The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 11, 2013, 08:01 PM   #26
MTSCMike
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2011
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 164
You will most likely have to convince a DA or jury that you, or the person you protected, were in immediate fear of death or serious bodily injury. You don't always have to think you are going to die. You can defend yourself from serious injury although defending yourself in court could be more difficult.

You will also likely be judged against some variation of a use of force continuum. Justification for the use of deadly force can be due to a disparity of force like multiple assailants, an assailant much larger or more fit or one with a weapon.

It will also depend on your State. Some require you to retreat until no other option is available and some do not. If you are in a situation and you are wondering if the circumstances warrant the use of deadly force then they probably don't. If the use of deadly force is needed you will most likely be fully aware of that fact without having to ask yourself.

For me personally, I will not change what I carry for fear of prosecution. I intend to do all I can to survive and I will deal with the court when that time comes. I think prosecution trumps burial.
__________________
IDPA Member A00640
Founding Charter Member - Middle Tennessee Shooter's Club
MTSCMike is offline  
Old January 11, 2013, 09:31 PM   #27
bedbugbilly
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 19, 2009
Posts: 2,207
I agree with "a deadly weapon is a deadly weapon" but I also see the OP's point. I have to believe that it would be considered on a case by case situation and also depend upon the make up of a jury.

Case in point - several years ago in Michigan, police responded to a alarm at a bank in the early hours of the morning (I'll try to remember the facts the best I can) - I believe around 3 a.m. A number of officers entered the premises and cornered a girl inside who was also high on drugs. They finally subdued her on the floor and in the process of trying to cuff her, she broke loose and had a utility type razor knife which she tried to slice an officer with - mind you, if she had hit his carotid artery in the close quarters they were in with her - the officer could have been killed or maimed for life. As a result, an officer drew his weapon and shot her - with the result of her death. If I remember right, it was ruled a clean and justified shooting by the DA. However - since she was a minority - it soon became blown out of proportion with even a preacher (I believe he was from a church in Lansing) who started making charges that it was an unjustified shooting - excessive force - played the minority card, etc.

Yes, the shootings are unfortunate and we all feel sad about them - but in the end, it wasn't the guns that killed - it was the individual behind them. I won't even get started on that. My point is - if someone attacks you and intends to do you great bodily harm and you fear for your life - it matters little if they are armed with a gun, a knife, a lug wrench, a ball bat or even an automobile - the end results are the same - you could end up dead. Yes, it would be nice if there was a LE officer right there to handle it so you wouldn't have to - but the chances of that are pretty bill. (This is not meant as a criticism of LE.) Unfortunately - they will eventually get involved in the situation - after the fact when they have to sort out what happened - and by then, it's too late for you unless you come out on top.
__________________
If a pair of '51 Navies were good enough for Billy Hickok, then a single Navy on my right hip is good enough for me . . . besides . . . I'm probably only half as good as he was anyways. Hiram's Rangers Badge #63
bedbugbilly is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 07:40 PM   #28
SgtLumpy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2013
Posts: 779
Quote:
there's no denying the negative trend towards gun ownership
I'm not seeing a NEGATIVE trend in the least. Guns are flying off the shelves where I am. It's clearly a POSITIVE trend out here in the West.

Quote:
And if duty to retreat laws get much stricter
I'm not seeing that either. They're getting LESS strict, more reasonable. At least they are where I'm at.

In my state, Arizona, roughly 3% of the population is a CCW permit holder. That's a lot of people considering a permit is NOT required to carry either open or concealed in this state. We do not have a duty to retreat in AZ.

Are the trends REALLY going the opposite way there where you live?


Sgt Lumpy - n0eq
SgtLumpy is offline  
Old January 12, 2013, 10:11 PM   #29
jason_iowa
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2011
Posts: 686
No it has not changed my attitude towards carrying.
jason_iowa is offline  
Old January 13, 2013, 01:49 PM   #30
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 976
The news media is speculating that Obama will use Executive Orders to initiate gun control. Our carry philosophy can more than change.

In the era of WWII hysteria FDR’s Executive Order 9066 directed the internment of more than 120,000 Japanese Americans, many of whom were U.S. citizens.

We are in the midst of our own hysteria. The anti-gun hysteria.

And we are the targets
dajowi is offline  
Old January 14, 2013, 12:48 AM   #31
kilimanjaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 1,859
Just published here were County statistics on CCW, no addresses, just numbers. 5% of the County Seat, 1% my town, countywide about 3% of population are CCW permittees. I'll hazard that works out to about 5-10% of the adult population, and perhaps 15% of the adult population who would be allowed to carry a firearm in the first place.
kilimanjaro is online now  
Old January 14, 2013, 03:19 AM   #32
peacefulgary
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 524
Quote:
Would that change the type of handgun you carry? Knowing that the only time you would ever be justified in using it would be against an attacker who is also armed with a firearm, and not a knife, or club, or other weapon.
The very notion is just silly.

Suppose my 72 year old mother was attacked by two 20 year old thugs....what jury would say she wasn't justified using a handgun just because the two 20 year olds didn't have a firearm?
peacefulgary is offline  
Old January 19, 2013, 12:17 AM   #33
SFsc616171
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2011
Location: "In the swamps of Montana" with the gators
Posts: 84
Carry philosophy changing with the times?

You do that, and you let the "buzzards" win!

If my life, or the life of the next two most precious human beings, are being threatened with our safety and/or lives, it is the THUG that chose the time, the day, the moment, and the place, to cross paths, not mine.

All this stuff, brazens the THUG, in the media's ATTEMPT, to cower Americans into THEIR desired trains of thought!

That won't work with this ol' sarge!
SFsc616171 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.07855 seconds with 9 queries