PDA

View Full Version : You draw a weapon on a man, but he still keeps coming...


JohnH1963
March 15, 2009, 06:58 PM
You have decided to draw your weapon on a man. The man keeps approaching you at a steady, but slow, pace forward. You retreat somewhat, provide the man with a strong verbal warning that you will fire if he keeps approaching, but he still keeps coming forward.

At what point can you fire? Have there been cases such as this one that we can study?

hogdogs
March 15, 2009, 07:03 PM
I would try to refrain until the Bg was close but not able to reach me with a lurch and out stretched arm. I will also have given obvious warning so by standers can't say I ambushed the goon. So about 7-9 feet and he is a goner.
Brent

Keltyke
March 15, 2009, 07:08 PM
Does he have a weapon? Is he advancing in a threatening manner? Do you feel "in fear of your life"?

To "legally" fire, the BG must meet three criteria:
1. He must have ability.
2. He must have opportunity.
3. He must have intent.

You may only fire if "you are in fear of your life or severe bodily injury."

However, our CWP instructor (a 25 year old, retired LEO of a local agency) told us if someone comes at you with his fists, you MUST assume he's going to beat you to a pulp. If he comes at you with a knife, you MUST assume he's going to carve you up. If he comes at you with a gun, you MUST assume he's going to shoot you dead. ACT ACCORDINGLY - the penalty for being wrong is too great.

I would back up AND side step. If he follows your sideways movement, I'd say do what you gotta do.

If you wanna know what I'd do, read my tag line.

JohnH1963
March 15, 2009, 07:14 PM
Lets say you had good reason to draw. He might have been on your property or in the process of harming another individual hand-to-hand. Your intentions are purely for self defense.

However, he does not have anything in his hands.

hogdogs
March 15, 2009, 07:39 PM
In florida, the presentation of a traditional weapon is not required... Many folks have been killed by either one blow to the head or head injury sustained in the subsequent fall.
Brent

Shane Tuttle
March 15, 2009, 08:11 PM
To be specific, do you have your weapon drawn at him, or low ready?

What state do you live in?

Are you in your own home? Public?

To you have the room to exit/retreat?

Does the assailant have a weapon? What type? Does he appear to have motive?

Your question is just to general to give a definitive answer. Even then, we could only give you an answer based on observation, not really a clear cut answer.

ElectricHellfire
March 15, 2009, 08:30 PM
If he appeared to be a threat with intent to do me or mine imminent harm, I'd kill him.

I think a lot has to be said for what the other circumstances are. Were there words exchanged? Was there a precipitating event? Is he armed or potentially armed? Etc. This is an "iffy" thing and no blanket statement would apply to every situation IMO.

Scorch
March 15, 2009, 08:37 PM
It goes like this:
Stop! Stop! Stop, pow, pow, pow. If he won't stop for the verbal warning, and won't stop for the drawn 1911, he means business.

jhenry
March 15, 2009, 08:47 PM
You draw and present if he has the means, opportunity, and intent. Those things have been met or you have made a mistake. As far as how close, it has been proven over and over that a normal man can cross 21 feet with weapon and deliver a fatal blow in one and a half seconds. How fast can you deliver COM hits under stress to a moving target.

David Armstrong
March 15, 2009, 11:05 PM
At what point can you fire?
You can fire whenever the law says you can, which differs from state to state and by situation within states. Generally, I'd suggest that if he is just "approaching you at a steady, but slow, pace forward" you will have a difficult time meeting that legal standard lots of places. He has no weapon, he is not making any verbal threats, he isn't trying to catch you, and so on. This is a basic problem with pulling a gun, BTW...what do you do if it doesn't impress the BG?

zxcvbob
March 15, 2009, 11:10 PM
The man keeps approaching you at a steady, but slow, pace forward. You retreat somewhat, provide the man with a strong verbal warning that you will fire if he keeps approaching, but he still keeps coming forward....lurch and out stretched arm.Sounds like a zombie to me... ;)

(someone had to say it)

__________________
"They're coming to get you Barbara..." —Johnny

doh_312
March 15, 2009, 11:16 PM
Seems to me he is asking for it. Many things to consider on this one, is he obviously armed and such. Seems to me, my gun is out because he is a threat and should be treated accordingly. Assume the worst, hope for the best.

SquidWarrior
March 15, 2009, 11:58 PM
In this case, the big word in the deadly force triangle is capability. The VA has already established opportunity and intent; Most of the time, intent is the most complex and subjective point of a deadly force encounter. In this case, there are many variables that come into play. You have to take into account the VCs size, aproximated strength; is the perp armed? What is his demeanor? Do you know the perp and are you aware of his physical capabilities? Basicly, do you stand a reasonable chance in a hand to hand encounter? It reminds me of my one (civilian, off duty) encounter. An unarmed 17 year old attempted to mug me outside a 7-11. I verbaly resisted him, when he bagan to close into my reactionary gap I drew my Springfield. He emidiatly turned and ran. Called to mind, if he had continued to advance(he was at about 9 feet when I drew and backpedled a few steps), I probably would have lowered my weapon and to the ready and went with passive hand to hand(alot of sidestepping, jabs and thrusts to the throat if he had tried to disarm me).

Keep in mind; I am about 6'1", 220lbs, in pretty good shape; the VC was 5'10", 172lbs. I have a good amount of combat training and the size advantage. In my mind, if he had a weapon, he would have made a move for it and I would have acted acordingly. I could have defended myself without use of a weapon in that situation, if I had shot an unarmed 17 year old child, you could imagine that I would be in prision for a long, long time, especially since a good amount of it was caught on survailence tape. Now, If the VC was, say, 6'9" 300lbs, I would have again acted acordingly by double tapping the chest cavity, for which I would have been completely justified.

For the record, after the incident I called 9-11; after my description and the survailance footage, he was arretsted two days later at a near by WaWa gas station.

teeroux
March 16, 2009, 12:13 AM
Once you draw on a BG there is a deadly weapon present yours and any advancement of the BG will result in a strugle for your weapon meaning his intent is in fact deadly.

BillCA
March 16, 2009, 03:15 AM
You have decided to draw your weapon on a man. The man keeps approaching you at a steady, but slow, pace forward. You retreat somewhat, provide the man with a strong verbal warning that you will fire if he keeps approaching, but he still keeps coming forward.

At what point can you fire? Have there been cases such as this one that we can study?

I'm assuming that drawing on this male individual is warranted for some reason -- he just beat down a senior citizen to rob them or he just committed some felony, say arson, in my presence.

If his slow, steady pace towards me even as I move laterally and he maintains the gap even if I jog a few feet, then he gets a final Stop! Stay Away! command. Failing to heed that last warning he gets to test the penetration of two rounds of my JHP ammo. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

My rathionale is that he sees the gun and continues coming. He is not afraid of the gun. He tracks on my movements, turning or increasing speed when I do. Thus, he's not afraid of my gun AND he's tracking on me. He is issued a final warning with the gun in the ready-to-fire stage. So he's ignored the presence of my guns and/or is not afraid of it. He is tracking on me specifically, ignoring verbal warnings, not afraid of a gun... He is either crazy or determined to reach me to commit another act of violence.

(Run away? Really? At my age and with desk jockey spread? And he appears to me to be more able to run than I can. I can neither walk backwards forever nor run whilst looking over my shoulder. Disengagement only works if HE lets me disengage.)

scottaschultz
March 16, 2009, 03:53 AM
I was always taught that one of the basic rules of firearms is Never point a weapon at anything you are not willing to destroy!

So basically, if you draw your weapon on a person but they still keep coming, be prepared to follow the above rule, but keep in mind dead is forever. There are no do-overs. If you are not sure you have the psychological makeup or stomach to kill another human being, you should not be carrying a gun in the first place.

Scott

nate45
March 16, 2009, 04:45 AM
This is the type of situation where carrying a non lethal alternative would probably serve you best. Pepper foam or spray would probably be the best choice. An unarmed man with his face completely covered in Pepper foam is easier to get away from than one who's face is not.

Like David Armstrong says, once you draw a lethal weapon you are pretty much committed to using that weapon if the aggressor does not back down and or flee.

This also sounds like another situation where avoidance may have prevented it. Why is an unarmed man approaching you with a look and/or demeanor that makes you fear great bodily injury or death? If it was out of the blue and you did nothing to provoke it thats one thing. If you started or engaged in an argument with someone who could obviously beat you in a fist fight, because of Road rage, etc, then I would say you are not practicing the first rule of all credible self defense systems; Avoidance.

TheNatureBoy
March 16, 2009, 04:53 AM
Lets see....I draw my weapon on a man, but he still keeps coming at a steady, slow pace forward. I retreat at the same time giving strong verbal warnings that I will fire if he continues to approach me. At what point can I fire? Based solely on the scenario that you presented, no what ifs, at this point he hasn't given me justification to shoot him. I think some of you would be going to jail for a while.

______________________

"Im not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express."

PoorSoulInJersey
March 16, 2009, 05:44 AM
let's back up.... why did you draw in the first place? You can't draw on an unarmed person who's just walking down the street. For you to draw in the first place, he's already got to have means, intent, and opportunity to injure or kill.

As a civilian defending yourself, you'd have a hard time defending drawing a gun to threaten someone with. If he's not already intent on serious harm, you shouldn't be drawings.

Personally, if I'm on the street (not in my house) and draw in a situation, I'm looking to present to a target, offer a verbal warning, and shoot. The verbal warning is looking for the BG to immediately withdraw. If I've got a little distance between us, I'd consider a slow retreat myself, but I don't know how long I want to be walking backwards with a gun on someone. If the person keeps coming forward into a gun, I'd fire.

Keltyke
March 16, 2009, 06:26 AM
Frankly, from the information you give in your original post, it sounds like the guy is simply drunk. He might not even be aware of your presence. He's presented no weapon, and a "steady, slow pace" isn't very threatening.

Tuttle8 is right, we need more information.

AirForceShooter
March 16, 2009, 06:29 AM
If you drew your gun you were in fear for your life and safety at that point. He keeps coming?
Shoot him.

AFS

ATW525
March 16, 2009, 07:17 AM
The way I see it, this can go two ways depending of the circumstances prior:

The first way: you made a mistake and you drew your gun before you believed you were legally justified to use deadly force. At this point you need to back away, shout commands telling him to stop and attempt to leave the area. You need to make it clear to any potential witnesses that your intention is to leave and you're not looking for a fight.

The second way: you drew your gun only when it was clear that deadly force would justified in solving the situation. Unless his behavior dramatically changes in a way to make him no longer a threat, you should be pumping him full of lead.

Creature
March 16, 2009, 08:00 AM
Turn and run away?

Double Naught Spy
March 16, 2009, 08:10 AM
You draw a weapon on a man, but he still keeps coming...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have decided to draw your weapon on a man. The man keeps approaching you at a steady, but slow, pace forward. You retreat somewhat, provide the man with a strong verbal warning that you will fire if he keeps approaching, but he still keeps coming forward.

I won't turn and run away for a couple of reasons. 1) like Bill, I don't run so well, and 2) I don't want to lose track of the threat.

Since the guy is advancing at a slow pace, I will retreat at a slightly quicker pace and open up the interval between us.

Brian Pfleuger
March 16, 2009, 09:30 AM
Turn and run away?


...and there you have it. Although, I'd say DON'T turn but do make every effort to get the hell out of dodge. How's about getting the hell out of dodge BEFORE you draw your weapon?

In NY state you'd be in serious trouble if you didn't make a VERY serious effort to leave the situation. The law requires that you retreat regardless of all factors EXCEPT that you must be able to do so safely. The problem being that you CANNOT assume that retreating will not be safe unless the BG has a "distance weapon", at least so far as I've been able to verify with authorities. Versus an unarmed or knife wielding opponent you MUST attempt to extract yourself from the situation before firing. Essentially, only against a gun wielding BG can you assume that retreat cannot be done safely.

Creature
March 16, 2009, 09:32 AM
I won't turn and run away for a couple of reasons.

Okay. How about just move away?...

onthejon55
March 16, 2009, 11:20 AM
...and there you have it. Although, I'd say DON'T turn but do make every effort to get the hell out of dodge. How's about getting the hell out of dodge BEFORE you draw your weapon?


That's the worst plan Ive ever heard. What happens when you try to run but hes faster? You end up being attacked from behind having no idea how hes going to try to hurt you. Its impossible to evaluate any evolving situation when hes behind you out of you line of sight.

Creature
March 16, 2009, 11:39 AM
Moving away quickly does not mean you have to break eye contact. The idea is to create distance. If the BG adjusts his speed to match your's, or increases speed to close the distance while in pursuit, then that is a whole different story.

Brian Pfleuger
March 16, 2009, 12:09 PM
That's the worst plan Ive ever heard. What happens when you try to run but hes faster?...You end up being attacked from behind


Actually, I clearly said "DON'T turn around." The idea is to make distance. Can you imagine going through a trial and being cross examined for shooting this guy?

Prosecutor: "...and what was he doing when you shot him?"

You: "He was walking toward me."

Pros: "Walking? Just walking toward you?"

You: "Well, I told him to stop."

Pros: "So, you shot a man who was unarmed and walking in your direction?"

You: "Well, I told him to stop or I'd shoot."

Pros: "Did you consider that he might not speak english or that he could have been deaf."

You: "Well, I, uh,..... I told him to stop. He just kept walking."

Pros: "So, you shot a man for.... walking? Did he have the right to be where he was at the time?"

You: "Well...."

Pros: "Did he threaten you?"

You: "No, but..... he wouldn't stop walking toward me."

Pros: "Alright, I understand what you're saying. Let me break it down. You shot an unarmed man, walking in your direction, who made no threats toward you?"

You: "Um, I'm allergic to cotton. Can I have my prison suit in silk, please?"

onthejon55
March 16, 2009, 12:37 PM
Actually, I clearly said "DON'T turn around." The idea is to make distance.

So you are suggesting running backwards? I dnt know how else to get the hell out fo Dodge without running in sum way, shape or form.

Prosecutor: "...and what was he doing when you shot him?"

You: "He was walking toward me."
..........


Well if i drew down on some one im pretty sure thats the universal "Stop or I'll shoot signal" so it really would not matter if he was deaf. The OP also suggests that he is behaving in a threatening manner so that whole skit you just wrote is kind of silly.

djohn
March 16, 2009, 12:39 PM
I think safest bet is retreat, Looking for a escape rout and avoid at all cost.Your freedom is at stake here and if your life is not in immediate danger keep a level head and dont panic just relax and breath try not to show fear and stair him down that you mean buisness.Do you have a cell to dial 911 while keeping Him in your sights,did you yell for help.could you have out run him or hide somewhere.May be the question of a officer and the DA you may face after the fact and everyone knows you cant call it back So be sure its a good shoot.

ElectricHellfire
March 16, 2009, 01:00 PM
In NY state you'd be in serious trouble if you didn't make a VERY serious effort to leave the situation. The law requires that you retreat regardless of all factors EXCEPT that you must be able to do so safely. The problem being that you CANNOT assume that retreating will not be safe unless the BG has a "distance weapon", at least so far as I've been able to verify with authorities. Versus an unarmed or knife wielding opponent you MUST attempt to extract yourself from the situation before firing. Essentially, only against a gun wielding BG can you assume that retreat cannot be done safely.


I'm glad I don't live in NY.

Brian Pfleuger
March 16, 2009, 01:00 PM
The OP also suggests that he is behaving in a threatening manner...

The OP:
You have decided to draw your weapon on a man. The man keeps approaching you at a steady, but slow, pace forward. You retreat somewhat, provide the man with a strong verbal warning that you will fire if he keeps approaching, but he still keeps coming forward.

Where is the "threatening manner" aside from the walking toward me?

So you are suggesting running backwards? I dnt know how else to get the hell out fo Dodge without running in sum way, shape or form.

Well, I can move fairly quickly backwards, yes, but running, no. You could also move laterally which would actually be a better move because it would force the guy to change course to follow you, which could go a long way toward establishing a threat.

There's also the question of distance. If the guy is 50 feet away, I'd turn and run. If I hear him running after me I'd try to get cover or turn and confront, whatever was appropriate for the terrain and surroundings and remaining distance. This action also helps satisfy:
1) My own moral code of avoiding a shoot if possible.
2) The legal requirement to attempt retreat in NY state.
3) The "intent" portion of the lethal force triangle.

...that whole skit you just wrote is kind of silly.

I can absolutely, positively guarantee you that, if it was brought to prosecution, every attempt would be made to make it appear as though you shot an unarmed, completely innocent civilian who was doing nothing more than walking through a parking lot/park/wherever.

SwampYankee
March 16, 2009, 01:11 PM
You can fire whenever the law says you can, which differs from state to state and by situation within states.

Bingo-Bango. That's all that counts in my book. Might I suggest moving out of New York State?

In Rhode Island:

§ 11-8-8 Injury or death – Defense. – In the event that any person shall die or shall sustain a personal injury in any way or for any cause while in the commission of any criminal offense enumerated in §§ 11-8-2 – 11-8-6, it shall be rebuttably presumed as a matter of law in any civil or criminal proceeding that the owner, tenant, or occupier of the place where the offense was committed acted by reasonable means in self-defense and in the reasonable belief that the person engaged in the criminal offense was about to inflict great bodily harm or death upon that person or any other individual lawfully in the place where the criminal offense was committed. There shall be no duty on the part of an owner, tenant, or occupier to retreat from any person engaged in the commission of any criminal offense enumerated in §§ 11-8-2 – 11-8-6.

Brian Pfleuger
March 16, 2009, 01:17 PM
Might I suggest moving out of New York State?

Well, yes, I'd love to move somewhere else but it has nothing to do with that particular law. I live in a very safe place. I mean VERY safe. We have not had a murder in this area that didn't involve some sort of domestic dispute in my memory. There aren't a bunch of crack heads breaking into peoples house or robbing stores. We don't have gang initiations or even gangs at all, to speak of. I don't actually concern myself to much about what the law says in these scenarios. I know it but it doesn't concern me. The need to defend myself is unlikely to begin with, in addition, any SD situation I find myself in is virtually guaranteed to be inside my home or business. The retreat clause does not apply in those places.

Creature
March 16, 2009, 01:18 PM
So you are suggesting running backwards? I dnt know how else to get the hell out fo Dodge without running in sum way, shape or form.
Well, I can move fairly quickly backwards, yes, but running, no. You could also move laterally which would actually be a better move because it would force the guy to change course to follow you, which could go a long way toward establishing a threat.

Bingo. Laterally or even diagonally...which ever offers the best avenue of separation. This isnt that hard, folks.

Maromero
March 16, 2009, 01:46 PM
This scenario happened to me. I draw a S&W k frame at two intruders & one kept coming. On hindsight I believe the man thought it was a toy gun. I shot a warning shot to his right & told him the next two were going into his chest. I have to admit I hesitated and made a mistake. I could have legaly killed that man. It's not what I wanted. It's not what I would like to do today if the situation raised again. Faced with the same situation I believe I would shoot.

Creature
March 16, 2009, 01:54 PM
Faced with the same situation I believe I would shoot.

Just to be clear...do you mean you would shoot a warning shot again?...or you would shoot the intruder in the chest?

pax
March 16, 2009, 02:16 PM
I just deleted an unacceptable post & some responses to it.

Thanks to those who hit the "report this post" button. That's helpful for sure!

pax

Daugherty16
March 16, 2009, 03:20 PM
This is another good exercise for the grey matter. There is little info, about the BG, the scene, whether you or the BG are alone or with others, you don't even know if it is day or night. Sort of like, "Make a Scenario". But probably just like it could happen on the street. If the guy got that close before you noticed him, your awareness suffered a lapse; suddenly you're backing up and shouting at the guy with your gun out.

But the point is these kind of unanswerable questions keep us thinking, evaluating our own knowledge of the law, situational awareness, and reactions. Anyone who carries had better think these kind of thoughts, both to be ready/able to deal with the one time it happens for real, but equally important to "do the right thing" and stay out of jail. Even if you don't know the "answer", it is important and valuable to do the exercise.

Lots of these type of posts/questions deal with readiness in the home. Where do you sleep in relation to the doors/windows, your children's bedrooms, do you have a pet, an alarm, etc. But in reality shooting an intruder in your home is actually simpler than shooting a man on the street. Intent, ability, opportunity - all satisfied by the guy being in your home (or are they?).

Maromero
March 16, 2009, 03:55 PM
"Just to be clear...do you mean you would shoot a warning shot again?...or you would shoot the intruder in the chest?"

Lik I said before, I'm happy no blood was shed and that would be my choice of outcome if th situation happened again. At 10 feet I'm sure I unecesarily exposed myself in firing a warning shot at someone briskly walking towards me. If thr guy would have rushed at me, too many variables. Yes. I would shoot on in th chest, no warning shot. I'm realy happy I fired that warning shot though.

Creature
March 16, 2009, 03:57 PM
I'm realy happy I fired that warning shot though.

Did you recover that bullet which you shot?...or know exactly where it ended up?

SMiller
March 16, 2009, 04:20 PM
If you are justified in drawing your weapon then you are justified in shooting it. It is agains't the law to brandish a weapon, if you are allowed to draw it you are allowed to shoot it. Retreat, back up, and side step, when the time comes you will know. Don't wait till its to late, bullets dont stop people, most times they dont even slow them down, chest and head shots get the job done!

Maromero
March 16, 2009, 04:23 PM
"Did you recover that bullet which you shot?...or know exactly where it ended up?"

No.

It made a nice dent in my neighbor's patio fence wall, made of solid concrete, about chest height. The shot was fired in his patio. The intruders attempted to break in while three girls (teens) were in the house. They started screamming away so I jumped a fence. When I turned th corner the 2 intruders came my way @ 10 yrds. away. I drew and ordered them to stop. Both stopped with th command, one hesitated, and kept walking briskly towards me.

onthejon55
March 16, 2009, 04:47 PM
Where is the "threatening manner" aside from the walking toward me?

I don't know about you but Ive never had to draw my gun on some one who wasn't acting in a threatening manner.

There's also the question of distance. If the guy is 50 feet away, I'd turn and run. If I hear him running after me I'd try to get cover or turn and confront, whatever was appropriate for the terrain and surroundings and remaining distance.

If you trip and fall then what? I am willing to bet he can close that 50 feet faster than you can get back up. In which case it would be a ground fight.

2) The legal requirement to attempt retreat in NY state.

Luckily your laws do not apply to very many people on this forum so they can be ignored.

I can absolutely, positively guarantee you that, if it was brought to prosecution, every attempt would be made to make it appear as though you shot an unarmed, completely innocent civilian who was doing nothing more than walking through a parking lot/park/wherever.
Today 01:00 PM

Try as they might I absolutely, positively guarantee I won't get convicted.;)

djohn
March 16, 2009, 04:56 PM
One time my wife,Kids and I where on the way Home from a fun day with the kiddies and stopped off for a bit to eat to take home but there was No drive thru window of where we stopped. So I parked the car and stayed with the kids that where sleeping in the back seat while my wife went in side for take out.This was in the winter months so the car was running and Why I was day dreaming a man Out of nowhere a shady looking character knocked on the glass of my drivers door and it startled me.He then asked if I could spare some change and I replied sorry but No I can't and he said please and I said No once again then he stood there looking at me and I looked at Him and then the next thing I know he was trying to open to my drivers door but it locks automatic when put in reverse So the drivers door was stilled locked and my wife locked her side when she exit the car.I then pull my side arm which was a taurus Millenium at the time and tapped it on the glass window the dudes eyes got like a owls eyes and ran off.I still think this was a carjack attempt more then looking for some spare change and I am certainly glad the flash and tap of the glass thing worked.I couldn't help thinking to my self man I am glad I have a CCW permit and a sidearm to go with it.

Maromero
March 16, 2009, 05:01 PM
Most jurisdictions in the U.S. require a person to "retreat to the wall" or similar concept before deadly action is taken.

In my jurisdiction a person is entittled to "stand his ground". If a person invades your ground, it becomes a threat to you. For those wondring, its Puerto Rico.

OldMarksman
March 16, 2009, 05:39 PM
The OP also suggests that he is behaving in a threatening manner so that whole skit you just wrote is kind of silly.

Perhaps you could relate for the rest of us how you came to conclusion that you may shoot someone because he is "behaving in a threatening manner".

Luckily your [New York] laws do not apply to very many people on this forum so they can be ignored.

Actually, in most states, one does have a duty to retreat, unless one is in his home or automobile, and in some states, even then. There is no duty to retreat in Indiana.

Try as they might I absolutely, positively guarantee I won't get convicted.

Famous last words, as they say, and the belief of a lot of people who are serving or who have served time and forever forfeited their right to own a gun.

You will have shot a person. That will not be in question. To avoid conviction for some type of murder, you will have to produce evidence that you reasonably believed that your action was necessary to protect your self from serious injury.

The jurors will judge what is reasonable and what was necessary. Your testimony, which will be subject to cross examination that could render it ineffective, may be of insufficient help.

Think about it. If the courts relied solely on the shooter's testimony, there would be very few convictions for murder--everyone would claim self defense. A lot of people do, but many do not prevail.

Keep in mind there is pretty good chance that the person will survive and testify against you. Don't assume that in court he will be regarded as the "bad guy." And whether he lives or dies, don't assume that you will be regarded as the "good guy."

It will come down to how well your testimony matches the forensic evidence and any testimony of others, who may well not have noticed what was going on until they heard the sound of your shots. And if someone did, what will they remember? In most places in the country, drawing a gun on someone who is not posing an imminent danger is a crime. How do you think this will be taken: "I saw a man pointing a gun at another man; then he fired and the man went down"?

I suggest that you bookmark and study this:

http://www.useofforce.us/

Also this, which goes into the aftermath and what you will face.

http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2006/02_StudyDay.htm

Your defense attorney may have studied this, which you should also read:

http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/01c1e7698280d20385256d0b00789923/f587d7d10c34fff2852572b90069bc3c?OpenDocument&Click=

It would be a very worth while investment to consult with an experienced trial attorney in your area.

Let's hope you never get into such a situation. How do you think your posts on this will sound to a DA, grand jury, or jury?

mrt949
March 16, 2009, 06:09 PM
Survivor of open heart surgery .I guessed i feared for my life your HONOR.and ladies and gentlemen of the jury.;)

JohnH1963
March 16, 2009, 06:44 PM
Just checked back in here and read all these responses. Thanks to all who participated.

I purposely made the post very generic so as to keep the situation flexible for discussion.

After thinking about it for a day, here is what I would do. This is just my opinion and Im not saying this is what you should do, its what I would do...

1) Do not turn away or remove your eyes from the target.

2) Remain in motion with the purpose of placing distance between you and the target. Side-step as well as back/forth in a quick manner keeping a minimal of 25 feet distance. Be quick on your feet and avoid a stance.

3) Keep shouting commands at the target in a loud firm voice. Yell at the target to get down or you will fire. Keep shouting the commands as many times as it takes...

4) If the target is obviously unarmed and starts running at me, then I would fire at the target, but in a manner to slow its speed rather then to kill. I would fire at the legs or a lower extremity below the heart. I would consider utilizing a warning shot into the ground or large tree. This is controversial in this forum, I know...most advocate always firing center mass and never using warning shots. I know the ability of my bullets and would consider where I was before firing a warning shot. If I was in a forest, then a shot into soft ground by a tree would certainly be low risk.

5) Depending upon the situation, there would be different reactions. For example, if the man has a bloody knife in his hand standing over a body then I wouldnt attempt so much at retreating. I would definately back away and give commands, but I wouldnt totally retreat from the situation. I feel I have a moral obligation in this regard and it wouldnt be the right thing to do in letting him go.

If I drew my weapon on someone unarmed and prowling in my backyard at 3am while I was trying to get into my house(lets say I just pulled up after a long cross country trip), then I would definately retreat and exercise more restraint. I only have a suspicion that the man is doing wrong, but no actual evidence.

No matter what the law might state, Im going to do what common sense tells me to do and let the attornies figure it out later. For example, Im not certain its lawful to draw a weapon on a strange man in the backyard at 3am, but thats what I would do to protect myself.

The level of restraint and retreat would depend upon the situation. If I had witnessed the man perform a violent act, then he is not going to be let go. If it was a non-violent crime, then I would be more apt for a total retreat. If there was no crime and just suspicion, then I would definately attempt a total retreat.

David Armstrong
March 16, 2009, 06:51 PM
Try as they might I absolutely, positively guarantee I won't get convicted.
The jails have hundreds, if not thousands, of people in them that felt that same way!

zxcvbob
March 16, 2009, 07:12 PM
Does he look anything like this? :D
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/CemeteryZombie.jpg

JohnH1963
March 16, 2009, 08:38 PM
The jails are also full of people who were either innocent or where the decision of guilt was very controversial.

When the police make their decision to arrest you, then they usually stand by that decision to the bitter end. The prosecutor will stand by the officer's decision. The judge and jury will look down at you and only see a guy in handcuffs that the officer, who can do no wrong, arrested.

The best you can do in any situation is to make every attempt to avoid it in the first place. However, if a strange man rushes into my home, is in my yard or a violent situation presents itself, then Im not going to be thinking about the law. I will do what I think is right to protect myself or others.

For example, in some states you have to make an attempt to flee from your home before you can use lethal force. However, if some guy invades my house then I will probably be using lethal force and I wont be retreating no matter what the law might say.

Shane Tuttle
March 16, 2009, 09:19 PM
I'm not an expert in this field nor do I pass myself off as one of the most knowledgeable members on this board. But I'll put in my two hay-pennies worth based on what you provided:

4) If the target is obviously unarmed and starts running at me, then I would fire at the target, but in a manner to slow its speed rather then to kill. I would fire at the legs or a lower extremity below the heart. I would consider utilizing a warning shot into the ground or large tree. This is controversial in this forum, I know...most advocate always firing center mass and never using warning shots. I know the ability of my bullets and would consider where I was before firing a warning shot. If I was in a forest, then a shot into soft ground by a tree would certainly be low risk.

Since you didn't answer my question, I'm going to assume that you have the gun pointed at the subject rather than at low-ready. If the subject never was truly a threat to your life, you are the assailant, not him. The simple statement of "I felt my life as in imminent danger" just won't cut it. This is extremely subjective to people that aren't educated on diciphering the clues with a clear head.

If you think it's OK to fire your gun to just slow down the approach, you're putting your behind in the sling from the moment you touch off that round. If you really think you know your bullets and where they will go upon ricochets, then you might as well change your handle to Revolver Ocelot. Your statement is wrong on so many levels. If you don't see this, I really don't think I have the ability to articulate my point without further confusion. I think this should be left to someone else that's more qualified to explain.

And to top it off, you're ready and willing to shoot an unarmed person without considering other options? Responsible gunownership lies more heavily when NOT to shoot, rather than when TO shoot.

Steviewonder1
March 16, 2009, 09:22 PM
Shout GO AWAY, three times, with pistol drawn, then do the Mosambique Drill two to the body and one to the head, repeat if necessary. I still have more rounds to do this one more time...

David Armstrong
March 16, 2009, 09:50 PM
However, if a strange man rushes into my home, is in my yard or a violent situation presents itself, then Im not going to be thinking about the law.
I would suggest that is a terrrible tactic. You need to both know the law in your state regarding use of force and you need to think about that law when deciding to use force. If you don't think about the law, the shooting and the aftermath, you are planning to fail, IMO. What good does it do to survive an encounter if you lose your home and your family because you spend the rest of your life locked away from them?

onthejon55
March 17, 2009, 12:22 AM
Perhaps you could relate for the rest of us how you came to conclusion that you may shoot someone because he is "behaving in a threatening manner".

If someone threatened you life you wouldn't consider shooting them? That's sad and unfortunate for people who may rely on you for protection.

onthejon55
March 17, 2009, 12:23 AM
The jails have hundreds, if not thousands, of people in them that felt that same way!

They felt that way because they were wrong. Im not.

The jails are also full of people who were either innocent or where the decision of guilt was very controversial.


+1. Thank You!

I would suggest that is a terrrible tactic.

I disagree. i would rather take my chances going to prison and guarantee my survival than risk my or my family's life.

Superhornet
March 17, 2009, 08:22 AM
I wish to apologize to the forum. I posted a reply that tried to be humorous about the subject, but it fell terribley flat. That reply was deleted by the administration. I was wrong in trying to inject such humor into such a serious discussion..again forgive me..it will not happen again...

OldMarksman
March 17, 2009, 08:49 AM
If someone threatened you life you wouldn't consider shooting them? That's sad and unfortunate for people who may rely on you for protection.

You have obviously not studied any of the links I've posted.

NO, I WOULD NOT (shoot someone because he is "behaving in a threatening manner)"! I would remain very alert, but I would not shoot unless and until (1) I had reason to believe that that someone had the ability and opportunity to seriously injure me or mine, (2) I had reason to believe that we were in imminent danger of serious bodily harm, and (3) it appeared to me that I had no reasonable alternative.

To do otherwise would constitute murder.

That's the law, and it has been for many centuries.

Actually, I would have been unlikely to draw under the circumstances described. Unlawful act, for a citizen, generally, unless there was imminent danger. Brandishing, assault, illegal use of a firearm ,depending on the state code....

They felt that way [that they would not be convicted] because they were wrong. Im not.

Your basis for that brave assumption?

You just might be acquitted, or have your conviction overturned upon appeal under the circumstances described, even after having given the state a basis for establishing mens rea by your cavalier posts. I very seriously doubt it, however.

But let's assume for a moment that that will happen. While you are consulting with an experienced criminal trial attorney in advance, and I strongly recommend that you do so, you might ask him what he thinks the ordeal might cost you.

alberich
March 17, 2009, 09:09 AM
At what point can you fire?

Assuming that I really had a good reason to pull the gun, ie. I evaluated the situation and under my best knowledge I found that a life is in danger, I'd shoot immediatelly after he ignored the first warning.

However I'd never draw a gun when not in a real danger. I believe that posing with a gun - or even worse, thinking that a gun is some kind of a human remote control - is the worst error one can do. I mean a gun is a tool for killing things and one should never pull it if s/he is not in a situation when killing is morally justified (for our moral and experience is the only things we can use to make our decisions namely in a danger).
For me, a handgun is a last line of defence. For other than openly life threathening situations I'd rather use bare hands, telescopic batton or cajune pepper spray.

Brian Pfleuger
March 17, 2009, 09:48 AM
The jails are also full of people who were either innocent or where the decision of guilt was very controversial.
+1. Thank You!


Let that be sweet consolation to you during your 25-life for murder. Remember those words as everyone around you expounds on their own innocence.


Originally Posted by David Armstrong
I would suggest that is a terrrible tactic.

I disagree. i would rather take my chances going to prison and guarantee my survival than risk my or my family's life.

You should NOT be considering the law during a SD shoot. There's no time. You need to make those considerations and decisions WAY before you need them and you'd better be right. You only get one chance.

If someone threatened you life you wouldn't consider shooting them?

Therein lies the problem. What I'm asking you, and the OP, is what exactly this guy has done that you feel is a threat to your life? I see no reason that the gun has been drawn in the first place. Now that it has it is YOU who must be able to articulate to the law WHY you not only drew on but shot this man. I can absolutely guarantee that "He was walking toward me and wouldn't stop!" will NOT be justification enough.

If you trip and fall then what? I am willing to bet he can close that 50 feet faster than you can get back up. In which case it would be a ground fight.

What if your gun doesn't fire? What if... What if there are an infinite number of "what ifs" so as to make any scenario mean anything to anyone who would like to insert the appropriate "What if.."

OldMarksman
March 17, 2009, 09:56 AM
Let that [(the assertion that the jails are full of people who were either innocent or where the decision of guilt was very controversial)] be sweet consolation to you during your 25-life for murder. Remember those words as everyone around you expounds on their own innocence.

That's great!

pax
March 17, 2009, 10:06 AM
And with that: closed.

pax