The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old September 25, 2005, 10:10 AM   #26
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
Quote:
Guy breaking into my neighbors car. If I think I can take him, I'm perfectly within my rights to tackle his butt to the ground and hold him in a headlock until the police arrive. Tackling somebody and holding them in a headlock is physical force, not deadly force. Police give me a slap on the back and take the guy in.

If the guy is too big to tackle, I have every right to come up near him and yell at him that I'm calling the cops. In this latter situation ... I have been told by a lawyer that if I am carrying a weapon, it would be considered prudent and NOT brandishing to have that weapon unholstered. The lawyer even said I could point it at the BG, even though I have no right to fire, though I doubt I'd do that myself.

If the BG responds to me with agressive force that I believe to be life endangering I have as much right to fire as if he had attacked me out of the blue.
Very doubtful, considering YOU STARTED the altercation. Now a guy that was trying to steal a car is dead. He wasn't armed, he wasn't holding anybody up, you shot him period. That's what the prosection is going to say infront of the jury. The law isn't so cut and dry, your life is going to be in the hands of 12 people. You could have retreated, easily. You didn't even have to retreat because you weren't being threatened in the first place. You choose to involve yourself in a situation which you engaged. Jesus, where did you guys get your ccw permits at?
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 12:07 PM   #27
Model520Fan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Location: PDR of MA
Posts: 164
Quote:
Also, as far as cocking the revolver, I would only do that if I HAD to approach the criminal, and I would secure my thumb over the hammar and my index finger away from the trigger.
You're not thinking this out at all. First off, you DON'T have to approach the BG.

Cocked revolver, with your thumb over the hammer? ? ? ! ?

Is this a SAA, and you're not telling us?

Are you making this up as you go along? It certainly sounds like it.

A well-trained person would most likely not cock the gun AT ALL. Under certain circumstances, a well-trained person MIGHT cock the gun and fire it with the intention of dropping the BG to the ground, This would quite possibly involve killing him.

I recommend Massad Ayoob's LFI-1 course. At the very least, purchase and read his In the Gravest Extreme.
Model520Fan is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 12:37 PM   #28
BerettaCougar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,226
One of my first classes was home defense and we went over this.

Not sopposed to search them. keep them at gun point, finger off trigger.
The BG on the floor face down...not to a side, but DOWN, lips on the floor, arms and legs spread wide open.

And you call 911 for BU, or yell as loud as you can for help.

As a side note, if you catch them IN your house, they (BG) shouldnt be alive anymore.
BerettaCougar is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 12:39 PM   #29
BerettaCougar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,226
Quote:
Guy breaking into my neighbors car. If I think I can take him, I'm perfectly within my rights to tackle his butt to the ground and hold him in a headlock until the police arrive.
I was told by a trainer that using the headlock could be seen as attempted murder if you dont kill the person.
BerettaCougar is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 12:43 PM   #30
stephen426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 2,868
Quote:
Suppose I catch a perpetrator breaking into my house, car, robbing my neighbor or friend, holding me or them up with a gun or knife etc. and I pull my gun and tell him to put his hands over his head, kneel down, cross legs or spread his hands on the car, or whatever to get him under control. How do I approach him to search him?
If they are holding a gun or if they have a knife and are within 20 feet, I'd say shoot them. What if they turn around and try to shoot you? What if they grab the person you are trying to protect and use them as a human shield? What if they then tell you to drop the gun or else they will slit your friend's or neighbor's throat?

If there is no other person involved and I get the drop on the intruder, that is another story. If I see a gun and the person even tries to turn around and use it, I will shoot. If they surrender and toss the weapon away, I can't legally or morally shoot someone who is no longer a threat. In that case, I would have them lay face down with their fingers laced behind their head. I would then call the pollice. If they ran, then there isn't much you can do.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency!
stephen426 is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 01:12 PM   #31
L8sho2003
Junior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2005
Posts: 6
split second decisions

I once stopped a fleeing perp running down my block at gunpoint. I looked down the block and could see a cop chasing him through an alley. I got my G19 and grabbed the cordless phone, thinking I could direct backup to assist the officer. Apparently the perp had jumped a couple of fences and lost the officer. Next thing I know, I see a 7ft. tall, 350 pd. shadow with a gold tooth gleaming, running straight at me. The cop was a good 50 yds. behind and losing pace. I drew down on the perp and yelled "get on the ground M.F." a couple of times and he paused. The officer caught up some as the perp paused and the cop yelled "get down or he is going to shoot you". The enormous perp gets on the ground and begs "please don't shoot me, please!" The officer finally gets there and starts cuffing him while huffing and puffing "thank you..thank you" I don't know what this little 145 pound rookie cop would have done if I wouldn't have been there. He apparently thought the cop wouldn't shoot him, but he sure as hell wasn't sure about me. This is a memory I laugh about everytime I think about it. Cops...hehehehe
__________________
Rem 740 12 g. 10 rd. mag, folding stock
Glock G19 15 rd. mags
Charco Pug .44 Spl
Colt Challenger .22
NEF .308 Bull barrel/ 6x24 world class
NEF .17 Hornady/ 6x24 world class
NAA 22lr mini
Rem. 700 7mm Mag/ Leo vari-x III
Browning A-bolt .270/ Leo vari-x II
Rem. 740 .243/ Leo vari-x I
Marlin model 39, made in 1939
Hawken .50 cal
Too many hunting scatterguns to list!
L8sho2003 is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 01:23 PM   #32
Garand Illusion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,278
Quote:
Very doubtful, considering YOU STARTED the altercation. Now a guy that was trying to steal a car is dead. He wasn't armed, he wasn't holding anybody up, you shot him period. That's what the prosection is going to say infront of the jury. The law isn't so cut and dry, your life is going to be in the hands of 12 people. You could have retreated, easily. You didn't even have to retreat because you weren't being threatened in the first place. You choose to involve yourself in a situation which you engaged. Jesus, where did you guys get your ccw permits at?
We get our CCW permits from educated people -- like lawyers. People who know the law and what they're talking about.

As to whether a headlock is considered lethal force as another poster stated ... I don't know. But the cop who takes the guy in isn't going to care, and since the car thief is sitting there alive and unharmed I'm not worried about what a Colorado jury or DA will do (your state may be different).

In terms of this reply ... everything I said was correct. There is NO DUTY TO RETREAT in Colorado. You ARE allowed to used physical force to protect private property. If you are using LEGAL physical force to protect your property and the BG gets the upper hand and/or produces a weapon and you are in fear for your life, you can respond with deadly force and NOT be considered the one beginning the altercation.

Colorado is not a state that has totally neutered its citizens and left them incapable of protecting ourselves or our property. Of course we can't just pull out a gun and start blazing away at car thieves, but if physically able we can stop them.

Now ... if you try to take someone down and get your butt whupped, even if he's robbing your car, I'd guess you'd be unlikely to get a successful assault charge on him. But that's just a guess.
Garand Illusion is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 01:40 PM   #33
Doug.38PR
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2005
Posts: 3,298
Quote:
Very doubtful, considering YOU STARTED the altercation. Now a guy that was trying to steal a car is dead. He wasn't armed, he wasn't holding anybody up, you shot him period. That's what the prosection is going to say infront of the jury.
No. HE started it by violating me or my neighbor by trying to steal my or their property. Property IS worth risking your life for. You spent part of your life working for it, to pay for it, it cost you time, money, effort. Property of any kind is part of the fruit of your labor which you have the right to enjoy. When the criminal trys to steal it, he is violating your life and liberty.

As for calling the police, that is absurd. YOU are there now and have the means to stop him from commencing his act. By the time the police get there, that car and the BG are gone. They may NEVER get it back. They may find him and he may give them a chase putting dozens of other people in danger (including the officers). All of this would have been avoided if the problem (The problem being the Bad Guy) had been stopped right then and there before he was allowed to escape.

Going back to the cocking the revolver, I agree it is probably (alright definately) not a good idea to approach the criminal. But if I HAD to for whatever reason I am talking about cocking the gun and keeping my finger inside the trigger guard away from the trigger AND holding the hammer down with my thumb. That way, even if my nervous finger works its way to the other side of the guard to put enough pressure on the cocked trigger, I still have my thumb or forethumb holding down the hammer.
Why do this? Well, if for whatever reason (YES I am making this up, this is not a true story, it is a hypothetical situation. No it is not a SAA) if I should have to be within 5 feet of the BG it would keep him from being able to grab the gun and keep the cylinder from rotating preventing me from firing the gun. If the gun is cocked and hammer held down, I don't need to worry about the cylinder rotating, I just need to slip my thumb away from the hammer and BAM, I stop the gun struggle with a bullet in BG's chest.

Automatics are cocked when they are ready to go. You wouldn't approach a bad guy with a 1911 that was uncocked . Most other automatics are single action only when they are ready to fire. (excepting Sigs and Berrettas) Only differences is you can't really keep a hold of their hammer with your thumb. All you can do is keep your finger off the trigger. (which you should do until you're ready to fire) Seems to me an auto would be even more dangerous if it is that dangerous to cock the gun.
Doug.38PR is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 02:21 PM   #34
aspen1964
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2005
Posts: 1,030
Amen..Doug..which is why I railed so badly on the law and it's unbalanced view towards the victim and the criminal....changes are needed..
aspen1964 is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 02:46 PM   #35
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
Quote:
No. HE started it by violating me or my neighbor by trying to steal my or their property. Property IS worth risking your life for. You spent part of your life working for it, to pay for it, it cost you time, money, effort. Property of any kind is part of the fruit of your labor which you have the right to enjoy. When the criminal trys to steal it, he is violating your life and liberty.
No, he didn't. Stealing the car isn't an altercation between 2 people. You going over there and engaging him is the altercation. A altercation requires 2 people, not a person and a car. If you think your life is worth risking for a 10 thousand dollar car I feel really bad for you. Lets just say the car is worth 10 grand, that's about a months pay for most successful people. You're telling me that a 70+ years worth of life is worth giving up for a months pay? I hope you're not older than 14 or 15 with that kind of logic and reasoning. I'm just waiting for one of you cowboys to get into one of these situations and see what happens when you bend the law and use a ccw permit as it wasn't intended to be used.

Hold the bg at gun point until the police arrive, fine-nothing wrong with that. However, it something happens and you end up shooting a unarmed person that wasn't in your home you're in for some serious ****. What are you going to say in the court room? Um, he was trying to steal my neighbors car, and he attacked me so I shot him. Says who? Where are your witnesses? Can you prove he attacked you? If you're a male then being attacked by fists isn't considered serious bodily harm or death. It's your word against the prosecutors. In case you didn't know- in court you're not just pleading your case, there is an oppostion trying to make you look as guilty as possible.

The original point is if you're willing to kill someone and then risk going to prison over a honda accord then you're a moron. Nobody was being threatened in the first place, nobody. You created the dangerous situation by choosing to involve yourself in it.
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 03:03 PM   #36
Doug.38PR
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2005
Posts: 3,298
Quote:
No, he didn't. Stealing the car isn't an altercation between 2 people.
It is when he is stealing a car that doesn't belong to him. If nothing else, HIM doing this will cause the owner of that car to go over there and say "what's the problem." HE has caused the altercation
Doug.38PR is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 03:17 PM   #37
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,526
When you go over to challenge him, he shoots you while you are flapping your righteous gums.

You want to get into a wrestling match and get stabbed in the guts or your arm slashed open when contact starts.

I thank those like JohnKSA and others for their reasonable responses.

This thread also highlights the need that one needs serious training and some FOF experience. We have a great number of autodidactic tacticians and legal experts. They plan fantasy battles where all their head shots are true and lethat. The bad guy just stands there and gets shot or immediately complies.

Oh, well
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is online now  
Old September 25, 2005, 03:24 PM   #38
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
Doug, the starter of this thread said he wasn't the owner of the car. He is trying to defend someone elses property with deadly force which is plain stupidity-especially since there was nobody in the car being forced out it was just parked in the driveway.
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 03:36 PM   #39
Blackwater OPS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,153
One point no one seems to be mentioning, the BG you see commiting the act is most likely NOT alone when you are approaching him, or even staring a hole into his back from ten feet away with him at GP, his buddy aiming at you with a stolen gun from behind a a car out of your sight. Bottom line: be aware of your surroundings at all times. Also I read many people saying why risk your life, or possible legal trouble just to defend property, especially if its "not even yours". Well if you don't understand why, I cannot explain it to you, but I hope my friends and neighbors don't feel the same way.
__________________
"Those who would give up essential Liberty,
to purchase a little temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-Ben Franklin

Spc. Jeremy M. Campbell
Died 9/1/2005
and the best DS ever
MSG Matthew Ritz
Died 11.23.2005
matthewritz.com

For those who have had to fight for it, Life holds a special meaning that the protected will never know.

(\__/)
(='.'=) Someone set us up the bunny!
(")_(")
Blackwater OPS is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 03:40 PM   #40
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
Let me get this correct, you're telling me that you will risk your life to defend your neighbors honda?
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 04:35 PM   #41
Blackwater OPS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,153
I will risk my life to protect the safety and security of where I live. This time it's a honda, next time it could be a life. I will not stand by and do nothing while criminals operate with impunity in the place I live.
__________________
"Those who would give up essential Liberty,
to purchase a little temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-Ben Franklin

Spc. Jeremy M. Campbell
Died 9/1/2005
and the best DS ever
MSG Matthew Ritz
Died 11.23.2005
matthewritz.com

For those who have had to fight for it, Life holds a special meaning that the protected will never know.

(\__/)
(='.'=) Someone set us up the bunny!
(")_(")
Blackwater OPS is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 04:43 PM   #42
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
You're avoiding my question. I didn't say a life, I said a honda. My question is very simple. Will you risk your life to protect your neighbors honda from being stolen?
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:01 PM   #43
Don Gwinn
Staff Emeritus
 
Join Date: March 9, 2000
Location: Virden, IL
Posts: 5,917
Doug, I'm sorry, I just think you're really missing the point here. Garand, Steven, Model520. . . . these guys are telling you what the law says and what IS going to be the consequence of your proposed course of action. You're arguing with them as if they were presenting their opinions.

The fact that judges and juries don't look kindly on shooting people who were not armed nor committing a violent crime when you shot 'em is not Garand's opinion. It's an objective fact, like the fact that a tornado will wipe your house off the block. And like the fact that a tornado will wipe you out, it doesn't matter whether you choose to agree, or whether you think it's morally right. It's going to happen anyway and to deny it is to deny reality.

Just to sum up the very good advice given so far:

1. It is never going to be necessary for you to cock a double-action revolver in order to approach a suspect. Ever. Period. Don't do it. It's dangerous and unnecessary. You have to cock a single-action semi-automatic or a single-action revolver, which is the only reason you accept the danger of doing so. If you really think you need a single-action trigger pull at close range, a single-action semi-auto would be a safer option (you'll have a safety, etc.) Even better would be something like a USP which offers a decocker along with the safety.

2. You should not need to approach a suspect who has complied with your orders and is on the ground at gunpoint. Period. It's not going to help. Keep him there. Keep distance. Keep him covered. Wait for the cavalry. You already stated that you agree with this, I'm just repeating it.

3. If you did, for some reason, decide that you need to cock your double-action revolver, putting your thumb over the hammer doesn't make much sense. It would be a whole lot faster and more accurate for most people simply to pull the trigger in double action than to shift their thumb back over the hammer, acquire a firing grip, and then pull a single-action trigger. It just isn't giving you any advantage.

4. If you carry a double-action revolver, one of the nicest things about it is that your first and second shots will have the same trigger pull. Get used to the idea that you're going to give yourself a crutch by making the first shot single-action, and you re-introduce the problem of learning two trigger pulls. Unlike a semi-auto, each subsequent shot is going to be double action unless you thumb cock every shot--in which case that Single Action Army might not be such a bad idea.
__________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don Gwinn: Chicago Gun Rights Examiner
Don Gwinn is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:06 PM   #44
Doug.38PR
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2005
Posts: 3,298
Quote:
Doug, the starter of this thread said he wasn't the owner of the car. He is trying to defend someone elses property with deadly force which is plain stupidity-especially since there was nobody in the car being forced out it was just parked in the driveway.

hehehe Actually, I am the "starter of this threat." Doug.38PR is me. So I am qualified to say what the original thread starter mean't by that. I didn't necessarily mean that it was someone else's car. It could be someone elses or it could be mine. Either way I was talking about a hypothetical situation where say I am walking out the door to go towork and I see some hood breaking into my car OR my neighbor's car.

The point, at least to me, is not so much who's car it is as it is who's car it isn't (the criminal breaking into it). But the situation applys to cars, houses, cattle, tv sets, your friend, or you.

Like Blackwater said, you can't just let criminals act with impunity and just walk away and say "oh well, maybe the cops will get him."
Doug.38PR is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:10 PM   #45
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
I completely agree. People have to understand that you're going to be tried for a homicide if you do something like this. Even if you win, which is a really big gamble, you're going to be sued in a civil case by the family of the deceased.

Avoid involving yourself in these situations AT ALL COSTS because you are carrying a gun. People tend to think "because I'm carrying a gun I should involve myself in these type of situations". The truth is the exact opposite. You have a gun, you can't afford to be attacked over a neighbors car and have to use deadly force to protect yourself. It's not worth it.
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:27 PM   #46
Doug.38PR
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2005
Posts: 3,298
Quote:
Doug, I'm sorry, I just think you're really missing the point here. Garand, Steven, Model520. . . . these guys are telling you what the law says and what IS going to be the consequence of your proposed course of action. You're arguing with them as if they were presenting their opinions.
Oh I understand you and others are just saying what the courts would likely say and what the law says (or doesn't say in some cases). I understand you all are not giving your opinions.
I'm not arguing with you or them personally because of any opinion they might have.

What I AM saying is the fact is that what the law "says", what the courts and judges have "said" is what is in fact denying reality. Incidents just don't work out the way the law reads because the law is not written based on reality anymore.

If someone approaches me and threatens me with a bat or if they are bigger than I am or if they threaten me with a gun they say they have under their shirt, I'm not going to be thinking about what some judge or DA is going to say about whether that person really "needed to be shot" or "if I could have retreated" or if "they really had a gun." I am going to do whatever I need to do to stop that threat and get out of that situation by negotiation or by force. But I am not going to put my life or my property in extra risk because in some twisted way of thinking I "didn't give the bad guy a fair enough chance."

What these lawyers have done, is to self-righteously create a world in which nobody is a victim and everybody is a criminal. The criminal is a criminal if he takes action against you but if you take action to stop him then you are a criminal too.

Granted, it's not quite that simple...yet. (Like we all agree that I am okay if a criminal pulls a gun on me and tries to kill me I can shoot back at him and kill him without any trouble) But that where we are going with all these nutty laws and civil cases where criminals can sue victims.

I try to play by the rules and stay out of trouble, but it doesn't always work out that way.

But in reality, I am not going to worry about what some DA is going to say if I am fighting to save my life liberty or property from a criminal.

It's like the Pharisees in the Bible that self-righteously invent rules and laws out of thin air perverting the real Law to make them look self righteous and make the law into something oppressive to the people.
Doug.38PR is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:30 PM   #47
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
If there weren't strict laws pertaining to deadly force people would be killing one another over simple arguments. These laws are in place for a reason. And you should be considered a criminal unless you were threatened with serious bodily harm or death.
tsavo is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:33 PM   #48
Doug.38PR
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 18, 2005
Posts: 3,298
that's why we have laws against murder. I am not talking about a "simple argument" I am talking about a crime that is being committed, not someone flipping you off on the freeway.
Doug.38PR is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 05:58 PM   #49
aspen1964
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2005
Posts: 1,030
...so many people can't see the bottom because they won't stop stirring up the water....keep hitting them Doug...
aspen1964 is offline  
Old September 25, 2005, 08:37 PM   #50
tsavo
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 18, 2005
Posts: 103
What do you mean by crime? Police officers aren't allowed to shoot someone because they are breaking into a car, why should a civilian?
tsavo is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:50 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 0.11424 seconds with 7 queries