Sum1 Special,
I find it overly convenient that you have opted to cite text from another source without citing some critical information that immediately preceded it. Quoting from the same original source in the same section and citing lines just preceding the ones you cited...
Quote:
V.D.1.d.: When to draw or shoot?
Three conditions have to met before you can even consider drawing your pistol:
somebody has the *intent* of killing or severely hurting you
they have the *means* of doing so (a knife, pistol, shotgun, their hands, etc.)
they have the immediate *opportunity* to do so
|
Then when countered by Armstrong, you came up with the lame scenario that you called murder,
Quote:
|
Lets say a drunk stumbles out of a bar and bumps into you. He gets angry and starts yelling at you, you do nothing, he pushes you and threatens you with violence, you 'fear for your life' draw your gun and empty the magazine into him...
|
This scenario does NOT match the criteria cited in the article for using lethal force. Your example constituted simple assault maybe, which is a use of force, but not a use of force that indicates the need for the use of lethal force. The drunk had NOT demonstrated the ability to kill you and so you should not have emptied your gun into him.
The article had some shortcomings, such as noted by Charles S, but the suggestion to use lethal force to the fullest extent to assure one's own safety when your life is intentionally being endangered by another who has the intent, opportunity, and ability to kill you is solid logic. Sure, if you want to draw to draw on somebody who already has those three criteria met and THEN verbrally challenge that person, that is your call, although from the overly simplified description, it would appear to be a very tactically stupid call to make.
You are right, cops don't draw their guns at the first sign of minor trouble, sum as being pushed by a drunk, but they do at the first sign if potential lethal force conflict where the opposition meets those criteria IF drawing is the best alternative they have at that time. Then again, most cops I know where ballistic vests, carry a myriad of weapons, can call OFFICER NEEDS HELP and have multiple responders on scene within seconds whereas calling 911 might take minutes or 10s of minutes for a non-LEO to summon help. No sir, what officers do or do not do is NOT a direct comparison with what non-LEOs should do in many cases because us non-LEOs don't have the same situation and support base as LEOs.
A couple of years ago in Dallas, the most highly critical 911 calls, such as a person was being attacked, still took 6-8 minutes for Dallas LEOs to make it on scene on average and that was the best it had been in years and they were proud of the improvement. Some cities were in double digits.
No sir, you don't have the same support structure as the cops and using the cops as a model on how to respond to a lethal force confrontation without that same support structure, training, and gear is exceedingly naive.