A scenario. It happened to me today.

[Joven]

I'm in a small retail candy & gifts type store with my family which happens to be next to a liquor store in a strip mall type shopping center. Through the wall we can hear a lot of yelling from the liquor store, a few seconds later the door flies open and man comes in yelling that he hates cops, we better watch out for the NAACP, what the hell is your problem, what kind of crap are you selling here, not making any sense at all. It is like he is crazy.He is obvioulsly drunk and or stoned.
He is between my family and I and the door, there is only one clerk who is scarred s.less. I am carrying, but do not have any non lethal weapons, i.e. pepper spray, baton, etc.
As quick as he came in and wreaked havoc, he left. We got plate number and called P.D. etc.
All turned out OK but it was definitely scary especially for the kids.
I said nothing to this guy, and I didn't take my eyes off him. I placed myself between him and my family and was ready to draw if i needed to.
My question is this; what if he would have physically assaulted me with out any weapons, fists, feet whatever. Would I have to fight him hand to hand? At what point could I draw and fire? In Texas, I believe you have the right to defend yourself with lethal force if being attacked. I remeber a case years ago where a CHL got into a fender bender, the other person started punching him through his open window, he drew and fired and was not charged. The reasoning was that he was unable to retreat because he was stuck in traffic and he did not have to sit there and take a beating.
At what point would you draw your weapon?

[springmom]

...in your class? You probably know the answer to this if you were listening during that part of the day.

You can use lethal force when you reasonably believe that your life or the life of another is in danger, when your property is in danger (including of being stolen) and to prevent somebody else from doing something heinous (that's not the legalese, and IANAL and never want to be but that sums it up).

Go back and re-read the statutes. You need to know them better, I think.

If you're sort of also asking what would we have done....

I would have drawn. Because he was not showing a weapon I would not have fired, but I would have told him to get out (probably not that cleanly, either). He didn't need to be shot but you really didn't know that, and by the time this yahoo would have done something bad, you would have been at quite a disadvantage. What if he'd grabbed one of your kids? If you'd already drawn you'd have been able to shoot BEFORE HE SUCCEEDED; but as it was, you let HIM control the situation.

I am no tactician, but I'm sort of fierce about my family, and I'm not going to let anybody threaten them, or engage me in a fistfight either. We carry the guns we do for self-defense. Use it for that.

Springmom

[Joven]

Springmom,

I understand completely where you are coming from but,
If I would have shot this guy I wouldn't I be in jail for murder?

and you can and will lose your CHL for brandishing which is what you described.

I think the ideal situation would have been to have pepper spray or a non lethal atlernative.

[trooper3385]

"I would have drawn???" I think someone needs to have there CHL revoked until they can fully understand the law, springmom. At what point was there a threat of serious bodily injury or death. The man was yelling. Obviously the man is mentally unstable. Why don't we draw and point a weapon at someone thats lost there top. That just doesn't make sense. I've been in the Texas Highway Patrol for several years and have learned, that in most situations, you can talk your way out of it without having to use or threaten to use physical force. Not in every situation, but most. You still have to been on your toes and ready to react. At this point, the man had not violated any laws. Yes, he's crazy and needs to be taken off the streets. The only laws that would have been violated were you drawing a weapon. Call 911, back you and your family up so not to make the guy feel threatened, and try to calm the man down and ask him to leave would be the smart thing to do. If the man gets violent, then thats a different situation. This man did exactly what he should have done. He kept his eyes on him and did not threaten the guy in anyway. The guy turned around and walked out. I would bet money that if he had drawn and pointed a weapon at him, it would have a totally different ending. You have someone that is obviously paranoid, like this guy was, and you point a gun at him, he's going to attack you. Use your brains first to try to get out of a situation.

[coolridelude]

You can use lethal force when you reasonably believe that your life or the life of another is in danger, when your property is in danger (including of being stolen) and to prevent somebody else from doing something heinous (that's not the legalese, and IANAL and never want to be but that sums it up).

if the clerk was scared then he was in fear for his life, maybe not that he might die but that he might get hurt.

now as for drawing your weapon springmom and trooper bring in good points.

if springmom felt threatend then i think she is justified in drawing. i don't have a ccw. but i use to know the person that use to teach it, he still does but it has been a couple of years since i have talk to him. so he would tell me what he taught in class never had the money to take the class.

trooper you know the law better because you worked for the Texas highway patrol. you have more experience with stuff like this.

i know that since i don't have a ccw then my opinion might notbe worth anything but is is alright.

i am always willing to hear all sides.

[Sir William]

Change the setting/scene. Knife/cutlery shop. If the MD reached for a knife, triple tap. Imminent threat of life or limb or defense of another-children. In a Sees candy shop? Watch and call 911. What is he able to use for a weapon, a peppermint log? It boils down to the reasonable man theory. If he had snatched up a glass display shelf? He is armed and presenting imminent threat to life or limb and you would be acting in defense of another-children. I think you did act reasonably and remained calm. That may have influenced his behaviour. Springmom, you may not be considered as brandishing/terroristic threatening. You are acting in defense of the children. The court would decide your fate IF a LEO even charged you.

[Garand Illusion]

In Colorado, at least, for "brandishing" there has to be an implied threat to the person being brandished. The lawyer who taught my advanced class said that if you're facing a possible threat it is not out of line to draw a weapon as a precaution to have it ready. If you don't point it at anybody and keep it low key, you're PROBABLY alright (never liked the probably part) and it's highly unlikely anyone would trie to pursue the charge.

Brandishing is meant to be used against someone agressively threatening someone by flashing their gun; not against someone preparing a weapon for use when another is being physically agressive.

Springmom has the advantage of being a woman. No jury is going to convict a woman of using lethal force against a male (assumably larger and stonrger) who is clearly nuts.

For me, though, as a large male ... unless I really thought he was planning on doing harm to my family, I would avoid drawing unless he showed a weapon. I'd rather exchange a few punches with someone while keeping my weapon in deep concealment.

If he gets past me and heads for the wife, of course, things change. Hopefully I still be capable of taking action.

[RsqVet]

Trooper -- you are a wise man, I wish more people realized what you have come to know, you guys who want to draw your ccw you have to realize, people like the one described are like dealing with a wild animal -- you want a firm attitude but not authoratarian or threatening, gentle handeling of the situation and every one goes home --

If you unholster your gun, no matter how discreetly there is a good leagal argument that that is a threat --- you are making ready to use it right? plus the practical fact of the matter is it will be percieved as a threat by the nut job --- what if instead of walking away he walks towards you taunting you to shoot --- now the situation in some lawyers eye might be that you and your actions percipitated the turn of events, which while it might not be your fault, it certainly evolved from your response.

[grimjaw]

I've been in the Texas Highway Patrol for several years and have learned, that in most situations, you can talk your way out of it without having to use or threaten to use physical force. Not in every situation, but most.

Shouldn't you include the fact that as a member of the THP you're allowed to carry openly? Your gun is already brandished, basically, so you don't have to threaten. I think that if I was in a confrontation with someone that I knew had a gun, I might be a little more friendly, too. It's not that I disagree with your point, it's just your experience might be a little different than myself.

I wouldn't have drawn in the specific case mentioned, either, but neither do I think I would have been able to talk the person down if he threatened me. I've not been trained to do so, nor have I had experience in confronting thugs. So what does that leave me with? Avoid the situation if at all possible, contact authorities if there is time, and when all else fails, hope I brought enough gun.

jmm

[Glock 31]

You did exactly the right thing. As long as it is not physical yet, there is no need to escalate the situation by introducing a gun into the mix. When it finally comes to blows, then draw and fire. Your family is in the building with you and you have no means of escape from how it sounds. If it means you have to take a punch or two to justify shooting him then do so.

Also consider disparity of force. If he is bigger than you, or is obviously trained in lethal tactics or martial arts, or there are more of "them" than there are of you, or he is obviously drunk, under the influence, or mentally altered, these are all good justifications to lethal force. You have to decide how much pain and humiliation you are willing to take before using lethal force.

But based on what you described, I would have drawn and ordered him out of the building or on to the ground. If he complies great, if not, well that's his tough luck. Afterall, if you have a gun pointed at him, and he sees it, and still comes at you. That right there tells you something is not right with him. Plus it becomes your responsibility to shoot him. If he gets ahold of your gun and uses it on someone else, it could come back to bite you in the ass.

[XavierBreath]

This man sounds like he was mentally ill, or on drugs.

I have dealt with potentially violent people of this type fairly frequently as a professional. An irrational person is totally unpredictable. As a bystander, which is what you were, the one thing you do NOT want to do is become the focus of their attention. The best way to focus their attention on you is to pull a gun and point it at them. Chances are, you will then find yourself with an irrational person who you MUST shoot to protect yourself. A gun is only a deterrent against rational people.

So what do you do? Be ready to draw and use your weapon if necessary. This is when pocket carry is extremely handy, since you can discreetly have a hand on your weapon. Then.....
#1. Protect family.....don't let them freeze. Tell them what to do, get them out of sight, but discreetly. Even that action can create an attention focus. Be careful not to stare or challenge the deranged person.
#2. Refocus the person's attention. Scream, and point to something in the distance, outside of the store, and your lunatic will look, and then go to investigate like a bird seeing something shiney on the ground. Meanwhile you call law enforcement. They will arrive with enough people to subdue him, and restrain him.

[rezmedic54]

Most have had very good ideas and I agree with most of them. But the whole key to all this is that a reasonable person put in the same surcomstances would do the same thing. You all assumed he had no weapons but could his hand have been those weapons, you don't know his level of training he might have been a black belt or had street fighting training.Here in Az you can only shoot for 2 reasons and 2 reasons only you are in fear for your life or grevous body harm. And the key is to be able to articulate this. As far as I know as a law man you sometimes have to talk to these people as a civilian you don't you just have to feel that a reasonable person would do the same thing. Be Safe Out There. Just my 2 cents. Thanks , Kurt

[USP45usp]

An irrational person is totally unpredictable.

and

people like the one described are like dealing with a wild animal

Wayne

[Derius_T]

springmom wrote:

I would have drawn. Because he was not showing a weapon I would not have fired, but I would have told him to get out (probably not that cleanly, either). He didn't need to be shot but you really didn't know that, and by the time this yahoo would have done something bad, you would have been at quite a disadvantage.

Are you serious? I think you need to turn in your permit before you get someone else, or yourself killed. You CANNOT draw unless you are in serious threat of death. This guy threatened you in no way whatsoever, other than maybe making you wet yourself, and you pull a gun!? So you brandish your weapon and yell threatening, nasty stuff at the clearly unstable guy, and you CAUSE the situation to get worse. He rushes you and you shoot him, or he pulls out his own gun and kills someone before you get him? Or he leaves, goes out to his car, and comes back to spray down the front of the store with HIS gun? And GUESS WHAT? YOU just caused all that by acting like joe hardass. YOU are at fault, and you WILL go to jail. After all, the guy probably would have just blew off steam and left........oh wait.....thats what he did.....

[springmom]

Let me clarify before I take everybody's advice and 'turn in my permit'.

I would not be ABLE to physically engage ANYBODY. I'm disabled, and for ME, in THAT situation, I would have been in fear of my life. I wouldn't have POINTED IT AT HIM. I wouldn't have SHOT him. But I would have been in a position in which my gun, which is usually either IN MY PURSE or IN MY WAISTBAND UNDER MY TEE-SHIRT would NOT have been in deep concealment and essentially UNAVAILABLE. I said NOTHING about BRANDISHING, Darius. I said nothing about shouting ANYTHING. All I said was that I would have drawn my weapon, because if he had escalated, he would have done so before we could have MOVED, let alone REACTED.

It would have taken split seconds for this guy to have pulled a gun and fired, had he had one. Would I have been able to engage and prevent myself from getting killed if I had NOT gotten the gun to where it was usable???? I don't think so. I am thrilled that Jovan got himself, the clerk, and his family out of this safely, but unless he carries such and is trained such that he has lightening-fast reflexes, that guy could have pulled AND FIRED before he could have done jack squat.

You guys who are DPS troopers and big healthy strong men, no, YOU would have been drawing prematurely. However, as a disabled woman who couldn't run if there were a pack of pit bulls chasing me, THE ANSWER IS DIFFERENT.

Mr. Trooper, I hope that if you ever go on a call where a disabled woman drew her handgun before you, a big healthy man would have, I hope you have more empathy and sense for the woman who might very sensibly have feared for her life than you show here.

I answered for ME, for what would have been the case with ME in that situation. Jeez.

Springmom who has no INTENTION of "turning in her CHL" because of you all.

[Derius_T]

Springmom

I would not be ABLE to physically engage ANYBODY. I'm disabled, and for ME, in THAT situation, I would have been in fear of my life. I wouldn't have POINTED IT AT HIM. I wouldn't have SHOT him. But I would have been in a position in which my gun, which is usually either IN MY PURSE or IN MY WAISTBAND UNDER MY TEE-SHIRT would NOT have been in deep concealment and essentially UNAVAILABLE. I said NOTHING about BRANDISHING, Darius. I said nothing about shouting ANYTHING. All I said was that I would have drawn my weapon, because if he had escalated, he would have done so before we could have MOVED, let alone REACTED.

I beg to differ. Your words were:

I would have drawn. Because he was not showing a weapon I would not have fired, but I would have told him to get out (probably not that cleanly, either). He didn't need to be shot but you really didn't know that, and by the time this yahoo would have done something bad, you would have been at quite a disadvantage. What if he'd grabbed one of your kids? If you'd already drawn you'd have been able to shoot BEFORE HE SUCCEEDED; but as it was, you let HIM control the situation.

So you did say you would draw first, even though it was very clear he had no weapon. That immediately violates the law. You are in the wrong, in effect brandishing, and the law would nail you for it. Black and white, plain and simple.

And with your gun out, you would have ordered him to get out, probly not that cleanly either, which means you have drawn a gun, then exchanged harsh words. You felt the need to CONTROL the situation. You used your firearm to threaten, and exert your authority, to CONTROL a situation. This is strictly against all laws. You in effect, acted in a much more aggressive manner than he did. You drew a gun and started giving orders. You were in the wrong. Disabled or not. You seriously need to rethink your stance before you get yourself in trouble....

[springmom]

.....for the enlightenment.

I hope you are never in my situation, because you obviously have no clue what it is like. In this situation, I would have been at the mercy of this loony had he attacked. Get that through your head. Jovan didn't know the ending of the situation when he was in it. You do. So you are answering based on what ENDED UP happening...ok...I am answering based on what I would have done AT THE MOMENT.

You need to know the law in Texas before you post absolute statements on what would or would not have been the legal outcome. Drawing first is not against the law. He did not "obviously" not have a weapon...he just hadn't SHOWN a weapon. For all we know, he DID have a weapon, he just didn't remember to use it or didn't want to. We can't say. And for me, in case you haven't ever read any of my posts, "not too cleanly" would have been:

"get the hell out of here."

Foul mouthed beyond words, I know. I'm sorry.

As for the rest:

You felt the need to CONTROL the situation. You used your firearm to threaten, and exert your authority, to CONTROL a situation. This is strictly against all laws. You in effect, acted in a much more aggressive manner than he did. You drew a gun and started giving orders. You were in the wrong. Disabled or not. You seriously need to rethink your stance before you get yourself in trouble....

You don't know what I would be feeling, Dr. Freud. Anybody who is defending themselves is, essentially, regaining control of a situation that has spiraled dangerously out of control. D'uh. I don't have authority, I wouldn't try to exert authority I don't have... but I have a RESPONSIBILITY to protect myself and my children and the law gives me the RIGHT to protect others who are in danger of physical harm.

One more time: I would have drawn the gun out of my waistband holder and discreetly held it so that it was ready but NOT BRANDISHING and told him to get out. That is pretending for the moment that I don't know the end of the scenario as it was presented, that's all. No way, in a tiny little candy shop with this guy maybe 15 feet away, that I COULD have drawn, decocked, come to ready and fired in time otherwise. Disabled or not.

The disability point is that a big wild crazy male is a disparity in force by definition FOR ME. Read that again, Derius; FOR ME. Not for you, not for Jovan, not for the men on this list. FOR ME.

The point of this subforum is to think through tactics and training. The answers are NOT IDENTICAL FOR ALL PEOPLE.

Springmom, who is getting disgusted with this

[Dwight55]

FWIW, Springmom, . . . I'm in your corner. Those who have really good health have no ability to see through the eyes of the disabled (Springmom) or those who have a seriously impaired ability to go one on one with much of anyone (speaking mainly of myself).

Given the situation, my wife and children (it would be grandkids for me) perhaps at risk, . . . yes, . . . I would have herded them behind me, putting a row of something between me and the BG, . . . and very quietly and unasumedly, . . . I would have unholstered, . . . and covered it with my off arm as though I had gas or heartburn. I would not have said anything to him, but my eyes would have followed him until he left or escalated the situation seriously.

If he, on his own, escalates the situation, . . . I am in a better position to be able to defend the clerk, another customer, or my family. If he leaves, . . . re-holster, . . . buy some chocolate, . . . go home, . . . sit down, . . . and enjoy being alive.

There is a doctrine out there that deals with the disparity of force of the combatants, . . . and with my limitations, . . . I'm behind the 8 ball before the break. I believe Springmom was preaching that same sermon.

May God bless,
Dwight

[MountainJoe]

I think both sides have valid points. Like the Trooper, most healthy adult males would be able to go hand-to-hand with the guy at least long enough for the clerk, kids, or whoever else to escape. I am in good health, but only 5'8" and about 160. I would literally have to "size up" the situation to assess the disparity of force. If the guy was 6'5" and 250 I would hesitate to go up against him without some kind of weapon, but I would look for something else (chair, broom handle, whatever) rather than going to a gun, unless he produced a weapon.

In my case I would probably have had pepper spray on me and I would have taken that out of my pocket and ordered him to leave. If he doesn't leave he gets it in the face. Without the pepper spray, I would reach into my pocket or reach for my holster (depending on what and how I am carrying) and put my hand on my weapon for quicker access, but would not actually draw it unless the guy produced a weapon or made a move to threaten me or someone else. In that case it is a split second judgment call as to the seriousness and proximity of the threat. If I think any of the good guys (especially a kid) are going to get seriously hurt or killed, I draw and fire.

HOWEVER, the answers to the above depend greatly on my size and physical shape. If I am, say, a 5'2" 110 pound woman (or my size but disabled) there is a much greater disparity of physical force and I might be quicker to go for the gun, feeling that I am already in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. (That's the legal requirement for use of deadly force in Tennessee, where I live, anyway.)

P.S. to explain that last part, in my HCP class the question of course came up as to what constitutes serious bodily harm. The instructor said (I paraphrase) that merely being punched in the nose or "getting your butt kicked" did not meet that standard. However, if you reasonably believe that the disparity of force is such that the guy could kill you or put you in the hospital with his bare hands/feet, in other words if he is a whole lot bigger than you or you know he has advanced martial arts training or some similar reason, that would weigh heavily (no pun intended) in your favor if it ever went to court.

[SamD]

It all comes down to what you and your attorney can convince the jury of.

Proper response really depends on the individuals involved. I can't wouldn't gt away with firing in Joven's situation. i look like I can handle myself and won't get much sympathy from a jury. Springmom may be a 84 lb "blowaway in the breeze" type and disparity of force comes into play(along with sympathy and yes that does count). Ya pays yer dime and takes your chances, that's how life works.

Sam

[BillCA]

Good discussion here and we've touched on something that's important to a good many people -- physical limitations.

Springmom's limitations may prevent her from even defending herself against a hearty shove. Others may have age-related limitiations or physical conditions that preclude rapid movement (retreat, running away, etc.) or the ability to engage with bare knuckles.

Arthritis in the knees, a bad back, asthmatic or other conditions can have a serious implication on one's tactics and procedures. I used to know one man who was confined to a wheelchair who *gasp* carried illegally in CA after being victimized three times (twice having his chair stolen). The best advice cops could give him was to get a companion for public travels. Yeah, right.

While I would not have drawn in the scenario mentioned, I don't think it's unreasonable that some others might put their hand on their pistol or discretely position it behind their leg or back. The two factors here are the presence of the family and any particular physical limitations the CHL holder has.

Just for a moment, think about having your weak arm in a sling after surgery, or perhaps wearing a cast on your right foot and still having to use a crutch. Or it could be much simpler -- suffering a nasty cold or flu which has made you weak and tired. In these situations your ability to react to a threat will be vastly different. You're likely to change your tactics accordingly.

[springmom]

Arthritis in the knees, a bad back, asthmatic or other conditions can have a serious implication on one's tactics and procedures. I used to know one man who was confined to a wheelchair who *gasp* carried illegally in CA after being victimized three times (twice having his chair stolen). The best advice cops could give him was to get a companion for public travels. Yeah, right.

While I would not have drawn in the scenario mentioned, I don't think it's unreasonable that some others might put their hand on their pistol or discretely position it behind their leg or back. The two factors here are the presence of the family and any particular physical limitations the CHL holder has.

Right. A hearty shove can break a bone for me. No joke. I fell on my mother in law's tennis court years ago (many years' less prednisone to thin my bones, many years' less muscle wasting) and broke my ankle in three places. I fell at my daughter's wedding and managed to derange my right hip such that it is still in need of cortisone shots into the joint and constant pain management. I fell a couple of years ago walking my dogs and I still have intermittent bleeding in my right knee and cannot place any weight on it at all. (Hm. There seems to be a common thread here. So should I take on a BG hand to hand, guys??? )

I have asthma, so pepper spray might do a lot more damage to ME than to anybody else The BG can get over pepper spray while I'm laying on the floor with my bronchii closed up and suffocating.

Disparity of force is different for everybody. Dwight is correct: that is what I was trying to say but I thank him, and you others, who have obviously said it better.

Springmom, who will avoid posting late at night anymore so as to try to be more clear, measured, and judicious in her language so as to communicate more effectively

[Joven]

So it is hard to say what you would do and how things "felt". I got the sense that this guy was on the edge and I did not want to do anything to push him over the edge, nobody did and nobody spoke a word to this guy which I think is a good thing. I "felt" that this guy was crazy and unpredictable but I was in no way justified (IMO) in pulling a weapon, which I felt would have escalated the situation to possibly him either attacking me or pulling a gun. The last thing I wanted was to escalate the situation in any way and put my family in the line of fire. Remember they were directly behind me. My first concern when he left was that he was going to his car to get an AK or something.

On a lighter note I forgot something else this nut said; he said "watch out for UT, USC!" Refering the upcoming Rose bowl prospects. Really weird.

[springmom]

No, Jovan:

On a lighter note I forgot something else this nut said; he said "watch out for UT, USC!" Refering the upcoming Rose bowl prospects. Really weird.

Clearly, the man had ONE MOMENT OF UTTER CLARITY!!!! Maybe he's a prophet!!!!!!

Seriously, I'm glad it came out well, and I shouldn't have "second guessed" you, I expect. I was just thinking out loud (if that's what you can call the internet) about that situation and what I might do. I hope I didn't offend you.

Thanks for posting the event, and I am glad beyond words that you and your family AND the clerk are okay.

HOOK 'EM HORNS!!!!!!!!

Springmom

[Joven]

Springmom; no offense taken. No harm no foul.
Cheers.