When To Pull and or Shoot - Page 4
Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 151

Thread: When To Pull and or Shoot

  1. Quote Originally Posted by HKS View Post
    Regarding the question about the justified defensive display, I have my own rules about that.

    My first premise is that I really don't want to shoot anybody IF I have a choice in the matter.

    So as a confrontation develops, you always should try to de-escalate it IF POSSIBLE.

    The first de-escalation step is to STOP TALKING. Let the other person talk.

    When he/she is finished talking, as long as they are just talking, I would then apologize.

    It is a lot easier apologizing even when you don't mean it than it is to fill out the paperwork at the police station explaining why you shot somebody.

    In one of two hostile encounters that I have been in, apologizing calmed the other person down, who happened to be quite drunk.

    In the second of two hostile encounters that I have been in, the opponent rushed at me (3 different times).

    Bruce Lee teaches that you should always maintain your fighting interval, and so when someone rushes you it means you should withdraw backwards. Now a lot of would-be gunfighters don't like this answer, but that's what I did.

    Normally after the first rush I would not draw, although drawing would be justified.

    In this case with this second opponent, he figured out after his 3 failed rushes that (1) I was not easy to catch, (2) I was probably a trained fighter, and (3) I was probably holding an ace that he was not holding.

    I think if he had rushed me a 4th time then I would finally have drawn, and kept my pistol close at my side, pointed upwards towards the sky, in a two handed grip. But I did not need to. He gave up his aggression and walked away after his 3rd attempt to close the gap on me failed.

    In states where there is stand your ground, I still like to follow Bruce Lee's advice and retreat to preserve my interval. I think this is critical even if your plan is to draw and shoot. Keeping your interval is a very successful defense against a knife (if there is one) or a lucky swing (if the other guys can swing fast).
    What about the driver in this scenario?

  2.   
  3. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by maat View Post
    Are you one that believes there is no justification for pulling as a deterrent?
    Please explain what the imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm is! Did you watch the video, I posted? It is your behind that will sit in the chair in the court room, not mine. If you can't even defend your actions on an Internet forum, then you clearly can't defend them in court.

  4. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by maat View Post
    What about the driver in this scenario?
    Like I said, even if the driver was armed, which he was not, he was outnumbered.

    So his only hope was to get to a place where he could get support.

    The nearest police station would have been the best place like that.

    However in reality he never made it.

    The bikers stopped him and beat the crap out of him.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    As I said, you clearly do not understand the law then.

    Once the window is broken, there is no barrier between you and the attacker. That's usually when the justification for using lethal force applies. By that time, showing the gun to the biker is the same as pointing it at him. If he complies, good if he doesn't then you may lawfully use deadly force.

    If the window is not broken and the biker is hammering at the car, you are not in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Hence, displaying your gun is illegal and stupid.
    I would agree with you if the biker was just trying to dent his car. Yet, the biker was showing full intent to penetrate the car, which is imminent threat. When my family is in the car I going to take extra measures to defend them. I would think this would be easily justified.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by HKS View Post
    Like I said, even if the driver was armed, which he was not, he was outnumbered.

    So his only hope was to get to a place where he could get support.

    The nearest police station would have been the best place like that.

    However in reality he never made it.

    The bikers stopped him and beat the crap out of him.
    The point of this thread is to put yourself in his shoes, which is also considered to be carrying.

  7. Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    I didn't say anything about shooting the biker walking up either. I just said that you clearly do not understand the law then. This post demonstrates it clearly.

    In the eye of the law, showing your weapon in a threatening manner and shooting it are both considered use of lethal force. Once you show someone your weapon in a threatening manner, you need to be able to justify it with the argument that you were in imminent danger of death or seriously bodily harm. That's why your concept of brandishing is considered stupid by all firearms trainers and by all criminal lawyers.

    Here is the corresponding criminal codes from my state, Tennessee, TCA 39-13-102 and 39-13-101. I put your stupidity in bold and underlined the show vs. shoot clause:





    Listen and learn:

    I'm riding my opinion on that the bikers showed plenty of imminent threat. You sound like you think there was a possibility the bikers were going to offer driving advice.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by bofh View Post
    Please explain what the imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm is! Did you watch the video, I posted? It is your behind that will sit in the chair in the court room, not mine. If you can't even defend your actions on an Internet forum, then you clearly can't defend them in court.
    The bikers clearly threatened the driver before he fled the first time. If I had just driven over a biker, I would expect they were chasing me to do harm. The biker getting off his bike clearly has a weapon in hand and does use it. The bikers were clearly the initiators and showing plenty of hostility at the point of the attack. How you don't see imminent threat is puzzling.

    I'm curious, at what point did the bikers become an imminent threat? Maybe after half his face was smashed? Under your thinking, the only right scenario is shooting the biker. Mine at least attempts to deesculate before entre of the car.

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by maat View Post
    I would agree with you if the biker was just trying to dent his car. Yet, the biker was showing full intent to penetrate the car, which is imminent threat. When my family is in the car I going to take extra measures to defend them. I would think this would be easily justified.
    Showing full intent to penetrate the car is different from actually penetrating the car. When someone shows full intent to penetrate the car, then you are not in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Any criminal defense attorney will tell you that once you have been charged. Good luck with your approach.

    Watch the video I posted, specifically the part starting at 8:12. It specifically refers to people like you.

  10. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by maat View Post
    The bikers clearly threatened the driver before he fled the first time. If I had just driven over a biker, I would expect they were chasing me to do harm. The biker getting off his bike clearly has a weapon in hand and does use it. The bikers were clearly the initiators and showing plenty of hostility at the point of the attack. How you don't see imminent threat is puzzling.

    I'm curious, at what point did the bikers become an imminent threat? Maybe after half his face was smashed? Under your thinking, the only right scenario is shooting the biker. Mine at least attempts to deesculate before entre of the car.
    If you "drive over" a biker then you will stall your car.

    Cars were not made to run over hunks of metal like motorcycles.

    The engine block of the cycle would teeter you car. Then you would really be in a jam.

    You cannot give up mobility.

    In a car trying to evade a rat pack of bikers you would need to keep moving -- like I said -- to the police station.

    And you cannot stop to "shoot" them either because you can bet several of them are already armed and then you would be outnumbered and gunned down.

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by maat View Post
    I'm riding my opinion on that the bikers showed plenty of imminent threat. You sound you you think there was a possibility the bikers were going to offer driving advice.
    This isn't how it works. This isn't how any of it works It is imminent danger of death or seriously bodily harm. You have to prove that the danger was imminent, meaning now and not in 5 minutes. You need to prove that the threat was deadly or would cause you bodily harm. You also need to show that your decision was reasonable. As I said, good luck with your approach.

Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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