GlockTalk.com
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 05-09-2012, 13:58   #41
Misty02
Senior Member
 
Misty02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
Misty - I can understand the misinterpretation, but I was not responding to your post.

PEC - some good questions - In this situation, the door behind me does not lock. It opens into the sanctuary. It is clear (to me) that the individual is intent on getting physically ahold of the pastor. The observed strength, possibly drug-enhanced?, and the determination raise serious concerns (to my mind) that he intends to really hurt the pastor. Consider your own body size and your assumed duty as part of your church team to protect the pastor - this was the practice sceanario that I faced Sunday afternoon.

The state is a no duty to retreat state. The escape room is like a very large closet/storeroom - no windows. There is an armed individual with the pastor in the room. The room is about 10x10. Pastor is an average guy - 5"9", about 180lbs. Not really fit, but not a couch potato either.

My apologies, Riz58. The disclaimer at the beginning of my comment was poorly written (to put it mildly). I knew you were addressing Sam. My intent was to add my comment, while acknowledging I knew you weren’t addressing me with your question. I also felt the need to add I had no training or experience in addressing that type of problem (roughly translated to mean, my opinion is likely not worth much in that case).

.
__________________


"In making tactical dispositions, the highest pitch you can attain is to conceal them." - Sun Tzu

Outpost Member #69
Misty02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 14:07   #42
PEC-Memphis
Scottish Member
 
PEC-Memphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Doh ?
Posts: 3,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
PEC, et.al. - There are not 6 to 8 security guys left. Go with the facts stated: He has successfully defeated 5-6 people to get to this point - they are unavailable for whatever reason - It is one on one with the angry husband.

Pepper spray in an enclosed builidng with elderly people, young children, etc can be a dangerous option to them. This is a volunteer group, and I know of few civilians who own Tazers and fewer still trained with them.

Again, please quit adding to or picking apart the facts. No one asked for a dissection of the plan or woulda, coulda, shoulda: Accept the situation as it is. There you stand - facing an oncoming bad guy intent on attacking the pastor. The only weapon you have is your gun - What do you do?
I am going with the facts of your hypothetical situation....

The direct answer is that I would not draw a firearm. There is no disparity of force. Based upon your description, there is no reasonable expectation that anyone is immanent danger of serious bodily harm, therefore lethal force is not justified - it is not even close - it is not grey.

Here's why....

You stated that the attacker "blew though" 5-6 guys. You stated that the remaining "good guys" are you, another armed person past you, and the pastor - that's three guys.

In your original hypothetical "facts" you never stated that the the other guys were not available for whatever reason, your are the one adding to the "facts". Since the other 5-6 guys are apparently not injured, if you, and/or the other armed security guy and/or the pastor create even a small delay the other 5-6 guys get to re-engage.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
Pepper spray in an enclosed builidng with elderly people, young children, etc can be a dangerous option to them.
And you drawing and firing a gun under extreme stress is the "safer" option for them? While the risk of injury by OC/Mace exists to bystanders, is it very, very small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
Go wit This is a volunteer group, and I know of few civilians who own Tazers and fewer still trained with them.
Tasers are fairly common to security personnel. A high quality contact stun gun can be purchased for $70-$100. Lesser quality (~$30) stun guns are fairly common among "civilians".

Training exercises are learning experiences. The other folks and I, were merely making suggestions to prepare for the described situation should a similar event actually occur.

I'm not being snide. If you are going to work as security, volunteer or otherwise, and you wouldn't consider acquiring OC/mace/contact stun gun as a means of defense before employing lethal force - you really, really should reconsider if you need to work as security for your church. If that is your attitude, you are a liability to your church and yourself.

Another suggestion, go to a certification class for armed security. (I have) Most of the state requirements are very, very basic (at least they are in Tennessee), however, they do cover some of the legal aspects on what armed security can and can't (legally) do.
__________________
To all members of our Armed Forces - past, present and future - thank you for your service to our country.

Last edited by PEC-Memphis; 05-09-2012 at 14:08..
PEC-Memphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 14:43   #43
eracer
Where's my EBT?
 
eracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,722
If I can show that I exhausted all means of escape - that I did everything in my power to exit the scene before a physical conflict occurred, then I would rely on one simple fact to justify shooting an unarmed assailant:

The assailant continued the attack after not allowing me to escape."

At that moment, he has demonstrated an intent to attack and either injure or kill me. It's not incumbent on me at the moment he prevents my retreat to determine which, and I then have the right to defend myself with deadly force.

I don't know if a Grand Jury would agree with my rationale, but that's how I see it. I've never been in a fight, although I've talked my way out of a few, and twice I've fled when it was clear that talking wouldn't help. If I had not made my escape, and I had been armed when they caught me, I would have pulled my weapon with the intent of using it in self-defense.
__________________
Matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration; we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. And now...the weather! ---- Bill Hicks
eracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 14:50   #44
Misty02
Senior Member
 
Misty02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
Misty, with regard to your last post:

We train to use the minimum force necessary for the situation. We would rather that no one be permanently injured in any security instance. I was on a Sheriff ride-along when responded to a domestic situation where a man returned home after two weeks away at work to find his g.f. had moved another guy into his home. The man's kids were also in the house.

He went beserk (rumored he had issues with bipolar disorder), and started smashing stuff with a baseball bat. He calmed down when faced with a TASER and a Glock 19, but later erupted in the jail in in-take. Even cuffed to the chair, it took 4 250lb plus guys to subdue the man. What would he have done if he had gotten hold of just one of the guys? The deputy I was with did not want to be in the area when he went off.

It goes back to one of the points Sam made: What is your reasonable perception of the facts? In the hypothetical I stated above, I think the call can go either way. Maybe I can warn the defender inside that if the guy gets past me and opens the door, shoot him. Maybe I produce my weapon, warn him once again to stop, and if he rushes me, shoot him. (in our case there was room to do this). Maybe I do my best imitation of a speed bump and the guy squashes me.

I posted this fact situation to try to point out that often these situations are not cut and dried/ black and white. Others may disagree, but I think this one can go either way. What did I do - Nothing - the gang of 5 or 6 managed to stop him, but I was hurriedly going through the checklist in my mind as I watched this man nearly escape a group of people determined to stop him.
I agree with you. Actually I believe that a great majority of situations we are likely to face fall in that gray area and require more analysis that we may have time for. After the fact, when things turn out well, our thoughts are usually “I just knew….”. When it doesn’t the thoughts crossing our mind are more like “I should have known better!”

The minimum force necessary also falls into the “play and see”. I’ve seen videos where the person did not have the expected response (or no response at all) to OC or a taser. Everyone’s tolerance to discomfort or pain is not the same, if they are under the effect of a drug that may even further alter the expected/desired response.

While I still have no valuable input to your question, I’m curious….would any of the 5 or 6 men the husband got through before getting to you attempt to stop him by utilizing OC, a taser or something other than trying to tackle the person or physically over-power them?

.
__________________


"In making tactical dispositions, the highest pitch you can attain is to conceal them." - Sun Tzu

Outpost Member #69
Misty02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 15:09   #45
Dexters
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: ga
Posts: 4,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
What do you do?
Yell at the pastor to lock/bar the door and have him call 911.

The attacker is focused on the pastor, not me. The pastor is now secure and if the room is on the ground floor, he can escape from a window unnoticed.

I would not draw my gun (unless I was going to shoot). This guy 'blew by 6 guys' I wouldn't want to give him the idea to try and take my gun.
__________________
Montani Semper Liberi

Last edited by Dexters; 05-09-2012 at 15:17..
Dexters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 15:17   #46
Misty02
Senior Member
 
Misty02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
PEC, et.al. - There are not 6 to 8 security guys left. Go with the facts stated: He has successfully defeated 5-6 people to get to this point - they are unavailable for whatever reason - It is one on one with the angry husband.

Pepper spray in an enclosed builidng with elderly people, young children, etc can be a dangerous option to them. This is a volunteer group, and I know of few civilians who own Tazers and fewer still trained with them.

Again, please quit adding to or picking apart the facts. No one asked for a dissection of the plan or woulda, coulda, shoulda: Accept the situation as it is. There you stand - facing an oncoming bad guy intent on attacking the pastor. The only weapon you have is your gun - What do you do?
If your mission is to protect the Pastor at all cost, then you will likely have to shoot and then spend the next 25+ years in prison. When you allow no alternatives or suggestions, then you just do what you must do and prepare to face the consequences.

It’s really not so difficult to work through when the possibilities are set on stone and there is no way to work through them.

.
__________________


"In making tactical dispositions, the highest pitch you can attain is to conceal them." - Sun Tzu

Outpost Member #69
Misty02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2012, 17:01   #47
Riz58
Senior Member
 
Riz58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 4 Corners NM
Posts: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misty02 View Post
If your mission is to protect the Pastor at all cost, then you will likely have to shoot and then spend the next 25+ years in prison. When you allow no alternatives or suggestions, then you just do what you must do and prepare to face the consequences.

It’s really not so difficult to work through when the possibilities are set on stone and there is no way to work through them.

.
The point of the hypothetical was to help people think through situations that may arise with the way people actually carry. Adding facts or conditions - "you should have Tazer's", for example, is evading the question, not answering it. How many CCW's do you know that carry a Tazer along with a firearm?

The goal was to place yourself there at the door, which whatever you would normally carry, facing an enraged, very strong individual one on one, with, to my mind, a strong desire to harm the pastor. What would you do? What could you do? What should you do? Gender, age, the size of the attacker, the behavior of the attacker, etc - everything on Sam's list - gets mixed into the batch, and often times there is not a definitive answer.

By the way, a captain in the Sheriff's office was observing the exercise, and he is also in charge of the Sheriff's SWAT team. He said that for a civilian particularly, he would not charge someone if they used deadly force in this situation. Remember, defense of another is just as justifiable as defense of yourself in most states, plus that was an assigned, albeit voluntary, security person. Not a bright line call, but he would break in that direction. Cops with their variety of equipment and training may be a different result.

Again, the idea was to get people thinking about what they would do. The differences of opinion show how one fact situation can lead to different conclusions. The key is that each individual involved must be able to clearly articulate the facts justifying the action taken.
__________________
Regards,
Riz58

In self-defense there are three things you cannot use: skills you have not developed, a gun you do not have with you, and ammo that is still in the box.
Riz58 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 12:30   #48
PEC-Memphis
Scottish Member
 
PEC-Memphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Doh ?
Posts: 3,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
The point of the hypothetical was to help people think through situations that may arise with the way people actually carry. Adding facts or conditions - "you should have Tazer's", for example, is evading the question, not answering it. How many CCW's do you know that carry a Tazer along with a firearm?
Yes - simulated situations are to see how you will respond; but more importantly how you can respond better and be better prepared. Not too many CCW folks carry tazers - but you are not acting as a "EDC-CCW". You are acting as security. It is not uncommon for security to carry tasers - and very, very common for security to carry OC/mace.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
The goal was to place yourself there at the door, which whatever you would normally carry, facing an enraged, very strong individual one on one, with, to my mind, a strong desire to harm the pastor. What would you do? What could you do? What should you do? Gender, age, the size of the attacker, the behavior of the attacker, etc - everything on Sam's list - gets mixed into the batch, and often times there is not a definitive answer.
I think everyone who responded addressed this. The answer is don't shoot because the threat of death or serious harm doesn't exist in the situation you described; or you can shoot and face being arrested/charged/convicted/go-to-jail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
By the way, a captain in the Sheriff's office was observing the exercise, and he is also in charge of the Sheriff's SWAT team. He said that for a civilian particularly, he would not charge someone if they used deadly force in this situation.
I think the captain was correct - he wouldn't charge you in the situation you described. The DA would charge you and the captain would arrest you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
Remember, defense of another is just as justifiable as defense of yourself in most states, plus that was an assigned, albeit voluntary, security person. Not a bright line call, but he would break in that direction. Cops with their variety of equipment and training may be a different result.
Nobody seems to have forgotten that defense of another is just as justifiable as defense of yourself in most states. The situation hasn't met the requirement for the use of lethal force for anyone.

So here's some questions to you....

1. You don't want to learn how to respond better? You seem to be dwelling on this as "changing the facts", whereas these are suggestions to respond better should a similar situation actually occur.

2. So what, even remotely, makes you believe that the situation you described justifies the use of lethal force? Intent to do harm does not always justify responding with lethal force.

3. Does NM require a classroom/live fire course to receive a permit? Tennessee requires a class which addresses the legal aspects of the use of deadly force (I'm a Tennessee HCP instructor - as well as NRA and Mississippi). Typically, several situations are given in the class to illustrate the law. This one would be an example of when not to shoot.

So angry husband looks mean - and you are trying to decide if you should shoot? Angry husband pushes a few guys out of the way - and you are trying to decide if you should shoot? Angry husband is walking towards you - and you are trying to decide if you should shoot? Angry husband pushes you - and you are trying to decide if you should shoot? Angry husband punches you in the gut - and you are trying to decide if you should shoot? None - absolutely none - of these meet the requirement for the use of lethal force on your part. You don't get to legally use lethal force in a "typical" fist fight, "shoving match", etc. - even if you don't "start it" and even if you lose.

Watch the Ayoob video on disparity of force.
__________________
To all members of our Armed Forces - past, present and future - thank you for your service to our country.

Last edited by PEC-Memphis; 05-18-2012 at 16:24..
PEC-Memphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2012, 17:13   #49
Misty02
Senior Member
 
Misty02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
The point of the hypothetical was to help people think through situations that may arise with the way people actually carry. Adding facts or conditions - "you should have Tazer's", for example, is evading the question, not answering it. How many CCW's do you know that carry a Tazer along with a firearm?

The goal was to place yourself there at the door, which whatever you would normally carry, facing an enraged, very strong individual one on one, with, to my mind, a strong desire to harm the pastor. What would you do? What could you do? What should you do? Gender, age, the size of the attacker, the behavior of the attacker, etc - everything on Sam's list - gets mixed into the batch, and often times there is not a definitive answer.

By the way, a captain in the Sheriff's office was observing the exercise, and he is also in charge of the Sheriff's SWAT team. He said that for a civilian particularly, he would not charge someone if they used deadly force in this situation. Remember, defense of another is just as justifiable as defense of yourself in most states, plus that was an assigned, albeit voluntary, security person. Not a bright line call, but he would break in that direction. Cops with their variety of equipment and training may be a different result.

Again, the idea was to get people thinking about what they would do. The differences of opinion show how one fact situation can lead to different conclusions. The key is that each individual involved must be able to clearly articulate the facts justifying the action taken.
I thought the point was to review and provide suggestion on how to best handle the drill you had at your church and whether or not one could use deadly force in that case (I know you originally asked Sam though)? http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18942913&postcount=28

To answer your question, my sons own both OC and a taser, the taser is rarely carried, but then again they are not engaged in volunteer bodyguard and/or security duties.

Why would I only carry what I normally carry if I’m volunteering for a bodyguard/ security job?

Since you’re all doing this to prepare and improve (the drills), don’t dismiss the tools are not owned now as some are relatively inexpensive (definitely cheaper than needing to hire an attorney).

What some have been trying to explain here is that it may be possible that particular case may not be considered self-defense. Each case will be unique and individual but since you are all being the pastor’s body guard it may be wise to give more thought as to where is the line someone would have to cross before deadly force is used. Another thing to keep in mind, while the sheriff may decide not charge, it doesn’t mean a DA can’t later.
.
__________________


"In making tactical dispositions, the highest pitch you can attain is to conceal them." - Sun Tzu

Outpost Member #69
Misty02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2012, 16:38   #50
PimpStick
Senior Member
 
PimpStick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Naptown & Vegas
Posts: 1,079


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexters View Post
From a criminal point of view what needs to be emphasized is the legal hypothetical of the 'Reasonable Person' or objective standard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person

When thinking about the situation you should not be thinking about it from your point of view - subjective, but the 'reasonable person's' or objective point of view.

If the issue goes to court the prosecution will try to show your actions were 'unreasonable' your attorney would try to show they were.
Keep in mind, in almost all states, the "reasonable person" standard is actually defined in jury instructions as, "What a reasonably prudent person who do under the same or similar circumstance(s)." So there is always some subjective component to the analysis.

As far as self defense, the ultimate question is if one had a reasonable belief that his (or someone else's) life (or fear of serious bodily injury) was in jeopardy.
__________________
-CCW: SA XDs .45. Home Defense: Glock 29 and Bushmaster M4A3.
-Current G's: 19, 23c, 26, 27, 29, 36, 37 & 38 (Gen 3s)
-Past GLOCKs: 30, 37
"The green ones make me horny."
PimpStick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2012, 16:48   #51
PimpStick
Senior Member
 
PimpStick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Naptown & Vegas
Posts: 1,079


Quote:
Originally Posted by Riz58 View Post
Good job, as always, Sam.

Here is a hypothetical that I think reflects the "borderline" where tough decisions must be made: This past Sunday afternoon, our ushers and security team ran a mock drill wherein an angry husband starts walking down the aisle in the service calling out the pastor. The husband is 5-10, about 240lbs of solid muscle - strong as a bull and hard as a rock.

The second time we ran the situation: Husband was confronted outside the sanctuary, but managed to evade escape, and came in a side door. Pastor protection designee scoots with pastor out the opposite side door. ( I was nearest the escape hatch on the opposite side of the sanctuary from the angry husband.) Six people are trying to block and stop the guy, but he is bulling through (there are some limitations to hands-on physical response in training). I had stepped up to block the escape door in case he broke through.

Question: Angry husband, shouting threats to pastor, just blew through five or six men by physical force, and is heading towards where you are guarding the door of the room where your pastor is now located. You are the only one left in front of him. Can you use deadly force (your firearm) to stop the angry husband from reaching the pastor?
I assume you mean by pulling the trigger, not unholstering and demanding him to stop. I'd say not yet (firing) at that point. Now we're getting into what Ayoon calls disparity of force, and I doubt at this point anyone is reasonably in fear for anyone's life. If he then, at that point, produces a weapon of any kind, yes. Or if he grabs the pastor, slams his head on the concrete and there's no chance of pastor fighting back, yes...
__________________
-CCW: SA XDs .45. Home Defense: Glock 29 and Bushmaster M4A3.
-Current G's: 19, 23c, 26, 27, 29, 36, 37 & 38 (Gen 3s)
-Past GLOCKs: 30, 37
"The green ones make me horny."
PimpStick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2012, 19:41   #52
*Sheepdog*
Member
 
*Sheepdog*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 44
This thread has been a good read. It's near impossible to predict how a judge or jury will decide your fate. God forbid any of us ever find ourselves in the situation where we may have to take the life of another human being to protect ourselves or our loved ones. You do however need to consider that if you are charged, either in a court of law or civil court, that you risk the chance of life behind bars or penniless or both. These are responsibilities you must accept.

I've had the pleasure of attending one of Col. Dave Grossman's training seminars (The Bulletproof Mind for the Armed Citizen). This exact topic, along with many others, was presented to us. It really is eye opening to listen to uncensored facts pertaining to self defense in case law. I have read Mr. Ayoobs book: In the Gravest Extreme, listened to many of his podcasts, and watched countless YouTube videos of him. Both of these gentlemen are living legends.
__________________
Glock 19 Gen4
Glock 26 Gen 4
Glock 30 Gen3

Living in the U.S. is like being a tampon: In a great place at a bad time.
*Sheepdog* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2012, 20:02   #53
coqui33
NRA Instructor
 
coqui33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Spade View Post
My own student shot in a 3:1 situation after taking blows to the head and was prosecuted vigorously (2 trials, both that ended in hung juries. No conviction, but more than one juror wanted to send him to prison.)
Sounds like the Larry Hickey case in Tucson.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
coqui33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 09:18   #54
PEC-Memphis
Scottish Member
 
PEC-Memphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Doh ?
Posts: 3,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by coqui33 View Post
Sounds like the Larry Hickey case in Tucson.
Did'ja see post #24?
__________________
To all members of our Armed Forces - past, present and future - thank you for your service to our country.
PEC-Memphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 12:09   #55
coqui33
NRA Instructor
 
coqui33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by PEC-Memphis View Post
Did'ja see post #24?
Oops. No, I did not. Sorry
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
coqui33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 12:45   #56
SFla27
Senior Member
 
SFla27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: South Florida, USA
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by PEC-Memphis View Post
If found this to be an interesting case:

http://ostti.com/Hickey%20Booklet.pdf

Most likely the one mentioned in the OP.
Just read the case.

Could we use this fact pattern and identify a better hypothetical outcome for Mr. Hickey?

Please, do not misinterpret this post. All I am doing is using the fact pattern as a case study to identify what could have been done differently if anyone else was involved in a similar situation. Of course, in the middle of being pummeled and hit on the head with a glass bottle from out of nowhere, things go downhill quickly. There are no easy answers. Any statements made beyond this point are made solely for the sake of objective discussion and assessment.

Would the situation had been different if a can of pepper spray was the defensive weapon? Granted, the chances of the chemicals getting in the defendant's own face or his wife's face would be greater than usual, but this would represent the use of non-lethal force. Would the mere display of the pepper spray been a deterrent? And the timing of pepper spray deployment would also be a factor: It would have to come out before being hit on the head with the glass bottle (which may represent a "deadly weapon" in and of itself). I would imagine anyone subjected to that kind of aggravated battery would immediately be concerned that "grave bodily harm" was about to be committed, or just committed.

Or, would the mere display of his pistol been deemed adequate? Would it have been aggravated assault? What if the pistol was unholstered and in plain view of the assailants vs pointed at them?

And it is true that the beginning of Mr. Hickey's legal process went wrong in a number of ways. How can one ensure that the process addresses the defendants' statements and take on the assault? This would involve protocol regarding contacting 911. But what if the defendant mis-speaks, as things usually are heated when 911 is called? Possibly the installation of CCTV to monitor the perimeter of the house, including driveway / street area?

This armed vs unarmed situation sure is complicated.

Last edited by SFla27; 06-04-2012 at 13:10..
SFla27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 13:11   #57
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFla27 View Post
This armed vs unarmed situation sure is complicated.
We have a WINNER!

__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 14:04   #58
SFla27
Senior Member
 
SFla27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: South Florida, USA
Posts: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Spade View Post
We have a WINNER!

Indeed.

I just wonder if, given that scenario of facts, had the defendant made it clear he had some form of deterrent for self-defense, after pushing the two ladies away, if they would come back and resume their attack.

Then the defendant would communicate that the police were being called.

The display of pepper spray or even the pistol (holstered) at that moment would have to give the two ladies (or even two guys, in a similar fact pattern), pause. No?

They would have then be put on notice that if they continued their attack, there would be more serious consequences.

Flip side: Display of a pistol could be construed as aggravated assault, especially assuming the assailants get to 911 first and distort the truth.

My brain hurts...
SFla27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 15:52   #59
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFla27 View Post
Indeed.

I just wonder if, given that scenario of facts, had the defendant made it clear he had some form of deterrent for self-defense, after pushing the two ladies away, if they would come back and resume their attack.

Then the defendant would communicate that the police were being called.

The display of pepper spray or even the pistol (holstered) at that moment would have to give the two ladies (or even two guys, in a similar fact pattern), pause. No?

They would have then be put on notice that if they continued their attack, there would be more serious consequences.

Flip side: Display of a pistol could be construed as aggravated assault, especially assuming the assailants get to 911 first and distort the truth.

My brain hurts...
Every situation is a bit different, and the specifics matter. A lot.

To address your last point (okay, next to last; you need to take care of your own brain): AZ has a statute specifically allowing the defensive display of a firearm "when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force". We also allow for the threat of deadly force defensively. So, the defender has some built in protections against an aggravated assault charge. That's in AZ; as I said, the specifics matter, which includes your local laws.

Of course, all of this has to be done within the time and distance constraints that your assailants allow you, which is another issue.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 15:57   #60
PEC-Memphis
Scottish Member
 
PEC-Memphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Doh ?
Posts: 3,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by coqui33 View Post
Oops. No, I did not. Sorry
Just giving you a hard time - hard to read every post on a multi-page thread.
__________________
To all members of our Armed Forces - past, present and future - thank you for your service to our country.
PEC-Memphis 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 04:20.




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


Users Currently Online: 538
140 Members
398 Guests

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