The 'won't back down' situation

[Richard]

I'm no lawyer either , but I cant get passed the BG not having a weapon .

In this scenario control over the victims weapon is "in play" - the issue seems to come down to whether or not the victim has the right to use deadly force in order to maintain control of that weapon.

Just because the BG isn't obviously / visibly drunk or stoned doesn't mean there's nothing physiologically wrong with him , and YOU have the GUN .

I do not believe that the victim has a legal obligation to allow themselves to be put in a situation by their attacker where their firearm can be taken from them.

If you shoot , I think you set yourself up for failure in the courtroom . I understand if your a small woman or an older person .

Even a physically fit, highly trained professional fighter is under no legal obligation to allow themselves to be put in a situation where their firearm can be taken from them by an attacker.

I understand the reasons a person would shoot , but I don't trust lawyers or the courts either .

I keep going over this scenario and keep thinking , if I were a juror in your trial , and If the BG wasn't some form of "spec ops" or "black belt" and you shot him , I'd say guilty .

I disagree, I think the victims "use of deadly force" would be justified in order to maintain control over their weapon, regardless of the attackers lack of a visible weapon, prior martial arts experience or hand to hand combat training.

I think it comes down to how you carry yourself , do you look like a predator or prey ? Not looking like prey will keep all but the most determined BG's from trying something .

I am not sure how the victims appearence changes the attackers intent in this equasion.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Ok Richard , a deadly, permanent solution (gun) was brought into "play" by the "victim" , as a means to "diffuse" the situation .

Again , level of force . Come on ! , words vs bullets .

Did you see this BG hurt or kill anyone ? What makes you think he would've made good on any threats ?

I think the problem is that as the parameters of the scenario are given , we subjectively put ourselves in the "victims" position . We look at this scenario and think "what would I do " ?

In that subjective light , this is where the "victims"( my ) appearance comes in . I'm 6' tall , 212 lbs , I still wear a "high and tight" and frequently get asked if I'm a cop or Marine . Since I've never been either I laugh and tell them no .

I'm 34 now , and certainly NOT ANY KIND OF BAD ASS , period . That being said , because of how I look and carry myself , most men will not try to attack me , or at least haven't since the eighth grade .

Criminals will tell you there are two types of people that will look you in the eye when passing by , cops or other criminals .

I've been downtown "people watching" and have noticed this myself (try it ) , you can see the people that carry themselves like wolves , and you can definitely tell the ones who look like sheep .

So I guess for me it's hard to understand shooting an unarmed man , more than that why risk prison over a verbal threat .

 

[erik7941]

I think if I was faced with that kind of a situation I'd keep my hand on my gun while it was in open view to the aggressor and begin issuing warnings like stay back. If he keeps coming, slowly or not, arms out or in, I'd probably draw and re-issue a warning that I have a gun and will fire if he comes any closer. If he keeps coming, I'm going to put rounds in him with the intent to kill him. From what I've heard (I'm not sure if it's true or not) in IN if you shoot someone in the kneecaps, they can press charges and claim that it was you torturing them. That would suck to go to jail for that while you were trying to defend yourself.

 

[Willard]

And unfortunately...should you ever have to kill a man (or woman) to protect your own life...that statement may be produced by an attorney and used to hang you out to dry. Be cautious about what you say and offer for public viewing. You and I both know it's not meant as a threat...and was probably intended as half-humorous...but an attorney will produce that statement and say, "Did you or did you not, on 05/17/2009 at 08:41 hours post a comment on a local gun owners forum stating that you intended to kill a person if you ever got into a physical confrontation because if you killed that person they would not be able to testify against you"?

I'm not making a "tin foil hat" reference that somewhere, someone is taking notes on everything you say or post...but remember, "anything you say (and post) can be used against you". You only shoot a firearm to neutralize an imminent threat to life and safety...yours or that of someone else...never to kill. That should never be the intention. We've all done it...I'm just saying...

Understood & appriciated You were correct in it was intended to be 50% humor, but also 50% true. I've carried for decades, and thankfully never been in the situation to fire, unholster, yes. If the situation ever arrives where I did need to fire, I would do so to stop what ever the threat(s) was, not to slow it down, or "scare" it, to stop it.

What I wouldn't do is "show" it, then you're more apt to find yourself fighting a brandishing/intimidation charge. No one needs to know I have it until it's needed. They could just as well be armed, and turn to leave only to draw their weapon....I want the upper hand be it concealment or 1st to fire.

Not to worry, what with my Ron Paul, and "Don't Tread On Me" bumper stickers, I'm already on "the list"

 

[Richard]

Ok Richard , a deadly, permanent solution (gun) was brought into "play" by the "victim" , as a means to "diffuse" the situation .

I personally do not believe that a victim uncovering a handgun & ordering an enraged attacker to "STAY BACK" is unreasonable.

Again , level of force . Come on ! , words vs bullets .

And hopefully the now known "armed status" of the victim deters any futher hostilities from the attacker, I believe in most cases it would thus is a reasonable course of action.

Did you see this BG hurt or kill anyone ? What makes you think he would've made good on any threats ?

What would make the victim think that the attacker wouldn't?

I think the problem is that as the parameters of the scenario are given , we subjectively put ourselves in the "victims" position . We look at this scenario and think "what would I do " ?

Well if I were in that position the last thing I would allow would be an enraged attacker to close distance & engage me in a physical confrontation that would put the control over my weapon in question.

So I guess for me it's hard to understand shooting an unarmed man , more than that why risk prison over a verbal threat .

For all the victim knows this "unarmed" enraged attacker could reach into a pocket or waistband & produce a weapon at any time & if the attacker continues to advance on the now known to be armed victim, it would be reasonable to assume that the attacker intends to make a play for the victims weapon.

 

[Richard]

What I wouldn't do is "show" it, then you're more apt to find yourself fighting a brandishing/intimidation charge.

Unlikely, considering there is no brandishing statutes here in Indiana that I am aware of & victims of an attack are very unlikely to face an "intimidation" charge because they scared off their attacker.

No one needs to know I have it until it's needed.

And then there is always the "chalk outlined victim" who waited to long.

 

[Libertarian01]

Just had an encounter last night

To All,

Very interesting timing here.

Last night I returned LATE from the Libertarian Party of Indiana State convention in Clarksville. A three (3) hour drive home after getting up at 3:30AM Saturday morning for the drive down, all day convention, stay for dinner, then speech by our Vice Presidential Candidate, then head for home.

I got home about 12:30AM Sunday and was unwinding, checking Email and so forth when I hear loud banging outside the window. I look out and there is some idiot whanging the lightpost w/ I don't know what.

I put on my robe right away, grab my CZ-82 (it was handy) and head out the front door. I didn't even take time to put slippers on. I am standing right outside my front door on the walkway and there is nothing. All is quiet again and not a soul in sight.

Suddenly from my left less than 10' feet away comes a guy moving at a good clip but not running from around the side of my house. I immediately pull my pistol, safety is off but a round is NOT chambered, so both hands are one the pistol. One is on the slide ready to chamber the round while the pistol is pointed down.

I said, "excuse me" and he slowed but did not respond. He was walking right past me as I don't think he even knew I was there in the dark. I said "excuse me" again, "what are you doing here?"

At this he stopped and turned w/ a stick in his hand, probably the same stick he was wanging the lightpost with. He said something to the effect of "I'm just going home". Now he is facing me about 6' away and he sees exactly where my hands are (still pointed down w/ a pistol in them). I inquired as to where he was going. He told me, "My name is Greg and I live at 1234 Trierwood, Sir".

At this point I can tell he is probably drunk and isn't hostile. I tell him to take it easy and I hope he gets home soon. Gun is still out as I watch him walk off at a quick pace.

I know drunks can turn but he seemed like a young guy, mid 20's, who had just had too much. He was unarmed except for the stick.

This encounter turned out well. At the time I honestly was not frightened. It happened so quickly that I don't think I had time to create some sort of battle plan, legal plan, or feel much. I certainly did not want to shoot some drunk who had probably wandered away from a party but neither was I going to become a victim. Even w/ this guy I never raised my voice and spoke respectfully albeit firmly. I didn't want to needlessly escalate the situation. Of course he was in his right mind enough to refer to the guy w/ the gun as "Sir".

It amazes me when thinking about it how many different ways this scenario could have deviated from what happened. I had been awake for almost 24 hours straight and was definately NOT at 100%.

In the end I would far rather wind up defending myself in a court of law (civil and/or criminal) than putting my family and friends through a hospital visit and/or funeral visit for ME!

I guess the best thing to do is use the best judgement you can as the situation allows and make certain that you try to avoid problems without dodging responsibility.

Regards,

Doug

 

[agentl074]

Drunks lol.... I am glad it was not too serious!

 

[RelicHound]

could of sworn I replied to this topic..guess I didnt hit send

 

[JosephR]

Taken from another post three weeks ago:

Another neat tip from Masaad Ayoob was from his Judicious Use of Lethal Force video. It was during a talk about home invasions, but it applies here. If an altercation is imminent, and you draw your weapon to a low ready or whatever your training describes as a ready defensive position, and the BG continues to attack...You can make some assumptions.

1) He knows that I have a deadly weapon in my hand because he can see it.
2) He can reasonably assume that I know how to use it and that it is not an empty threat.
3) I don't know anything about this person. He may be a thug, a retired Navy Seal, SAS, KGB, Honor roll student, etc.
4) In that situation I know nothing about what training he has, but he knows something about the training I have.
5) No one would continue to attack if they thought they had a major chance of losing.
6) Because the bad guy is pushing the attack he must be confident enough in his skills that he can still win the altercation even with me holding a gun.
7) He has enough training to win the attack unarmed against an armed gunman
8) The only way to stop him is to kill him.

Yep, that's exactly how I look at it. What fool would advance towards you? He must have something up his sleeve and to advance, he must have bad intentions.

I'd circle around to my weak side, or strong side if I had to, keeping an eye on a location where I would have room to back away quite a bit so I could. I'd get there and back away slowly, shouting to him to stop advancing and stop his threats to my well being or I'll shoot, hoping a witness will hear this SEVERAL times, helping me later if need be.

He gets shot COM if he gets close enough AND moves quickly at me or my gun.

It's silly to think you're better off taking an "ass whoopin" vs. shooting someone. You don't know how hard they hit, how quickly you'll go down, and how quickly YOUR WEAPON may end up in THEIR HANDS. That is totally irresponsible.

 

[dross]

I think drawing and displaying the weapon in the low ready position makes a lot of sense. Someone posted that taking an "ass whuppin'" isn't enough reason to shoot someone. When grown men fight, it's not like it was on the playground at school. People get hurt. In my younger days, I'm not proud to say, when I was a young paratrooper out on the town, I used to get into some fights. I never started any, but I certainly helped escalate some easily diffused situations. I was never in a fight that one or both of us didn't need a trip to the emergency room afterwards. In the last fight I was in, the guy knocked me out. I had friends with me, but if I had been alone, he could have killed me had he wanted to. Men die in fistfights.

I'm a big guy, too big now, but even in top shape I weighed 230 pounds. Lucky for me, that keeps me from getting messed with very often. Yet, because I'm armed I can't afford to get into a fistfight. I simply can't afford to let a person angry enough at me to want to physically harm me have an opportunity to take my gun away. Also, even though I know how it would look in court, I have to assume that a guy who would confront me must be some kind of badass, or crazy at least.

I think the safest physically and legally is to draw the weapon and tell them to back away. If the guy still attacks, as the post that quoted Ayoob says, I have to assume that he still thinks he can win the altercation. He knows I have a gun and I've told him I will shoot him. I set the stakes for this altercation at life and death, and yet he still attacks me. If that isn't reasonable fear of loss of life and limb, I don't know what is.

If I don't draw my gun except to shoot, it's an easy argument that the guy was just going to shove me or something. And truthfully, the guy might be just an a-hole who was going to do just that. I don't want to kill that guy. By drawing the gun, I find out who I'm dealing with, and there's a very big chance that no one will be hurt. I like that solution.

 

[JosephR]

I've never killed any aggressor since 'Nam, but if I'm advanced upon by an obvious belligerent ne're-do-well, I'd STK. I have made my weapon obvious only one time in the last 15 years, and it was this year, as a "homey" in a "hoodie" (can I say that?) was shuffling around the M.O. kiosk in WallyWorld, looking suspicious to me. I had $1,000 in my hands, and other customers had cash showing also. I caught "homey's" eye and casually showed the full length of a under-the-arm holster G-1 to him, watching his face. Can black turn to white?? I think so. In that case, no-one encroached. But if "some-one" had, I would have drawn, and held him on the floor until help arrived. Same deal if I was still un-disclosed and "some-one" began to duct-tape citizens together. No where to go but down-hill from that. So I'd kill someone. I know what regrets are. I'd have none.

No, you cannot say that but you can say "homie"

LOL!

 

[JosephR]

Agreed. This brings up a question I've been meaning to ask; to wit:

How many of you practice drawing and NOT shooting?? In other words, do you worry that by constantly practicing the draw and double-tap that you are developing muscle memory so that they become one action, even in situations where drawing may be the only action needed?

NO, not a problem since firing requires aiming and thought as far as I am concerned; I don't shoot from the hip. I DO understand that it may be necessary, especially since we are talking about some scrub getting 5 feet away. Damn. Does everyone realize 5 feet is an arm's length and one step away?

 

[JosephR]

Just to follow up, this is a legal nightmare. Lets say he verbally assaults you, you show your weapon, and then he draws his weapon on you and shoots, and you shoot back. His actions are the ones that are going to be justified, not yours. Why? Because you escalated a screaming, he got in my face, match to a situation with a deadly weapon.

quote]

I believe you are wrong. If he's screaming at you and has a weapon and you draw and the shooting commences, you were in the right. If he's going to scream while armed, obviously looking for a fight and it does turn into a gunfight, well, guess what, you were defending yourself. I know what you are saying but it would be tough to hash that out. You act like it's ok to taunt someone with words thinking that if they draw you can "drop" them because they drew first?

Think about most fights, a verbal argument that gets the non-yeller to swing and the yeller to land the first good punch does not result in the yeller getting away scott-free with no repercussions and there's a reason for that.

 

[JosephR]

I'm no lawyer either , but I cant get passed the BG not having a weapon .

Just because the BG isn't obviously / visibly drunk or stoned doesn't mean there's nothing physiologically wrong with him , and YOU have the GUN .

If you shoot , I think you set yourself up for failure in the courtroom . I understand if your a small woman or an older person .

I understand the reasons a person would shoot , but I don't trust lawyers or the courts either .

I keep going over this scenario and keep thinking , if I were a juror in your trial , and If the BG wasn't some form of "spec ops" or "black belt" and you shot him , I'd say guilty .

I think it comes down to how you carry yourself , do you look like a predator or prey ? Not looking like prey will keep all but the most determined BG's from trying something .

Yes exactly, we're giving OUR opinions. I do NOT look like prey so if someone turns and starts something like this, he's obviously not right in the head or looking to do some damage and that's how I will treat his actions- as a serious threat and that's all there is to it.

Like it's been said before, I will HAVE to assume there's more to the guy than just words- he's obviously off-kilter and I'm not going to have tea and crumpets with him to find out what is up. I've been given the right to defend myself and I will do just that. I'm going home at the end of the day.

 

[JosephR]

Ok Richard , a deadly, permanent solution (gun) was brought into "play" by the "victim" , as a means to "diffuse" the situation .

Again , level of force . Come on ! , words vs bullets .

Did you see this BG hurt or kill anyone ? What makes you think he would've made good on any threats ?

I think the problem is that as the parameters of the scenario are given , we subjectively put ourselves in the "victims" position . We look at this scenario and think "what would I do " ?

In that subjective light , this is where the "victims"( my ) appearance comes in . I'm 6' tall , 212 lbs , I still wear a "high and tight" and frequently get asked if I'm a cop or Marine . Since I've never been either I laugh and tell them no .

I'm 34 now , and certainly NOT ANY KIND OF BAD ASS , period . That being said , because of how I look and carry myself , most men will not try to attack me , or at least haven't since the eighth grade .

Criminals will tell you there are two types of people that will look you in the eye when passing by , cops or other criminals .

I've been downtown "people watching" and have noticed this myself (try it ) , you can see the people that carry themselves like wolves , and you can definitely tell the ones who look like sheep .

So I guess for me it's hard to understand shooting an unarmed man , more than that why risk prison over a verbal threat .

You are answering your own questions. Stop and think, would you?

You are soooo certain no man in his right mind would assault you but you are faced with a situation where the threat of you being armed is not heeded in an intelligent way by a would-be attacker. What do you think is going on? Is the man sensible, intelligent, reasonable? Sounds like he's under the influence or mentally unstable.

 

[USMC_0311]

If you can control your adrenaline rush during a confrontation, trying to shoot someone in the kneecap is a good way to sign your own death warrant.

Glad you could find the sarcasim.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

I know the OP didn't want to hear it but , IMO pulling a gun on an unarmed guy that says he's going to kill you is wrong , all day long .

You've just escalated a situation that potentially could have been talked through , to a life or death situation . Did he know you were armed until you pulled it ? There could be a list of medical reasons for his behavior other than he is in fact a bad ass .

No, you don't know if he can kill you , but you don't know if he's some A--hole running his mouth and can't get it done either .

So big boys play ruff huh , no kidding . I guess if you don't know yourself and haven't invested in yourself with some training and a gun is the only advantage you have ...

On the battlefield I can see where shooting him makes sense , sure all potential threats get dealt with . Here in the world , we're civilized because we don't go around shooting people that run their mouths .

I cant help but think your gonna get crucified in court if you shoot this guy .

I guess you have to be a gambler , one bet says you forfeit the rest of your life (and your ass) in prison . The other says you bet your life now , by fighting him .

I'm willing to pull the trigger if I think there's no other way , but I'll give a person as much rope as they need first .

I'm not trying to come off all tree hugger , like life is all butterflies and rainbows , but as bad as things are getting for gun owners (us), I don't think we need to give the anti-gun folks any more ammo .

I think no matter how you feel about his intentions at the time , in the media YOUR gonna be the "psycho" , gun toting killer shooting unarmed "innocent" people .

I'd really like to hear from any LEO's or lawyers on this one .

 

[JosephR]

Actually NOONE wants to hear you say the same thing over and over again. What you've said is about 70% incorrect and the rest is just your opinion. You obviously aren't aware of what is within your rights so please stop lecturing people on what you believe is right vs. wrong based on your feelings.

Thanks.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

You are answering your own questions. Stop and think, would you?

You are soooo certain no man in his right mind would assault you but you are faced with a situation where the threat of you being armed is not heeded in an intelligent way by a would-be attacker. What do you think is going on? Is the man sensible, intelligent, reasonable? Sounds like he's under the influence or mentally unstable.

Are you willing to live with killing and unarmed man cause he was "high" or born retarded ?