Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-21-2012, 11:43   #221
Thumpernator
Senior Member
 
Thumpernator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Zombieland, Ga
Posts: 407
Wow, just read through all 9 pages. Very interesting how different we all are in the different scenarios. I think it's interesting to note that the OP's scenario could happen everywhere in the USA except Illinois. Citizens are sheep there since they can't carry a gun.

It's very easy for everyone to sit at the keyboard and say what they would do in the varying situations. But when the juices start flowing in the heat of the moment, anything is possible. I wish there were more training programs available where you could train for the various scenarios. LE have those neat simulators to help them train. Wish they were available for classes to the public. If the realism is anywhere near the sims I use for flight training, the training would be invaluable.

BTW, I'm siding towards Bren's advice. Thanks Bren.
Thumpernator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 18:55   #222
Lord
Senior Member
 
Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by barstoolguru View Post
I asked about shooting below the waist and it would still be intent to kill so you might as well shoot them in the chest and not take the chance of missing

Even if the weapon is dropped the perp is still moving towards you they are still a threat because you can't tell if they have another weapon
In TX the intent to kill would have to be proven. this is the reason that they drive home the following: you draw your weapon and shoot (if it comes to that) with the intention of STOPPING the threat. death from firing your weapon should be incidental, not intentional.
__________________
Lord
PPQ M2, G-19, PT-140 Pro, PT-111 Pro, Core-15
Lord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 13:55   #223
steveksux
Massive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord View Post
In TX the intent to kill would have to be proven. this is the reason that they drive home the following: you draw your weapon and shoot (if it comes to that) with the intention of STOPPING the threat. death from firing your weapon should be incidental, not intentional.
I think what he meant to imply that shooting below the waist is still employing deadly force.

The whole argument against shooting to wound being a bad idea hinges on the fact that shooting is use of deadly force whether you intend to kill or not. You realize you don't have justification to kill an attacker, so you shoot them in the leg and they die, your lack of intent to kill is pretty close to irrelevant. "I didn't mean to kill them" doesn't make it a justifiable shooting. At best maybe you get to negligent homicide vs another form of homicide or manslaughter. It falls under you should have known death was a fairly likely option, whether that was your intent or not.

I'm interested in avoiding prison and avoiding being killed. Distinctions that mediate my prison term are not of interest.

I'm no lawyer, I'm sure someone could phrase that better than I just did, and I could be wrong depending on state law.

Randy

Last edited by steveksux; 11-23-2012 at 14:07..
steveksux is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 15:31   #224
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by glock30user View Post
To be completely honest, if I draw my gun I WILL be shooting. I can not think of any situation where I would draw and then pause for a conversation or any other action besides me pulling the trigger.
Say you live (or are staying in a cabin) in an area where police can't arrive in under 45 minutes. You don't expect anyone else to be home, and hear footsteps in your house. You wouldn't draw your weapon? You investigate (because you know help can't arrive in a timely manner) and find an unarmed 12 year old eating the cheetos he found in your kitchen.
You'd still shoot?
SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 01:07   #225
Z28ricer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 923
Send a message via AIM to Z28ricer
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringerTGO View Post
Say you live (or are staying in a cabin) in an area where police can't arrive in under 45 minutes. You don't expect anyone else to be home, and hear footsteps in your house. You wouldn't draw your weapon? You investigate (because you know help can't arrive in a timely manner) and find an unarmed 12 year old eating the cheetos he found in your kitchen.
You'd still shoot?
I'm pretty sure he meant if he's confronted by someone, he's going to draw and fire if he's determined that he is justified.

In your scenario its different being in-home, you can have your weapon in hand without charges of brandishing, etc, obviously he would have reversed the steps of determining the threat and drawing, at that point.
Z28ricer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 23:12   #226
Kelo6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 203
<---Not a lawyer, but has had basic LE training and volunteers with a local LE Agency.


Quote:
Originally Posted by poodleshooter1 View Post
Let's say you had legal justification to shoot and drew, perhaps because they were approaching with a knife or bat in hand. When you drew your gun they dropped their weapon and stopped advancing. Now you're not able to shoot and are holding them at gunpoint(who would hoster at this point lol).

Not able to shoot? Not necessarily. Not in Oregon, anyway. Your justification is in their intent to commit a crime. Just because they stopped advancing or dropped their knife/bat/whatever doesn't necessarily mean they have changed their mind.

Maybe you just interrupted their OODA loop and they're taking a second to reevaluate and decide how to now deal with you, a now armed victim.

I'll touch on that later.


But you change the scenario in the very next paragraph by saying the keep advancing.

Those are TWO DIFFERENT scenarios and they can play out quite differently, or similarly depending on different factors.

Scenario #1 They stop advancing and drop their weapons (but don't run. This wasn't specified in the OP, but he seems to conclude that they don't leave, but keep advancing on you after dropping weapons)


Scenario #2:
They drop their weapons BUT KEEP ADVANCING


In Oregon, both are still attempting to commit Felonies, and both scenarios justify deadly physical force in your defense, and you can come out of the holster blazing.

Recommended? Maybe. Maybe not. Again, depends on a few factors.



See here:

Quote:
ORS 161.209 - Use of physical force in defense of a person

Except as provided in ORS 161.215 (Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person) and 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person), a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose.
So in Oregon, physical force is justified in self defense and in defense of a third party, and a degree of force which the person believes to be necessary for the purpose.



So whatever level of force is necessary to prevent the illegal use of force can be used upon the attacker(s), so long as I can clearly articulate based on the facts as to why I believed that level of force was necessary.

Those facts include what I observed to be happening at the time, and why that level was necessary given all factors (their numbers, size and weight vs mine, my dispositions [injuries, medical conditions, etc.]).


If I can take a look at the scenario, and I reasonable believe that the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force is being used against me or a third person, then I am justified in using an appropriate level of force to stop the illegal use of force against me or a third person.



That's just physical force, though:


DEADLY FORCE IN OREGON:

Quote:

ORS 161.219 - Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person

Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209 (Use of physical force in defense of a person), a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:
(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or
(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 23]
If they are "using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person" (be it me or a third party), then lethal force is justified.



In Oregon:

Quote:
ORS 163.185 - Assault in the first degree

(1) A person commits the crime of assault in the first degree if the person:
(a) Intentionally causes serious physical injury to another by means of a deadly or dangerous weapon;
Approaching me with a knife or bat in hand and displaying intent to harm me (the OPs scenario), then I am justified in using Deadly Physical Force.

I am also justified in using the same amount of force in defense of a third party who is in the same scenario, if I believe the attackers are "about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person."


Quote:
164.395 - Robbery in the third degree


(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the third degree if in the course of committing or attempting to commit theft or unauthorized use of a vehicle as defined in ORS 164.135 (Unauthorized use of a vehicle) the person uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person with the intent of:
(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to retention thereof immediately after the taking; or
(b) Compelling the owner of such property or another person to deliver the property or to engage in other conduct which might aid in the commission of the theft or unauthorized use of a vehicle.

(2) Robbery in the third degree is a Class C felony.
If they don't want to take anything, and just want to beat you up, then it's Assault (posted above), which at the top three degrees is Also a felony (ORS 163.185, ORS 163.175, ORS 163.165)

(Side note for the curious: Fourth degree assault in Oregon is a Class A misdemeanor, and involves Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing physical injury to another, or via criminal negligence causes physical injury to another by means of a deadly weapon [ND that injuries a person, doing something dumb while wielding a sword, etc, the key being that the act wasn't committed with intent to harm. It was an "accident".] It can bump up to a felony under certain circumstances.)



So, the two scenarios as presented by the OP (either robbery or assault with a weapon), is the commission or attempted commission of a felony:


Quote:
Originally Posted by poodleshooter1 View Post
Let's say the start talking to you and are approaching slowly step by step. If you can, try to create distance and put an object between you and them, sure. But whether you can or can't create distance and place an object between you, do you have legal justification to shoot if they disobey commands to stop advancing, etc. or do you actually have to get to the point where they are two feet from you and able to snatch your gun, and actually trying to snatch your gun?

Short answer, in Oregon, is no, you don't have to wait until they are that close. You could shoot them right off the bat (pun intended) and be legally justified as they have already shown their intent to commit a felony against you.



There are really two scenarios in the OP:


Scenario #1 They stop advancing and follow your commands to prone themselves out on the ground. You probably won't shoot, and you may decide to hold them there while you dial 911 and get the cops there. Or, run like a bat outta hell to safety.

And no, in this scenario you're not going to reholster, as the threat against you isn't definitely gone.


You don't know what their intentions are. For all you know, once you holster your weapon, they will jump up and attack you. So you're going to hold them there until the local Police/Deputies arrive and the threat to your life is removed. And yes, you will be drawn down on and ordered to drop the weapon. Do as you're told.

Drop the gun as the police arrive (away from your assailants on the ground, obviously), and keep your hands up. Everybody will be detained, and yelling at the cops that you're innocent won't change that, or speed the process up. They don't know who is who until they get everybody detained and ask some questions.



Scenario #2:
They drop their weapons BUT KEEP ADVANCING


The question for Scenario 2 is, has their intention to commit a felony against you changed?

If they are still advancing, they can still commit "seriously physical injury" against you with their hands. Especially if there are thee of them against you!!

But it's reasonable to believe that after moving toward you in a threatening manner with weapons, if they don't run away but keep advancing on you without weapons, ignoring your commands, then their intentions haven't changed.


If they drop their weapons (or even if they don't!), and just turn tail and run, then yes, their intention to commit a felony against you has obviously changed. They are going to leave you alone or go and get guns (or friends) and come back, so you should get out of there, but you probably shouldn't shoot them.

Definitely call 911, get to safety, and file the report. Give the Police every detail you have.



It could also depend on what they're saying. If it's along the "we're gonna kill you" or "give me your money" variety then they are attempting to commit Murder, assault, or robbery in Oregon, which are all felonies.


Again, justified under ORS 161.219 as they are "committing or attempting to commit a felony."



SHOOTING IN BOTH SCENARIOS IS JUSTIFIED:

Scenario 1: Attempting to commit a felony. It's not necessarily your job to wait to see if they change their mind. They are attempting to commit a felony, and deadly physical force is justified. If they do change their mind upon your challenge before you start shooting, then by all means, hold them their until LE arrives, but challenging is a way to protect yourself and clarify their intentions. But if it's already clear and you're the only guy there who could be their victim, it's pretty clear that you're the target. So challenging isn't even required. If there's time, do it. If they're already too close, you probably don't want to wait.


Scenario 2: Again, attempting to commit a felony, with or without weapons (without weapons is Assault in the Second degree which is a B Felony, ORS 163.175)



If they say, "We're so sorry you're on candid camera!" It could be different. But those people are likely to freak out and run for cover screaming.

But if they're pulling a stunt like that they might get shot anyway, because again, BOTH scenarios are felonies and shooting is justified.


Quote:
Originally Posted by poodleshooter1 View Post
What are the elements of such a situation?
As others have said, millions of options.


Totality of the circumstances is important:
1) Number of attackers
2) Their demeanor (what are they saying, how are they looking at you?)
3) Their actions (are they advancing or retreating?)
5) Their disposition (their numbers, their physical strength and abilities)
4) Your disposition (no retreat option, no chance of successful escape, and as others of mentioned, physical disabilities or limitations, illness, etc.)
6) Location. (Where are you? Any help nearby? Or are you in a scenario that they've obviously trapped you?)


As has been stated, there are a million elements, all of which contribute to your decision, your justification and the local authorities findings upon their investigation.


What you'll find is that it comes down to state and local laws.


Shooting in BOTH of the scenarios the OP presented (Have weapons, drop them, but don't leave, or drop weapons and keep advancing) is justified in Oregon, because there are clear and articulate facts that would lead to the reasonable belief that those individuals are attempting to commit a felony against you (or a 3rd party if it's the guy next to you).



As many have said, talk it over with a lawyer, and know your local use of force laws, and be able to articulate why you were justified. If you don't know the laws and/or can't articulate your reason for using Physical Force or Deadly Physical Force, carrying a weapon can result in a lot of legal problems. Definitely have a lawyer handy.


If you are legally justified, and can articulate it, then you probably won't wind up in a scenario where you unjustifiably shoot someone.

Yes, people make mistakes, but reduce those chances by knowing the legal requirements.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TDC20 View Post
The court case is a result of a disagreement with my judgement by the State's attorney. They are claiming that I committed a crime. I contend that I did not.
If you know the laws, and can articulate your use of force, chances are the DA won't file charges against you. You may be detained, but if the witness(es) and evidence are on your side, more likely than not you will be released.


ETA: Holy %$&% that is long.
But I hope it's useful and/or educational. Or at least interesting and thought provoking.

Stay Safe!

Last edited by Kelo6; 11-25-2012 at 00:39..
Kelo6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 15:54   #227
Jack23
I. B. Glockin'
 
Jack23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Deer Park, Texas
Posts: 2,971


Quote:
Originally Posted by janice6 View Post
Say, Stop or I'll shoot. Then shoot.



The threat hasn't stopped.
Basically this. The instant that, due to proximity and level of threat perceived you feel like your life and health are in danger you shoot. Actually, in Texas you are NOT required to warn the aggressor verbally. Your fear of death or grievous injury is your impetus to shoot.
__________________
G-17, G-23, G-21, G-36, Ruger blackhawk, ss, Ruger 10/22, Ruger Mark II, Ruger SP101, British Webley MKI .455, Kel-Tec P32, S&W top break .38, S&W 24-3 .44spl N frame Colt 1903 .32, Heritage .22 Combo, Colt AR-15, LE6920.
Jack23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 13:19   #228
SCmasterblaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Hartford, Vermont
Posts: 16,034
BangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBangBang - RELOAD
__________________
Gun Ownership Offers Freedom in Many Dimensions

Last edited by SCmasterblaster; 11-26-2012 at 13:20..
SCmasterblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 14:52   #229
Smithers
Senior Member
 
Smithers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schrag4 View Post
Easy. Because he's closer to me now then he was before.

You must be a big guy, and trained in hand-to-hand combat. I'm not. If the attacker has 50 lbs of lean muscle on me and he's still advancing, I'm guessing he'll either take the gun from me or he'll beat me and then take the gun from me. The situation changed when he dropped the knife and walked closer. It actually got MORE dangerous for me, IMO. I don't think I'm the only one who would feel "safer" when the guy is 20 feet away with a knife in his hand than when he's 10 feet away without a knife, having already shown intent to harm me.
Yup, your mind will unlikely be having an internal debate about juries and definitions.

Of course, if you don't shoot, you could have plenty of time debating from within your coma.
Smithers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 15:07   #230
Smithers
Senior Member
 
Smithers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveksux View Post
One point that should be blatantly obvious to everyone at this point.

It doesn't matter which side of this debate is right or wrong....

The fact that on a gun centric forum there is a controversy over whether shooting the guy under these circumstances is justifiable should raise a HUGE RED FLAG as to whether a jury of 12 "normal" non-gun centric folks will think it is reasonable.

They set the reasonable standard, not us. And if we can't even agree... good luck with the jury.

Randy
Actually, most agree. It just doesn't seem that way due to the number of ocd postings to the contrary.
Smithers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 15:14   #231
Smithers
Senior Member
 
Smithers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Ohio
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by janice6 View Post
Each individual experiencing the original scenario will have to come to a specific conclusion as to what they will do WHEN THEY (YOU) FEEL THEIR LIFE IS THREATENED. You must think of this now. This is the condition which caused you to draw deadly force in the first place.

Some of you, when push comes to shove, will not be able to kill another human being under any circumstances, some will kill right away because of overriding abject fear (justifiable or not), some will have to believe their lives are still in danger and subsequently shoot because their "final line" has been crossed.

I do believe each of you will (as I have) have to evaluate the specific situation for yourselves and know what your final limit is to pull the trigger. Trying to change others "opinions of what is right", because YOU think you have the answer for everyone else, will have no actual bearing on the final outcome.

What is important here is to understand that you have to have the mindset to do what you have to do, and not be indecisive when the time comes. You have to decide what your life is worth to you, and how to best preserve it.

Remember, you, and only you, will have to try to convince some strangers that you truly believed you did what you had to do to survive, and had no other recourse.

Then, see if these strangers concur with your decision. In the end, do you feel it is worth it to be alive, but serve prison time for a bad or questionable decision, survive the trial and go free, or do you die right there with your last thought being that you MAY have made the right choice. You will have to accept the decision you made on the spur of the moment.

This isn't a pi$$ing contest, it will be your life or death. Make the decision of what life is worth to you and then do what you have to do.
Excellent post. Worth reading twice.
Smithers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 21:26   #232
glocktecher
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lawrenceville GA
Posts: 675
Shoot yourself in the groin so they will know you mean business.
glocktecher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 06:49   #233
boyscout399
Stam Chipmunk
 
boyscout399's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Lyman, Maine
Posts: 410
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveksux View Post
One point that should be blatantly obvious to everyone at this point.

It doesn't matter which side of this debate is right or wrong....

The fact that on a gun centric forum there is a controversy over whether shooting the guy under these circumstances is justifiable should raise a HUGE RED FLAG as to whether a jury of 12 "normal" non-gun centric folks will think it is reasonable.

They set the reasonable standard, not us. And if we can't even agree... good luck with the jury.

Randy
A jury has to be unanimous to convict. You only need to convince ONE to force a mistrial.
boyscout399 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 20:04   #234
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 23,680
How much does it cost to get to a mistrial?
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2012, 22:57   #235
Paul53
Geezer Boomer
 
Paul53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Corner of walk & Don't Walk
Posts: 4,238
I'd rather be tried for their murder, than they be tried for my murder.
__________________
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." -Nietzsche.
Paul53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 08:35   #236
happyguy
Man, I'm Pretty
 
happyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: You can't get here from there!
Posts: 15,376
Well...what are you going to do after he takes your gun away from you and shoots you with it, or stabs you with the knife he has hidden in his other hand?

Easy decision for me though, I'm pushing 60 and have issues with both shoulders that precludes any intense physical training. Bang!

Regards,
Comrade Happyguy
__________________
Proverbs 21:31 The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but victory is of the LORD.

"I refuse to tip-toe through life only to arrive at death safely."

Last edited by happyguy; 11-28-2012 at 08:36..
happyguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 08:42   #237
vmann
Controller
 
vmann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: DFW
Posts: 1,817
i am going to say at the top of my lungs, " stop or i will shoot, i am in fear for my life"....make sure someone heres you say I AM IN FEAR FOR MY LIFE
__________________
19 OD,22,23,27, Taurus PT101FS, Sig P226, S&W 4006

U.S. ARMY
vmann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 09:32   #238
ModGlock17
Senior Member
 
ModGlock17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lalaland USA
Posts: 2,627
Think about what has to be proven to people who weren't there, judges and jury.

Unless you have video, how do you prove the person was approaching you? That was just your words, your view, of course favorable to you.

In FL, you can meet force with equal force. But if the dead one came to you with empty hand that had just dropped a gun. Who would know so, post facto? Who witnessed?

The Zimmerman case would be so easy if we had Trayvon video.
ModGlock17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 10:45   #239
Tru7h
Member
 
Tru7h's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 67
Thanks to the original poster for putting this question up. Not something I had considered.

It's a question of Ability. There's no argument that he has Opportunity: he's close and getting closer. Jeprody was already confirmed, he brandished a weapon and threatened you.

So if HE believes he is still a lethal threat to you, YOU are reasonable to believe it. If they're advancing even at gunpoint, they're on meth or something and can overpower you, they're counting on you to be a chicken and let them walk up and kill you, or they have an ace up their sleeve (body armor, another assailant you haven't seen, a hidden weapon, etc). Any of the above would reasonably stack up as unequal force.

Pull the trigger as fast as possible, then open your field of view. Then call the cops (be the guy who does this first!), then call your lawyer. This one might not be pretty in court, but that's your only real option.
Tru7h is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:57.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 858
227 Members
631 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31