|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 24, 2014, 03:15 AM | #51 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
Quote:
Getting out of your car removes the protection you have from an impact weapon. Sure, if you have a chance to get out of your car before your attacker is too close and you're also fast enough to always stay on the opposite side of the car from him, then that might work. But the better option is usually to simply to stay in your car and be prepared to shoot if the person starts to breach your car, even if you're in a Miata.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
||
June 24, 2014, 09:23 AM | #52 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
|
@Theohazard
Quote:
If the situation had turned into a gun fight, he would have to shoot through the window, which would likely deflect his shot. While the car itself is maneuverable, a passenger in the vehicle is not very maneuverable. Cars provide very poor coverage, especially newer cars (in the name of fuel efficiency). They provide very little concealment as well. If I had to shoot at a car, I would aim where the occupants would be seated. As I mentioned, the attacker is in FRONT of the other vehicle and he is approaching. It has not been determined if he is armed or not. Approaching him with the vehicle reduces the distance, making it easier for him to shoot you. Backing up is not really an option on an off-ramp. You are entitled to your opinion, but if I was in the situation, I would draw my weapon and prepare to exit my vehicle. The door offer little protection so I after a verbal warning, I would move to the back of the vehicle. I am not a cop and I don't play one on tv, but I did have a situation once that has caused me to believe my course of action would be the right one.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency! |
|
June 24, 2014, 09:26 AM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
I don't necessarily think the OP did anything wrong, except claim he would have started shooting at 21 feet. If he was truly blocked in, getting out of the car may have some merit - it gives you some freedom to move around if the road rage guy happens to be armed. Otherwise, you may be a sitting duck. We've had this discussion before, and depending on the details of the situation, I could go either way on whether to stay inside your car or not. Details like: how blocked in was he; how many aggressors was he facing; avenues of escape; size and type of the OP's vehicle; size of the aggressor's vehicle....
Personally, I'd stay inside my vehicle. If there was any ability to get around the aggressor's car, including hitting it with my vehicle, I'd opt for that. If not, I would hide inside of my Jeep, if I had time - my jeep's big enough to give me some options with multiple doors, etc. As my EDC only has 8 shots of 9mm, and to make sure that I am not shooting anyone who just intends to yell at me, I'm not firing any shots until someone is trying to break into my car to do obviously do harm to me or my passengers. Getting out of the car is an option, but from what I've seen, your chances go way down when being attacked by multiple attackers once you are outside of your car. |
June 24, 2014, 09:34 AM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
|
A lot of folks are still hanging on to the idea that the OP's car could drive away. Sorry folks, you don't get to choose the scenario or modify it to suit.
Here is what was presented: OP is riding in a car. Road rage guy exhibits extreme anger and traps the car so it can't move. Then RR Guy starts to get out of the car. You are armed, and you and your driver are capable of exiting the vehicle. That's it. And the question is, what do you do? I am absolutely correct in saying that if RRG has a gun, you better get out of the car before he does. That's worst case, and it is unlikely, but you are already in an unlikely situation. If you guess that he doesn't have a gun and you are wrong, you are probably dead. Inside the car you are a stationary target with no cover. So, what do I do? Get out of the car, make no move to draw my weapon, and tell my driver to call 911 Right Now. That's it. What happens next has to be evaluated, and it could go a hundred different ways.
__________________
SAF, ACLDN, IDPA, handgunlaw.us My AmazonSmile benefits SAF I'd rather be carried by 6 than caged by 12. 2020: It's pronounced twenty twenty. |
June 24, 2014, 09:35 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 18, 2011
Location: The Woods
Posts: 1,197
|
The news story would read:
- - Men from two cars were involved in yet another tragic road rage indecent on the freeway this week. The indent started on the freeway where it's unclear which driver starred the altercation. After exiting the freeway and stopping on the ramp men from both cars excited their vehicles. At this point the passenger from one car fatally shot the unarmed driver of the other car. Witnesses say the victim was shot just while exciting his vehicle. One witness was quoted as saying " the guy was just getting out of his car - he was just shouting at the guys in the other car and walking over and they just shoot him. This is why we need more gun control, man. I mean these psychos shouldn't have had guns. " The victim is survived by a whole bunch of family that all remember him as a great guy. The shooter is in police custody awaiting arraignment. Some politicians who want to be seen as "tough on violent crime" are demanding the shooter be tried for murder. State police are investigating the indecent, and declined to give comment. - - Maybe not your perception of the truth, but to anyone not on the car you'd just be a guy that killed someone in a road rage indecent. Unless he's approaching with a gun (or shooting at you) the best option is to either drive away, or let them smash up your car a little. Unless you're driving one of the more expensive Ferraris, any damage to your car is going to be a drop in the bucket next to what you pay in legal fees to defend yourself in both the criminal and civil trials, and then any appeals that come after. |
June 24, 2014, 09:50 AM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
|
@dayman,
That is your assumption of what the news story would read and what would occur. You are obviously entitled to your opinion, but there are other plausible scenarios. The ticked off road rage guy decides to draw a weapon and shoot both occupants of the car. No one caught the license plate since the other car was blocking the view. The passenger was armed but could not shoot accurately from within the car. yada yada yada survived by yada yada yada...
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency! Last edited by Frank Ettin; June 24, 2014 at 05:04 PM. Reason: delete vulgarity |
June 24, 2014, 10:31 AM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Quote:
|
|
June 24, 2014, 10:57 AM | #58 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
SAF, ACLDN, IDPA, handgunlaw.us My AmazonSmile benefits SAF I'd rather be carried by 6 than caged by 12. 2020: It's pronounced twenty twenty. |
||
June 24, 2014, 11:20 AM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2014
Location: Michigan
Posts: 189
|
Thanks for everyone's input, I've been reading posts and doing a lot of reflecting. This is where I am:
1. I think preparing to exit the vehicle was the right choice. Say the aggressor comes to the driver side window (I'm in passenger seat) and busts the window or presents a firearm of his own. The driver is now caught in crossfire and were both like shooting fish in a barrel. 2. It was very irresponsible for me to just say I would shoot if he got within 21 feet. For me to get to that point, the following would need to happen; he would have had to fully exit his vehicle and I mine. With my pistol at the low, I would tell him to get back in his car. If he continued at us, aggressively, I would have raised my pistol. If he continued, he is probably psychotic with intentions of doing physical harm and may even have a weapon of his own. Serious thought would be given to pulling the trigger. There are a lot of variables that would affect decisions made in mere seconds. Do I fire a warning shot? Not at the ground, it could ricochet and hit an innocent person. Would I shoot his trunk? Good possibility. When it comes down to it. I'm glad things never escalated to such a serious situation and I appreciate all the feedback. I've learned a lot from this experience. |
June 24, 2014, 11:55 AM | #60 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 21, 2011
Location: Southern Louisiana
Posts: 1,399
|
Good post. Sounds like you've done a lot of thinking since your original post.
Quote:
Quote:
Just remember that you can't use deadly force unless you're in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. Why would you shoot someone's trunk instead of them if you were in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm? Must not have been too imminent if you had time to shoot at their car. Last edited by 45_auto; June 24, 2014 at 12:05 PM. |
||
June 24, 2014, 12:13 PM | #61 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
Here's a police training article describing the tactics. In an ambush by a gunman, police are taught to use the car for cover, return fire from inside the vehicle, and only exit the vehicle when the situation allows it. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." Last edited by Theohazard; June 24, 2014 at 12:20 PM. |
|||
June 24, 2014, 01:37 PM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 3, 2012
Posts: 506
|
Some may think showing the FA solves the problem. Do not be surprised if the individual throws his arm up and say "what you going do shoot me"...and continues to cuss you out. You ready to shoot him now? If not he may take the gun from you and report the nut who just tried to kill him. You were the one who turned a verbal altercation into a gun fight by pulling first. Cry all you want how scared you were, but absent a weapon or physical injury YOU appear the aggressor who pulled a gun on an unarmed man.
If you pull it, better be ready to use it! Getting out of your vehicle totally negates any "fear" argument. Even a punch or assault in most cases does not justify use of deadly force. You prob recall the arguments in the FL case. Many might say because you had a gun you felt more aggressive in pressing the matter and engaging to inflame matters. |
June 24, 2014, 01:40 PM | #63 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
|
|
June 24, 2014, 01:55 PM | #64 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 14, 2007
Posts: 245
|
Quote:
But at least exiting your vehicle, weapon in hand, sets you up nicely for a charge of Mutual Combat negating your claim of self defense. But its not like there is any case law in Michigan covering how mutual combat negates the claim of self defense. The law is not want we want nor what we think it should be. It is what it is. Determined ignorance of the law is less than helpful. |
|
June 24, 2014, 02:00 PM | #65 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
If someone fires a warning shot, it can be argued that this means they weren't in fear for their life: After, all, if you're in fear for your life, why not actually fire at the person attacking you? And therefore, if it can be shown that the person wasn't in fear for their life because they fired warning shots, any subsequent shots that hit the assailant are more likely be called into question. Basically, the argument would be that when the person started shooting, they obviously weren't in fear for their life, otherwise they would have aimed directly at their assailant. So, when the assailant ends up shot, there might be more questions about whether the shooting was actually legally justified. Keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer nor am I an expert in the legal use of self-defense. But this is how it's been explained to me by people who are experts.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
|
June 24, 2014, 02:24 PM | #66 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Last edited by manta49; June 24, 2014 at 02:33 PM. |
|
June 24, 2014, 02:33 PM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
|
Quote:
So, by firing a warning shot, you're simply providing evidence that you weren't in fear for your life. And therefore lethal force may have not been justified at that moment. Warning shots have proven time and again to be a terrible idea from both a tactical and a legal standpoint. I'm amazed that there are still people here advocating for the firing of warning shots in a self-defense situation.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume." |
|
June 24, 2014, 02:45 PM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Last edited by manta49; June 24, 2014 at 02:51 PM. |
|
June 24, 2014, 03:12 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2002
Location: alaska
Posts: 3,498
|
If your life/safety is threatened to the point where you have to at the very least draw your weapon out, do you honestly believe that you will have the mental fortitude to take a carefully aimed shot in the direction of the threat yet aim it so that you dont hit the threat, and you are positive your bullet will safely fly off without harming anyone?
With that massive adrenalin dump, do you want to add to the fecesstorm firing a warning shot? We take the time to mentally prepare for the horrific event of using deadly force in defense of ourselves or for someone else, our loved ones, even complete strangers. We select weapons that will do the job, and practice shooting so we are proficient with them. We select defensive ammunition that is proven to stop an attacker, without over penetrating. We change our language so we talk about 'stopping' instead of 'killing'. Feel free to fire a warning shot if you like. Thats YOUR choice.
__________________
"Every man alone is sincere; at the entrance of a second person hypocrisy begins." - Ralph Waldo Emerson "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Soren Kierkegaard |
June 24, 2014, 03:29 PM | #70 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by manta49; June 24, 2014 at 03:41 PM. |
||
June 24, 2014, 03:47 PM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: Back in a Non-Free State
Posts: 3,133
|
First and foremost, get the hell out of there if possible.
Stay in the car and call 911. Make sure the guy sees that you are on the phone. Don't get out of your car. Take a pic of his plates if possible. Most people come to their senses when they realize that they can be ID'd. If the guy beats on your friend's car after all that; draw your gun but don't point it at him. The rest of it is a crap shoot. If he's trying to break into the car then all bets are off. Even then, though - some ADA wanting to make a name for themselves may come after you if you shoot or kill the guy. It's always a pain in the rear to shoot someone legally.
__________________
Simple as ABC . . . Always Be Carrying |
June 24, 2014, 04:20 PM | #72 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
June 24, 2014, 04:27 PM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 30, 2013
Posts: 1,037
|
Quote:
Cement highway dividers, trees, other vehicles. And what's more is that you have the freedom to move. I'm not saying that exiting the car would always be the better choice, but sometimes it is. |
|
June 24, 2014, 05:10 PM | #74 |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
First, a warning shot is almost always a terrible, terrible idea. That bullet will be going somewhere -- and perhaps somewhere you don't want it to go. And if you're truly in a critical situation facing imminent death, you need to deal with the situation.
Second, in most cases, in most States, threatening someone with a gun (or firing the gun) must be justified on the same basis as using lethal force in self defense. Even in those few States applying a different standard to threatening lethal force you must still be able to show justification for you action.
__________________
"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 |
June 24, 2014, 05:43 PM | #75 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 15, 2011
Location: N Ireland. UK.
Posts: 1,809
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|