CCW Incident (Input please) - Page 5
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 62

Thread: CCW Incident (Input please)

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Green:243064
    Quote Originally Posted by milesihrig View Post
    Deadly force is not brandishing your weapon, deadly force is pulling the trigger... That is what I was instructed in my ccw class
    I said the *threat* of lethal force. Putting another in fear of his or her life. What do you think you'll be charged with after robbing someone using a blackened water pistol? Toy gun robbery?

    No offense dude but everything you've written implies you must be a youngster without much life experience or developed judgment. Not exactly the kind of person who should be carrying the power of life and death on his hip.

    You screwed the pooch and now you have to face the music. Here's hoping you learned something. I'm done.
    +1, Well stated!

  2.   
  3. #42
    I agree with most, but as stated, hind sight is always 20/20. You should have gotten in your car and backed out. Then if he continues you have something? The main take away, DON'T EVER SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER,DON'T EVER SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER, DON'T EVER SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER, DON'T EVER SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER, DON'T EVER SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER,

    Have I said this enough? lol....My father is a retired officer and ALWAYS told me the same thing...DON'T EVER SPEAK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER....

    Speaking in hind sight, you could have put the vehicle(s) between yourself and this guy, gotten into your vehicle, as I mentioned, or even gone into the store. I understand you were fearful and didn't want to fight this guy, but with your martial arts training and your friends around, I think you probably had LOTS of options before drawing on the guy. Also, in my CCW class and in one of the best books I read, if you do have to draw and someone and not fire, MAKE SURE YOU ARE THE ONE CALLING THE POLICE. That way it's your story they hear first.

    Luckily you didn't get hurt, hopefully it works out for you in the long run. Take this experience and learn from it.

  4. #43
    This is a good example of why you should be intimately familiar with your states gun laws. Here in Utah it is not illegal to "brandish" your weapon to prevent a forcible felony or severe bodily harm. Which I an very grateful for, I do not carry my weapon to kill. I carry for defense, and if letting them know I will use it ends the assault I am good with that.

  5. #44
    It was you, your friend and several other people...against ONE person. You will not win this arguement in court. I feel you were to quick to draw and there was no lethal threat from one person against a group of you and your friends. Sure the guy was an idiot, but he did'nt deserve to die for picking a fight he probably could'nt win to begin with. Thanks for sharing, sorry we could'nt agree.

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    A few observations.

    1 - Shouldn't have talked with the perp. No response would have been better. Continue talking with your friend, ignore the bad guy and he probably would have left. Remember AVOIDANCE and DETERRENCE are the first lines of defense.
    2 - You state you had three options. I see a fourth... why didn't you just drive away? And a fifth option would have been to close the windows, lock the doors and call 911.
    3 - Your life was not threatened. There was no IMMINENT physical attack or assault. The law requires there be.
    4 - You could have quietly removed the gun from your holster but kept out of sight as you ignored him. If your were blocked-in, could not retreat and he began to break into the car you would have been within the law.

    Recommendations?

    1 - Get the video from the service station. If that perp is really charging you it may help. His past criminal history won't come into play as you didn't have this knowledge at the time of the incident so it can't be used in an affirmative defense (standard of the reasonable person changes when he has knowledge that the attacker is a violent criminal). In most states you may not claim defense of justification if you participated in the escalation of the incident, thus always keep your mouth shut.
    2 - If the video shows you were blocked-in and could not escape, then your duty to retreat is removed from the incident. You may stand your ground when the ability to retreat is removed.

    Good luck on this. It may cost you more but I would personally look for an attorney who will do more than settle for a plea. Although the charge may be expunged after a year you will still have an arrest record. That doesn't get expunged, only the disposition of conviction gets expunged. You should expect to lose your CCW permit regardless.
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  7. Quote Originally Posted by tomatokilla View Post
    @pafindr I'm not sure I understand how presenting your weapons qualifies as lethal force. Beyond the obvious (you're not firing at anyone yet), using that logic, as soon as you break leather you are using lethal force? Or once you're at a low ready? The force continuum (sp?) shows the various degrees of increasing response to a given situation, ie, your mere presence and demeanor; verbal warnings/directions; presenting weapons (PR-24/nightstick); and then I think discharging your weapon while aiming center mass with the intent of neutralizing the threat.
    I should have said threat of lethal force.
    In this instance the OP escalated the situation.
    The guy had no weapon, the OP out numbered the guy 4 to 1, the OP was bigger then the guy, the OP has martial arts training.
    What do you think a court is going to think when they hear that info?
    I'm not a lawyer so take it for what it's worth. For legal advice ask a lawyer.
    --------------------------------------------------------
    Those who accept second best must learn to live with mediocrity. - pafindr

  8. #47

    Exclamation Dangerous notions that need clarified...

    I will not comment any further on the specific incident presented in the original post. It has probably gone to court by now, and been settled with a less than optimal - but liveable - plea deal. And I do want to remind everyone - we're only hearing ONE SIDE of this story.

    There have been a few points brought up that need to be clarified here. Some are myths. Some are incomplete. Some are just BAD information period. These notions are what I will focus upon.

    1) With some variation between states, the general rule of bringing lethal force to bear in a situation is that you have to REASONABLY BELIEVE your life or safety is in danger, or FACTUALLY KNOW that the life or safety of another is in danger. It's dicey; one often has a few seconds at best to ascertain the severity of the threat and act accordingly, whereas a jury (if you go on trial) has the luxury of "armchair quarterbacking" your decision in a safely sequestered room.

    2) How much do you say to the police after you've been involved in a defensive shooting scenario? A lot of folks think they have THE answer to this question. But the truth is, there is NO ONE ANSWER FOR ANY GIVEN SITUATION. Here is the most succinct advice I have seen on this. This comes from the booklet "What Every Gun Owner Needs to Know About Self-Defense Law" which is available at Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network, Inc.

    The armed citizen who has been forced to shoot in self defense faces a conundrum. You see, after a shooting, the police will be called (either by you or another person) and when they question you, anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. If what you say or donít say raises suspicions that you were not justified in shooting, you will probably be jailed until you can get a preliminary hearing in front of a judge. Conversely, if the officers believe you legitimately shot the attacker in self defense, you will more likely than not sleep in your own bed that night. Thus, the question is, how do you explain to responding officers what happened, but still invoke your right to remain silent? The answer is, you cannot.

    You must make a decision whether to keep silent or to explain what happened.
    Letís evaluate the pros and cons of both so you can make an informed decision.

    If you refuse to talk to the responding officers, it is extremely likely that you will be arrestedómaybe not 100% of the time, but often enough that you should plan on spending the next several days, and perhaps the next several weeks or months, in jail. While thatís pretty bad, at least you didnít incriminate yourself by your own words. That is about the only upside to keeping silent, but please understand that if you live in a jurisdiction that is rabidly anti-gun and anti-self defense, you may likely be arrested anyway, so sometimes a decision to remain silent might make sense. It is your choice.

    On the other side of the coin, discussing the incident with law enforcement might keep you out of jail and out of the courts, if you explain to the police officers why you felt shooting in self defense was necessary. This requires that you be a good witness and clearly explain the attackerís actions, telling the responding officers what the attacker or attackers were doing that convinced you that your life was in danger. It means identifying for law enforcement anyone else in the area who saw the incident. It also means pointing out any evidence that the officers might overlook in their investigation. For example, if you knew that the attackerís buddy grabbed his weapon and threw it in the bushes, it is probably a good idea to tell officers that the weapon is in the bushes, and how it got there. If you are going to claim self defense at trial, this approach is necessary because the police need to know what happened that caused you to shoot.

    However, being a good witness doesnít require explaining every minute detail about your act of shooting. When you were attacked, you were likely under extreme stress in survival mode and the fight or flight instinct kicked in. Physiopsychological effects known to occur during stressful incidents make you a poor witness about the facts and specifics of the attack. These physio-psychological effects include distorted perceptions of time and distance, plus tunnel vision and auditory exclusion, any one of which can result in an inaccurate report of the event if you try to report specific details.

    Instead of going into detail when speaking with responding officers on the scene, I recommend briefly explaining what the attacker did to precipitate your self-defense actions plus pointing out evidence that could be lost or overlooked and identifying witnesses to the event. Next, state that you would like the counsel of an attorney before you give a formal statement, a written statement or even a tape-recorded statement. Once youíve said that, keeping your mouth shut is likely the best approach. You have been a good witness and cooperated with the police. You have reported the crime committed against you, and frankly that is as far as you need to go at that time.
    3) In regard to the firearm(s) you carry. My advice to students is to carry "the largest caliber, with the biggest capacity, that you can comfortably carry and conceal daily." When it comes to firepower, more is better. BUT you also have to balance this off against how it will appear to a jury if you're charged. It sucks, but the reality is that what works for you "in the field" (high capacity firearm, fast trigger, multiple guns) can be used against you in court by a zealous prosecutor.

    The same principle applies to a number of other factors. If you wear a lot of clothing and gear that you purchased from police and army surplus stores, that's going to make you look less respectable than if you're wearing Dockers and a polo shirt, etc. If you're loitering in a known high-crime area, it looks worse than if you defended yourself in your driveway. If you are a fit man with martial arts or other fight training, a jury will question your need to draw your firearm more than if you were a petite girl without it. If you're with a group of friends, a jury will question your need to draw, moreso than if you were by yourself. If you are in your 20s, the jury will question your ability to make a smart self-defense decision more than if you're in your 40s. It's not fair...but that's life. Accept it, and make your choices accordingly.

    4) "When you draw, you have to shoot." NOT TRUE. NOT TRUE. NOT TRUE. And in case I wasn't clear, THIS IS NOT TRUE. However - when you draw, you are "bringing deadly force to bear." Which means, if the situation is not one where deadly force is already involved...you just made it into one.

    The important thing to remember is that the standard for being justified in DISPLAYING deadly force (pointing your firearm) is the SAME as for USING deadly force (shooting).

    To review - the only justification for bringing lethal force to bear (whether displaying or using) in a situation is that you have to REASONABLY BELIEVE your life or safety is in danger, or FACTUALLY KNOW that the life or safety of another is in danger.

    YOU MUST CEASE DISPLAYING OR USING DEADLY FORCE ONCE THE THREAT HAS BEEN STOPPED, THEN IMMEDIATELY GET TO SAFETY AND CALL 911.

    YOU ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN SHOOTING SO THAT IT WILL "LOOK BETTER IN COURT" OR SO THAT THE "POLICE WILL ONLY HAVE YOUR SIDE OF THE STORY"

    LYING ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE THREAT IS EVEN WORSE.

    5) It is also important to know whether or not, in your jurisdiction, you have a duty to retreat before bringing deadly force to bear. Many jurisdictions have different standards for this, depending on whether you are in your home or in public.

    6) In regard to the "21 foot rule" - this is a GUIDELINE USED WHEN DETERMINING THE SEVERITY OF A THREAT. Basically the idea is that if someone has a weapon, or if there is a disparity of force, or if someone is otherwise presenting what you "reasonably believe to be an imminent threat to your life and safety" or what you "factually know to be an imminent threat to the life and safety of another"...the assailant doesn't have to be right on top of you.

    If someone is just shouting at you from 5 feet away...that is still less of a threat than if someone pulls a knife at 21 feet away.

    7) Most importantly, this poster's scenario can serve to underscore just how serious of a mindset one ought to have, when choosing to walk around armed. The police allow very little room for error. If it gets to court, prosecutors and often juries will allow even less room for error.

    We cannot allow ourselves to get caught up in bluster, swagger, buzzwords, machismo, and catchphrases. We must take our responsibilites VERY seriously. We must make our choices VERY carefully. And we must understand (as in all things) that even if we do everything right, it is still possible to have a bad outcome.
    S&W M&P 45; Ruger GP100 .357 Magnum; Charter Arms .38 Undercover
    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/members/phillip-gain-albums-phil-s-photos-picture3828-reciprocity-map-29jun11.JPG

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sandpoint, Idaho
    Posts
    1,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillip Gain View Post
    I will not comment any further on the specific incident presented in the original post. It has probably gone to court by now, and been settled with a less than optimal - but liveable - plea deal. And I do want to remind everyone - we're only hearing ONE SIDE of this story.

    There have been a few points brought up that need to be clarified here. Some are myths. Some are incomplete. Some are just BAD information period. These notions are what I will focus upon.

    1) With some variation between states, the general rule of bringing lethal force to bear in a situation is that you have to REASONABLY BELIEVE your life or safety is in danger, or FACTUALLY KNOW that the life or safety of another is in danger. It's dicey; one often has a few seconds at best to ascertain the severity of the threat and act accordingly, whereas a jury (if you go on trial) has the luxury of "armchair quarterbacking" your decision in a safely sequestered room.

    2) How much do you say to the police after you've been involved in a defensive shooting scenario? A lot of folks think they have THE answer to this question. But the truth is, there is NO ONE ANSWER FOR ANY GIVEN SITUATION. Here is the most succinct advice I have seen on this. This comes from the booklet "What Every Gun Owner Needs to Know About Self-Defense Law" which is available at Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network, Inc.



    3) In regard to the firearm(s) you carry. My advice to students is to carry "the largest caliber, with the biggest capacity, that you can comfortably carry and conceal daily." When it comes to firepower, more is better. BUT you also have to balance this off against how it will appear to a jury if you're charged. It sucks, but the reality is that what works for you "in the field" (high capacity firearm, fast trigger, multiple guns) can be used against you in court by a zealous prosecutor.

    The same principle applies to a number of other factors. If you wear a lot of clothing and gear that you purchased from police and army surplus stores, that's going to make you look less respectable than if you're wearing Dockers and a polo shirt, etc. If you're loitering in a known high-crime area, it looks worse than if you defended yourself in your driveway. If you are a fit man with martial arts or other fight training, a jury will question your need to draw your firearm more than if you were a petite girl without it. If you're with a group of friends, a jury will question your need to draw, moreso than if you were by yourself. If you are in your 20s, the jury will question your ability to make a smart self-defense decision more than if you're in your 40s. It's not fair...but that's life. Accept it, and make your choices accordingly.

    4) "When you draw, you have to shoot." NOT TRUE. NOT TRUE. NOT TRUE. And in case I wasn't clear, THIS IS NOT TRUE. However - when you draw, you are "bringing deadly force to bear." Which means, if the situation is not one where deadly force is already involved...you just made it into one.

    The important thing to remember is that the standard for being justified in DISPLAYING deadly force (pointing your firearm) is the SAME as for USING deadly force (shooting).

    To review - the only justification for bringing lethal force to bear (whether displaying or using) in a situation is that you have to REASONABLY BELIEVE your life or safety is in danger, or FACTUALLY KNOW that the life or safety of another is in danger.

    YOU MUST CEASE DISPLAYING OR USING DEADLY FORCE ONCE THE THREAT HAS BEEN STOPPED, THEN IMMEDIATELY GET TO SAFETY AND CALL 911.

    YOU ARE NOT JUSTIFIED IN SHOOTING SO THAT IT WILL "LOOK BETTER IN COURT" OR SO THAT THE "POLICE WILL ONLY HAVE YOUR SIDE OF THE STORY"

    LYING ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE THREAT IS EVEN WORSE.

    5) It is also important to know whether or not, in your jurisdiction, you have a duty to retreat before bringing deadly force to bear. Many jurisdictions have different standards for this, depending on whether you are in your home or in public.

    6) In regard to the "21 foot rule" - this is a GUIDELINE USED WHEN DETERMINING THE SEVERITY OF A THREAT. Basically the idea is that if someone has a weapon, or if there is a disparity of force, or if someone is otherwise presenting what you "reasonably believe to be an imminent threat to your life and safety" or what you "factually know to be an imminent threat to the life and safety of another"...the assailant doesn't have to be right on top of you.

    If someone is just shouting at you from 5 feet away...that is still less of a threat than if someone pulls a knife at 21 feet away.

    7) Most importantly, this poster's scenario can serve to underscore just how serious of a mindset one ought to have, when choosing to walk around armed. The police allow very little room for error. If it gets to court, prosecutors and often juries will allow even less room for error.

    We cannot allow ourselves to get caught up in bluster, swagger, buzzwords, machismo, and catchphrases. We must take our responsibilites VERY seriously. We must make our choices VERY carefully. And we must understand (as in all things) that even if we do everything right, it is still possible to have a bad outcome.
    Hear, hear. And, as was stated previously, YOU being the one to call 911, and get on the record that YOU are the one who is being victimized is a pretty big deal.

  10. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Keykutter:243023
    I'm gonna play devil's advocate here and as you tell it, one guy confronting two is not winning a fist fight? The guy had yet to pull a knife or a gun and as you put it, you are a pretty big guy, at least bigger than the other with you.

    As in any scenario stated on this forum, if you are not there, you can't really make an educated call.

    That is what I perceived in reading your account. Another situation in another place makes no difference, except in your mindset.

    Good luck, but I don't think I would cop a plea if I didn't feel guilty and let the chips fall. But....that's why you pay lawyers for their guidance.

    KK
    Perfectly said. After reading the OP, my first thought was "the disparity of force favors the victim." Good call.

  11. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Honolulu, HI & Salt Lake City, UT
    Posts
    2,797
    Drawing down on an unarmed man will not help your case. Your truck was blocked in, so you couldn't drive away. Was there something wrong with your feet as to render you incapable of walking away?

    When confronted with a combative unarmed person, I would retreat to maintain my safe distance, then call 911. You're not allowed to draw down on an unarmed person simply because he said he's armed or he "might be" armed. If given the opportunity, I'd take the flight option every time. This would keep me out of legal troubles as well as keeps my conscience clear as I would not be forced to shoot an unarmed man.

    Having the martial arts training that you stated, a solid kick to the chest should have set the aggressor straight. Sounds like you were substantially bigger than the other man. This alone will put you in a bad light.

    You exercised very poor judgment and will unfortunately have to suffer the consequences. Good luck!
    "A few well placed shots with a .22LR is a lot better than a bunch of solid misses with a .44 mag!" Glock Armorer, NRA Chief RSO, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Muzzleloading Rifle, Muzzleloading Shotgun, and Home Firearm Safety Training Counselor

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast