Confrontation scenario

[concrete guy]

I have just been thinking about this for a few weeks and figured I would ask opinions.

Scenario:

2 a.m. walking back from McDonalds to your campsite. You are approached by three young men and one man has a visible club in his hand. Their are racial comments made by all three of the perps towards you so you begin to realize that money is not really what they are after. Your negotiations with them begin to fail and they take up positions preventing for a clean retreat (no castle doctrine enforced). The one man with a weapon starts his approach at you and you are at condition red. Since you have shown your hand by pulling your weapon and do not know if the other two perps have concealed weapons, are you justified in double tapping all three of them to defend your life? Do you hesitate on the other two and take the risk that they will get the jump on you with a concealed gun?

[thebrez1]

I have just been thinking about this for a few weeks and figured I would ask opinions.

Scenario:

2 a.m. walking back from McDonalds to your campsite. You are approached by three young men and one man has a visible club in his hand. Their are racial comments made by all three of the perps towards you so you begin to realize that money is not really what they are after. Your negotiations with them begin to fail and they take up positions preventing for a clean retreat (no castle doctrine enforced). The one man with a weapon starts his approach at you and you are at condition red. Since you have shown your hand by pulling your weapon and do not know if the other two perps have concealed weapons, are you justified in double tapping all three of them to defend your life? Do you hesitate on the other two and take the risk that they will get the jump on you with a concealed gun?

All three are acting together and have cut off any chance of retreat. At least one is armed with the other two aware of that fact, therefore you have to assume they are all armed. They have verbaly threatened so they can be considered hostile and you are in fear of your life. Your weapon is visible (I would not have done that. Gives the other two time to draw if they ARE armed) yet they continue. All doubt is removed, all legal requirements have been met. Double tap, then double tap again, reload and if one so much as twitches, double tap again.

[concrete guy]

I guess I should have stated in this scenario that when the weapon was pulled, it was imediately discharged on the perp approaching with a weapon.

[capo2186]

I guess I should have stated in this scenario that when the weapon was pulled, it was imediately discharged on the perp approaching with a weapon.

as stated above...double tap as many times as it takes to stop the threat. After you put him down, if his other two buddies persued or drew a weapon, they too are threats and should be delt with accordingly.

[concrete guy]

I guess my question in the scenario is do you double tap all three as fast as you can. No hesitation. All three are part of the threat even though only one has shown a weapon.

[sFe]

Its quite likely the other two will be well on there way away from the scene after shots fired.

[roguejesse]

Even if you're in the right in protecting yourself by shooting the 3 thugs, you will be in world of legal trouble if you get an over-zealous ADA.

But I digress, the situation you described shows a disparity of force; three against one. And you would be justified in shooting the thugs. You just can't shoot them once the threat is gone; after the first one is shot, and the other two turn tail and run, you can't shoot those two.

And neither of the three needs to show any weapon, it just has to be demonstrated that any reasonable man would believe that the three said thugs were intent on doing you harm.

That is where the legal system comes in, and could cost you quite a bit to be able to maintain your innocence, and prove that you weren't the aggressor.

[nogods]

Who camps near a McDonalds?

[PaulIcemanMc]

Who camps near a McDonalds?

Who wouldn't? No better place for a late night snack!!

[handgonnetoter]

Remember Bernard Goetz - aka - The Subway Vigilante.

He was found not guilty on most of his criminal charges (after years and years of litigation), but then was sued in civil court and now owes $43 million to one of his attackers.

Thats typical. Only in the United States could something like that happen.