PDA

View Full Version : Drawing Your Firearm: Prudent Action?


Shane Tuttle
July 13, 2010, 07:50 PM
In this thread, a member mentioned if you draw your firearm, you have no business doing so unless you pull the trigger as well.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=416256

I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. I believe there are times when drawing your gun in low ready is a very effective tactic. Also, there may be changes in dynamics of the situation from the time you draw your firearm to the moment before pulling the trigger that could place you on the wrong side of justice. Bear in mind, I never asked for clarification of the member's statement and I'm only going by the post provided.

What say you?

Brian Pfleuger
July 13, 2010, 07:57 PM
I say that you are absolutely, indisputably correct. The premise that "draw = fire" is foolishness.

There are an infinite number of scenarios that would have you draw and not shoot. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that you would more often than not, NOT be shooting after drawing.

There are few situations that would justify a draw/shoot mentality. One being that you are already under direct physical assault. Even then, if Mr. BG realizes that you're about to draw a gun and attempts to flee, you may STILL be drawing the gun without firing.

Young.Gun.612
July 13, 2010, 08:02 PM
I don't agree that pull=shoot. But, I think that pull=be ready to shoot. As was said, the situation in which you would draw is a volatile and dynamic one. Producing a weapon could lead the BG to stop all aggression. But it might not, and in that instance if you don't shoot, it could be you that gets put into the ground.

CMichael
July 13, 2010, 08:10 PM
I think if you draw you should be ready to shoot, but that doesn't mean that you should shoot.

For example, if the person coming at you stops when you draw your weapon, and that stops the threat, then you shouldn't shoot.

Shane Tuttle
July 13, 2010, 08:44 PM
I know it's seemingly remedial knowledge on the matter when burdening yourself with the responsibility to carry. But I had this innate need to start this up to garner a fresh set of opinions on the matter...

There are an infinite number of scenarios that would have you draw and not shoot. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that you would more often than not, NOT be shooting after drawing.

That's my mindset as well, Brian.

X_shooter
July 13, 2010, 09:35 PM
I too have given this a lot of thought. My take is that if you draw you had damn well be ready to fire. You don't necessarily have to if the situation de-escalates. I would hope that it would.

However, you should never have the mindset that "I just have to draw and the BG will back off." I think that is a good way to have your firearm taken away from you and used on you. Seconds count. Don't waste one or two thinking "oh ****!"

booker_t
July 13, 2010, 09:41 PM
Pull-ready. A lot can happen as you draw, even if it only takes you 1.2 seconds.

There are no absolutes, and no always/never. Saying you'd "never draw without shooting" or "always shoot when you draw" is inherently flawed.

Retired15T
July 13, 2010, 09:42 PM
On city streets here in the good Ole US of A, I would heartily disagree. As a matter of fact, I'd go so far as to say that anyone who has this mindset of pull=fire is but one bad situation away from being a convict who will never have the right to own a firearm again. They should be disarmed immediately IMHO.

I pray to God no one is out there actually teaching their kids or other people that to pull your weapon equals an instant trigger pull. Thank GOD our police were never taught that.

coldpointcrossing
July 13, 2010, 09:54 PM
I'm with the majority. If I had no other foreseeable options available to me and felt it absolutely necessary to have weapon in hand, then so be it. But I would like to add...

Also, there may be changes in dynamics of the situation from the time you draw your firearm to the moment before pulling the trigger that could place you on the wrong side of justice

There is a lot of discussion about the hows and methods to stop the Bad Guy in a confrontation but there is so little devoted to stopping yourself. There is no bell or buzzer, no referee, nothing but your judgment or maybe your ego. The difference between being one of the Good Guys and one of the Bad Guys could be as insignificant as a line drawn in sand.

grubbylabs
July 13, 2010, 10:14 PM
As some of you may have read the thread I started earlier this week, I had an encounter last week with an aggressive dog. I withdrew my side arm from the chest pocket of my waders but I never shot let alone pointed it at the dog or any one. While There was about as much potential for the situation to deteriorate as I have seen in a while it never deteriorated to the point where I felt shooting was imminent. But with dogs like that I never give them the benefit of the doubt, I was going to be ready.

CWPinSC
July 14, 2010, 06:41 AM
If it comes to this, my first option is to draw - my last option is to shoot.

There ARE times you should draw and immediately shoot. There are times when you should draw and watch what happens. I won't go into all the myriad of different scenarios that would determine this, each situation is different and has its own set of ROE. Only the circumstances, the mindset of the "victim", and the perceived mindset of the BG determine which action is appropriate.

I WILL say, if you are one who believes you should blindly pull the trigger whenever you draw, I hope you have a good lawyer.

shafter
July 14, 2010, 06:55 AM
If someone's coming at me with a knife but drops it as soon as he sees my gun why should I shoot him?

Hopefully someone can back me up on this but I think I remember reading that guns are used 2.5 million times per year in self defense. Only a small percentage of those instances result in shots being fired. I think its great if you can stop the threat without shooting someone.

ranburr
July 14, 2010, 07:14 AM
If it is so bad that I have to draw, then the next thing is a shot and then more shots. I don't think you draw until there is no other option but shooting. Keep in mind, anyone can be disarmed if they hesitate.

Skans
July 14, 2010, 07:46 AM
I agree with what the OP said. How can anyone affirmatively say that if they draw their firearm they will shoot. That's "cowboy shooting".

You don't know what you are going to do until you are actually faced with the situation of drawing your gun. Too many things can happen to accurately predict exactly what you are going to do. We're people, not robots and a gun is only a tool.

What I am talking about is different than "flashing" a pistol as a warning, or hesitation is shooting when an attacker has already begun attacking. I think most of us know that, from the time you even consider pulling out your firearm, your brain needs to constantly be assessing and reassessing the situation.

FreakGasolineFight
July 14, 2010, 08:25 AM
Tuttle, I agree with you a hundred percent. I've never understood the mindset some people have, that you have to shoot somebody once your gun's out.

Me, I consider a CCW weapon to be primarily a deterrent, because this is how it is most effective. I would only ever shoot/kill someone if I thought it was absolutely necessary, and even then it would definitely be something that I couldn't ever forget. Point being, in any confrontation, I hope that I'll be doing my best to keep the other person alive.

Only reason to shoot-to-kill is if the other person appears to be going for a gun or other weapon on his person. Then, all bets are off.

TailGator
July 14, 2010, 09:32 AM
I will concur with the majority opinion, for two reasons:

(1) Drawing increased your readiness and decreases your response time when it becomes necessary to shoot. It is therefore a reasonable tactical move to make when you are aware that a situation is developing that could lead to a defensive shooting.

(2) As has been noted many times in this and other threads, the mere presentation of a firearm changes the mind of many people with bad intentions, negating the need for firing.

At the same time, we need to remember that there is a certain amount of time that elapses between the decision to cease fire and the end of the physical activity of firing, just as there is a lag time between the decision to start firing and the first bullet leaving the barrel. IIRC, a study by the Force Institute not long ago showed that LEOs that were given a clear signal to cease rapid fire fired an average of between two and three more shots before the hand caught up to the brain. That is something that has to be considered in critiquing shootings and the shooters' responses.

Glenn E. Meyer
July 14, 2010, 10:00 AM
The OP is quite correct. The statement that if you draw, you must shoot is just another one of those gun/internet world cliches we get from folks who posture and chest thump. Sorry to be so blunt.

Longdayjake
July 14, 2010, 12:59 PM
I don't know. I am sitting here trying to think of a time that drawing without shooting would be a good idea. As a civilian I can think that one situation that would warrant drawing your weapon is a mass shooting like VT and westroads mall. You know there is a shooter but you aren't sure where. Drawing in that situation and waiting for a threat to present itself before doing anything more is a good idea. So, though I agree that you should have a DANG good reason for drawing your weapon, you don't always need to be pulling the trigger.

CWPinSC
July 14, 2010, 01:00 PM
If it is so bad that I have to draw, then the next thing is a shot and then more shots. I don't think you draw until there is no other option but shooting. Keep in mind, anyone can be disarmed if they hesitate.

Keep in mind what Ayoob said - (paraphrasing) Many people wait so long before drawing that the only option left is to shoot. They don't give the BG time to change his mind.

Frank Ettin
July 14, 2010, 01:20 PM
The OP is quite correct. The statement that if you draw, you must shoot is just another one of those gun/internet world cliches we get from folks who posture and chest thump. Sorry to be so blunt. May be blunt, but also accurate.

Lots of things could happen after drawing, but before shooting, to make shooting unnecessary/inappropriate/unwise.

ScottRiqui
July 14, 2010, 01:30 PM
Agreed - the threat of deadly force is a valid part of the "use of force" continuum, but if you're of the mindset that exposing/drawing your weapon is a commitment to shoot, then you've robbed yourself of that step in the continuum and are forcing yourself all the way to the end of the continuum (use of deadly force.)

After all, if the police can (and do) use the threat of deadly force as a tool to de-escalate or obtain compliance, why can't we?

Edward429451
July 14, 2010, 01:54 PM
if you are one who believes you should blindly pull the trigger whenever you dr

Now he clearly didn't say anything close to that in the other thread. Maybe most misunderstood his meaning. I didn't take his words as an absolute but rather as a mindset. Anything can happen in that loooong two seconds it takes to draw and if the threat ceases then the correct action is to stay the shot.

If we're not careful, some may set a bad precedent for themselves by learning to use drawing as a means to control situations that a gun is not called for. If you draw you better (be ready and willing to) shoot.

There's a slight fundamental difference of mindset. Who here has actually scuffled with someone while wearing a gun and never did draw? I have. I believe some would use a gun to avoid a scuffle knowing full well that its an intimidation thing and not being ready and willing to shoot him. I believe that is what he meant.

Hook686
July 14, 2010, 02:05 PM
Beacuse we are not LEO'ers.

Here in California I believe the use of deadly force is allowed if one is in immenent fear of deadly force, or serious injury. If a weapon is pulled and a person present feels threatened by that action, I think a call to police would result in brandishing charges.

If you see four gang-banger types approaching you, does that mean you draw, because they frighten you, so as to convince them they need change their course of travel ? Hmmmmm use of your gun to elicite a particular action by another ? This does not sound good to me.

If you actually are being attacked, where you have been shown that you are in fear of your life, or serious personal injury, do you really have the luxury of hesitating on drawing your gun ? That decision making process sequence can take 1 second easily. How far can an attacker approach in that 1 second ?

I do not support use of a gun to intimidate another, even if one is acting out in fear.

Glenn E. Meyer
July 14, 2010, 03:20 PM
Opinions are wonderful.

How about this. There are about a million or so defensive gun usages in the country, according to research by criminologists.

About 95% have no shots fired.

So, that's that. The day was saved with no shots fired. One can post zombie, meth head, biker, gang attacks all you want but it seems that guns are displayed and deterrent effects predominate.

Microgunner
July 14, 2010, 04:57 PM
I'll do anything I can to prevent being shot/stabbed/run over and anything I can to prevent shooting someone else. Having my defensive firearm drawn and ready allows me to exercise these options. Anything less would be unfair to my family and community.

Hkmp5sd
July 14, 2010, 05:11 PM
There is a fine line between drawing your weapon in a self-defense situation and brandishing, espcially if there are witnesses around. An old training video used to make the statement that there are two blanks on a police report, essentially "victim/reportee" and "assailant/suspect." The video shows the lawful displaying of the weapon to ward off an attack, but the BG turns around and calls the police, reporting someone pulled a gun on him. Who do the cops believe? The gist of the story is if you draw, go ahead and report it to the police. Be the first one to get your name on the report and your story told. It may save you some grief.

Microgunner
July 14, 2010, 05:18 PM
There is a fine line between drawing your weapon in a self-defense situation and brandishing, espcially if there are witnesses around. An old training video used to make the statement that there are two blanks on a police report, essentially "victim/reportee" and "assailant/suspect." The video shows the lawful displaying of the weapon, but the BG turns around and calls the police, reporting someone pulled a gun on him. Who do the cops believe? The gist of the story is if you draw, go ahead and report it to the police. Be the first one to get your name on the report and your story told. It may save you some grief.


Not so in Florida. I pointed my pistol at a man, he called the police and after just a few minutes they asked me if I wanted to press charges against him. Man did he have a surprised look on his face. He believed the same as you. BTW, I never called the police. I just waited for their arrival.

threegun
July 14, 2010, 05:19 PM
If it is so bad that I have to draw, then the next thing is a shot and then more shots. I don't think you draw until there is no other option but shooting. Keep in mind, anyone can be disarmed if they hesitate.

So was I justified??? I was playing basketball with my brother in law when a large (10-15 guys) group of ghetto youth walked over to start trouble. As they approached they made it clear in an very unfriendly way that we were not welcome to play there. As they continued to close the distance I pulled my pistol and held it at my side and made a peaceful exit. Had I waited until they began beating us to a pulp I would have been forced to shoot that is if I was even able to shoot at this point.

I wasn't justified, at the time I pulled my gun, to fire. I believe however that I could articulate in court why I was in fear for my life. I am just as justified in preparing to defend my with a firearm as I am in actually defending myself if I am in fear of death or great bodily injury.

BTW just because you have skinned leather doesn't mean you must point it or even display it.

ranburr
July 14, 2010, 05:19 PM
The OP is quite correct. The statement that if you draw, you must shoot is just another one of those gun/internet world cliches we get from folks who posture and chest thump. Sorry to be so blunt.

Sorry, I haven't chest thumped or postured in a number of yrs. I just don't believe anyone should know that you have a gun until they have been shot. I don't think you should draw until it is obvious you have no other choice. And, as I said before, anyone can be disarmed if you are standing there trying to hold someone at gunpoint or scare them off (a number of people have zero fear of guns).

Microgunner
July 14, 2010, 05:26 PM
(a number of people have zero fear of guns)

No one I've ever met. That must be a rare bird indeed.

threegun
July 14, 2010, 05:26 PM
Sorry, I haven't chest thumped or postured in a number of yrs. I just don't believe anyone should know that you have a gun until they have been shot. I don't think you should draw until it is obvious you have no other choice. And, as I said before, anyone can be disarmed if you are standing there trying to hold someone at gunpoint or scare them off (a number of people have zero fear of guns).


If you were right Ranburr (and you are not) then I would have shot some teen aged kids and or died trying to. Had they continued to advance faster than I could retreat they would have been shot. Display saved the day for them and me.

Hkmp5sd
July 14, 2010, 05:30 PM
Not so in Florida.

One incident that worked out well for you. Not a blanket ending for every incident. I'm sure there was something that made the LEO believe you over the other guy. Totally up to the individual whether or not to report it.

pax
July 14, 2010, 06:01 PM
Florida, like most states, has a "necessary self defense" exception to the no-brandishing rule. Contrary to internet public opinion, you don't have to shoot someone just because you drew a firearm. You must, however, be prepared to articulate how your use of force was justified under the circumstances--and prepared to defend it in court, if it goes that far. TANSTAAFL!

pax

Frank Ettin
July 14, 2010, 06:32 PM
...I believe the use of deadly force is allowed if one is in immenent fear of deadly force, or serious injury....And one may be in such a situation, but upon drawing his gun, the situation can immediately change so he is no longer in reasonable fear of an immediate, potentially lethal attack. And if the situation thus changes, he must not shoot.

So your back is to the wall and someone is advancing towards you in a menacing fashion with a knife in his hand. You draw your gun, and he immediately drops his knife, turns and runs away. Are you going to shoot him? Drawing your gun was justified, shooting the assailant when he breaks off the threat is not.

And BTW, if you do draw your gun, and the assailant splits, call it in and make a reports immediately. Usually the first guy to report is, at least initially, perceived as the victim. That's how you want to be perceived.

Shane Tuttle
July 14, 2010, 07:20 PM
I'm glad you chimed in, pax. Reading the post in that thread started by threegun had be think about what you said in your book. That was a motivating factor in starting this up and revisit the subject.

Sorry, I haven't chest thumped or postured in a number of yrs. I just don't believe anyone should know that you have a gun until they have been shot. I don't think you should draw until it is obvious you have no other choice. And, as I said before, anyone can be disarmed if you are standing there trying to hold someone at gunpoint or scare them off (a number of people have zero fear of guns).

To be clear where I'm thinking:
1. I don't think you're chest-thumping because you're one of the few here that disagrees. You presented your opinion with a thoughtful response and I see nothing wrong in doing so.
2. You say you shouldn't draw until you have "no other choice". Are you saying you have no other choice but to stop or be killed or succum to grave injury? If so, I must present some potentially loaded questions. Do you believe one of the best ways to prevent being caught in a compromising position is to avoid being there to begin? Do you believe drawing your firearm to low-ready is the same as brandishing a firearm? Do you believe drawing a firearm to low-ready the moment before your life is in imminent danger is not a sound tactic if the possibility of losing it to the would-be attacker is low?

My point is there are many times drawing a firearm to low-ready (NOT aiming at the possible would-be attacker) is useful to DETER a situation when properly executed. Are you still saying you should NEVER draw your gun unless you are 100% certain it will be fired?

old bear
July 14, 2010, 07:24 PM
It may not always be prudent, yet I was taught, 50+ years ago, you never pointed a weapon at someone you were not prepared to shoot, and you never shot anyone you were not prepared to kill.

Frank Ettin
July 14, 2010, 07:27 PM
...I was taught,...you never pointed a weapon at someone you were not prepared to shoot...Being prepared to shoot is one thing. Actually shooting, if the situation has changed, is another.

old bear
July 14, 2010, 07:39 PM
Being prepared to shoot is one thing. Actually shooting, if the situation has changed, is another.

You are 100% correct

pax
July 14, 2010, 07:41 PM
Being prepared to shoot is one thing. Actually shooting, if the situation has changed, is another.

And that's a really good point, that a lot of people in this thread have stated in different ways. This might even be a case of vigorous and vehement agreement, for the most part!

Legally speaking, I suspect a person's a lot more likely to get into trouble by shooting too late (eg, after the bad guy has thrown down his firearm, or fainted unconscious, or started to run away) than by drawing too early (eg, brandishing). But I'm not a lawyer -- you are. What's your experience on that? Is my impression generally correct?

pax

threegun
July 14, 2010, 07:56 PM
I think this notion of drawing equals a must shoot is a morf of the passionate drilling done by instructor for decades that you better be prepared to shoot if you pull. Some of the students I teach say the same thing.

Brian Pfleuger
July 14, 2010, 08:30 PM
Legally speaking, I suspect a person's a lot more likely to get into trouble by shooting too late (eg, after the bad guy has thrown down his firearm, or fainted unconscious, or started to run away) than by drawing too early (eg, brandishing). But I'm not a lawyer...

I'm no lawyer either, but I can guarantee which of those things that I'd RATHER be charged with!

Drawing sooner rather than later would seem to make firing less likely. Anything I can do to avoid shooting someone is a good thing.

Frank Ettin
July 14, 2010, 08:37 PM
...Legally speaking, I suspect a person's a lot more likely to get into trouble by shooting too late (eg, after the bad guy has thrown down his firearm, or fainted unconscious, or started to run away) than by drawing too early (eg, brandishing). But I'm not a lawyer -- you are. What's your experience on that? Is my impression generally correct?...I'd agree. Although I don't have any direct experience, certainly that's consistent with some of the discussions I've had with Massad Ayoob and what he's said about his experiences.

Mas, IIRC, was involved in at least one case in which the defender fired late, as the assailant was breaking off the attack. The defense was able to prevail by putting on expert testimony about reaction times and the time lag involved in trying to stop and reverse an action in progress. But whenever a legal defense needs to be based on that sort of reasonably esoteric information, there's a risk that a jury won't be able to process the concepts.

On the other hand, if you draw your gun and don't fire, at least no one has been shot. At worst someone has been scared. So, with no blood on the sidewalk and no holes in any protoplasm, you'll probably be okay if you can do a decent job of articulating why (1) in the same situation a reasonable and prudent person would have concluded that lethal force was necessary to prevent otherwise unavoidable, immediate death or grave bodily injury to an innocent; (2) you reasonably determined it was necessary to draw your gun to defend yourseld, or an innocent third party; and (3) the situation changed so that there was no longer a reason to shoot.

All things considered, the latter should be a much easier sell than trying to explain why you used high speed lead projectiles to punch holes in the living flesh of someone who had given up or otherwise was no longer a threat.

stargazer65
July 14, 2010, 08:40 PM
When I click on the link that the OP posted, I get a thread of someone selling a Sig. Am I the only one?

I concur with the idea of pulling sooner vice later when warranted.

Shane Tuttle
July 14, 2010, 08:53 PM
Thanks for bringing that to my attention, stargazer. Long story short, I didn't copy/paste the correct thread. :o

Crankylove
July 14, 2010, 08:55 PM
you better be prepared to shoot if you pull

100% correct.

If you carry a weapon (of any kind) you must be willing and prepared to use it.

If you draw your weapon (firearm in this case), you must be prepared to shoot.

If you fire your weapon, you must accept the fact that you may kill another person.

Being prepared to do a certain action, and thinking you that you MUST do that action, are entirely different.

If the threat stops after I draw, I am happy.
If the threat stops after I aim at the aggresor.......... not quite as happy, but still a good outcome.
If it stops after one shot........its a crapy deal all around, but the attack has stopped so I don't need to shoot any further.
If I need to empty my gun into the attacker to stop the threat, I will, but just because I had to draw my weapon, dosen't mean this last out come, is the only acceptable outcome.

X_shooter
July 14, 2010, 09:15 PM
So I am guessing the draw for affect types practice the NRA first two rules of gun safety. Of course you don't want to accidentally shoot someone you were going to shoot. ;)

Brian Pfleuger
July 14, 2010, 09:19 PM
So I am guessing the draw for affect types practice the NRA first two rules of gun safety.


I assume that you mean that to be sarcastic, but in fact the answer is yes.

You don't point a gun at someone because you MIGHT need to pull the trigger in a second or two.

If you don't need to shoot RIGHT NOW but you do feel the need to draw your gun then the gun is drawn and held at a safe position, at your side, or low ready, situation dependent but is NOT pointed at ANY individual.

Now, the INSTANT that the situation warrants actually pulling the trigger the safety rules in regards to the aggressor are out the window. You may very well still point it at the person without pulling the trigger but you had better not be pointing it at them unless you COULD LEGALLY pull the trigger.

briandg
July 14, 2010, 11:54 PM
draw or display?

If you show your weapon, it will change the dynamics of the entire situation, whether it is in your hand or not.

From the decision to show that you are armed, a person had better be utterly ready to "throw down" and fire. Until then, it's a whole different situation.

For my part, I don't believe in rules, and every second of every encounter is bound to be a whole different universe from the one before.

This reminds me of the silly thing I read in Dune, where the traditional sandworm tooth dirk had to taste blood if it was drawn, before it was put back in the sheath.

Frank Ettin
July 15, 2010, 12:01 AM
So I am guessing the draw for affect types practice the NRA first two rules of gun safety. Of course you don't want to accidentally shoot someone you were going to shoot.Actually, in practical training (as in IPSC and IDPA) we go by the Jeff Cooper/Gunsite Four Rules:


All guns are always loaded.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Keep your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard until your sights are on target and the decision has been made to shoot.
Know your target and what's behind it.


And yes, we train observing those rules and follow them at all times.

Hook686
July 15, 2010, 03:16 AM
So your back is to the wall and someone is advancing towards you in a menacing fashion with a knife in his hand. You draw your gun, and he immediately drops his knife, turns and runs away. Are you going to shoot him? Drawing your gun was justified, shooting the assailant when he breaks off the threat is not.

Let's see, BG is advancing on you with knife. You pull your gun (at what distance ?). Then you hesitate (how long ? 1/2 second ?) Then you check to see if he dropped his knife, turned and ran. How long this analysis take ? (another 1/2 second ?) OK now 1 second has passed. The advancing bad guy has not dropped his knife and fled, but is now has covered how much ground ? (20 feet ?) Hmmm I think you are history.

Frank Ettin
July 15, 2010, 04:35 AM
Let's see, BG is advancing on you with knife. You pull your gun (at what distance ?). Then you hesitate (how long ? 1/2 second ?)...Wow, you really want to shoot someone.

Anyway, there need be no hesitation. In the slightly more that one second it takes me to present my gun, the guy with the knife remembers an appointment elsewhere. By the time my gun is almost on target, he's turned and is running away.

ranburr
July 15, 2010, 06:51 AM
In the slightly more that one second it takes me to present my gun, the guy with the knife remembers an appointment elsewhere. By the time my gun is almost on target, he's turned and is running away.

Frank, you are assuming that the person you are dealing with is a normal thinking person. I can tell you for a fact that a number of groups truly will not turn and run because they have no fear of a gun. When they see a regular person brandishing a gun, they think "I'm going to take this guy out and get a new gun at the same time". I have had two encounters with people like this. Both times they tried to enter my home late at night clearly saw me and a .45 coming up on them. Both times they came towards me, both times the were put down by my Boerboel before I could get a shot off. First case was a Katrina guy who had been shot in the past, second case was two Tango Blast members, one of whom had been shot before. All of them told the police that they had no fear of me or guns but "please, please sir keep that dog off". Gunshot wounds are a badge of honor for many idiots.

Deputy Dog
July 15, 2010, 07:08 AM
Just because you draw your weapon, doesnt mean you have to shoot. If when you draw your weapon, and are lucky enough that the BG drops his and runs away, thats a good day. If you pull the trigger when he runs you will most likely go to jail for shooting an un-armed fleeing subject. Now if he drops his weapon and still charges you, you have a situation that is in the grey area. "If you are going to carry be prepared to use it" that is what I tell my students. Even if you get the drop on the perp, and you have your gun on them, doesnt mean that their going to stop the attack. You might even provoke them further, and force you to shoot. If you are going to shoot, aim and shoot center mass. You wont have time to aim for a pelvis area unless they are literally on top of you and thats the only shot you can get off to get them off of you. And dont think just because you carry a big ole .45 or
.44 that the attacker will stop instantly in their tracks. Sorry it doesnt always work that way. If the attacker gets ahold of your weapon they can and will use it on you. A little something to ponder!

DD

demigod
July 15, 2010, 08:57 AM
Originally posted by Tuttle8:
I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement.

Thank GOD!!

I didn't see anyone who disagreed with the guy who posted that nonsense. It was a completely absurd reply.

Brian Pfleuger
July 15, 2010, 09:03 AM
Let's see, BG is advancing on you with knife. You pull your gun (at what distance ?). Then you hesitate (how long ? 1/2 second ?) Then you check to see if he dropped his knife, turned and ran. How long this analysis take ? (another 1/2 second ?) OK now 1 second has passed. The advancing bad guy has not dropped his knife and fled, but is now has covered how much ground ? (20 feet ?) Hmmm I think you are history.


No one is saying that you don't shoot if you're in "instant" peril. You don't "wait to see".

There are approximately 897,965,538,167,835 scenarios wherein you would draw and instantly fire.

There are approximately 538,761,835,569,798,631 scenarios wherein we would draw and NOT shoot immediately.

It is impossible to cover them all and it's not the point of this thread. The point is that "draw" does not "equal" fire.

It's not about being "ready" or "prepared" to fire, as in "Don't carry a gun unless you're prepared to use it." That is assumed.

It's about whether or not drawing your gun essentially REQUIRES pulling the trigger. That notion, would be silly were it not so dangerous.

Glenn E. Meyer
July 15, 2010, 09:23 AM
Again, as I said earlier - if there are a million DGUs a year - why are they successful with 95% of them having no shots fired?

Frank Ettin
July 15, 2010, 10:28 AM
...you are assuming that the person you are dealing with is a normal thinking person..And you are assuming that he is not.

You (and Hook686) missed the point. I was just illustrating that it's possible that a situation will change. At first, the situation is such that you are justified in drawing your gun. But then the situation changes such that you would not be justified in shooting. There are limitless ways this could happen in real life.

But the question before us was, in effect, "If you draw your gun, must you shoot?" And the answer is, unequivocally, "No." If you draw you gun, you need to be prepared to shoot. And if you draw your gun, the situation should have been such shooting would be justified, i. e., you can articulate how a reasonable and prudent person would have concluded that your assailant had the ability to deliver lethal force, had the opportunity to deliver lethal force and was putting you in jeopardy of an immediate death or grave bodily injury.

But situations are dynamic and can change in an instant. And they can change in a such a way that shooting would no longer be justified.

As Glenn has pointed out (twice) in the vast majority of successful defensive gun uses, no shots are fired.

peetzakilla gets it. ...The point is that "draw" does not "equal" fire. ...

Maromero
July 15, 2010, 10:55 AM
There are approximately 897,965,538,167,835 scenarios wherein you would draw and instantly fire.

There are approximately 538,761,835,569,798,631 scenarios wherein we would draw and NOT shoot immediately.


Pete. Where do you get those numbers, ah?:eek: Good thing you say they are approximates.:D

Brian Pfleuger
July 15, 2010, 10:58 AM
Pete. Where do you get those numbers, ah? Good thing you say they are approximates.


Bah! My keyboard doesn't have a side-ways "8".... I thought those figures would get the point across!:D

stargazer65
July 15, 2010, 11:01 AM
Pete. Where do you get those numbers, ah? Good thing you say they are approximates.

He obviously has a hotline to Mr. Spock.:D

elad
July 15, 2010, 11:10 AM
Originally Posted by peetzakilla
I'm no lawyer either, but I can guarantee which of those things that I'd RATHER be charged with!

Drawing sooner rather than later would seem to make firing less likely. Anything I can do to avoid shooting someone is a good thing.

That's the one I would rather defend.

Hook686
July 16, 2010, 12:41 AM
You (and Hook686) missed the point. I was just illustrating that it's possible that a situation will change. At first, the situation is such that you are justified in drawing your gun. But then the situation changes such that you would not be justified in shooting. There are limitless ways this could happen in real life.

I figure you and I see this comepletely different. You seem to think that the BG threatening lethal, or serious injury, force is at sufficient distance to allow you the luxury to evaluate changed actions, as opposed to simple reactions.

Tell me if a BG is at 50 feet, waving a knife and yelling he is going to cut your heart out. Are you justied in pulling your gun ? Hmmmm I'm thinking here in California, Marin County, you might end up in prison if you do.

How about at 40 feet ? 30 feet ? 20 feet ? At 20 feet I figure you are history if you hesitate. Here in California I bet the jury would 'Hang you out to dry' at 30 feet, or greater. It all depends upon the jury, and the attornies I'm thinking.

Bottom line I think your scenario has no rational, logical, factual answer. If you believe you are good enough, quick enough and accurate enough to wait until you have a 'legitimate' lethal threat situation, and still have time to analyze and chamge decisions for action, then more power to you.

Let us simply agree to disagree. I won't draw on the guy across the creek, or street, waving a bat, or knife, yelling how he is going to waste me. Now if he comes across to my side still yelling and swinging then I guess I don't have any choices. You go ahead and hesitate.

My view is it comes down to the jury, the DA, and the lawyers in your jurisdiction, not what anyone of us really think is right, or wrong. What are your possible costs if you do draw a gun and have enough time to see if the BG is going to change his mind ?

Frank Ettin
July 16, 2010, 01:02 AM
I figure you and I see this comepletely different. You seem to think that the BG threatening lethal, or serious injury, force is at sufficient distance to allow you the luxury to evaluate changed actions, as opposed to simple reactions...I guess we do. My opinion is based on the training I've had at Gunsite, with Louis Awerbuck, with Massad Ayood and with others. What is your opinion based on?

...I think your scenario has no rational, logical, factual answer. ...As Glenn has pointed out in posts 24 and 56, shots are fired in only about 5% of successful defensive gun uses; so obviously, you're wrong.

RGR3/75
July 16, 2010, 01:07 AM
i've trained so much to fire when i draw that it's engrained in my head. if you're a cop then yea it's "freeze FBI!" and you're basically trying to scare the guy. it's just become a necessity for me to make it muscle memory.

ranburr
July 16, 2010, 01:37 AM
I guess we do. My opinion is based on the training I've had at Gunsite, with Louis Awerbuck, with Massad Ayood and with others. What is your opinion based on?

I think it it is a little ridiculous to start bringing up my school is better than yours. If you want to go that route, how about: CSAT, Suarez Intl, Southnarc, Tac Pro, Hackathorn, and others.

Frank Ettin
July 16, 2010, 01:47 AM
I think it it is a little ridiculous to start bringing up my school is better than yours....So Randy, are you now going to contend, as Hook686 has, that, in effect, if you draw your gun you will fire it? Are you going to do so even though all the data says, as Glenn has pointed out, that shots are not fired in the vast majority of successful defensive gun uses. You obviously have the background to know better.

And since some folks seem to still doubt that it's possible to appropriately draw one's gun in self defense and still not fire it, here's a thread on another board describing just such a situation: http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=419100.

ranburr
July 16, 2010, 02:07 AM
So Randy, are you now going to contend, as Hook686 has, that, in effect, if you draw your gun you will fire it?

99% of the time yes. As I stated, I am not drawing my gun unless I have no other option. Meaning, I can't leave (escape blocked), I am somewhere that I won't leave (home), I must do so to protect my property (Sony TV = no shoot; family heirloom that can't be replaced = shoot). The 1% is described by the two times my dog took care of things. In those cases 150lbs of angry Boerboel was doing more than sufficient damage (I actually thought one guy was dead). And, I couldn't shoot in those cases without hitting my dog. Incidentally, if you want a dog that is "Johnny on the spot" when he needs to be and a rub my belly/let the neighborhood kids ride me like a horse dog, I suggest you look into Boerboels.

Frank Ettin
July 16, 2010, 02:39 AM
99% of the time yes. As I stated, I am not drawing my gun unless I have no other option. Meaning, I can't leave (escape blocked), I am somewhere that I won't leave (home), I must do so to protect my property (Sony TV = no shoot; family heirloom that can't be replaced = shoot). The 1% is described by the two times my dog took care of things. ...Too bad. I guess you don't understand this stuff as well as I thought you did.

ranburr
July 16, 2010, 02:50 AM
Frank, let me ask your expert advice. If you can't get away from a bad situation what do you do? If someone is in your house what do you do? Now this last one I understand why you may differ from me due to the state you live in. What do you do when your property is being stolen? I think many people are missing my point here. I am not pulling my gun until I feel I have absolutely no other choice. I will admit that I have been heavily influenced by a number of the classes I have attended. I think everyone should attend Southnarc's courses. They are very eye opening in just how quickly someone can be on you and disabling your pistol or disarming you before you can get a shot off. Once again, I don't care who you are, you can have your gun taken away from you.

threegun
July 16, 2010, 05:37 AM
Let's see, BG is advancing on you with knife. You pull your gun (at what distance ?). Then you hesitate (how long ? 1/2 second ?) Then you check to see if he dropped his knife, turned and ran. How long this analysis take ? (another 1/2 second ?) OK now 1 second has passed. The advancing bad guy has not dropped his knife and fled, but is now has covered how much ground ? (20 feet ?) Hmmm I think you are history.


It is entirely possible to disengage after the draw and before dropping the hammer.

I had a situation years ago that forced me to respond. I have posted it before but it is very relevant here. I manage a pawnshop. We open carry in this shop. One day Microgunner and myself were passing time and talking guns (as usual). Our front door buzzer indicated someone coming in. I look to my right and see this man wearing a trench coat walk in (mind you that this is Fla and it wasn't cold). He begins to make a b line for microgunner completely oblivious to my presence. About halfway through the store and to Micro's position he reaches under the left breast of his coat (were shoulder holstered firearms are kept) and begins to pull a firearm from it. My reaction was instantaneous. From the moment he reached under his coat I began to draw my firearm (my draw was about 1/2 second back then from a snapped holster). As I raised my Glock 20 and began to climb his legs toward the firing position his gun appeared from beneath the coat. I remember how big it appeared to me. As I began to press the trigger while still climbing this guys body I suddenly realized that the firearm being pulled was in fact a crossman bb/pellet/dart gun made to resemble a 1911. I released the trigger and microgunner proceeded to ream this guy a new arse and tossed him from the store.

Microgunner said that the guy said he wanted to pawn the bb gun as he pulled AND THEN POINTED IT at him. I didn't hear or don't really remember hearing anything. I got tunnel vision also.

The point is I made several decisions in the span of 1/2 second. I even remember telling myself to find the front sight and commenting or thinking in my head how skinny this guy was and how easy it would be to miss and how microgunner was going to be shot if I did.

There is no doubt in my mind that as you draw and without delay of any kind, you can make the decision to ceasefire. Had I not recognized the gun as a BBgun the nano second it was exposed I would have fired once the G20 had leveled on the Bad Guys shoulder. I saw the large charging toggles as it began to clear the coat but before it was completely exposed or pointed at micro and was able to stop.

In the knife scenario quoted above if the bad guy complied before you pulled the trigger then stop pulling the trigger. If he doesn't then don't stop its really not rocket science. This nonsense about 1/2 second this 1/2 second that is pure BS. You will be surprised at how many decisions you can make in that draw time.

threegun
July 16, 2010, 05:56 AM
Frank, let me ask your expert advice. If you can't get away from a bad situation what do you do? If someone is in your house what do you do? Now this last one I understand why you may differ from me due to the state you live in. What do you do when your property is being stolen? I think many people are missing my point here. I am not pulling my gun until I feel I have absolutely no other choice. I will admit that I have been heavily influenced by a number of the classes I have attended. I think everyone should attend Southnarc's courses. They are very eye opening in just how quickly someone can be on you and disabling your pistol or disarming you before you can get a shot off. Once again, I don't care who you are, you can have your gun taken away from you.


I'm not frank but I will tell you what I would do. Someone in my house (burglar I assume) is going to be met at gunpoint. What happens next depends upon the situation.

Ranburr, How would you have handled this? Wait for justification and you are surrounded by 10-15 guys beating your head into a mush ball

So was I justified??? I was playing basketball with my brother in law when a large (10-15 guys) group of ghetto youth walked over to start trouble. As they approached they made it clear in an very unfriendly way that we were not welcome to play there. As they continued to close the distance I pulled my pistol and held it at my side and made a peaceful exit. Had I waited until they began beating us to a pulp I would have been forced to shoot that is if I was even able to shoot at this point.


I think the reasonable answer would be to do as I did and give the bad guys a chance to understand what they are going up against while also giving yourself a chance to ready your firearm for duty.

Whoever influenced you that pulling your weapon should only be done at the very last minute did you a disservice. They just got you killed or forced you to kill had my situation happened to you. If you can't see this then there is nothing else we can say here to correct you.

Please don't take this as a beat down on you.

OldMarksman
July 16, 2010, 06:40 AM
It all depends upon the jury, and the attornies I'm thinking.Actually, should it go that far, it depends on the law, the evidence presented by you and by the state including witness testimony, the jury instructions, and on the jury and the attorneys.

If the witnesses testify (and/or for that matter, the forensic evidence indicates) that, upon your presentation of a weapon, the attacker made it clear that he was no longer interested in harming you and you shot anyway, your defense is going to have to depend entirely upon a discussion of reaction time and the details of the evidence and testimony as they relate to timing. If the net result is that the jury believes that you could not have stopped what started out as a justified shot in time, you will be OK; otherwise no. That phraseology probably needs work for accuracy to take into account burden of proof, but the idea should be clear enough.

You may prevail, and you may not.

As Fiddletown pointed out in Post 42, Mas, IIRC, was involved in at least one case in which the defender fired late, as the assailant was breaking off the attack. The defense was able to prevail by putting on expert testimony about reaction times and the time lag involved in trying to stop and reverse an action in progress. But whenever a legal defense needs to be based on that sort of reasonably esoteric information, there's a risk that a jury won't be able to process the concepts.

Not a good time to have trained oneself to shoot automatically, for those who have for some reason done so.

My experience has been limited to indoor situations, and while I've never had to fire I've never had to draw from concealment.

If one believes that he will fire 99% percent of the time if he draws, and if real experience indicates that the mere presentation of a weapon resolves conflicts in 95% of the instances, one is either (1) expecting to always encounter a very rare kind of violent attacker, (2) expecting to stretch his defense of justifiability to or beyond the limit at great risk to the outcome, (3) waiting too long to draw at great risk to his own safety, or (4) some combination of the foregoing.

It's a dilemma for anyone. If evasion and avoidance don't work in the face of a serious imminent threat, one may have to draw a deadly weapon. I believe it is incumbent upon oneself to be able to do so very quickly, to err on the side of sooner rather than later (in some states, including Texas, that's provided for in the law), and to be well trained to avoid shooting too late.

Again, back to Fiddletown in Post 42:

On the other hand, if you draw your gun and don't fire, at least no one has been shot. At worst someone has been scared. So, with no blood on the sidewalk and no holes in any protoplasm, you'll probably be okay if you can do a decent job of articulating why (1) in the same situation a reasonable and prudent person would have concluded that lethal force was necessary to prevent otherwise unavoidable, immediate death or grave bodily injury to an innocent; (2) you reasonably determined it was necessary to draw your gun to defend yourseld, or an innocent third party; and (3) the situation changed so that there was no longer a reason to shoot.

All things considered, the latter should be a much easier sell than trying to explain why you used high speed lead projectiles to punch holes in the living flesh of someone who had given up or otherwise was no longer a threat.

Microgunner
July 16, 2010, 08:27 AM
Tell me if a BG is at 50 feet, waving a knife and yelling he is going to cut your heart out. Are you justied in pulling your gun ? Hmmmm I'm thinking here in California, Marin County, you might end up in prison if you do.

This is precisely why I'd never live in California.

Baryngyl
July 16, 2010, 08:32 AM
peetzakilla,
here you go ∞ just copy it and you can save it to paste it later.


Michael Grace

OldMarksman
July 16, 2010, 08:57 AM
This [(in California, Marin County, you might end up in prison if you pull your gun on someone who is at 50 feet, waving a knife and yelling he is going to cut your heart out)] is precisely why I'd never live in California.Do you think it would be different in Florida, or anywhere else, for that matter? How would you convince anyone that drawing your gun because someone was waving an edged weapon at you at a distance of fifty feet was necessary to protect yourself against imminent danger?

Do you think that someone would have the opportunity to harm you seriously with a knife from that distance? Do you think that you would be in jeopardy? Do you think that you would could lawfully draw your weapon if the answer to any of those questions is "no"?

I suggest studying this:

http://www.useofforce.us/3aojp/

Here's a relevant excerpt:

Although opportunity can be viewed as a subset of ability, it is an equally important criterion. Basically, while your attacker may very well have the ability to cause you harm, it means nothing unless he also has the opportunity to do so—right here and right now. After all, there are probably countless criminals in the world who “could” kill you and might do so, given the chance; but they aren’t standing in front of you at this moment, so they don’t have that opportunity.

The biggest consideration here is range or proximity. Although a man with a gun is considered dangerous at any reasonable distance, a man with a knife standing 300 feet away is not, simply because he cannot stab you from that far away. Yet there is another factor, as well. If he were standing mere yards away, he still probably couldn’t reach you with his knife, but because it would only take him moments to approach you and change that, he would still be considered dangerous. A common police standard is to assume that a knife-wielding assailant is capable of covering 21 feet and striking with the blade in 1.5 seconds. Mull on that time span.

Maromero
July 16, 2010, 09:22 AM
Interesting thread. I was taught that you only bring a gun into a situation if you are going to use it. Never to show it, never to scare someone but only to use it. Using it means fire the gun. You don't have to fire the gun every single time you draw your handgun but every time I draw the sole intention is to immediately stop a threat. If the situation then changes, act accordingly. You will only have a spit second to react so if you happen to shoot someone, the facts have to be clear that you reasonably believed your life or the life of another was in danger and that's why there is someone lying on the floor dead due to lead poisoning.

P.S. Someone started a thread about why we post. I do because of threads like this one.

Frank Ettin
July 16, 2010, 10:07 AM
Frank, let me ask your expert advice. If you can't get away from a bad situation what do you do? If someone is in your house what do you do? Now this last one I understand why you may differ from me due to the state you live in. What do you do when your property is being stolen? I think many people are missing my point here. I am not pulling my gun until I feel I have absolutely no other choice.....Of course I'd deal with the situation as I've been trained and be prepared, among other things, to appropriately use lethal force. But that doesn't mean that as the situation unfolds things might not change to make the use of lethal force inappropriate.

That's all this thread is about: just because you've appropriately drawn your gun doesn't mean that you will fire it.

As Glenn has pointed out, a gun is fired in only about 5% of successful defensive gun uses. And in posts 66 (link) and 70 we see some real life examples of guns being properly drawn, but not ultimately fired.

...I think everyone should attend Southnarc's courses. They are very eye opening in just how quickly someone can be on you and disabling your pistol or disarming you before you can get a shot off....Yes, things can happen quickly. But at the same time, every encounter will not be the same. One reason I think training and good practice is so important is that in an emergency we will want to be sufficiently familiar with our weapons to be able to manage them properly without conscious thought so our focus will be on our OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide and Act) loop and not on trying to figure out how to make our guns work.

The fact is that there is always the possibility that one will face a situation in which it is reasonably necessary to draw his gun for self defense or the defense of an innocent, but it will not then be necessary to fire it. As Glenn has pointed out, in posts 24 and 56, a gun is fired in only about 5% of successful defensive gun uses. And in posts 66 (link) and 70 we see some real life examples of guns being properly drawn, but not ultimately fired.

OldMarksman
July 16, 2010, 10:11 AM
Interesting thread. I was taught that you only bring a gun into a situation if you are going to use it.In that wording, I think, lies the confusion for some people. Try it this way: you only bring a gun into a situation if you would be justified in using it.

Never to show it, never to scare someone...Right, but there are some nuances among state laws. Know yours and those in the states in which you will be carrying.

You don't have to fire the gun every single time you draw your handgun but every time I draw the sole intention is to immediately stop a threat. If the situation then changes, act accordingly.Right. That's the whole point.

You will only have a spit second to react so if you happen to shoot someone, the facts have to be clear that you reasonably believed your life or the life of another was in danger and that's why there is someone lying on the floor dead due to lead poisoning.Generally true, but some states do have some other justifications for using deadly force. I'll conduct myself under your rule here.

One other thing: do not assume that the assailant will die, and expect his testimony to enter into investigations, a charging decision, and perhaps, trial.

threegun
July 18, 2010, 11:59 AM
Do you think it would be different in Florida, or anywhere else, for that matter? How would you convince anyone that drawing your gun because someone was waving an edged weapon at you at a distance of fifty feet was necessary to protect yourself against imminent danger?

Do you think that someone would have the opportunity to harm you seriously with a knife from that distance? Do you think that you would be in jeopardy? Do you think that you would could lawfully draw your weapon if the answer to any of those questions is "no"?


I have no doubt in my mind that I would be justified in accessing my firearm in this scenario. I have even less doubt about articulating my fear of death or great bodily injury should it become necessary.

Brandishing and Aggravated Assault with a firearm goes out the window in this scenario despite the distance and (potentially temporary) lack of opportunity.

If you say you are going to kill me with this disassembled rifle then proceed to assemble, load, and aim this rifle, at what point is one justified in drawing ones firearm. Of course this is if retreat and or escape is not possible. According to the logic above opportunity isn't present until the rifle is loaded and charged.

Interesting thread. I was taught that you only bring a gun into a situation if you are going to use it. Never to show it, never to scare someone but only to use it. Using it means fire the gun. You don't have to fire the gun every single time you draw your handgun but every time I draw the sole intention is to immediately stop a threat. If the situation then changes, act accordingly. You will only have a spit second to react so if you happen to shoot someone, the facts have to be clear that you reasonably believed your life or the life of another was in danger and that's why there is someone lying on the floor dead due to lead poisoning

So you were taught that pulling equals a must shoot. Then you say you don't have to fire it after pulling every time. This is a major contradiction. So one must conclude that either you were taught wrong or that pulling always equals shooting. Since we know this is not the case I think it is safe to say that you were taught wrong. Good to see that you were able to set aside this bad teaching.

Try it this way: you only bring a gun into a situation if you would be justified in using it.


I disagree with this. How about this instead: You bring the gun into any situation that causes you to be fearful of death or great bodily injury or eminent threat thereof.

DanThaMan1776
July 18, 2010, 03:44 PM
If I can get away with drawing my firearm and not using lethal force to defend myself or another.. I would choose that route any day.

Maromero
July 18, 2010, 05:21 PM
So you were taught that pulling equals a must shoot. Then you say you don't have to fire it after pulling every time. This is a major contradiction. So one must conclude that either you were taught wrong or that pulling always equals shooting. Since we know this is not the case I think it is safe to say that you were taught wrong. Good to see that you were able to set aside this bad teaching.

There is no contradiction. When you draw, you draw to fire. Let's agree to disagree and you are welcome to do so.

DanThaMan1776 If I can get away with drawing my firearm and not using lethal force to defend myself or another.. I would choose that route any day.

If I could avoid the whole situation altogether even better.

Nnobby45
July 18, 2010, 05:34 PM
Interesting thread. I was taught that you only bring a gun into a situation if you are going to use it. Never to show it, never to scare someone but only to use it. Using it means fire the gun. You don't have to fire the gun every single time you draw your handgun but every time I draw the sole intention is to immediately stop a threat.

That's contradictory. The first sentence says you were taught not to draw unless you're going to use your gun.

The next says you don't have to fire it every time you draw.

Sometimes the threat IS stopped when you draw. Sometimes you have to shoot. OF COURSE the intention is to immediately stop a threat.

Lots of folks take the position that they aren't going to draw unless they're going to shoot. Guess they'll be shooting Bubba down while he's screaming "DON'T SHOOT!" with his hands in the air in front of witnesses, or while he's hot footing it in the other direction the instant he sees you go for a weapon.

Common sense should prefail over what someone heard or read somewhere. EVERYONE who carries a gun should know that the situation can change by the time you clear leather. Anyone who would teach someone they have to shoot everytime they draw is incompetent, and so is someone who teaches that just drawing the gun will always solve the problem.



Yes, I do feel better now. Sorry to vent, but sometimes enough is enough--probably the dang Red Bull again.;)

GunGuy34
July 18, 2010, 05:36 PM
I agree with the OP also. I also love what Glen said, was kinda funny. Police draw their weapons all the time, many have done it over their entire career without ever fireing a shot. If your carrying a cw period you should be willing to use it if a situation dictates. If you have no intention of using the weapon and are just carrying it as a deturent then ya thats a mistake.

m&p45acp10+1
July 18, 2010, 06:23 PM
I was taught and trained to not bring a firearm into the situation unless I was willing to use it if need be. That does not mean if I take it out then someone is getting filled with lead. Simply put I will not pull it out unless I am in a situation that calls for the use of deadly force. If the threat ceases without me having to shoot then it worked. I know not to just pull out a weapon if I am not going to use because if the threat calls that bluff thing will get deadly fast.

Rastus
July 18, 2010, 07:09 PM
Tell me if a BG is at 50 feet, waving a knife and yelling he is going to cut your heart out. Are you justied in pulling your gun ? Hmmmm I'm thinking here in California, Marin County, you might end up in prison if you do.

Well, here in South Carolina, Charleston County, I doubt I would be prosecuted for simply showing Mr. Bad Guy that I am armed if he's only 50 feet away, armed with a knife and declaring his intent to kill me. I am disabled and unable to run and I can no longer fight effectively. I would feel compelled to draw.

Maromero
July 18, 2010, 10:02 PM
That's contradictory. The first sentence says you were taught not to draw unless you're going to use your gun.

The next says you don't have to fire it every time you draw.

Sometimes the threat IS stopped when you draw. Sometimes you have to shoot. OF COURSE the intention is to immediately stop a threat.


Of course. That would be murder 1 but that's not the point. You don't draw to scare the would be attacker or intimidate a bully. When you draw your gun unnecessarily because there was no immediate threat, you escalate the situation. So, you only draw when there is a threat to you or a 3rd person. And you draw to shoot, not intimidate. Now, if the situation manages to change in the second or two you draw you have to make that decision to stop because the threat was stoped. if you shoot you commit a crime.

Common sense should prefail over what someone heard or read somewhere. EVERYONE who carries a gun should know that the situation can change by the time you clear leather. Anyone who would teach someone they have to shoot everytime they draw is incompetent, and so is someone who teaches that just drawing the gun will always solve the problem.

Wow! Personal attacks. Tell you now I won't compete in the Special Olympics.

Glenn E. Meyer
July 18, 2010, 11:21 PM
This is a stupid debate over nit-picking parsing.

1. You draw because you feel the need that you might have to shoot as the situation meets the need for and criteria to use deadly force.
2. You don't have to shoot.
3 You can challenge someone to see if that stops the threat that did meet the criteria for using deadly force. That depends on the lay of land.

So that's it. Stop playing word games and having a personality contest.

Nnobby45
July 19, 2010, 12:07 AM
This is a stupid debate over nit-picking parsing.

1. You draw because you feel the need that you might have to shoot as the situation meets the need for and criteria to use deadly force.
2. You don't have to shoot.
3 You can challenge someone to see if that stops the threat that did meet the criteria for using deadly force. That depends on the lay of land.

So that's it. Stop playing word games and having a personality contest.


I agree, and that's essentially what I'm saying. The specific situation determines the proper (and legal) course of action.

Sorry you think my attack was personal. It wasn't. It was aimed at a way of thinking that, as I mentioned, is too wide spread.

Lastly: :)I personally think you'd do fine in the Special Olylmpics--if you trained hard.:p;):D

threegun
July 19, 2010, 06:08 AM
When you draw your gun unnecessarily because there was no immediate threat, you escalate the situation.

This has not been my experience nor the experience of about 95 percent of defensive gun usages according to Glenn Meyer. As I said earlier and Glenn clarified sometimes you display your weapon before all three criteria ability, intent, and opportunity are met. This rarely escalates the threat and almost always DEescalates it.

Never to show it, never to scare someone but only to use it. Using it means fire the gun.And you draw to shoot, not intimidate

You say that our sole intention for drawing should be to fire and this is simply wrong. When I drew on those kids on the basketball court my intention was to get them to stop advancing so I didn't have to shoot. I wanted to scare them. Guess what it worked.

If I don't "intimidate" them if I wait until all three criteria are met before pulling I just did a disservice to myself tactically, the kids I just shot, their families, my brother in law, etc.

Pulling equals being willing to use it thats it. Justification for pulling must be determined at that moment. Sitting here I can tell you without a sliver of doubt that had you been on that basketball court with 10-15 teen aged kids threatening to stomp you and closing the distance you would understand that there are times when pulling is both justified and multi intentioned.

OldMarksman
July 19, 2010, 07:54 AM
When you draw your gun unnecessarily because there was no immediate threat, you escalate the situation.You also put yourself at great legal risk. In most states, you must be in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Some states specify that force must be justified, and others, deadly force, though in the latter, your presentation of a weapon may not constitute deadly force per se.

When I drew on those kids on the basketball court .... I wanted to scare them. Guess what it worked.

Here's what the state of Florida puts on its website on that subject:

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html

A relevant excerpt:

Q. When can I use my handgun to protect myself?

A. Florida law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.
Using or displaying a handgun in any other circumstances could result in your conviction for crimes such as improper exhibition of a firearm, manslaughter, or worse.


Arizona also provides legal guidance for the citizen:

http://www.azdps.gov/Services/Concealed_Weapons/documents/instructors_ccw_legal.pdf

Here's a relevant excerpt:

Effective Sep. 30, 2009, there is a new self-defense justification that permits the “defensive display” of a firearm “when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.” A.R.S. § 13-421. In other words, a person threatened with unlawful physical force or deadly physical force can respond with “defensive display of a firearm.” “Defensive Display” means (1) verbally informing an aggressor that you are armed; (2) exposing or displaying a firearm in a manner that a reasonable person would understand is meant to protect against the aggressor’s use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force; or (3) placing your hand on a firearm that is contained in a pocket, purse or other means of containment or transport.

Before the law was changed last year, this same on-line resource by attorney Michael Anthony included the discussion of a hypothetical example in which it was explained that a person being intimidated and shoved by several people would have faced charges of aggravated assault had he drawn his gun or perhaps even put his hand on it. Most states have much more severe restrictions than Arizona has now.

Also, very few states provide resources such as these from Arizona and Florida. It is not a good idea to try to interpret the state code for oneself. So, unless you have reason to know otherwise, it is no doubt best to go by this from Glenn:

1. You draw because you feel the need that you might have to shoot as the situation meets the need for and criteria to use deadly force.
2. You don't have to shoot.
3 You can challenge someone to see if that stops the threat that did meet the criteria for using deadly force. That depends on the lay of land.

Hopefully, your employment of your weapon will result in your not being killed or seriously harmed or in your shooting of an innocent person. It would be very, very good, of course, if it turns out that you do not have to shoot at all. Still better if you are not charged with a crime for either having drawn without lawful justification or having used deadly force without lawful justification.

threegun
July 19, 2010, 11:13 AM
Oldmarksman, I had 10-15 teens approaching me while making threats of violence. Their numbers certainly gave them the ability to cause me great bodily harm and death. Their verbal threats and posturing certainly gave them the intent to do the same. The only thing lacking because of the distance remaining for them to finish covering was opportunity. I made the decision that should I not be able to retreat safely I was going to use my firearm to stop the threat. When I displayed my firearm it was in the hope that the sight of it would stop the advance and thus end the encounter. I could have waited perhaps a few seconds longer to reach that danger zone in which I would be lucky to get my firearm into action had they chosen to turn a walk into a bum rush. Then I would have eliminated any advantage I had at the moment as well as doomed them to a much greater risk of being shot.

I was totally justified in pulling my firearm according to FLA law. I absolutely hoped that it would scare them into compliance. I was also preparing to use it should they continue.

I posted this to respond to this......

Never to show it, never to scare someone but only to use it. Using it means fire the gun.................


.................And you draw to shoot, not intimidate


This is simply not true.

Maromero
July 19, 2010, 11:20 AM
This is simply not true.

If when you draw your gun you are not justified to shoot in self defense you have no business drawing.

Glenn E. Meyer
July 19, 2010, 11:34 AM
Like I said, we are word playing and the concept is clear. I explained it. :D

You don't have to shoot when you draw it. That's all.

Bye Bye

Closed.