Drawing but NOT Firing in Self Defense

[desibaba]

Im in florida also and say in the middle of the night I hear sounds in my garage. Go there and see a man trying to steal my property. Can I aim and keep my gun pointed at him until the police arrive?

[kilimanjaro]

You can detain him for the police, yes.

Hopefully, he will become compliant and docile, and not attack you or appear to reach for a weapon.

[jnichols2]

I definitely agree that the best course of action is a hasty retreat.
It's not going to be as easy at 68, with mild COPD. Maybe impossible.
But it's still the desired way out.

I try to avoid verbal altercations. Like the plague if I am carrying.

I'm willing to take a beating rather than use my gun, if I feel it's only going to be a beating. But that gets dangerous at my age. Deciding on a split second could be a difficult choice indeed. I hope I never have to make that choice.

As for the man leaving my garage or house with my belongings, he's welcome to them. I have insurance, and if he's leaving he's no threat to me.

With that said, I often feel the law is simply stacked against me if I'm ever forced to defend myself.

Too often, I see the legal opinion to just let the court sort it out. Sometimes that's the right way. But ruining someone's life so you don't have to do your job, or to advance your job, is just wrong.

I can't defend George Zimmerman as a person, but he didn't deserve what was done to him for political reasons.

I also remember a time when using your gun to scare a bad guy off was treated differently. I suspect out society was more willing to make a judgement in the interest of judgement.

[g.willikers]

I'm willing to take a beating rather than use my gun, if I feel it's only going to be a beating.

What is there about the concept of self defense that eludes you?

I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them - John Wayne from the "The Shootist."

[qkarl]

If someone wants to take a beating let them take a beating, just don't push for laws that force other people to have to take a beating too. We're not all tough, resilient studs.

[tangolima]

The laws are already here, for some time. Not quite require people to take a beating, but verbal assault most likely.

Different times. You can't shoot someone because he insulted you. Self defense is a noble right, but it is also a terrible burdon to bear.

Turn the other cheek, the man said. There is wisdom in that teaching.

-TL

[kilimanjaro]

Having boxed two years in college, I'm pretty sure I can still take a punch, but there is no way a sixty-year-old can take a beating the way someone could at twenty.

And, if you are on the ground, you can be kicked to death in moments, just one good shot is all it will take to put you into permanent care or kill you. Don't think for one moment the assailant is going to defer to your age or give you a break for being knocked down.

[Sharkbite]

The often overlooked part of "taking a beating" is that it IS an armed confrontation.

YOU have the gun right now, but during that "beating" he could very easily take that gun from you.

In every encounter im in, there IS a gun involved. Mine.

[adamBomb]

Every state is very different on this issue. All in all, its a grey area and one that is a case by case basis even though its usually defined by law. Dont pull your gun out unless you believe your life (or someone elses) is being threatened. If you can answer yes to the question 'was a life being threatened' then its probably reasonable to pull out and use your gun. Each case is different and each situation is different so there is no right answer unless you describe a situation...and even then the police/judge may take it differently.

[Brit]

Taking a beating? No, not happening.

I have broken noses, ribs, arms, jaws, cheek bones, eye sockets.
With feet, hands, head butt (Liverpool Kiss) in a five year period as a Bouncer in Liverpool UK.

Plus not working. All this in the early 1960s.

Now as an old chap, no, I am not taking any kind of a beating, thank you.

Lots of people have been killed with a punch in the throat. Or a fall on steps, stairs.

The good news is, I do not operate in the kind of places that this is a common occurrence anymore, thank the Lord.

[K_Mac]

I can, and have walked away from confrontation to avoid violence. If that is not a possibility then the criteria for me is simple; am I or those in my care in danger of great bodily harm or death? If yes, whether presenting a weapon stops the attack or shots are fired, I will then report the incident to police if I'm able. These are not two different situations. They are the same, with different outcomes. The endgame is to stop the attack. If that is accomplished without firing a shot, great. The decision to face the consequences of my actions is made every time I leave the house.

Yes, I know that life or death decisions that have to be made in the blink of an eye are not really simple. That is why we train to assess and react skillfully and wisely. If that doesn't make you a little uncomfortable, you're not paying attention in my opinion.

[pnac]

"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem is a nail" or something to that effect. Look at less lethal options to use before your carry weapon, it might end the confrontation or ,at least, buy you some time or "working room".

[SailingOnBy]

Which I understand. And Florida law is obviously different than NY. Personally? I'm never going to exit a vehicle. I'm not a cop. A CCW doesn't make me one. Period.

It makes me feel good seeing rationale like this. This type of thinking keeps gun owners out of trouble and out of the anti gunners spotlight.

Also yeah, altercation =/= justified use of deadly force. Even if you're not legally obligated to retreat... just get out of the situation. Might hurt your pride but hey, at least you won't screw up your life for shooting someone.

So this is in one of those weird brackets where you COULD have a legitimate fear for your life,

Never use "could" as justification to use or even draw your weapon. Could leads good guys straight to jail. Think more along the lines of "definitely".

And this is also bearing in mind that bearing a weapon or even stating that you are armed might be enough be considered an escalation.

There's no might here. It is in every way shape and form an escalation.

[44 AMP]

I'll agree that "less lethal" options are something to be carefully considered. HOWEVER, DO NOT make the mistake of thinking anything that goes in a gun is not lethal. It is.

People have been killed by blanks! Ok, it takes just the right conditions, but it has happened.

Rubber bullets, and all the things that are sometimes called "less lethal" are really "Less likely to be lethal". They all can kill, when things go just "right" (or wrong, from the other point of view).

Another thing is the use of "deadly force", and how different places regard it. IF it comes out of a gun, the law may regard it as deadly force, no matter what it is.

OR, if it is "less lethal" ammo, you might find yourself in the legal can of worms that opens with "you chose "less lethal" ammo, because you didn't believe deadly force was justified"...and if you don't believe deadly force is justified, you are not justified in shooting, ...etc....

So your claim of self defense becomes charges against YOU for assault!

Stranger things have happened...

[Spats McGee]

In 2013 (I think it was), I went to the NRA convention in Houston. While there, I attended a talk given by Rob Pincus, who said something that has always stuck with me. To paraphrase, because I cannot remember it accurately enough to quote: Don't ask, "can I shoot?" That's the wrong question. What you should ask is, "Do I have to shoot?"

[Jim Watson]

I would hope that "brandishing" a gun to (successfully) repulse an assailant would be viewed as a more restrained level of self defense.
I would definitely be the first to call the police no matter how far an armed encounter went.

[adamBomb]

So this is in one of those weird brackets where you COULD have a legitimate fear for your life, but if the guy says "I am going to kick your blank" and if you end up in fear and draw your weapon, a better lawyer might get YOU convicted. And this is also bearing in mind that bearing a weapon or even stating that you are armed might be enough be considered an escalation.

I spoke to a sheriff in NC about this exact situation and in NC is a grey area. He said if the guy was much bigger than me I would probably be justified or it was a guy/girl situation. He said if the guy was my size I would have a really tough time justifying I needed a gun to the police unless the guy had a weapon or said he was going to kill me or something like that. I hate these situations. I will never pull my gun unless I have no other options and fear for my life.

[thallub]

The state of Oklahoma calls it "brandishing".

TITLE 21 § 1279 MISDEMEANOR POINTING A FIREARM

Except for an act of self-defense, it shall be unlawful for any person to point any pistol or any other deadly weapon whether loaded or not, at any other person or persons.

So you draw the gun and the guy hreatening you runs away. That is the desired outcome.

[Sharkbite]

I'll agree that "less lethal" options are something to be carefully considered. HOWEVER, DO NOT make the mistake of thinking anything that goes in a gun is not lethal. It is.

People have been killed by blanks! Ok, it takes just the right conditions, but it has happened.

Rubber bullets, and all the things that are sometimes called "less lethal" are really "Less likely to be lethal". They all can kill, when things go just "right" (or wrong, from the other point of view).

Another thing is the use of "deadly force", and how different places regard it. IF it comes out of a gun, the law may regard it as deadly force, no matter what it is.

OR, if it is "less lethal" ammo, you might find yourself in the legal can of worms that opens with "you chose "less lethal" ammo, because you didn't believe deadly force was justified"...and if you don't believe deadly force is justified, you are not justified in shooting, ...etc....

So your claim of self defense becomes charges against YOU for assault!

Stranger things have happened...

Im pretty sure the "less lethal" options in mind were along the lines of OC (pepperspray) or a TASER. Something other then the pistol.

[pnac]

Bingo, Sharkbite.

[desibaba]

Im sure even though guys like George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson didnt go to prison their lives on a practical level are still ruined. Cant go out to eat anywhere, get a job, or even get noticed without constantly looking over your shoulder. Who wants to live like that?

[turkeestalker]

if the guy was my size I would have a really tough time justifying I needed a gun

Just to clarify my situation that I described. This guy isn't much taller than me, maybe 2 inches but I would bet that he outweighs me by at least 50 pounds and is almost 10 years younger.

He is a trainer and promoter of MMA fighters. Not sure about the rest of you but the one common trait that I can attribute to people that I've known that were wrapped up in MMA fighting, is that they were fairly volatile, aggressive, and unpredictable personalities. Nothing personal, just my observation.

Had he succeeded in dragging me through the window of my service van, I am betting I'd have been toast pretty much immediately, and I doubt he'd have practiced any self restraint.

I've never shared that story here or on any other forum, I'm not exactly proud of it. I think I've even gone as far as to say that I'd never pulled my DC on anyone in self defense in another posting here. I may not have pointed it at him, but I did produce it. Honestly I guess there's not much difference.

If I ever found myself in a similar situation, I don't think I'd hesitate to produce my DC again whether I'm proud of it or not. I just hope that if I feel compelled to produce it, I don't actually have to pull the trigger.

[Sharkbite]

What you describe is the CLASSIC Disparity of force situation.

Larger, younger, more trained (and you knew that at the time of the incident) aggressor.

[trucker3573]

This seems like a really really gray line. I would think drawing a weapon based on threat and no action would never be a good thing. Heck I wonder if you would necessarily be in the right if you shot someone who started physically assualting you with no weapons other than their fists??? At what point in that scenario, assuming you were not aggressive in any manner, would you have the right to use deadly force??

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by trucker3573

This seems like a really really gray line....

The whole area of claiming that you were justified in threatening or committing an intentional act of violence against another person is very much a gray area.

See post 23 for an overview of the law on the use of force in self defense.