Opinions pls.

[NRMCOLT]

Situation: An aggressor (could be male/female) is attacking someone with the intention of great bodily harm or even death with a deadly weapon in hand, you are a ccw holder(PTC), you draw your pistol at low ready and shout command to the attacker to drop the weapon which he/she does but, after dropping said weapon the attacker begin to advance to your position showing signs of aggressive behavior towards you but is unarmed.

Question: What would you do?

Thanks!

[Superhornet]

Another no win situation set up ??? Bang, Bang..drop the weapon........

[molonlabe]

and shout command to the attacker to drop the weapon

Shoot and say, Did I say don't move????

Going for 100

[Redworm]

I've noticed these types of questions come up a lot on this forum and so far the general concensus has been to research your local laws. From what I understand some states would let you take the agressor down without a second thought while others would send you to jail.


Shoot the guy in the leg? If he's unarmed I'd weigh the question of whether or not I can take him down without a weapon, but not knowing if he's carrying an extra weapon or if he's a skilled fighter would usually answer the question right there.

[MRex21]

The perp has already demonstrated his intent to maim/kill. Dropping the implement he was using does not change that intent. He is taking an aggressive stance at another potential target. Shoot. Render aid to his victim. Activate EMS.

Local laws apply.

[Clayfish]

That would definatly be a stupid person. I'd still protect myself.

[progunner1957]

It sounds like if they come at you with no weapon in sight, their intention is to take your gun and use it to kill you. In that case, you are in "immediate danger of grave bodily harm or death" and are justified in shooting your attacker.

It is popular to believe that if you carry a gun, you must have 10 years of "weapon retention training" under your belt and hold a 50th degree black belt in weapon retention.

Weapon retention training is a good thing to have, but IMHO the best weapon retention technique is obviously this:

Shoot your attacker!

[ATW525]

Clearly the question is wrong, because if I believed "An aggressor (could be male/female) is attacking someone with the intention of great bodily harm or even death with a deadly weapon in hand" I wouldn't have shouted anything, and my gun would have done all the talking.

[RWK]

" . . . and shout command to the attacker to drop the weapon"

Why? I know of no law that requires -- or even recommends -- any verbal commands or exhortations. If the felon is an immediate threat to innocent life/grave injury, reasonable force (lethal force) can generally be employed. How does shouting anything alter this fundamental principal?

[Bob42]

But does it hurt to give a verbal command? If the guy is not charging you why not try to avoid shooting someone? A lot of people here seem to be of the shoot first ask questions later persuasion.

[ATW525]

But does it hurt to give a verbal command? If the guy is not charging you why not try to avoid shooting someone? A lot of people here seem to be of the shoot first ask questions later persuasion.

By the wording on scenario the aggressor is attacking someone else with a deadly weapon. Taking the time to give a verbal command can be fatal to the victim.

[Bob42]

I guess that didn’t make sense. I was responding to the original question. If the aggressor is advancing on me in a threatening manner, but not immediately threatening me, then he gets a verbal warning. If he does not comply, then he gets shot. (Yes, I’m being sexist)

As for the shouting to drop the weapon, I can see situations where just shooting the attacker would be inadvisable. (If the only shot is a headshot) However, if one cannot make the shot then drawing seems like a bad idea in the first place.

[ISP2605]

Your scenario is a good example why just carrying a gun is not self protection. In LE it's called the use of force continuum. If you aren't training in other methods of self protection then you really aren't protecting yourself.

[Twycross]

1st item- Bob42. Welcome to TFL!

2nd item- I think I have a compromise. Start your shout to "drop it now!!!" as you start your draw. If they havn't dropped it by the time you have acquired the target and are ready to fire, shoot. It they do drop it, assess the situation farther.

3rd item- As far as the original scenario goes, I have one question. What kind of thug would disarm themseves before attacking an armed person?

[ATW525]

What kind of thug would disarm themseves before attacking an armed person?

The soon to be deceased kind.

[RWK]

"But does it hurt to give a verbal command? If the guy is not charging you why not try to avoid shooting someone? A lot of people here seem to be of the shoot first ask questions later persuasion."

In addition to concurring with ATW525’s comment, I would offer two further points:
a) Accuracy and speed are crucial in lethal situations; I want to focus my FULL concentration on that shot -- given that the circumstances are SO extreme that deadly force must be utilized -- and movement, speech, time consumed, or any thing else lessens my capabilities.
b) I think you could not be more wrong in your belief that “A lot of people here seem to be of the shoot first ask questions later persuasion”. Since you made that assertion in response to my posting, I want to respectfully correct your misapprehension. I pray I never have to fire -- or draw -- a weapon in self-defense (or, for that matter, in the defense of others who are in mortal peril). However, if I am compelled to do so, I want to be extremely effective, simply because the lives and well-being of innocents will depend on my competencies.

And, by the way, more than a few of us on TFL have served in combat and know how dreadful the aftermath can be. This, alone, should be adequate to indicate that we are NOT of the “shoot first ask questions later persuasion”.

[RWK]

"If the aggressor is advancing on me in a threatening manner, but not immediately threatening me, then he gets a verbal warning."

Bob,

As a “PS” to the foregoing post, I really do not understand your logic, as articulated above. How can someone “advance in a threatening manner”, but not be ”immediately threatening"? I sincerely do not get it.

The standard in Virginia (and in most other states) is clear: Either someone poses a grave and immediate threat of death/serious injury to innocents or they do not. If they do, you do not have the time to wait -- that is what the word “immediate” signifies.

More important, welcome to TFL!

[tshadow6]

I would make every attempt to get away, not caring if I looked like a coward.

[john in jax]

Florida law, as I understand it, is simple and clearcut. If you can escape the situation you MUST try to escape. BUT if at any point you BELIEVE you or anybody else might be seriously hurt or killed, then you can use deadly force in defense.

In your senario, you might might be able to escape only to have the perp, kill the original victim. It all comes down to what you BELIEVE will happen. I think I would retreat trying to lead the perp away - distract him from his victim, but if at any point I could not escape OR that anyone was in danger I would have no choice but to use deadly force to stop him.