[OldMarksman]

Your quote: "And somehow, you think you have the authority to tell him to get to the ground'?? Typical resonse!

Yes, probably pretty typical of what your lawyer, the civll attorney of the man at gunpoint, law enforcement officers, and, should it come to that, a prosecuting attorney would say or ask.

Yes, he should yell at him! Ordering him (in a loud and deliberate command) to stop in his tracks immediately. "Do not approach me any further"!

Sounds very reasonable indeed. Lay opinion.

If he does approach, then he should order him to the ground with his weapon drawn.

At that point we start to disagree. What's the objective? To arrest him? What are the requirements in Maryland? Do you really want to take the risk? (Unlawful restraint, perhaps).

Note: Of course, with the victim being armed he should try his best to retreat and/or get in his vehicle to leave the scene if at all possible. But that may not be feasible, depending on the circumstances...

Back in agreement, again. Whether armed or unarmed.

Personally, I believe I would at that point use a Kimber Pepper Blaster (pyrotechnic deployment, and far more effective than a spray).

http://personalsecurityzone.com/cgi-...roductID=27921

Watch the video.

I carry one of those in addition to a firearm, in case force is required but lethal force may not be.

Now, if that doesn't work and someone bigger and younger keeps coming, there's still a much more serious option if needed.

But it will not involve telling him to get on the ground, much less trying to enforce such a command.

Should deadly force be used, I should think the existence of the restraining order and prior repots of threats, along with the disparity of force, would help a defendant. Lay opinion.

It seems to me that the fact of a pepper shot, and the existence of forensic evidence showing that the assailant continued to advance after that shot, would help still more.

In Maryland, the gun will no doubt not be part of the equation. The pepper blaster will have to suffice.