrecisionRifleman
02-12-2012, 12:00
In my state, you needn't be in fear of your life. Serious bodily harm is sufficient for a deadly force response.

I'd consider that being in fear for your life. Like others said gotta know your state laws. Here in Texas you no longer have to retreat, and so long as you are in fear of serious bodily harm/fear for your life you are justified. The thing is your perception of being in the way of being seriously harmed better be convincing to a jury as well.

Civilian sheep Dog
02-12-2012, 12:30
First off this is my first post here, I decided to get more involved with the shooting community after I purchased my first glock (m19 3rd gen) for concealed carry. Anyway my question comes from the experiences of a friend who thankfully was able to deescalate the situation before anything happened. The situation is you are confronted by a big mean crazy possibly tweaking BG. The catch is he is completely unarmed except for his out of control temper. You are carrying your ccw of choice which brings us to the point of this post. If this guy rushes you and you present your weapon, issue a warning etc. can you legally fire? If you don't he takes your gun away and shoots you and we possibly have an active shooter on our hands, or even beats you to death. Even though I'm decently skilled at hand to hand I wouldn't want to engage in a fight because I have a responsibility to keep my weapon out of the hands of said bg. Also something might preclude me from retreating like a girlfriend/wife/child being with me. Personally, if I presented and that didn't stop him, I'm shooting, especially if someone I have a responsibility to protect is with me. What would you do? Would I be in serious trouble for shooting an "unarmed" man? I've looked everywhere for an answer but this seems to be a murky subject. Lets second guess ourselves now so we don't have to later.

they just had a case wrap up where a guy and his gf were out at a few bars, fight breaks out guy rushes the guy with the gun, he pulls the gun and shoots the guy in the hand, back and stomach. (all caught on camara) long story short he was charged with very series charges but acquitted and not found guilty. As far as a civil suit Im not sure how thats working out. If you live in a state where you have the castle doctrine law then you dont have to try to show retreat and also you would be protected from a civil suit in this case. But if it wasnt for the video Im sure they would of hung this guy out to dry. I would suggest you carry a less lethal weapon like mase or stun gun to deploy before you go for the gun. Also even if you dont have to retreat you should try to anyway after all your in fear for your life. Also shooting someone cause you think they might take your gun after beating you up idk, that gonna be pretty tough to prove to a jury

themiller
02-12-2012, 12:32
I'm not skilled in hand to hand.

Sam Spade
02-12-2012, 14:06
There's a huge area between the time to talk and the time to shoot. You should have something to fill it.

LApm9
02-12-2012, 14:35
There's a huge area between the time to talk and the time to shoot. You should have something to fill it.

Like: "Man I am REALLY sorry! Just let me get out of here and you will never see me again!"

shnev
02-12-2012, 14:53
Oh, that's easy. Just have the throw down weapon handy that day. Problem solved.

SouthernBoyVA
02-12-2012, 14:57
I'd consider that being in fear for your life. Like others said gotta know your state laws. Here in Texas you no longer have to retreat, and so long as you are in fear of serious bodily harm/fear for your life you are justified. The thing is your perception of being in the way of being seriously harmed better be convincing to a jury as well.

Serious bodily harm includes injuries such as broken bones (the threat of), lacerations/cuts requiring sutures, disfiguring injuries, burns, and temporary unconsciousness to name some. Virginia is a "true man state" which means we are a "stand your ground state" which we have always been. The onus of the perception of the fear of serious bodily harm or worse favors the victim over the perpetrator. Still one never knows how a jury is going to rule.

And as for standing your ground, I would advise finding an escape if possible before pulling your gun, not so much for potential liability issues but much more for the reason that you might lose the fight. Just because one has a gun on their person does not mean they are automatically going to win in a deadly fight.

dosei
02-12-2012, 15:31
Know your State's laws. And, even more importantly, know your State's case laws and court rulings. If you draw a gun in a situation where deadly force is not appropriate, you have become the deadly aggressor and the other person is the one who can now legally use deadly force in self defence. Many people expouse the "in fear for my life" line like it is a free pass to use deadly force...it is not. One thing that I have found to true over the years...more often than not it is a persons mouth/attitude/habits/social circle that will put them in the "no win" situation, not the gun.

Here are a few old but excellent videos on the Judicious Use of Deadly Force:

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [1] - YouTube

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [2] - YouTube

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [3] - YouTube

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [4] - YouTube

katana8869
02-12-2012, 16:07
OC Spray.... get some and carry it as religiously as you do your CCW. Around here we have alot of belligerent drunks, belligerent panhandlers and well, just belligerent people in general. A drunk that wants to start a fist-fight is not what I consider a "lethal" threat, but I have no intention of rolling around on the ground with somebody while carrying a firearm if I can help it.

steveksux
02-12-2012, 18:07
When you're more afraid of what the big guy in front of you on the street will do to you than you are of what the big guy behind you in prison will do to you then you pretty much have satisfied the requirements to utilize deadly force in most any state in the union. That must be a reasonable fear, not based on worst case ridiculous what-ifs.

By all means, study the laws in your state regarding deadly force. But don't look for the first available legal opportunity to use deadly force, avoid the gray where possible. But don't wait for the last possible moment either, and be too late. There's a reasonable area in the middle to shoot for. So to speak.

Randy

LoadToadBoss
02-13-2012, 10:31
The phrase to consider here is "disparity of force".

"big mean crazy possibly tweaking BG" certainly fulfills that category, unless you're twice his size. If you're with women or children and he comes towards you (them), that seems pretty clear cut as well.
Disparity of force is a large component in whether or not a SD shooting of an unarmed assalant is justifiable.

For me, at age 53, 5' 9" & 170 lbs with 3 herniated discs repaired in my neck last year and spinal arthritis, I am in less of a position to fight off an unarmed attacker if he is a healthy 20 y/o, 6-foot 200lb body builder. I could probably get a jury to believe I acted reasonably to the perceived threat provided that I was not an instigator nor antagonizer of the event leading up to the shooting.

There will aways be an evaluation of the totality of the circumstances. In many cases, the question comes down to whether or not (in the totality of the circumstances) you acted reasonably as well as lawfully.

FlCracker70
02-13-2012, 15:07
You need to know state laws first and foremost. After that you need to have a plan about what you are going to do if confronted and it looks like you need to protect yourself. This has to include post shooting interview with the police. Upon the advice of counsel, I have the following printed on the back of his business card.

"My client Joe Smith of 1 Main Street Maybury Fl will not answer any questions nor provide any statement without me being present. Please call me on the cell number provided on the front of this card to arrange a mutually convenient time for any questioning."

My plan should anything ever happen is to hand the card over and wait for my attorney before I say word one. This is an important part of your training as to what to in case of an indecent (including any incident where a firearm is involved).

Misty02
02-13-2012, 18:11
You need to know state laws first and foremost. After that you need to have a plan about what you are going to do if confronted and it looks like you need to protect yourself. This has to include post shooting interview with the police. Upon the advice of counsel, I have the following printed on the back of his business card.

"My client Joe Smith of 1 Main Street Maybury Fl will not answer any questions nor provide any statement without me being present. Please call me on the cell number provided on the front of this card to arrange a mutually convenient time for any questioning."

My plan should anything ever happen is to hand the card over and wait for my attorney before I say word one. This is an important part of your training as to what to in case of an indecent (including any incident where a firearm is involved).

FLCracker70, Iím curious, how many cases of self-defense shootings has the attorney that made that recommendation to you been involved in? Have you inquired as to how he/she will find witnesses that left without giving their information? How about evidence that if not collected at that moment could be gone forever?

The reason I ask is because some people may select a criminal attorney that has little or no experience handling firearm self-defense cases. For the majority of their clientele (criminals), it is indeed wise for them to not say a single word. Granted, if we know we are in the wrong, then perhaps it is best that witnesses and evidence disappears; otherwise, it may be in our best interest to help the investigators gather as much evidence and witnesses as possible to exonerate us.

That of course, is just my opinion after having consulted with an attorney that deals with legally armed citizens.

The following video from Mas Ayoob is more in line with the recommendations provided by my attorney.

After a self-defense shooting
Massad Ayoob (Aftermath Shooting) - YouTube

There are other things Iíve learned as well from participating in this and another forum, as well as following a few self-defense shootings. Since Kage505 is relatively new to the forum (although his experience may far exceed mine) Iíll go ahead and share them. There is more, but the following provide additional things we may wish to consider (Sam was instrumental in helping me develop some of these):

1. Before the conflict, donít post identifying pictures or comments that reveal your childís school, extracurricular activities or known landmarks that are close to places you frequent, the same for you and your spouse.
2. After the conflict, delete you facebook or other networking site that contains any personal information or information about people you know.
3. Stay away from the media.
4. Increase vigilance and insist the rest of the family does the same.
5. Have your family keep you informed of things/people that seem out of place.
6. Discuss and implement appropriate cautionary measures with the family and close friends that may be affected.
7. Good neighbors will be a greater asset than ever, extra eyes wonít hurt. Ask them to let you know of any vehicles or people that donít seem to belong.
8. Do google and other available searches to see what the attacker/ accomplices are discussing on line.
9. If there are threats, evaluate the credibility (that may be harder than it sounds)
10. Report all threats to the police (whether credible or not), establish the paper trail.
11. If the threat is credible, alert the school so extra precautions are taken with your child.
12. If you post about it online, do not use your name or theirs, this reduces their ability to do searches (on your name to see what you or others are saying on their name to see what others are saying about him/her).
13. Lather, rinse and repeat, if there is a trial it all starts all over again, at sentencing, at parole hearings, at release.
14. If they died, be sure to know when their birthday is (youíll know the date of death). Those are days to be a little extra vigilant.

.

Bruce M
02-13-2012, 20:06
Sounds to me like the best choice would be to avoid him before he gets close, and the next best would be to try to escape from there.

wrenrj1
02-13-2012, 20:14
Regardless of state laws, every bullet fired comes with a lawyer attached. My cardinal rule is to avoid any confrontation, place etc. I'll retreat if at all possible.

As for facebook, people are asshats for posting all the crap they do about their lives, kids, pets, health etc.

josey88
02-13-2012, 21:25
I live in Florida, where the Castle Doctrine law applies and no retreat is necessary , but still I firmly believe that in order for me to draw my gun and shoot I would have to be in a life or death situation or about to be inflicted lethal bodily damage to me or my family .
I would let go any provocation or something like that and deflect the whole thing if is up to me in order to not to be drawn into a problem .
When I am carrying , I am always well aware of my surroundings , so, for example , if I see a small group of guys on the Walmart parking late at night (I like to go to WalMart late at night sometimes) , I will go around to avoid a possible problem , even if I have to walk a little more .
My philosophy is to avoid a problem if it is avoidable . Use lethal force only as last absolute recourse and be cool headed and keep in mind that you must shown that your act was justified and that you acted in self-defense . I hope I would never be on a situation like that .
If an intruder gets on the house to rob or whatever one night I would probably shoot him or them if there are more than one assaltant , but that is a clear case of self defense and the Castle Doctrine is adamant on that , so I don`t think it would be problematic as a case of defending your life and the life of your family with lethal force on your property grounds , inside your home .
Behaving in a correct way , being smart about it , knowing the laws of your state and thinking always ahead and trying to not being confrontational is 85% of having no problems ... Amen to that ...!!!

FlCracker70
02-14-2012, 12:52
[QUOTE=Misty02;18574387]FLCracker70, Iím curious, how many cases of self-defense shootings has the attorney that made that recommendation to you been involved in? Have you inquired as to how he/she will find witnesses that left without giving their information? How about evidence that if not collected at that moment could be gone forever?

The reason I ask is because some people may select a criminal attorney that has little or no experience handling firearm self-defense cases. For the majority of their clientele (criminals), it is indeed wise for them to not say a single word. Granted, if we know we are in the wrong, then perhaps it is best that witnesses and evidence disappears; otherwise, it may be in our best interest to help the investigators gather as much evidence and witnesses as possible to exonerate us.

He is a criminal defense attorney who has handled 10 or so defensive shootings. He is also my friend and neighbor so I was able to talk with him in detail about defensive shootings. Most of his cases are not defensive shootings.

His opinion was that in all of his cases, he was in a better position when his clients did not talk to the police at the scene and always wished that his clients that did speak with the police did not. He says that the police notes of discussions are often not 100% accurate mostly not due to police trying to get something wrong but hearing something different than was said.

I know that Mas Ayoob has ALOT more experience than I have in defensive shootings. I have never been party to one and if i am (which is unlikely) it will almost certainly be the only one that I ever am a part of. I however disagree with most of what he said in the video.

Call 911 - I agree that someone must call 911. If there are witnesses, I would ask that they call 911 as I would want my full attention to be on the situation at hand. I would not want to be on a 911 call for the entire time that the police are in route and it is my understanding that 911 is trained to keep you on the phone until the police arrive. If there are no witnesses, I would of course call but I would say only that there was a shooting at 1 Main Street and hang up the phone. Again I want to be 100% attentive to the situation at hand.

Point 1 : "Officer this man attacked me" I question being able to limit my statement to this and this only. The police are certain to ask exactly what is meant by this and I'm not sure that I would be in a position to be 100% certain of any statements that I made at that point. Trained police (who have more / better training that I do have issued sworn statements that later turn out to be a physical impossibility. If you can limit your self to these 5 words then I think this is OK.

Point 2 : "I will sign the complaint" This is going to have some detail on it that I'm again certain that I would not want to sign until my attorney looks at it.

Point 3 "Evidence is here" I am certain that the police are going to look everywhere for evidence and they are not going to look exclusively where I direct them. Additionally my instructions to the police could later be used against me in court by an overzealous prosecutor. Lets say for example that you said that the first bullet missed and it was in the middle of a building and it turns out that you pointed out the wrong building that was opposite of the building you said. Trying to explain why will make you look bad in a jury's eyes.

Point 4 "Witnesses are there" I am certain the police are not going to look for my assistance in identifying a witness. Again what if you say for example that the man in the yellow Tshirt was there and witnessed the crime and he says that he was not there. Calling into account testimony that has been proven not to be true is a tactic that any prosecutor is going to use to discredit your recollection of the events.

Point 5 "You will have my full cooperation" I'm not sure what this means but he did add that it would be 24 hours later after consultation with an attorney.

I don't think that his check list adds a whole lot to my defense and potentially hurts it. I could say things that I believe to be true but in fact turn out to be false. I can make estimates that again turn out to be deferential to my defense.

The police, who are trained to interrogate people which means that they are trained to ask aggressive questions that are designed to ferret out untruths or lies. I would not lie, however every statement that I make will be subject to scrutiny and errors in my statement as the result of distress could be interpreted as in intentional deceit or be used to place doubt in a jury's mind should I ultimately be prosecuted.

The job of the police is to collect evidence and information from a crime scene. That information includes questions that you are not obligated to answer and the police unfortunately often deal with the reality challenged. Information that you give them "may be used against you in a court of law".

My plan essentially revolves around the idea that post shooting I will be a wreck. As such my plan is to say nothing until I have time to gather my thoughts and discuss with attorney which of these thought(s) are most beneficial for me to share and which of these thoughts / memories are best not shared.

No one person in the US court system has the job of finding out the truth. The prosecutor is trying to get a conviction, the defense is trying for an acquittal and the judge is making sure that these two parties are complying with the law. This adversarial system goal is ultimately justice however if you unwittingly stack the deck against yourself, you could find yourself a wrongly convicted felon.

Misty02
02-14-2012, 13:26
You are correct about one thing, FlCracker70, saying the wrong thing or more than necessary could lead to problems. Iím not completely certain that Iíll be able to react as rehearsed or that Iíll be able to stick to what I know is pertinent and necessary. The only thing I can do is bring it to mind often in an effort to successfully brainwash myself.

.

eclark53520
02-14-2012, 13:42
I get the hell out of the area ASAP.

If that's not an option and he's truly a mad man, and i'm afraid he's a threat to kill me or cause me great bodily harm, at that point i'm willing to stop the threat.

josey88
02-14-2012, 18:43
I agree that one must say as little as possible . It would have to be a short sentence , like "Officer , I will cooperate after I have advise from my lawyer" , or something alike ... that is it . Anything more than that and the police can very well turn it against you , so , better shut up and wait for the lawyer . There is always time to sign a complaint and explain everything while coached by the lawyer, of course.
I hope I would never ever be on a situation like that , but if I ever do I would most likely follow those parameters , since it is in my own benefit to do it .

mortpes
02-14-2012, 20:37
The question is state specific. For a start look at danger of death or harm, reasonable man theory, and does the attacker have the ability, opportunity, and jeopardy.

robhic
02-16-2012, 17:09
Here's something I found from the state of LA's CC law. It's even fairly understandable!

ß19. Use of force or violence in defense
A. The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense, and that this Section shall not apply where the force or violence results in a homicide.
B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:
(1) The person against whom the force or violence was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.
(2) The person who used force or violence knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.
C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using force or violence as provided for in this Section and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.
D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used force or violence in defense of his person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry.
Acts 2006, No. 141, ß1.

DaneA
02-16-2012, 18:40
IMO - the difference in the approach of FLCracker70's approach and Misty02's approach is how long you plan on spending in jail. Under FlCracker70's approach you had better hope that your attorney is not on vacation or otherwise unavailable because you most certainly are spending some time in jail while things get sorted out. Misty02's approach, if handled correctly, will most likely have your firearm going to the station while you go home.

Misty02
02-16-2012, 18:54
IMO - the difference in the approach of FLCracker70's approach and Misty02's approach is how long you plan on spending in jail. Under FlCracker70's approach you had better hope that your attorney is not on vacation or otherwise unavailable because you most certainly are spending some time in jail while things get sorted out. Misty02's approach, if handled correctly, will most likely have your firearm going to the station while you go home.

.... and I certainly pray you are right. That is what I am hoping for, although not what I'm expecting (I don't wish to be caught off guard by not preparing for the worst). :)

.

DaneA
02-16-2012, 20:13
.... and I certainly pray you are right. That is what I am hoping for, although not what I'm expecting (I don't wish to be caught off guard by not preparing for the worst). :)

.

I think part of it depends on the attitude of the responding officers. If they are going to be pricks and treat me like a criminal then I'd probably shut up and ask for my lawyer. If they are going to treat me like the victim I am then I would be more likely to be as helpful as I can to get everything resolved as soon as possible.

Of course some of this may depend if you called 911 yourself and explained it as well. Because a responding officer only knows what dispatch as told him. Which, if a witness has called in, is probably just a shooting and a MWAG on the scene. VS. If you call them and explain you are the victim, have a gun, and are covering the BG (or whatever). You may be met a little kinder.

The Dying Gaul
02-22-2012, 09:53
So many factors at play. You need to examine your state's law regarding defensive use of force. In Arizona, for example, the law now allows "defensive display of a firearm", i.e brandishing when unlawful physical force is imminent or threatened. So in AZ, you may be okay in your hypothetical. Other states, not so much.
I advise individuals I work with to never pull their firearm unless they are going to shoot someone. Never shoot someone unless you can articulate facts that show justification under state law.

cloudbuster
02-22-2012, 11:20
There's a huge area between the time to talk and the time to shoot. You should have something to fill it.

Just gimme three steps! Gimme three steps, Mister! Gimme three steps toward the door! Gimme three steps! Gimme three steps, Mister, and you'll never see me no more! ;)

MannyA
02-22-2012, 19:17
[QUOTE=dosei;18568473]Know your State's laws. And, even more importantly, know your State's case laws and court rulings. If you draw a gun in a situation where deadly force is not appropriate, you have become the deadly aggressor ...


The best response I have ever read on GT.
Thanks for posting.

TDC20
02-22-2012, 21:04
The situation is you are confronted by a big mean crazy possibly tweaking BG.

OK, he confronted you, so what? Walk away. He's looking for trouble, let him find it with someone else.

The catch is he is completely unarmed except for his out of control temper. You are carrying your ccw of choice which brings us to the point of this post. If this guy rushes you... can you legally fire? If you don't he takes your gun away and shoots you

Again, you know that he is unarmed and that you are armed. If you can walk away and choose not to, you have made a conscious decision to put yourself in this situation. If you are cornered and can't escape, that's another matter, but you should still try to leave.

As Sam Spade and others have mentioned, you need to have a plan to fill the gap between talking and shooting. Find a good OC spray and carry it whenever you leave your home. If the situation can't be de-escalated and the guy attacks you, spray him in the face. Then, while he is temporarily blinded, get away from the scene and call police immediately and file a complaint that he attacked you. Even if for some reason you are charged with assault for using pepper spray, it's pretty minor compared to being charged with murder or manslaughter. Furthermore, if after being sprayed the guy continues his attack and you can't escape, and you choose to shoot him instead of being beaten, you have at least shown the following:
1. You tried to de-escalate the situation by walking away, but the BG physically detained you from leaving, and
2. You used OC spray in an attempt to disorient your attacker so you could escape, but he just became more aggressive and physically abusive.

The escalation of force that you use may help convince a grand jury that your ultimate action of shooting the aggressor was reasonable under the totality of circumstances.

I consider the use of a gun for self-defense as the "nuclear option." Of course if someone has a deadly weapon and is attacking me or my family I'm going to shoot them. Other than that, I'm heading the opposite direction if I can. In the case of an unarmed attacker and I can't walk away, he's gonna get a face full of OC spray before I'm gonna get a beatdown. There's nothing to be gained in a street fight, even if you are good at hand-to-hand. Maybe the guy has a knife in his pocket and once you start getting the better of him he starts stabbing you.

If you can't keep your ego in check, then maybe carrying a firearm isn't the right option. If you learn to avoid these situations, you won't find yourself making a lawyer richer or a cellmate satisfied.

fletch_man
02-23-2012, 13:16
Basic Rules

do not drink
do not go to bars
do not take dope
do not heavily modify your carry weapon
do not have a closet full of guns and ammo
do not wear NRA regalia or T-Shirts with witty commando related verbiage and/or skulls on it
do not talk regularly on internet forums about shooting someone
If you are in fear of your life or the lives of those close to you and you have to shoot, keep your mouth shut till you get legal representation.

Remember: there are no dangerous tweakers/crackheads/gang members, only pitiful individuals whom we as a society have failed by not giving them enough of our hard earned money.

All this will come up in court, killer, so the time to modify your profile is now.

Misty02
02-23-2012, 16:19
Basic Rules

do not drink
do not go to bars
do not take dope
do not heavily modify your carry weapon
do not have a closet full of guns and ammo
do not wear NRA regalia or T-Shirts with witty commando related verbiage and/or skulls on it
do not talk regularly on internet forums about shooting someone
If you are in fear of your life or the lives of those close to you and you have to shoot, keep your mouth shut till you get legal representation.

Remember: there are no dangerous tweakers/crackheads/gang members, only pitiful individuals whom we as a society have failed by not giving them enough of our hard earned money.

All this will come up in court, killer, so the time to modify your profile is now.


http://glocktalk.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=221262Hmmmm is that a bad thing?

Gimp
02-23-2012, 16:28
There's a huge area between the time to talk and the time to shoot. You should have something to fill it.

I believe Boyd Crowder said "Once the decision is made to shoot a man, there's nothin' left to talk about."


...or sump'n like that, anyway.

Bren
02-23-2012, 16:42
An unarmed nutjob threatening me would not justify deadly force. A nutjob trying to arm himself with my gun would. That's an easy one.

I'm more with Boyd on this, and most things.

MarkM32
02-23-2012, 17:16
As many have stated, know the laws of your state. For instance, I live in Virginia, in any scenario, "There must be an overt act..." Meaning said BG must make a motion, such as reaching for a weapon, drawing a weapon, attempting to use that weapon, before I would be able to act. We have a Castle Doctrine in Va, but that only changes one thing, I don't have to retreat. If I'm on the street and someone tries to attack me, I must flee until no longer reasonable, basically meaning I've got to run until I run into a wall, or said BG is running faster than I am. Then, they must have an action of deadly force or serious bodily harm or disfigurement. Being in fear of my life is not enough in Va. If I were to draw down on him without him providing an overt act, that CAN and probably WILL be considered using deadly force, or at least brandishing a deadly weapon. In the event that you do successfully defend your life, calling 911 immediately, as others have said, is what you should do. Just be careful what you say, as 911 calls are recorded and ARE admissible. Most SD convictions come from these recordings, because you are in such a high stress state, with so much adrenaline that you are unable to accurately portray the events until you calm down and process. I would say, "I need an ambulance at 123 Easy St. A man/woman tried to kill me and I defended myself." Click. As far as what you're able to do in defending yourself, though, it varies widely state to state. A good book to check out for after you shoot, is called 'After you shoot.' by Alan Korwin at the Bloomfield Press. It brings a lot of light to some things you would never think about.

cloudbuster
02-24-2012, 08:20
Basic Rules

do not drink
do not go to bars
do not take dope
do not heavily modify your carry weapon
do not have a closet full of guns and ammo
do not wear NRA regalia or T-Shirts with witty commando related verbiage and/or skulls on it
do not talk regularly on internet forums about shooting someone
If you are in fear of your life or the lives of those close to you and you have to shoot, keep your mouth shut till you get legal representation.

Remember: there are no dangerous tweakers/crackheads/gang members, only pitiful individuals whom we as a society have failed by not giving them enough of our hard earned money.

All this will come up in court, killer, so the time to modify your profile is now.

Darn. I have a safe for the guns, but where am I gonna put all this ammo?

HKLovingIT
02-24-2012, 10:00
Here:

http://nononsenseselfdefense.com/self-defenseexplained.htm

http://nononsenseselfdefense.com/FEARvsDANGER.html

http://nononsenseselfdefense.com/deescalation.htm

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/lethalforce.html