The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 26, 2012, 08:54 AM   #1
mete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 5,489
Bicycle Carry

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...d-bicycle.html

Even carrying on a bicycle can be a good idea. The article didn't have very much in detail and the headline should have read 'attacked by three teenagers'. BTW those of us who are seasoned citizens should be aware that we are targets for crime !! Old , not physically strong -an easy target !
__________________
And Watson , bring your revolver !
mete is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 09:27 AM   #2
ChuckS
Member
 
Join Date: March 4, 2009
Location: Albion, PA
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by mete
Even carrying on a bicycle can be a good idea. ...BTW those of us who are seasoned citizens should be aware that we are targets for crime !!...
Cycling leaves you open and vulnerable and as often the case, like this gentleman, far from home and alone. This was my exact incentive to get my original carry license about twenty years ago.

Glad it turned out well for him.
ChuckS is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 09:57 AM   #3
spacecoast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 14, 2009
Location: Sunshine and Keystone States
Posts: 4,173
I always carry when biking, either my LCP or my 637-2 in a front or back pocket.
spacecoast is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 10:16 AM   #4
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,553
I don't ride bicycles but I do ride motorcycles. I don't vary my carry methods when I'm on a bike.

I do most of my practice one handed so that's not an issue.

My wife and grandduaghter play at Mounted CB Action shooting. We have a roping arena we use for practice.

I don't PLAN on having to shoot from my Sporster, but it is a lot of fun playing with it, shooting wify's MCBAS baloons.

Just another shooting sport.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 11:44 AM   #5
doofus47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 1,353
Hey kraigwy: is it harder to hit a moving target or to be a moving shooter?
I never thought I'd ever ask that question, but you seem to be one of the few to be able to answer.

Glad it turned out okay for the old guy.
doofus47 is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 11:52 AM   #6
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,553
Personally I think its harder to shoot while you're moving then to shoot a moving target but that's just me.

I think it might have more to do with the idea that I practice shooting movers more then I practice shooting from a horse or bike.

Shooting as in Run 'n Gun doesn't matter that much to me, I don't move that fast any more. More like slow motion even if I'm going as fast as I can.

I think it has to do more with which one you practice the most.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 02:38 PM   #7
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 1,847
I brought this subject up a while back. A point I tried to make was that people on bikes just seem to be natural targets. a pedestrian can step out into an intersection, and be given right of way, but when a cyclist interferes with traffic, you can count on some jackass in a car to brush him off the road.

This guy may or may not pack a gun when he is out shopping, but he packs when he is on his bike, simply because this is probably not the only time that he's been assaulted while biking, either by drivers or people on foot.

I don't know if it has been reported here, but there is a new "game" making the rounds. Groups of kids target an old person, then beat that person down, while recording the video on a phone. The video is posted to the internet. People have been killed; locally, a guy spent weeks in a coma, and has serious brain damage after an attack.

It is highly probable that the third was hanging back from the attack because his role was "photojournalist," and if this was the case, according to what I have read, this guy probably had only a 25% chance of escaping with his life. Most of the vicitms do wind up with some sort of permanent injury.
briandg is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 03:16 PM   #8
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,553
Along the same lines

A 65 year old man shot two teens when three of them knocked him off his bike that then tried to attack him. One was killed, one wouldnt and the thrid sent to a youth center.

The 65 year old was released without charges.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46143485...me_and_courts/

I often wondered if an old man, lets say, he had a bad ticker, would be required to take a Butt Whipping from an much younger, stronger guy, instead of using his hand gun to protect himself.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 03:37 PM   #9
C0untZer0
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
I have a pouch that attaches to my bike that would be perfect for carrying a gun, and I know it's easier for me to retreive a gun from it than for me to reach to my hip.

But the high probability of being knocked off the bike during an attack makes it a bad choice.

Another thread where these issues were discussed:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/show...highlight=bike
C0untZer0 is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 10:31 PM   #10
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,983
Quote:
I often wondered if an old man, lets say, he had a bad ticker, would be required to take a Butt Whipping from an much younger, stronger guy, instead of using his hand gun to protect himself.
Kraig,

Civil law has a concept called the "eggshell skull" doctrine, which basically says an attacker takes the victim as he finds him -- that when someone commits a negligent act that leads to another person getting injured, then that person is culpable for the entire extent of the injury even if the victim had some pre existing condition that turned what should have been a minor problem into a major one.

In criminal law, a similar doctrine applies in self defense. The attacker doesn't have to know he is putting you in legitimate & reasonable fear for your life. You simply have to know it and be able to articulate your reasonable belief that (for example) someone about to punch you in the head was actually about to use deadly force against you whether he fully realized it or not. A man with a known issue such as a "bad ticker" would almost certainly find relief in such a rule.

See http://www.useofforce.us/ for a really good overview.

(Disclaimer: IANAL, simply a firearms instructor who's also an autodidact with a wickedly obsessive reading habit.)

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 10:35 PM   #11
9ballbilly
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 19, 2008
Location: northeast Florida
Posts: 437
I always carry when my son and I are out mountain biking. For me it's either a Ruger speed-six .38 or a S&W 4006 .40 in a fanny pack.

I'd also like to take just a moment to thank the members here. My best friend and shooting partner passed away in 2003. Since then I've bounced many ideas off you guys and always appreciated the feedback both positive and negative.

Thank you, Bill (formorly HFPD#16)
9ballbilly is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 11:05 PM   #12
Buzzard Bait
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 349
bike like car?

In Texas I can carry a gun in my car without a licence would my bicicle count like my car or as on my person like I was walking?
Buzzard Bait is offline  
Old January 26, 2012, 11:47 PM   #13
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,553
Thanks PAX
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old January 27, 2012, 12:01 AM   #14
Stevie-Ray
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: The shores of Lake Huron
Posts: 4,556
My Glock 26 is my biking gun, as I shoot it best one-handed and equally well with each. It's only cover is a safety vest, and it rides OWB in a Michaels of Oregon Kydex at 3:00. Biking is one of the few times I change from my EDC.
__________________
Stevie-Ray
Join the NRA/ILA
I am the weapon; my gun is a tool. It's regrettable that with some people those descriptors are reversed.
Stevie-Ray is offline  
Old January 27, 2012, 12:49 AM   #15
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Dear Pax,

Thank you for that example. I am a hemodialysis patient and have a blood access in my left upper arm which could easily be damaged in a fight of any sort let alone if they had a knife or something. Any damage to my blood access could end in fatal complications or require surgery and other types of procedures to stay alive on dialysis.

In addition, I heal much slower than normal so cuts and scrapes and even bruises could be devastating. I have assumed that my medical condition could be a justification for use of my weapon in the event of a single attacker larger than me. I am only 5' 6" inches since I have shrunk in my "old age" of 53.

In addition, even though I am still fairly muscular, I have very little sustained exercise tolerance at high levels for more than a little bit of time. Quite a complicated explanation dealing with oxygen utilization differences in dialysis patients, but once again, I won't have as much fight in me as someone without this medical condition even though I still have a fair amount of my strength.

I haven't seen it written anywhere before, but I have asked folks if this a viable defense against a single person who is hell bent on doing harm. I hope I never have to put it to a test, but it is something that I have thought about in the disparity of force argument of self defense. Simply put, after a very short burst, I would not have the oxygen carrying capacity to sustain a full fighting potential compared to someone else with my weight and muscle mass at my age.

If you have some case law that goes into that in detail, that would be very helpful to know in advance.

Thank you,

By the way, if you live long enough, you will become as decrepit as I already am.
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 27, 2012, 03:22 AM   #16
Hook686
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2005
Location: USA The Great State of California
Posts: 1,988
All that said, I suspect the DA will not take your word for all that. Doctors statements, lab tests, medical records I think would all need come into play. Ultimately I think it is a jury that decides if ones action was reasonable. If a DA wants to press it, I suppose he could. The DA is not out of any pocket expenses. However the same might not be true for you. No matter how rational, reasonable, or justifiable you believe your actions would be, I doubt that your fate depends upon them.
__________________
Hook686

When the number of people in institutions reaches 51%, we change sides.
Hook686 is offline  
Old January 27, 2012, 03:33 AM   #17
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by pax
...In criminal law, a similar doctrine applies in self defense. The attacker doesn't have to know he is putting you in legitimate & reasonable fear for your life. You simply have to know it and be able to articulate your reasonable belief that (for example) someone about to punch you in the head was actually about to use deadly force against you whether he fully realized it or not...
I'd say that's correct. The key is that one be able to articulate why a reasonable and prudent person in like circumstances (including having the same medical indisposition) would conclude that the attacker had the ability to wield force sufficient to cause death or grave bodily injury. So medical issues get factored in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hook686
...I suspect the DA will not take your word for all that. Doctors statements, lab tests, medical records I think would all need come into play...
And I think that's correct too.

If you're going to claim that you are particularly fragile and thus reasonably feared death in circumstance in which a more robust person might not, you may need to establish a sound basis for your belief.

Last edited by Frank Ettin; January 28, 2012 at 04:19 PM.
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old January 27, 2012, 07:25 AM   #18
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,289
Quote:
In Texas I can carry a gun in my car without a licence would my bicicle count like my car or as on my person like I was walking?
No. The vehicle exemption is specific.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old January 27, 2012, 06:22 PM   #19
Stevie-Ray
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: The shores of Lake Huron
Posts: 4,556
Quote:
I'd say that's correct. The key is that one be able to articulate why a reasonable and prudent person in like circumstances (including having the same medical indisposition) would conclude that the attacker had the ability to wield force sufficient to cause death or grave bodily injury. So medical issues get factored in.
I had a friend that had had 2 skull fractures, one when he was little, another in a horriffic motorcycle accident where he was thrown headfirst into a tree. The second was enough that the Doctors told him he could take no more blows to the head. He asked, "You mean like if somebody punches me in the face...." and the doctor finished, "It could very well kill you." I always wondered if he ever applied for a CW permit or even if he changed his life. Haven't talked to him in many years, but I would consider him a prime example that medical conditions would indeed be factored in.
__________________
Stevie-Ray
Join the NRA/ILA
I am the weapon; my gun is a tool. It's regrettable that with some people those descriptors are reversed.
Stevie-Ray is offline  
Old January 28, 2012, 04:03 PM   #20
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Proving my medical condition would be as simple as rolling up my sleaves and quoting medical studies on what an injury to my fistula would entail, or quoting medical studies on oxygen usage in dialysis patients compared to those with kidney disease. Lots of pictures and other issues. So that wasn't really what I was asking.

I would really like to know if there is any actual case law where that was brought to force as a successful defense proving the disparity of force issue. Documenting my medical condition would not take long and I could do that myself as an expert witness since I have testified as an expert medical witness in the past. The question, is, is there any case law where this was used as a successful defense.

Of course, you must have the elements of jeopardy, imminant threat of grave bodily harm or death, opportunity and ability. The disparity of force issue goes into the ability portion of the self defense criteria. For myself, there are many issues where I would not tolerate a beating as others might. Platelet dysfunction in renal disease promotes easier bleeding, poor wound healing, the need for continued dialylsis which after bodily injury is subject to the need to anti-coagulate the blood during dialysis or risk clots, blood loss when I am already 20% lower levels of blood than normal people, fragile bones from the mineral bone disease of secondary hyperparathyroidism, i.e. we break bones easier and could be disabled in a fight quicker.

That is just a partial list of physiologic changes from renal disease that would be very easy to document. But once again, that is not the question. The question if anyone has it, is physical disability a known and proven case law to show that a single attacker equals disparity of force for someone in my condition. I am interested in the actual case law history of this type of self defense. I asked one CCW instructor, he did not have a specific answer, but felt by opinion that it would be a reasonable disparity of force documentation. Once again, this goes to the ABILITY aspect of a lawful self defense.

Thank you,

Alaska
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 28, 2012, 04:22 PM   #21
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaska444
Proving my medical condition would be as simple as rolling up my sleaves and quoting medical studies ...
No one said that it necessarily had to be difficult to do, but you will still need to show that you're at greater risk than someone without your medical condition.

It might be pretty easy to do that in some cases, and it might be harder in other cases. But it will still need to be done.
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old January 28, 2012, 04:35 PM   #22
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Dear Fiddletown, I truly don't question the ability to prove my disability. That is truly a given. Once again, the question is case law and precedent from other cases. The prior post hinted that is the case. I am simply asking for specifics on an issue that I have wondered for quite some time without any specific answer to date.

Am I at higher risk of grave bodily injury and or death from what others would take as a survivable but severe beating? Absolutely. That would not be an issue to prove whatsoever. The question I have deals with case law and historical references to specific cases where the courts recognized this in a successful self defense case.

Thank you,

Alaska444
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 28, 2012, 04:44 PM   #23
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
I guess I will try to answer my own question on disparity of force which is what the victim of the bike attack had by multiple attackers although apparently unarmed.

Here is one case:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...g=content;col1
Alaska444 is offline  
Old January 28, 2012, 04:48 PM   #24
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaska444
...the question is case law and precedent from other cases. The prior post hinted that is the case. I am simply asking for specifics on an issue...
The general legal principles are as pax and I have outlined. Looking for case law, especially specific to dialysis patients, would entail many hours of research. I'm not planning to do that.
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old January 28, 2012, 05:03 PM   #25
Alaska444
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
Quote:
January 26, 2012, 07:31 PM #10
pax
Staff

Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 5,748
Quote:
I often wondered if an old man, lets say, he had a bad ticker, would be required to take a Butt Whipping from an much younger, stronger guy, instead of using his hand gun to protect himself.
Kraig,

Civil law has a concept called the "eggshell skull" doctrine, which basically says an attacker takes the victim as he finds him -- that when someone commits a negligent act that leads to another person getting injured, then that person is culpable for the entire extent of the injury even if the victim had some pre existing condition that turned what should have been a minor problem into a major one.

In criminal law, a similar doctrine applies in self defense. The attacker doesn't have to know he is putting you in legitimate & reasonable fear for your life. You simply have to know it and be able to articulate your reasonable belief that (for example) someone about to punch you in the head was actually about to use deadly force against you whether he fully realized it or not. A man with a known issue such as a "bad ticker" would almost certainly find relief in such a rule.

See http://www.useofforce.us/ for a really good overview.

(Disclaimer: IANAL, simply a firearms instructor who's also an autodidact with a wickedly obsessive reading habit.)

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
Managing Editor, Concealed Carry Magazine
My personal website: Cornered Cat
Let's go back to post #10 where I entered due to the "egg shell skull" doctrine in civil courts. I am not looking for a dialysis specific case, but the issue of disability of the victim raising the level of concern over grave bodily injury or death as a disparity of force justification. I have no doubt that a single blow by fist to my dialysis access could absolutely cause grave bodily injury or death if it ruptured the access. Not an issue to prove the disability whatsoever to a court or a jury. Not my concern.

Once again, what disability related disparity of force issues are part of case law already. Is it state by state, or are there general parameters already settled case law. Going back to Pax and the egg shell skull theory, I have yet to see a direct application of that sort of thinking to any specific self defense cases. That is the question, not simply for dialysis patients. In other words, as it would apply to the disparity of force issue which I know is settled law. How does a proven disability, (I am certified as 100% disabled legally right now) apply to the disparity of force issue?

Thank you,

Alaska444
Alaska444 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 03:15 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 0.15419 seconds with 9 queries