I drew my weapon, was it the right thing to do

[j706]

I might have figured out multi quote. Thanks to the guys who got me squared away on that. I would have NEVER figured that out!

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I do not believe I would pull a weapon until I was at least physically attached. I also do not believe I would draw if I was attacked and hit by one person if they were anywhere near my size,age ect. Now IMO if three guys are actually PHYSICALLY attacking you, Yea I think you would more justified in drawing. That might be a tough thing to do (Draw while taking a beating). Dunno.

A person should/would be fine if they can show that they were in fear of serious bodily injury or death. Then of course we have the newer statute on the carjacking,attack on a dwelling ect. I think the mere verbal threat or suspicious acts will not cut it.

First thank you for commenting in this thread. You have given me a few things to think about and provided a different viewpoint.

But would I draw on one person who was physically attacking me? About my size and age? Quite possibly because I don't know the etc. Hell he could be someone like this UFC® : Ultimate Fighting Championship®
comparable ht/wt/age, could he whip my butt/main/kill me without breathing hard? I'd say he'd have a dang good chance. In my younger days I've won fights with guys bigger than me and had my behind handed to me by guys smaller than me. Size doesn't matter(to a degree). I'm not talking about drawing if I get into a argument with some guy and yelling leads to pushing leads to fist swinging, I'll hopefully be long gone by the time it gets to that whether I'm carrying or not. I'm talking about a unprovoked attack.

And this part

That might be a tough thing to do (Draw while taking a beating). Dunno.

I don't know either I've never had to do it, heck I've never had to draw period. But I would assume it would be a good bit harder and much more dangerous. Higher chance of it being taken away and used against you once your all ready engaged with the attacker, more so if there is more than one of them.

What would you think if at night you were leaving a store and two guys come out from behind a dumpster yelling, you look the other way and another guy is coming out from around a dark corner moving towards you fast, you hurry up to get away and as soon as your in your car, they are on both sides with the windows down and the doors unlocked. If you were just and average joe not a LEO? Would you think that an unlawful use of force was about to come your way? Do you think the average reasonable person would believe so?

And for the guy that shot at the car that was driving past his place, yes he was stupid, criminally so. Several years back I had something along the same lines happen, I turned off the inside lights, got the shotgun, and then called the local PD to let them check it out. No idea what ever came of it. Now if its on my property I will check it out, I don't want to call the local PD 2-3 times a week because there is a dog in my garbage, or a raccoon on the roof, or even when I'm hearing noises from my garage(happened last week, neighbors cat got locked inside and knocked over a shelf of cans).

 

[agentl074]

That does not mean a guy 100 yards away saying he is gonna kill you with his knife. I am thinking someone close enough to use it,someone presenting a knife, not just saying they have one. Only a fool underestimates a knife IMO. They scare me,more than a firearm. Perhaps I am weird.

It has to be reasonable. A knife 100 yards away is not going to cut it (no pun intended lol). A knife within closing distance is however.... Remember that even within the reactionary gap, a knife wielding person can close it faster than a person can draw if the defender is not keeping the gap open.

Also food for thought... in the right hands, a highly skilled person with a knife can make a bad day for the defender even outside of the reactionary gap (throwing). The good news is that there aren't a whole lot of those guys.... Mainly in the Green beret and Seal circle.

 

[ocsdor]

Sounds like you were okay with the exception of not notifying the nearest PD. ALWAYS inform a LEO to prevent the aggressors from calling the police and making you out to be the bad guy.

A lawyer's point of view why you should not talk to the police:
YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1

A cop's point of view why you should not talk to the police:
YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2

Two videos worth watching which may keep you out of jail some day.

 

[Roadie]

My question is, should someone wait to be fully attacked before they draw? In the OP's case, 3 men, coming from the shadows and surrounding him, yelling at him in uncomprehensible babble, I'd say he was justified in pulling his gun, but as you said, the burden of proof is on him. The only proof it sounds to me that he could get is if the store had outside cameras.

rep to the OP for being alive to tell us about it.

I honestly do not have the answer to that. Myself? I do not believe I would pull a weapon until I was at least physically attached. I also do not believe I would draw if I was attacked and hit by one person if they were anywhere near my size,age ect. Now IMO if three guys are actually PHYSICALLY attacking you, Yea I think you would more justified in drawing. That might be a tough thing to do (Draw while taking a beating). Dunno.


And I understand not wanting to report it. They left, he left, no one was harmed. Why bring pain and misery to yourself if it doesn't need to be brought?

Something to be said with that. With my position as a public servant I would be inclined to say "report it". But thinking as a normal person I would be inclined to think more along the lines of getting out of the area as fast as safely possible.



Also a point worth noting.



I think the last paragraph is good thinking. If you do report it and you are wrong you MIGHT have a problem. No right or wrong answer unless you are pretty sure you was justified. However, like I posted before,some of these guys think they were justified. Again as a LEO I would say report it. I think some of these guys we are dealing with on some of these incidents did not really think, I think they just acted. People on this thread are obviously thinking people or they wouldn't be on this thing.


A person should/would be fine if they can show that they were in fear of serious bodily injury or death. Then of course we have the newer statute on the carjacking,attack on a dwelling ect. I think the mere verbal threat or suspicious acts will not cut it. A knife within a reasonable distance as well as the persons vocal intent to use it on you and or actions to lead a reasonoble person to think they are going to cut/stab you would most defianntly be a weapons justifiable incident. That does not mean a guy 100 yards away saying he is gonna kill you with his knife. I am thinking someone close enough to use it,someone presenting a knife, not just saying they have one. Only a fool underestimates a knife IMO. They scare me,more than a firearm. Perhaps I am wierd.

THere is no way to go through evey possible senario. I think if a person does what a reasonable person would do under a like circumstance, you should not have a problem.
[/quote]

Thank you for your response.

 

[SavageEagle]

A lawyer's point of view why you should not talk to the police:
YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1

A cop's point of view why you should not talk to the police:
YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2

Two videos worth watching which may keep you out of jail some day.

I love these videos! Repped for reposting those for those who haven't watched them!

 

[j706]

First thank you for commenting in this thread. You have given me a few things to think about and provided a different viewpoint.

But would I draw on one person who was physically attacking me? About my size and age? Quite possibly because I don't know the etc. Hell he could be someone like this UFC® : Ultimate Fighting Championship®
comparable ht/wt/age, could he whip my butt/main/kill me without breathing hard? I'd say he'd have a dang good chance. In my younger days I've won fights with guys bigger than me and had my behind handed to me by guys smaller than me. Size doesn't matter(to a degree). I'm not talking about drawing if I get into a argument with some guy and yelling leads to pushing leads to fist swinging, I'll hopefully be long gone by the time it gets to that whether I'm carrying or not. I'm talking about a unprovoked attack.

And this part I don't know either I've never had to do it, heck I've never had to draw period. But I would assume it would be a good bit harder and much more dangerous. Higher chance of it being taken away and used against you once your all ready engaged with the attacker, more so if there is more than one of them.

What would you think if at night you were leaving a store and two guys come out from behind a dumpster yelling, you look the other way and another guy is coming out from around a dark corner moving towards you fast, you hurry up to get away and as soon as your in your car, they are on both sides with the windows down and the doors unlocked. If you were just and average joe not a LEO? Would you think that an unlawful use of force was about to come your way? Do you think the average reasonable person would believe so?

And for the guy that shot at the car that was driving past his place, yes he was stupid, criminally so. Several years back I had something along the same lines happen, I turned off the inside lights, got the shotgun, and then called the local PD to let them check it out. No idea what ever came of it. Now if its on my property I will check it out, I don't want to call the local PD 2-3 times a week because there is a dog in my garbage, or a raccoon on the roof, or even when I'm hearing noises from my garage(happened last week, neighbors cat got locked inside and knocked over a shelf of cans).

I think I would have to be taking a very bad whipping before I considered using deadly force. Agent1074 made a correct comment,the force must be "Reasonable". One point I had not even though about during this discussion. Reasonable is a biggy I would think. Reasonable can be a tall order considering that the ones deciding if you were reasonable (Initially)will be doing so sitting behind a desk in an office somewhere.
A few possible examples:

1) Granny is getting beat on by 6'7" 300 lbs. male. She is probably going to be justified in shooting him, perhaps even before, but more than likely during the attack. Not after however.

2) Johny is 30. He has a permit and is packing his Ruger LCP. Steve, 20 is drunk and decides to pick a fight with Johny. Steve tells Johny I am going to kick your a-- and punches Johny in the nose. Johny has never even been in a fight before. He panics,draws and shoots Steve. Johny, even though being a victim initially, is more than likely going to have a big problem IMO.

3) Rick is walking down the street minding his own business. Three guys confront him. ONE guy starts shoving Rick as the other two stand by. IMO Rick would NOT be justified in shooting the aggressor at that point. Now put all three in the mix with punching ect. different story IMO.

Another thing to keep in mind,just because you might be or even if you are justified in using deadly force, that does not necessarily mean you should or have too. (PM me if you would like a link to an related example that happened with me.) My point is sometimes,often times, the gun is not the only answer. I can die happy having never shot someone. I will if need be, but if I can reasonable avoid it I will and so should we all. Way to many people are way to eager to pull and use a gun IMO. There seems to be a coolness factor with drawing and using a gun among some guys. And more and more guys seem to be getting in trouble as a result. Think,do not over react,do not freak out, use your head,use some common sense,do not go looking for a excuse to pull your weapon.

 

[SavageEagle]

I'm sorry, but if it's me against three others and one of them starts punching me, I'm drawing on them and screaming at the top of my lungs to back off. If they don't, I'm not going to start taking a beating from three guys while HOPING I still have my pistol in reach. The threat of force is reasonable. As set forth in case law. I'll have to get my "Indiana Handgun Law" book out to find the cases... Either way, Multipule people versus one person and them being aggressive and threatening IS reason to fear for your life. IMHO of course.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I think I would have to be taking a very bad whipping before I considered using deadly force. Agent1074 made a correct comment,the force must be "Reasonable". One point I had not even though about during this discussion. Reasonable is a biggy I would think. Reasonable can be a tall order considering that the ones deciding if you were reasonable (Initially)will be doing so sitting behind a desk in an office somewhere.
A few possible examples:

1) Granny is getting beat on by 6'7" 300 lbs. male. She is probably going to be justified in shooting him, perhaps even before, but more than likely during the attack. Not after however.

IMHO if granny is being advanced on by a guy that size or hell a guy my age and size, she would be justified in shooting him before. She has a "reasonable" expectation of serious injury/death. After she's lying there beaten up and the guy is walking away, I wouldn't convict but legally she is not justified.

2) Johny is 30. He has a permit and is packing his Ruger LCP. Steve, 20 is drunk and decides to pick a fight with Johny. Steve tells Johny I am going to kick your a-- and punches Johny in the nose. Johny has never even been in a fight before. He panics,draws and shoots Steve. Johny, even though being a victim initially, is more than likely going to have a big problem IMO.

In this situation your probably right, depending on several circumstances. Size of Steve and Johny, prior interaction, warnings from Johny etc.

3) Rick is walking down the street minding his own business. Three guys confront him. ONE guy starts shoving Rick as the other two stand by. IMO Rick would NOT be justified in shooting the aggressor at that point. Now put all three in the mix with punching ect. different story IMO.

Shooting perhaps not, drawing and maybe pointing quite possibly. Walking down the street minding my own business, and get confronted by 3 guys one of which starts getting physical. If I had time I would back away and warn, if they continued the action and I could not get away I would draw and warn again, after that would be up to them. True story I was working out of town with a large group of people, one guy got jumped similarly to what you posted, the one guy punched him and he fell down, then the other two joined in and all three of them litterally kicked him almost to death. He actually did die three times on the way to the hospital, and spent 2 weeks in intensive care. By the time he was down it was too late to draw even if he was carrying. People get a pack mentalilty, what starts out as one turns into everyone at the scent of blood.

Another thing to keep in mind,just because you might be or even if you are justified in using deadly force, that does not necessarily mean you should or have too. (PM me if you would like a link to an related example that happened with me.) My point is sometimes,often times, the gun is not the only answer. I can die happy having never shot someone. I will if need be, but if I can reasonable avoid it I will and so should we all. Way to many people are way to eager to pull and use a gun IMO. There seems to be a coolness factor with drawing and using a gun among some guys. And more and more guys seem to be getting in trouble as a result. Think,do not over react,do not freak out, use your head,use some common sense,do not go looking for a excuse to pull your weapon.

Agreed, I have been in (at least) one situation where I would of been justified in using deadly force, I didn't, if you would like the whole story give me a pm. And I'm glad I didn't. And I also agree the gun is not the only answer. And I sincerely hope I never have to use one against someone.

But the OP I don't think was looking for and excuse to draw. In my opinion if he had been looking for and excuse, he would not have been questioning his reaction by coming here and asking if he did the right thing, he would of been bragging about it and saying why he was justified to do so(similar to the guy who shot at the car driving past his house). And from what he posted I don't think he necessarily over reacted. And IMHO he was legally justified to draw and point (again not being there, but I'm assuming he was being honest) it may have been an over reaction, and he might of freaked out(again not being there I have no idea) but if you were just and average joe not a LEO would you think that an unlawful use of force was about to come your way? Do you think the average reasonable person would believe so? In this scenario.
Its night and your leaving a store, two guys come out from behind a dumpster yelling, you look the other way and another guy is coming out from around a dark corner flanking you and moving towards you fast, you hurry up to get away and as soon as your in your car, they are on both sides with the windows down and the doors unlocked and the guy at your window has his hands on the window ledge right next to you saying something you don't understand. Personally I'd believe I was about to get jumped. How about you?

You seem to think a fist fight is just going to end up with some bruises and a bloody nose, that may be true in jr/high school but I'm sure you have seen otherwise if you've been a LEO for any length of time. I myself have seen some gruesome things done with one punch, including a eye socket being crushed and the eye popped out hanging on the cheek You also seem to think that you will be able to draw and stop the attack after it has started. Look at the LEO in LA who pulled over a guy, he hit the guy with OC spray, and did manage to get his pistol out and one shot off after the guy attacked him. Then the guy had him on the ground and was beating the crap out of him, a citizen ended up shooting the guy 5 more times 4 in the torso, and then when he still didn't stop one in the head.
The Shootist: One Man Got Involved. The Perry Stephens/George Temple Incident

But the OP I don't think he was looking for and excuse to draw. In my opinion if he had been looking for and excuse, he would not have been questioning his reaction by coming here and asking if he did the right thing, he would of been bragging about it and saying why he was justified to do so. And from what he posted I don't think he necessarily over reacted. And IMHO he was legally justified to draw and point (again not being there, but I'm assuming he was being honest) it may have been an over reaction, and he might of freaked out(again not being there I have no idea) but if you were just and average joe not a LEO would you think that an unlawful use of force was about to come your way? Do you think the average reasonable person would believe so? In this scenario.
Its night and your leaving a store, two guys come out from behind a dumpster yelling, you look the other way and another guy is coming out from around a dark corner moving towards you fast, you hurry up to get away and as soon as your in your car, they are on both sides with the windows down and the doors unlocked and the guy at your window has his hands on the window ledge right next to you saying something you don't understand.

 

[j706]

Agreed, I have been in (at least) one situation where I would of been justified in using deadly force, I didn't, if you would like the whole story give me a pm. And I'm glad I didn't. And I also agree the gun is not the only answer. And I sincerely hope I never have to use one against someone.

But the OP I don't think was looking for and excuse to draw. In my opinion if he had been looking for and excuse, he would not have been questioning his reaction by coming here and asking if he did the right thing, he would of been bragging about it and saying why he was justified to do so(similar to the guy who shot at the car driving past his house). And from what he posted I don't think he necessarily over reacted. And IMHO he was legally justified to draw and point (again not being there, but I'm assuming he was being honest) it may have been an over reaction, and he might of freaked out(again not being there I have no idea) but if you were just and average joe not a LEO would you think that an unlawful use of force was about to come your way? Do you think the average reasonable person would believe so? In this scenario.
Its night and your leaving a store, two guys come out from behind a dumpster yelling, you look the other way and another guy is coming out from around a dark corner flanking you and moving towards you fast, you hurry up to get away and as soon as your in your car, they are on both sides with the windows down and the doors unlocked and the guy at your window has his hands on the window ledge right next to you saying something you don't understand. Personally I'd believe I was about to get jumped. How about you?

You seem to think a fist fight is just going to end up with some bruises and a bloody nose, that may be true in jr/high school but I'm sure you have seen otherwise if you've been a LEO for any length of time. I myself have seen some gruesome things done with one punch, including a eye socket being crushed and the eye popped out hanging on the cheek You also seem to think that you will be able to draw and stop the attack after it has started. Look at the LEO in LA who pulled over a guy, he hit the guy with OC spray, and did manage to get his pistol out and one shot off after the guy attacked him. Then the guy had him on the ground and was beating the crap out of him, a citizen ended up shooting the guy 5 more times 4 in the torso, and then when he still didn't stop one in the head.
The Shootist: One Man Got Involved. The Perry Stephens/George Temple Incident

But the OP I don't think he was looking for and excuse to draw. In my opinion if he had been looking for and excuse, he would not have been questioning his reaction by coming here and asking if he did the right thing, he would of been bragging about it and saying why he was justified to do so. And from what he posted I don't think he necessarily over reacted. And IMHO he was legally justified to draw and point (again not being there, but I'm assuming he was being honest) it may have been an over reaction, and he might of freaked out(again not being there I have no idea) but if you were just and average joe not a LEO would you think that an unlawful use of force was about to come your way? Do you think the average reasonable person would believe so? In this scenario.
Its night and your leaving a store, two guys come out from behind a dumpster yelling, you look the other way and another guy is coming out from around a dark corner moving towards you fast, you hurry up to get away and as soon as your in your car, they are on both sides with the windows down and the doors unlocked and the guy at your window has his hands on the window ledge right next to you saying something you don't understand.

I canot say I disagree on all counts. As for the OP,we wasn not there and I don't know anything about him. He might have been in a very bad situation. Glad it workied out for him.

On a related note I have been reading about this Yalanda Parrish deal. This is a prime example of what I am attempting to warn people about. Yes it was differant but it is/was that "the gun is the answer" type thinking. I read that she had a history of whipping out a gun on motorists. I believe most of agree that she got what she had coming.

It is serious busniess guys. Scares me!!

 

[Timjoebillybob]

On a related note I have been reading about this Yalanda Parrish deal. This is a prime example of what I am attempting to warn people about. Yes it was differant but it is/was that "the gun is the answer" type thinking. I read that she had a history of whipping out a gun on motorists. I believe most of agree that she got what she had coming.

It is serious busniess guys. Scares me!!

Agreed on Parrish, she may have been right to draw (although in her case I would of just ran over the bike and drove away) but as soon as the guy started backing away she had no right to fire. And her words "Its your lucky day, I'm going to kill you" And then her and her son swearing at him and kicking him as he lie there well....

And I agree it is serious business. But if I ever have a need to use a firearm or anything else to protect myself and others, I hope that fear doesn't stop me from doing what needs to be done.

 

[ocsdor]

Ok, I've said it on a different thread, and now, after 28 pages I'll say it here. Pepper Spray would be a good addition with your firearm carry. Since Pepper Spray is not a deadly weapon, one can use it in the situations we have talked about in this thread.

Example, Johnny, a 30 year old yuppie who has never been in a fight, gets punched in the face.

If he pulls out his gun, that is Intimidation with a deadly weapon (Class C Felony). And, if he pulls the trigger, Johnny will be facing, at the least, a Voluntary Homicide with a Deadly Weapon charge (Class A Felony). Johnny's lawyer will have a hard time convincing a jury that Johnny was justified in using a deadly weapon for self-defense.

If he pulls out his Pepper Spray, it is Intimidation (Class A Misdemeanor). If he uses the Pepper Spray, Johnny will be facing, at the most, a Battery charge (Class A Misdemeanor). Johnny's lawyer will have an easier time convincing a jury that Johnny was justified in using a non-lethal weapon for self-defense.

Now, if Johnny gets punched in the face, backs off, threatens to use pepper spray if attacked, is attacked again, uses pepper spray, bad gun pulls out a deadly weapon (firearm, knife, bat, sledge hammer, hand grenades), then Johnny can pull out his own deadly weapon and use it in self defense. As all of this is happening, the attacker needs to be continuously attacking, and Johnny should be continuously trying to retreat.

Pepper Spray makes a good intermediate tool for what we have been talking about for 28 pages. That's why cops carry pepper spray (and/or tasers) as well as their firearm.

IC 35-50-3-2
Class A misdemeanor
Sec. 2. A person who commits a Class A misdemeanor shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of not more than one (1) year; in addition, he may be fined not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000).


IC 35-50-2-6 Class C felony
Sec. 6. (a) A person who commits a Class C felony shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of between two (2) and eight (8) years, with the advisory sentence being four (4) years. In addition, the person may be fined not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000).

IC 35-50-2-4
Class A felony
Sec. 4. A person who commits a Class A felony shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of between twenty (20) and fifty (50) years, with the advisory sentence being thirty (30) years. In addition, the person may be fined not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000).

*Disclaimer: Just my opinion as a citizen who has studied law on an amateur level. Contact a lawyer for legal advice.*

 

[j706]

Ok, I've said it on a different thread, and now, after 28 pages I'll say it here. Pepper Spray would be a good addition with your firearm carry. Since Pepper Spray is not a deadly weapon, one can use it in the situations we have talked about in this thread.

Example, Johnny, a 30 year old yuppie who has never been in a fight, gets punched in the face.

If he pulls out his gun, that is Intimidation with a deadly weapon (Class C Felony). And, if he pulls the trigger, Johnny will be facing, at the least, a Voluntary Homicide with a Deadly Weapon charge (Class A Felony). Johnny's lawyer will have a hard time convincing a jury that Johnny was justified in using a deadly weapon for self-defense.

If he pulls out his Pepper Spray, it is Intimidation (Class A Misdemeanor). If he uses the Pepper Spray, Johnny will be facing, at the most, a Battery charge (Class A Misdemeanor). Johnny's lawyer will have an easier time convincing a jury that Johnny was justified in using a non-lethal weapon for self-defense.

Now, if Johnny gets punched in the face, backs off, threatens to use pepper spray if attacked, is attacked again, uses pepper spray, bad gun pulls out a deadly weapon (firearm, knife, bat, sledge hammer, hand grenades), then Johnny can pull out his own deadly weapon and use it in self defense. As all of this is happening, the attacker needs to be continuously attacking, and Johnny should be continuously trying to retreat.

Pepper Spray makes a good intermediate tool for what we have been talking about for 28 pages. That's why cops carry pepper spray (and/or tasers) as well as their firearm.

IC 35-50-3-2
Class A misdemeanor
Sec. 2. A person who commits a Class A misdemeanor shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of not more than one (1) year; in addition, he may be fined not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000).


IC 35-50-2-6 Class C felony
Sec. 6. (a) A person who commits a Class C felony shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of between two (2) and eight (8) years, with the advisory sentence being four (4) years. In addition, the person may be fined not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000).

IC 35-50-2-4
Class A felony
Sec. 4. A person who commits a Class A felony shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of between twenty (20) and fifty (50) years, with the advisory sentence being thirty (30) years. In addition, the person may be fined not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000).

*Disclaimer: Just my opinion as a citizen who has studied law on an amateur level. Contact a lawyer for legal advice.*

I could not agree more. I make a habit of carrying chemical agent (OC) almost all the time. I really like it and it is an invaluable tool. Funny thing? I have used mine on duty more on animals that people. Usually works pretty good.

Good points IMO.

 

[snojet]

First, I only read 7 or 8 pages of this post, so I just will comment on the original post.
Here is my .02 cents on this subject.
Sometime back I had a conversation with some nice police about when, where, why, and what-to-do if a person pulled their gun and if they used it. There general response was something to the effect of, ultimately a person must be able to articulate in a court of law why you were felt threatened to pull or/and use the gun.
What I came away from that conversation with the police was to know the laws well and then be able to explain clearly why the gun was pulled/used.
After reading the original post, I believe "Chubbs" (I think that's his screen name) articulated properly the scene and why he reacted like he did.

 

[Scout]

So let me get this right, You exit a store and three males approach you and/or your vehicle and you draw a weapon and point it? WOW!! Yes you did wrong. Matter of fact you broke the law and committed a crime based on the way you described the incident. Unbelievable!! In fear of serious bodily injury or death by a group of guys walking towards you is a stretch IMO. You might want to brush up on state law before you find yourself is some legal jeopardy.

I really hope this is sarcasm.

 

[matthock]

In the situations described above, number 2 hits pretty close to home for me. I've been a total choir boy my entire life - never even had detention in school, haven't ever gotten into a physical confrontation of any sort with anyone. I'm also pretty out of shape - if I did get into a fight with anyone tough enough to be willing to initiate the confrontation, I would get my *** kicked, badly. I wouldn't stand a chance.

My problem with what j706 has been saying is that, it seems like in all situations, he's recommending waiting until the point when any normal person being assaulted is probably going to already be incapacitated beyond response before even drawing. An LEO or someone with a military background might be in good physical condition and have training to handle a physical confrontation. Me? A couple of punches to the face is likely going to daze me enough to make response difficult if only from the confusion and lack of familiarity with the situation, not to mention that I'm just about blind without my now likely to be broken glasses. They'd just laugh it off if I tried to swing back, assuming I even managed to connect. If I wait as long as you say for me to, I WILL be badly injured if not killed, and I WILL NOT be capable of responding any longer. What the heck am I supposed to do if option A lands me in jail with a felony, and option B lands me in the hospital or morgue?

I mean, no, I'm not going to just go shooting someone. It would mess me up in the head as much as it would mess the other guy up physically to do so. But given my lack of physical ability, drawing a weapon would be my only option to try to even up such a severe disparity of force.

 

[tharlow514]

First thank you for commenting in this thread. You have given me a few things to think about and provided a different viewpoint.

But would I draw on one person who was physically attacking me? About my size and age? Quite possibly because I don't know the etc. Hell he could be someone like this UFC® : Ultimate Fighting Championship®
comparable ht/wt/age, could he whip my butt/main/kill me without breathing hard? I'd say he'd have a dang good chance. In my younger days I've won fights with guys bigger than me and had my behind handed to me by guys smaller than me. Size doesn't matter(to a degree). I'm not talking about drawing if I get into a argument with some guy and yelling leads to pushing leads to fist swinging, I'll hopefully be long gone by the time it gets to that whether I'm carrying or not. I'm talking about a unprovoked attack.

Unfortunately, you would probably have to proove you knew he was a UFC fighter and could easily kill you before you used deadly force on him.

 

[laws1785]

Like j706 said...I fail to see the threat...Because we carry people can't approach us? Sorry, my weapon is not my first line of defense when dealing with people. I see no need to even call the police in this situation.

Can you tell me WHEN this situation would have become a threat to you?

 

[ocsdor]

My problem with what j706 has been saying is that, it seems like in all situations, he's recommending waiting until the point when any normal person being assaulted is probably going to already be incapacitated beyond response before even drawing.

j706 is not recommending it; it is the law, and the Judicial system's interpretation of the law, that is recommending it. Even though we were falsely taught that we are innocent until proven guilty, the law has been written/manipulated in a way that makes the opposite hold true.

This is why good people need to get more involved in politics, and good people like us need to be on jury duty instead of trying to avoid jury duty.

 

[SavageEagle]

j706 is not recommending it; it is the law, and the Judicial system's interpretation of the law, that is recommending it. Even though we were falsely taught that we are innocent until proven guilty, the law has been written/manipulated in a way that makes the opposite hold true.

This is why good people need to get more involved in politics, and good people like us need to be on jury duty instead of trying to avoid jury duty.

Actually, the threat of force is the same as using force. And it works both ways. If they are within striking distance and it's 3v1 and are acting aggressively and threating bodily harm you are within your rights to pull your firearm. If they are actually charging you and you tell them to stop (SCREAM IT) and they refuse, then you can shoot.

I really need to get my Indiana Handgun Law book out and scan some pages for you all. If you don't have the book, buy it. It'll be the best book investment you'll ever make. If you live in Indiana of course.