The Firing Line Forums

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old August 11, 2013, 12:29 PM   #51
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,529
If someone is robbing you and has a gun in his belt - you cannot use your firearm?

Well, please quote the appropriate laws to support than opinion. I doubt that view will be supported.
__________________
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 offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 01:29 PM   #52
Sierra280
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Posts: 569
Sure you can use your firearm! But you better find a really good lawyer who can prove that a holstered(or in the belt) firearm was an imminient threat.
Sierra280 is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 01:32 PM   #53
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,529
Didn't answer the question I posed. Also, the guy is robbing you in this discussion. I suggest that if a person approaches you and says Give Me Your Dough and exposes a holstered weapon - your opinion that he has to draw it and aim it is incorrect.

Please provide statutes that support your view.
__________________
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 offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 01:59 PM   #54
allaroundhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
At what point do you draw?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierra280 View Post
Sure you can use your firearm! But you better find a really good lawyer who can prove that a holstered(or in the belt) firearm was an imminient threat.
They don't have to. The fact that he was robbing me is reason enough for me to draw my firearm.

If he then motions to his firearm or does anything threatening whatsoever then I am perfectly justified in shooting.

It seems as if you are not understanding what exactly constitutes an 'imminent threat'. Nor the fact that robbery (be it armed or not) can legally be met with lethal force (or the threat of it) most anywhere in the US.

If someone comes up to me and demands my money, then I do not have to wait to determine if he is armed or not to react with the force required to keep my money and stay alive.

Last edited by allaroundhunter; August 11, 2013 at 02:12 PM.
allaroundhunter is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 02:09 PM   #55
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,529
Unless one can refute Allaround's analysis with legal references - I suggest that other opinions aren't useful. He nailed it.
__________________
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 offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 03:15 PM   #56
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 470
One of the main things I am reminded of by this conversation is that responsibly carrying a weapon requires training, awareness, and maturity. The decision to draw or shoot (two very different things) often has to be made very quickly with little time to deliberate. Avoiding confrontations, or keeping one's head when that doesn't work is easier done here on the interweb than in reality. Walking, running, or driving away from a potentially deadly situation, or drawing a weapon to stop an attack without having to fire it are good outcomes. These choices often require speed, self discipline, and control with lives hanging in the balance.

One-answer-fits-all solutions to self defense scenarios are as useful as those same solutions in automobiles or health care.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin

"If you let "need" be a requirement and Government be the arbiter of that "need", then Liberty is as dead as King Tut." Jimbob86

Last edited by K_Mac; August 11, 2013 at 07:50 PM. Reason: grammar
K_Mac is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 03:30 PM   #57
daddyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2013
Posts: 112
Quote:
I'm surprised so many on this forum have forgotten one of the basic rules of gun use: Never point a gun at anything you don't intend to shoot.

Leo's operate by a different set of laws than civilians do. If a civilian takes a gun out and points it at someone, it is (at best) brandishing a weapon, something you are going to jail for.

In the civilian world using a gun, or any deadly force, to defend yourself must be based on the IMMENIENT theat of death or bodily harm. It's not enough that the other guy had a knife on him, that knife must be drawn back ready to strike. If a robber has a gun in his belt, and you shoot him, you will go to jail. The robbers gun would have to be locked, loaded, and aimed...an IMMINIENT THREAT. Didn't everyone have to take a concealed carry class?
If I draw I intend to shoot........if....... the bad guy continues whatever caused me to draw. So at this point the rules for safe gun handling are out the window.

If a civilian takes a gun out and points it at someone.......who is about to cause them death or grave bodily injury.......he or she is guilty of nothing. It is still legal in most of the U.S. to defend yourself from violent attack. Now if a civilian pulls and points a gun for no legal reason, then they are guilty of aggrivated assault with a firearm punishable in Florida by a minimum mandatory 3 years in prison.

Food for thought on your robber with a gun in his waistband. If you are of the mindset that you are only in imminent danger when the gun is being raised then perhaps it is you who should take a class....a defensive firearms training class. Study the Tueller Drill for your knife scenario. Understand that a human being can talk, fight, and run for up to 20 seconds with a completely destroyed heart. Then think about how long it takes a knife weilding attacker to cover 21ft or for a man to draw a pistol from his waist band. Now its time to rethink your response to either threat before you or even worst, your family, are victimized by false information.
daddyo is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 04:07 PM   #58
tepin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 14, 2006
Location: MN
Posts: 114
If someone says "give me your wallet" and you see a gun in their waistband, a reasonable and prudent person should conclude that the firearm is the tool they plan to use to gain compliance should you choose not to hand over your wallet; or, as in some cases, you do comply and get shot regardless.

To display a firearm during the commission of a robbery is the same as holding the gun to someone's head. The use of deadly force is being implied by the criminal and therefore deadly force is authorized to resist the assault. To believe otherwise is foolish.

Rather than going for your own gun, you would be better off going for their gun... unless they were at a distance to where you could run in the opposite direction and hope they don't shoot you in the back... or you believe you can outdraw them.
__________________
"Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife." by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in Brown v. United States, 256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921).
tepin is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 04:11 PM   #59
daddyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2013
Posts: 112
Quote:
Sure you can use your firearm! But you better find a really good lawyer who can prove that a holstered(or in the belt) firearm was an imminient threat.
Easy to do if that was necessary as the cemetary is filled with guys who thought like that.

Once a man has made known his intent to cause death or grave bodily injury then he only needs the ability and opportunity to cause said injury.

Example if Mike Tyson says he will beat you to death if you don't give up your jewelry, you are perfectly justified in preparing your defense to this IMMINENT threat BEFORE Tyson gets close enough to carry out that threat. You will of course need to wait until he attempts to get within striking distance, which is his ability to cause DOGBI, before discharging your firearm. You don't have to wait for him to start beating you before offering up your defense.

Imminent is defined by Marriam Websters as ready to take place; especially: hanging threateningly over one's head.

A robber with a gun in his waistband is certainly imminent by definition, completely an imminent threat by every known source of information available, and extremely imminent by any trained firearms training expert.
daddyo is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 04:14 PM   #60
allaroundhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
At what point do you draw?

Daddyo, in your example Mike Tyson simply closing the distance between you and him after you ordering him to stay back can be seen as threatening. He doesn't have to be within striking distance or it to be imminent.
allaroundhunter is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 05:33 PM   #61
daddyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2013
Posts: 112
I agree. I think you misread my post.....
Quote:
You will of course need to wait until he attempts to get within striking distance
daddyo is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 05:40 PM   #62
allaroundhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
At what point do you draw?

Fair enough, it would appear that I did just that... My bad
allaroundhunter is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 05:48 PM   #63
tomrkba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2011
Posts: 602
You did just fine because the result was positive and nobody left with bad feelings. This is a good rule of thumb for defensive success. You could have noticed him earlier, but it is impossible to maintain awareness at all times when out and about.
tomrkba is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 05:59 PM   #64
easyliven88
Member
 
Join Date: June 7, 2013
Location: Macomb County Michigan
Posts: 42
Check this link out...I have to skirt the outer edges of Detroit to get to work so this was a no brainer...

http://www.gungoddess.com/steering-w...holster-mount/
__________________
There can be only one....and thats me
easyliven88 is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 06:44 PM   #65
buckhorn_cortez
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2010
Posts: 389
About 30 years ago, I was sitting in my truck in a food store parking lot waiting for my wife to get a few things for a trip. I saw a very large (6'-3" or more, and 260+ pounds) drunk working the parking lot trying to get money for liquor.

I had the windows rolled down in my truck because it was 80+ degrees. He saw me sitting in my truck and started walking toward me. I rolled up the windows about 2/3 of the way.

He started banging on the glass on the driver's side demanding money. I asked him to go away as I was not going to give him money for liquor. Then he shoved his arm through the open portion of the window attempting to grab me. I got my Walther P5, pointed it at him and told him that I thought the best thing he could do was go away.

He took one look at the pistol pointed at him, jerked his arm out of the window and high tailed it to another part of the parking lot.

As far as I'm concerned there was no other course of action in the short period of time this all took place. It's easy to second guess "what's best" given lots of time to look at all of the alternatives - but in the 30 second period that all of this transpired, there's really not a lot of time for analysis.

I'm sure lots of situations fall into that same category - not a lot of time for analysis - you just react to the situation.

In my case, it all worked out for the best for both of us.
buckhorn_cortez is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 09:19 PM   #66
Sierra280
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2013
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Posts: 569
My opinion comes from discussions with multiple prosecutors, DA's, and ADA's. if you are getting 'robbed' something we haven't really defined situationally, (i'll assume someone trespassing, taking your stuff, who you are not within a few arms reach of)you see a gun in the thief's belt, so you draw and fire upon seeing it(even if he 'motions' for it) you are in for a legal battle you may very well lose. Regardless of what people say would be a legal use of your firearm.

Last year a local business owner shot a man 'going for his gun in his truck' after threatening the owner. months after the business owners arrest, he was found to be in the clear, but the jail time, legal fees, and lengthy trial by jury (which can go anyway), speak to what I'm trying to get across.

Last edited by JohnKSa; August 11, 2013 at 09:42 PM. Reason: No Zimmerman hijack, please.
Sierra280 is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 09:37 PM   #67
allaroundhunter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2012
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 1,670
At what point do you draw?

'Going for a gun in his truck' and having a gun in easy reach in a waistband are two VERY different things.

What we have asked for are cases that prove the points that you have made, because I, for one, don't think they exist. I have also spoken with attorneys, criminal prosecutors, and even judges on what their definition of 'immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm' is and it most certainly is not what you are trying to show.

That is the wording from the Texas Penal code regarding the justifiable use of deadly force. Is it verbatim what other states have? No, but it is a good indication and, thankfully, the word 'imminent' does not take new meaning when we cross state lines.

Last edited by JohnKSa; August 11, 2013 at 09:43 PM. Reason: Removed response to deleted material in another member's post.
allaroundhunter is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 09:42 PM   #68
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,194
Quote:
My opinion comes from discussions with multiple prosecutors, DA's, and ADA's.
You need to start with much simpler questions the next time you talk to them.

For example, robbery is defined in the law, there's no need to redefine it here, nor is it productive, especially given that your attempt at a definition is badly in error. Trespassing and simple theft are NOT robbery and while armed robbery is virtually always justification for the use of deadly force in self-defense, simple theft and trespassing are virtually never sufficient justification.

If you see an armed person committing trespass or simple theft and you use deadly force against them with no other circumstances to justify it, you're almost certainly in a lot of trouble--it's going to cost you some legal fees, even if you avoid jail. Shooting someone who is committing armed robbery is an ENTIRELY different story.

That said, if a person is trespassing or committing simple theft and starts to go for his weapon when you see him, you would certainly be justified in drawing your own firearm if there is no other reasonable course of action. That is true because a reasonable person would consider his move towards his firearm to constitute the start of a deadly force attack on your person. He has means (firearm), motive (desire to escape/cover his crime) and he certainly has opportunity (can harm you if he wishes). Those three things together with his action towards his weapon are certainly sufficient circumstances for a person to assume that a deadly force attack is either in progress or imminent.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 10:36 PM   #69
Psychedelic Bang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2009
Location: FL USA
Posts: 210
Recently I too had a guy come out of nowhere and pop up next to my driver side window asking for money!! (Must be the economy or something)

I'm grateful I am not trigger happy. I also do not spook easily.

Unfortunately, I can think of several times in my life, where I probably could have drawn but did not have a gun. I would say about, "4 of these," I was a minor... But I grew up in early 1990s NYC. Mugged twice at knifepoint, and attacked pretty badly two other times.

The other time, where I probably could have drawed, I was traveling in the UK so.. "no gun."

I think the moral of this all is, "There are a lot of situations where you can draw. However, those same situations can be survived without drawing." You can get out a lot of street trouble without a gun.

I believe the time to draw is when: There is no other option. You want it clear to you and a jury of your peers that you had no other choice. Life or death.
__________________
"Was always kinda partial to Roy Rogers actually. I really like those sequined shirts..."
Psychedelic Bang is offline  
Old August 11, 2013, 11:35 PM   #70
colbad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 3, 2012
Posts: 300
If I were to draw on every homeless person asking for money I would need a gun mount on my window. Drawing and threatening deadly force without an articulable justification can be considered assault.

Sounds like you handled it well. Should he have reached in, made threats or attempted to enter the vehicle, then I would say "game on".
colbad is offline  
Old August 12, 2013, 10:23 AM   #71
daddyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2013
Posts: 112
Quote:
My opinion comes from discussions with multiple prosecutors, DA's, and ADA's. if you are getting 'robbed' something we haven't really defined situationally, (i'll assume someone trespassing, taking your stuff, who you are not within a few arms reach of)you see a gun in the thief's belt, so you draw and fire upon seeing it(even if he 'motions' for it) you are in for a legal battle you may very well lose. Regardless of what people say would be a legal use of your firearm.

Last year a local business owner shot a man 'going for his gun in his truck' after threatening the owner. months after the business owners arrest, he was found to be in the clear, but the jail time, legal fees, and lengthy trial by jury (which can go anyway), speak to what I'm trying to get across.
One thing I have found common in my quest for answers on the proper use of deadly force, is that authorities, when giving advise to a stranger, almost always offer extremely conservative advice.

My advice to you is to read the law for yourself. In Florida a person is justified in using deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another OR to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

So if a DA or anyone else for that matter tells me that I can't use deadly force (firing at the robber with a gun in his waistband who is moving to get that gun) they are wrong according to the law.

Quote:
I think the moral of this all is, "There are a lot of situations where you can draw. However, those same situations can be survived without drawing." You can get out a lot of street trouble without a gun.

I believe the time to draw is when: There is no other option. You want it clear to you and a jury of your peers that you had no other choice. Life or death.
Just because you can survive or may survive or the bad guy with a knife didn't kill you, doesn't mean I have to take a beating or leave the decision to let me live or die up to that bad guy. You were lucky. I'm not so lucky and have never been lucky. Thankfully the law still allows us to prevent such life threatening attacks, should we as an individual choose to do so.

Around 80 percent of civilians shot with handguns survive. Would you allow someone to shoot you during a robbery just because the overwhelming majority survive the same situation without fighting back with lethal force?
daddyo is offline  
Old August 12, 2013, 10:58 AM   #72
Psychedelic Bang
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2009
Location: FL USA
Posts: 210
I said nothing about taking a beating before you draw. In fact I said, "those were times where I probably could have drawed."

The laws vary by state.

"Lucky," is incorrect. If you are walking to your car, and a thug comes to carjack you, and the thug already has a gun in his hand, even if you have your gun on you, you will need a lot more than a draw to get yourself out of that situation. You will need to reverse the odds from a disadvantage.

That's a lot more than luck.
__________________
"Was always kinda partial to Roy Rogers actually. I really like those sequined shirts..."
Psychedelic Bang is offline  
Old August 12, 2013, 11:05 AM   #73
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by daddyo
...Thankfully the law still allows us to prevent such life threatening attacks, should we as an individual choose to do so...
It doesn't help us to think of the use of lethal force as a "choice." If one resorts to the use of lethal force it should be under circumstance which made its use a necessity.

Now let's look at the basic legal reality of the use of force in self defense.

  1. Our society takes a dim view of the threat or use of force and/or intentionally hurting or killing another human. In every State the threat or use of force and/or intentionally hurting or killing another human is prima facie (on its face) a crime of one sort or another.

    1. However, for hundreds of years our law has recognized that there are some circumstances in which such an intentional act of violence against another human might be legally justified.

    2. Exactly what would be necessary to establish that violence against someone else was justified will depend on (1) the applicable law where the event takes place; and (2) exactly what happened and how it happened, which will have to be judged on the basis of evidence gathered after the fact.

    3. Someone who initiated a conflict will almost never be able to legally justify an act of violence against another.

    4. If you threaten physical harm to another person, if you use force against another person, if you intentionally hurt another person, if you intentionally kill another person, you will have performed an act that is a crime of one sort or another.

      1. You may try to avoid criminal liability by claiming that your act was legally justified.

      2. If you claim justification, you will be admitting the elements of the crime, i. e., that you intentionally performed the act.

      3. You will then have to establish your justification and be able to articulate why you did what you did, and why a reasonable person would have determined the otherwise criminal act was justified.

  2. The amount of force an actor my justifiably use in self defense will depend on the level of the threat.

    1. Under the laws of most States, lethal force may be justified when a reasonable person in like circumstance would conclude that a use of lethal force is necessary to prevent the otherwise unavoidable, imminent death or grave bodily injury to an innocent. And to establish that, the actor claiming justified use of lethal force would need to show that the person against whom the lethal force was used reasonably had --

      1. Ability, i. e., the power to deliver force sufficient to cause death or grave bodily harm;

      2. Opportunity, i. e., the assailant was capable of immediately deploying such force; and

      3. put an innocent in Jeopardy, i. e., the assailant was acting in such a manner that a reasonable and prudent person would conclude that he had the intent to kill or cripple.

    2. "Ability" doesn't necessarily require a weapon. Disparity of force, e. g., a large, young, strong person attacking a small, old, frail person, or force of numbers, could show "Ability."

    3. "Opportunity" could be established by showing proximity, lack of barriers or the like.

    4. "Jeopardy" (intent) could be inferred from overt acts (e. g., violent approach) and/or statements of intent.

    5. And unless the standard justifying the use of lethal force is met, use of some lesser level of violence might be legally justified to prevent a harmful or offensive, unconsented to contact by another person.

  3. If you have thus used violence against another person, your actions will be investigated as a crime, because on the surface that's what it is.

    1. Sometimes there will be sufficient evidence concerning what happened and how it happened readily apparent to the police for the police and/or prosecutor to quickly conclude that your actions were justified. If that's the case, you will be quickly exonerated of criminal responsibility, although in many States you might have to still deal with a civil suit.

    2. If the evidence is not clear, you may well be arrested and perhaps even charged with a criminal offense. If that happens you will need to affirmatively assert that you were defending yourself and put forth evidence that you at least prima facie satisfied the applicable standard justifying your act of violence.

    3. Of course, if your use of force against another human took place in or immediately around your home, your justification for your use of violence could be more readily apparent or easier to establish -- maybe.

      1. Again, it still depends on what happened and how it happened. For example, was the person you shot a stranger, an acquaintance, a friend, a business associate or relative? Did the person you shot forcibly break into your home or was he invited? Was the contact tumultuous from the beginning, or did things begin peaceably and turn violent, how and why?

      2. In the case of a stranger forcibly breaking into your home, your justification for the use of lethal force would probably be obvious. The laws of most States provide some useful protections for someone attacked in his home, which protections make it easier and a more certain matter for your acts to be found justified.

      3. It could however be another matter to establish your justification if you have to use force against someone you invited into your home in a social context which later turns violent.

      4. It could also be another matter if you left the safety of your house to confront someone on your property.

  4. Good, general overviews of the topic can be found at UseofForce.us and in this booklet by Marty Hayes at the Armed Citizens' Legal Defense Network.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old August 12, 2013, 11:32 AM   #74
Bullcamp82834
Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2013
Location: Buffalo, WY
Posts: 94
Recommended Reading:

In The Gravest Extreme by Massad Ayoob
Bullcamp82834 is offline  
Old August 12, 2013, 02:24 PM   #75
daddyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2013
Posts: 112
Quote:
I said nothing about taking a beating before you draw. In fact I said, "those were times where I probably could have drawed."

The laws vary by state.

"Lucky," is incorrect. If you are walking to your car, and a thug comes to carjack you, and the thug already has a gun in his hand, even if you have your gun on you, you will need a lot more than a draw to get yourself out of that situation. You will need to reverse the odds from a disadvantage.

That's a lot more than luck.
You said.......
Quote:
"There are a lot of situations where you can draw. However, those same situations can be survived without drawing." You can get out a lot of street trouble without a gun.
........my take on this quote is that you don't feel the need for a gun. Why else mention that many of the situations where a gun was justified in being presented but none was presented, are survivable. Then you go on to explain how you were robberd at knife point............IMO that qualifies as your life being held in the hands of the knife holder......and beaten pretty badly in two others....also life threatening IMO seeing as a single blow has killed many full grown men.

So I simply explained that you were lucky. Guess what???? Your robbers/muggers didn't kill you and that is lucky for you. Many innocent folks die every year from the same beating and/or a robber who decided to use the knife.

If you are walking to your car and a thug comes to carjack you and you allowed him to approach you with a gun in his hand without a response then you deserve to be at his mercy. At that point compliance is probably the best course of action.
daddyo 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 10:49 PM.


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 0.14658 seconds with 8 queries