The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 1, 2011, 04:28 PM   #76
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Some, such as MLeake and ripnbst, are apparently confident enough of their hand-to-hand skills to let him get close. Others of us don't think that's a good idea -- hands and feet can injure or kill, and it's possible that he is carrying some sort of weapon.
Perfect.
threegun is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 04:39 PM   #77
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
My personal concern with this entire thread, as I outlined earlier, is that almost everyone is looking at this "individual" as an aggressor, largely because the OP phrased it in such a manner.

This is supposed to be an evaluation of a scenario. Already a hypothetical scenario of this specificity is somewhat pointless as it would have a zillion other factors that can't be imagined.
Consequently, all those blanks are filled in by members who are on a gun forum.... So naturally this "neutral" situation is already biased toward an issue of attack and defence.

Nothing in the OP talks about an attack, though. Except the title, that is. There is the word assailant is in bold letters. So again, the perspective is biased yet more.. That is "kooky".

Others have mooted that this individual could simply be in distress. If I had to fill in some of the blanks of this situation, given the environment, that would seem the more likely explanation.

Yet so many are chomping at the bit to pull a gun.
All we can do is take the words of the OP. If this scenario happened to you how would you handle it? I for one would love to know why someone would allow a stranger, in the middle of nowhere, who refuses to talk or otherwise state his intentions, to close to within striking distance, while armed. This to me is tactical stupidity.

If we were chomping at the bit as you put it to pull a gun why give multiple warnings or retreat? Such assumptions are not very nice.
threegun is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 04:52 PM   #78
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Posted by Vanya: But if someone doesn't answer such a hail and keeps coming even when you then ask him to stop, how do you know that he's NOT a threat?

He hasn't shown a weapon, but you don't know that he's unarmed.
You do not, and correct, you don't.

That's a long, long way from having an articulable reason to believe that an imminent threat existed and that the use of force (TX and MN) or deadly force (anywhere else) to defend against that threat was justified.

Yes, I know that drawing a firearm does not constitute the use of deadly force in most jurisdictions; it's just that a civilian may not do so except when faced with an immediate threat that would justify the use of deadly force (or force, in the two states mentioned).

Without a schematic, we cannot opine from here whether the approach was suspicious or simply coincidental. People come within arms reach of others all the time, and one cannot issue a lawful, enforceable command to not do so without cause.

What we can say is that if the man's behavior was lawful and proper, drawing the firearm could actually give either the approaching man, or his unseen companion or both, reason to believe that he was faced with imminent danger of death or serious injury, justifying the use of deadly force against the OP.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 04:52 PM   #79
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
So--what was it that led you to conclude that you would be able to convincingly articulate to police officers or if necessary, to others why a reasonable person, knowing what you knew at the time, would conclude that you had been justified in drawing your firearm simply because the person did not stop approaching you?
Read Vanya's post and thats what.

(1) Would you let a Lion, Tiger, or Bear close on you without a challenge? Why on Earth would you allow the most dangerous animal on Earth to close to within striking distance? Especially one exhibiting abnormal behavior.

(2) Do you consider ignoring commands to stop, alarming in the slightest?

(3) Do you suspect someone is willing to kill you if they are willing to continue advancing in the face of deadly force?

(4) Does the scenario posed by the OP raise any red flags at all in the strangers behavior?
threegun is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 05:04 PM   #80
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
(1) Would you let a Lion, Tiger, or Bear close on you without a challenge?
Challenge? What good would a challenge do?
Quote:
Why on Earth would you allow the most dangerous animal on Earth to close to within striking distance? Especially one exhibiting abnormal behavior.

(2) Do you consider ignoring commands to stop, alarming in the slightest?
See Post #78 about lawful, enforceable commands.

Quote:
(3) Do you suspect someone is willing to kill you if they are willing to continue advancing in the face of deadly force?
See Post #78 about reasonable belief. Suspicion is not enough.

Quote:
(4) Does the scenario posed by the OP raise any red flags at all in the strangers behavior?
Sure would take me out of Condition Yellow!
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 05:07 PM   #81
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Without a schematic, we cannot opine whether the approach was suspicious or simply coincidental. People come within arms reach of others all the time, and one cannot issue a lawful, enforceable command to not do so without cause.
Again this isn't the big city heck this isn't even a small town. This is the middle of nowhere. Yes you have the legal right to walk past the area I occupy. I also have the right to self defense. The fact that a stranger would choose the same path in the vast middle of nowhere and remain on that path after seeing me, is a cause for concern to me in and of itself. The fact that the stranger refuses to even attempt communication is even more alarming. I would confirm my suspicions by retreating of course. Once I am followed in my mind I am under attack.
threegun is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 05:14 PM   #82
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
The fact that a stranger would choose the same path in the vast middle of nowhere and remain on that path after seeing me, is a cause for concern to me in and of itself.
My point is, if I am on the shore and he is walking along the shore, I de not have reason for commanding him to stop. There are other possibilities that give the same result. We need more on it.

Quote:
The fact that the stranger refuses to even attempt communication is even more alarming.
It would raise concern, but consider hearing impairment, an IPod, or certain completely not violent attention disorders.

Quote:
I would confirm my suspicions by retreating of course.
I presume you would include evasion, to test his intention. I would do that too.

Quote:
Once I am followed in my mind I am under attack.
Certainly would indicate that you are a target. Question remains how to avoid the use of excessive force if possible.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 05:33 PM   #83
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
Quote:
(1) Would you let a Lion, Tiger, or Bear close on you without a challenge?

Challenge? What good would a challenge do?
Quote:
Why on Earth would you allow the most dangerous animal on Earth to close to within striking distance? Especially one exhibiting abnormal behavior.

(2) Do you consider ignoring commands to stop, alarming in the slightest?

See Post #78 about lawful, enforceable commands.


Quote:
(3) Do you suspect someone is willing to kill you if they are willing to continue advancing in the face of deadly force?

See Post #78 about reasonable belief. Suspicion is not enough.


Quote:
(4) Does the scenario posed by the OP raise any red flags at all in the strangers behavior?

Sure would take me out of Condition Yellow!
You challenge a beast with your firearm. Fire a warning shot to scare it off if possible or just shoot it.

I read post 78 and in the real world if you wait and it is an attack you will likely suffer injury or death while struggling for control of your openly carried firearm.

Condition red won't help you if the bad guy waits until he is in swinging range to finally give you the justification you are waiting for.

With your thinking I really hope you have a hellava hand to hand skill set and some major gun retention skills.
threegun is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 05:51 PM   #84
Evan Thomas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pond, James Pond
...all those blanks are filled in by members who are on a gun forum.... So naturally this "neutral" situation is already biased toward an issue of attack and defence.

Nothing in the OP talks about an attack, though. Except the title, that is. There is the word assailant is in bold letters. So again, the perspective is biased yet more.. That is "kooky".
Yeah... umm... well... it's a gun forum. In particular, it's a tactics forum. Sure, the thread title could have been better phrased, but I think by now we all get that.

On a wilderness medicine forum, the thread title might be "Uncommunicative victim approaching," which is also biased.

On a fishing forum, it might be "Blundering fish-scaring fool approaching."

Et cetera.

If you find it "kooky" that members of a gun forum would discuss whether it's appropriate to use, or even draw, a gun in a given, hypothetical situation, and why or why not... I guess I'm not sure why you're here.
.....................

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMarksman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanya
But if someone doesn't answer such a hail and keeps coming even when you then ask him to stop, how do you know that he's NOT a threat?

He hasn't shown a weapon, but you don't know that he's unarmed.
You do not, and correct, you don't.

That's a long, long way from having an articulable reason to believe that an imminent threat existed and that the use of force (TX and MN) or deadly force (anywhere else) to defend against that threat was justified.
Agreed. Which is why I'll retreat and continue to tell him to stop, and use pepper spray rather than a gun if he persists...

Quote:
Without a schematic, we cannot opine from here whether the approach was suspicious or simply coincidental. People come within arms reach of others all the time, and one cannot issue a lawful, enforceable command to not do so without cause.
There's plenty of room between "coincidental" and "suspicious" -- it's not a dichotomy. If "coincidental" means something like "happens to be walking along an established trail in the general direction of a woman who is fishing," then you're right: there's no justification -- at that moment -- for saying anything except "Hi, nice day, isn't it?"

But when someone steps off a trail and approaches, it's not coincidence any more. It remains to be seen whether it's suspicious; it may or may not be. At that point, "Can I help you?" is an utterly reasonable question to ask such a person.

I've spent a lot of time in the backcountry, and I have no hesitation at all in saying that in really remote places, people do not generally "come within arm's reach of others" without making some kind of contact first. If you meet someone on a trail, it's polite to greet them as you're approaching. If you're coming off a trail to approach a campsite, it's polite to stop, hail the campers, and wait for them to respond before coming into the camp. If you're canoeing and you stop at someone's camp, the polite thing is to stay in your boat until they greet you.

I'd never suggest that if someone (rudely) doesn't do those things, it's a reason to pull a gun -- that would be absurd. But I'd absolutely pay some "extra attention" to anyone who failed to observe that kind of elementary backcountry etiquette.

And for sure, it's either rude or very odd not to reply to a simple inquiry like "Hi! Can I help you?" In this scenario, it's the failure of the approaching man to do any of those things that justifies caution: retreating or moving aside, telling him to stop, and so forth.

Quote:
What we can say is that if the man's behavior was lawful and proper, drawing the firearm could actually give either the approaching man, or his unseen companion or both, reason to believe that he was faced with imminent danger of death or serious injury, justifying the use of deadly force against the OP.
Whoa... now you're positing an unseen companion -- who also doesn't have the wit or courtesy to acknowledge a hail? I rest my case, I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMarksman
Quote:
Originally Posted by threegun
The fact that the stranger refuses to even attempt communication is even more alarming.
It would raise concern, but consider hearing impairment, an IPod, or certain completely not violent attention disorders.
Nah. We've already done the hearing-impairment-etc. thing. If someone who is neither blind nor obviously ill or disoriented doesn't respond to words or to gestures, something is wrong enough to justify defensive action of some sort.

Lethal force is an absolute last resort in this or any other situation, but if someone continues to come at me for no apparent reason after I've given every indication, including moving away, that he should stop doing so... Sorry, but he's a threat, and I'll defend myself -- hoping pepper spray will suffice.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry.

Last edited by Evan Thomas; August 1, 2011 at 05:59 PM.
Evan Thomas is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 06:45 PM   #85
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
The grave yard is full of folks who waited to long to react. The line between being legal and in danger vs borderline and safe is very thin. Sometimes you gotta tip toe the line to maintain safety.
threegun is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 07:47 PM   #86
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Posted Vanya: Whoa... now you're positing an unseen companion -- who also doesn't have the wit or courtesy to acknowledge a hail? I rest my case, I think.
I do not think that you should you should.

Look: whatever the lack of wit or courtesy, if it is later determined that our hero had produced a firearm without having been actually threatened with imminent death or serious injury (think A, O, J), it is not only conceivable that either the strange individual or a third person (companion or anyone else) would be justified in the use of deadly force against the OP, but it is a fact that such things have happened. The case law goes back a long, long way.

Quote:
If someone who is neither blind nor obviously ill or disoriented doesn't respond to words or to gestures, something is wrong enough to justify defensive action of some sort.

Lethal force is an absolute last resort in this or any other situation, but if someone continues to come at me for no apparent reason after I've given every indication, including moving away, that he should stop doing so... Sorry, but he's a threat, and I'll defend myself -- hoping pepper spray will suffice.
Seems reasonable to me, but don't bet on it.

But the OP spoke of drawing a gun.

We have been shown nothing that indicates that the strange fellow possessed the ability of kill or cripple our fisherman: that would require either arms or a disparity of force. The idea that "a punch can kill" just won't cut it.

Nor have we seen any evidence of an overt indication that the man intended to harm said citizen with deadly force--that the fisherman was in jeopardy. I think that may fall back on the schematic: was the dude heading along his established way and the fisherman happened to be in his path, or was the dude purposely going after the fisherman?

Unless one is confined to a wheelchair, or is otherwise limited in physical ability, it is highly unlikely that any male citizen will be able to justify threatening an apparently unarmed person who has given no overt indication that he intends to harm said citizen with deadly force, unless he could convincingly mount a furtive movement defense and he could show that he had had he had no alternative in defending himself from imminent death or serious injury.

Drawing a gun under such circumstances? We still haven't seen the map, but it sounds a lot like aggravated assault, probably, as the situation was described. One hopes that the OP had the presence of mind and the wherewithal to be the first to report the incident.

And I think that you understand that very well:

Quote:
I'd never suggest that if someone (rudely) doesn't do those things, it's a reason to pull a gun -- that would be absurd. But I'd absolutely pay some "extra attention" to anyone who failed to observe that kind of elementary backcountry etiquette.
Some years ago my wife and I were photographing wild flowers by the bank of a river. A car drove up to the river some yards away, and a very scary man got out. He looked at us, pulled a knife from his pocket and put it back, and headed our way on foot. Etiquette heck--this guy was worrisome.

We did not have concealed carry than, and we drove away quickly.

Would I have drawn, had I been lawfully armed? Only as a last resort, if escape had been impossible.

I really do not like confrontations, and I prefer avoidance to escalation.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 09:30 PM   #87
Evan Thomas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldMarksman
We have been shown nothing that indicates that the strange fellow possessed the ability of kill or cripple our fisherman: that would require either arms or a disparity of force. The idea that "a punch can kill" just won't cut it.
Mmm.. yah. But I've been consistent in addressing this question from the point of view of a fisherwoman, which was the question in the OP. As I keep pointing out, for the average woman, there's automatically a disparity of force when she's confronted by the average man. So the rules are a wee bit different.

And I know from experience that it can and does happen. I've almost never been harassed, myself; I'm fairly tall, strongly built, and not victim-y, I guess -- at least, I don't seem to attract hostility or unwanted attention -- but I've been in a backcountry situation in which two men decided it would be fun to hassle a group of six women, including by blocking our one escape route. We persuaded them that it was a bad idea, but it took a bit of doing; they assumed they were entitled to invade our campsite just because they felt like it.

Quote:
I really do not like confrontations, and I prefer avoidance to escalation.
Yes indeedy -- we surely agree about that.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry.
Evan Thomas is offline  
Old August 1, 2011, 09:50 PM   #88
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
my rant, not my argument as I respect+appreciate the previous posts(Just My Take)

the fact of the matter is this:

if you do not draw then you might not have to worry about the courts because your butt might be pushing daisies. That doesn't mean it's an "automatic" draw scenario(pun intended), it just means what I am picturing might be something different than you.

I am in the Wilderness on a shore that can kill me if I get wet and don't have a fire by morning(pointless info but what I picture). A man comes from the Distance like some cat out of hollywood or Terminator or something and just Keeps coming. He is working his way over those little and big rocks. He is NOT going to just keep walking and walking to me with no resistance. Maybe I'll retreat, maybe I'll shoot him in the leg, maybe I'll eliminate the threat, maybe I'll draw, maybe he'll stop and start talking, or numerous other examples.

Bottom line up front (as stated in my earlier post), communication Will be made with this person and he will have to stop in some form or another and hopefully and expectedly he will answer me as I will have enough time and extra time to make contact. This isn't commando keyboard hour; it is just I will be able to tell if this is something more sinister then some people realize. It isn't like this guy just appeared right next to me. He walked out of the wilderness. Hopefully he is just some thru hiker but I am not going to allow the AT Killer to have his playtime and I can care less if he is an escaped mental patient that needs some love...
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 01:59 AM   #89
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanya
Sure, the thread title could have been better phrased, but I think by now we all get that.
Numerous members refer to this person who is not known to be an attacker as the aggressor, the situation as the attack, so no, I don't think we all do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanya
On a wilderness medicine forum, the thread title might be "Uncommunicative victim approaching," which is also biased.
Why should one use a title biased toward the home forum, especially if you want an even handed discussion?

Would a title like "Totally normal looking man strolling in your direction" and subsequently information such as "you can't see if the man is wearing head phones", or "you can't see if the man is bleeding from the back of the head", rather than (or at least in addition to) "you don't know if he is armed" not have been more constructive, if you want a debate?

Dull, yes, but more constructive, IMHO.

Would all the shoot first assess later arguements still be so valid?

Finally, if we really want decent, open debate, instead of ending the OP with "What would you do?", better to ask "How would you assess?" or "What would you think?".
Might have reduced some of the seemingly knee-jerk responses.

All that is pretty much my one and only point about this thread.

If you want to discuss tactics, then discuss real cases, assess other member's experiences.
If the situation is fabricated, it shouldn't be biased. It defeats the object, in my view.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanya
If you find it "kooky" that members of a gun forum would discuss whether it's appropriate to use, or even draw, a gun in a given, hypothetical situation, and why or why not
Read my post.
I never said that I find the debate weird. I said I find it wierd that so many are that willing to draw and possibly shoot on another human being, when there are so many unknowns. Unknowns that in real life would exist.

Now if you don't, that is your prerogative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanya
... I guess I'm not sure why you're here.
So this internet forum is no place for challenging a commonly held view, high-lighting where I think people are mistaken or generally not having the same opinion as so many others?
Ok then, I stand corrected.

Last edited by Pond, James Pond; August 2, 2011 at 02:04 AM.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 08:25 AM   #90
AH.74
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 13, 2008
Location: Hermit's Peak
Posts: 623
Quote:
AH.74, the odds of encountering disoriented people in the woods are actually about as high as those of encountering an assailant in the woods.

People get lost and dehydrated, or suffer medical emergencies exponentially more often than people get attacked in the great outdoors.

That's not to say that people don't get attacked; they do. I can think of seven or eight murders in the last five years.

But look how many search and rescue efforts have happened in that same timeframe.

Franky, your hypotheticals are the ridiculous ones.
MLeake, we are just not on the same page. All of these things above are your variables that you have added into the OP's situation, which was simple and clear.

The last part- again you make no sense. I am adding NO hypotheticals. I am using only the facts supplied in the OP, nothing more. Please quote my posts where I have posed any hypotheticals or other variables. A lost Chinese tourist, who has Downs' Syndrome? That's not ridiculous? Please.

Have you encountered an assailant in the woods? As you say, it's rare but things do happen. And it happened once to me, for real.
AH.74 is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 08:33 AM   #91
AH.74
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 13, 2008
Location: Hermit's Peak
Posts: 623
Quote:
Before you get persnicketty you might look up how the law actually works. In more jurisdictions (granted there may be some this is the case) Self Defense is an affirmative defense. You've already admitted to the act and now you're trying to justify the act you did under a legally valid scheme. The presumption at that point is absolutely against you.
Zincwarrior, I hope you never find yourself in a situation where you need to have internal debates about how the law applies and whether you are justified about conducting self-defense. Because if you do, you'll be dead.

I know how the law works in my state because I have experienced it. In real life, not just in the books.
AH.74 is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 08:39 AM   #92
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 2,259
Then you would think your responses would be more appropiate if you supposedly dealt with them "in real life." You're not acting like it.

EDIT: Now I'm starting to sound equally snarky. I'll quit posting in this thread unless directly addressed.

Last edited by zincwarrior; August 2, 2011 at 08:58 AM.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 08:42 AM   #93
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
AH.74, the only facts the OP provided:

Unknown man is walking rapidly toward you, but not in an overtly threatening manner.

He doesn't respond to verbal challenges.

End of facts.

Your assumptions: His approach in and of itself poses a threat; if he doesn't respond to your verbal challenges, he is very obviously a threat; continued non-response justifies drawing; continued approach after draw justifies shooting.

And great, you've been accosted in the woods once, congratulations.

From my perspective, from Civil Air Patrol as a teenager, and military survival training as an adult; plus from having an RN for a significant other (who, by the way, teaches special olympics kids to ride horses); plus from having diabetic friends and relatives; plus from having deaf relatives; plus from working with CSAR and JPRC folks...

There are a LOT of things that can happen in the great outdoors that will cause strange-seeming behaviors.

Dehydration; head injuries; heat exhaustion/heat stroke; blood loss. These are all things that could easily happen to anybody, alone in the woods. Such persons would most likely bee-line for the first person they saw, and might well not respond to typical queries and challenges.

Alzheimer's... there's a big one, especially in Florida... Alzheimer's patients quite often wander off into the woods. They may be perfectly, physically able, yet completely clueless.

There are other mental conditions that could come into play.

As I noted earlier, insulin reactions and hypoglycemia can produce similar results. My grandmother, my lady's mother, an ex-girlfriend of mine were all examples I've personally seen. I've seen several cases on TV where suspected DUI drivers were actually suffering from acute blood-sugar issues, but displayed the symptoms of alcohol or drug excess.

Drugs could also be a factor.

A deaf person won't hear challenges; they might notice your lips moving, but are more likely to notice non-verbal cues. Same goes for one of the ubiquitous wearers of headsets.

Foreign tourists and hikers will normally speak English, but not always.

In other words, the facts as posted by the OP are minimal. You accuse others of making assumptions, yet you are making some mighty big ones yourself. Pond, James Pond has made a great point about how the title of the thread itself has skewed responses, yet you disregard that.

By the way, you still haven't figured out that the Chinese Down's Syndrome lost tourist was actually a joke, since I was positing an hypothetical extreme that actually mirrored some of the extreme assumptions from your side of the house.

But do a search online for lost mental patients in the woods, and compare numbers to assaults and murders in the woods; then do a search for lost foreign tourists and hikers. You might be surprised at how many you would actually find.

I wouldn't. Then again, a lot of my circle of peers are involved in SAR.
MLeake is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 08:59 AM   #94
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Posted by youngunz4life: if you do not draw then you might not have to worry about the courts because your butt might be pushing daisies.
"Might not have to worry" is a far cry from a "reasonable belief that an imminent danger exists and that deadly force is immediately necessary". The latter is the legal standard. The former is a mere possibility.

Quote:
I am in the Wilderness on a shore that can kill me if I get wet and don't have a fire by morning(pointless info but what I picture). A man comes from the Distance like some cat out of hollywood or Terminator or something and just Keeps coming. He is working his way over those little and big rocks. He is NOT going to just keep walking and walking to me with no resistance.
I have yet to see anything from the OP that would give me reason to believe that he is doing anything other than proceeding in a direction in which he has a legal right to proceed. Unless he is, no civilian has any right to resist his progress.

Quote:
Maybe I'll retreat,...
Retreat, if it is safely possible, is required in many jurisdictions.

Quote:
... maybe I'll shoot him in the leg, maybe I'll eliminate the threat,...
Whether you shoot him in the leg intentionally or while you intended to shoot him in the chest, that would constitute deadly force; it is also likely to kill him. In any event, absent an articulable basis for, and evidence supporting, a reasonable belief that he had the ability and the opportunity to kill you or cause crippling injury and that you were in fact in jeopardy and that you had had no alternative, you would most certainly end up locked up for a very long time.

So, what evidence might help you? Consider these:
  • His approach could not reasonably be interpreted as coincidental;
  • it turns out that he did in fact possess that weapon that you said he reached for right before you fired; and
  • either you had no place to go, or the forensic evidence indicates that he contnued to follow you as you attempted to evade him.

Quote:
...maybe I'll draw,...
Same as above.

Quote:
...maybe he'll stop and start talking, or numerous other examples.
Which would include, for example, "maybe he'll walk right on by".

Quote:
Bottom line up front (as stated in my earlier post), communication Will be made with this person and he will have to stop in some form or another...
One more time, just what is it that makes you believe that unless he is attacking you, you have any right to tell him that he will have to stop?

Look: if you draw, and he reports you and can describe your firearm, you will be vulnerable to a felony charge. If you shoot, and you cannot present evidence supporting a reasonable belief that he had the above mentioned ability and opportunity and that you were in jeopardy and that you had no other alternative, your chances of avoiding and beating a manslaughter charge, or even perhaps a murder charge, would be virtually non-existent.

Read this and study it. It would probably be useful to understand what your attorney would be faced with; read this. And take a look at this for more on the subject.

I do not recommend fishing in the great outdoors without a defensive weapon, but I do not recommend walking around with one without having some basis knowledge of both tactics and the legal principles of the use of deadly force, either.

The above links should help a great deal with the latter.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 09:11 AM   #95
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Oldmarksman, Just what does the potential threat have to do in your mind to justify pulling your firearm?
threegun is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 09:11 AM   #96
skydiver3346
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,222
What to do?

If they come into your comfort zone and keep on coming after you tell them to stop approaching you then you need to retreat and/or back out of the route of travel of this individual, (because you are the one that is armed).
If he follows you anyway, , tell him to stop or face the consequences. Pull your weapon and warn him again. If he still comes at you, then do what you think is best, (for me personally, I would shoot). Remember, he could have a knife or gun hidden that you can't see. You did your best to avoid this and tell law enforement that you felt your life was threanted and you responded to said threat.
skydiver3346 is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 09:19 AM   #97
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
I do not recommend fishing in the great outdoors without a defensive weapon, but I do not recommend walking around with one without having some basis knowledge of both tactics and the legal principles of the use of deadly force, either.
It is also not recommended to walk around armed only to allow a potential threat, in the middle of nowhere, alone, to get within reach of you without some defensive action.

As mentioned earlier if you do so you may not survive to face the potential legal trouble.

I am confident that I could explain to LE why I was alarmed to the point of preparing to defend myself by pulling my firearm.
threegun is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 09:21 AM   #98
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Vanya and threegun, if what you two think I'm saying is, "I can handle him unarmed so I'll just let him close," then you two are missing my point entirely.

My point about hand-to-hand skills is that, in certain circumstances they are usable when your gun legally is not; and, in certain circumstances where your gun would be legally viable, those skills may be the edge that helps you bring the weapon into play.

I am not remotely saying, "Intentionally let a real threat close to bad-breath distance."

What I have said in this scenario is basically this - the burden is on you to prove that the guy is really a threat.

Ergo, challenges need to go beyond verbal. Body language and hand signals should be pronounced and clear. Maneuver and evasion should be employed. Backing up is generally not tactically sound; it's hard to monitor the potential threat while also spotting hazards at one's six. Also, unless you practice taking full-sized steps while walking backward (I do, but that's part of MA weapons training), you will typically take mincing, half-steps, and will not be able to maintain distance.

Besides, that's his line of travel in this scenario, right?

So, move off to the side. Put obstacles between you and the guy, if possible.

In other words, do everything you can to either avoid drawing, or to verify that yes, you really needed to draw.

Some of the folks in here immediately leap to their gun; some seem to be looking for reasons to pull and/or shoot. Those folks are looking at some potentially very unhappy futures, if they don't rethink the way they do things.

And, as I keep saying, statistically you're more likely to encounter the injured, disabled, or lost out in the woods than you are to encounter bad guys. Bad guys exist, and one should be prepared to encounter them, but one should not assume that every oddly-behaving person is the bogeyman.
MLeake is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 09:24 AM   #99
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Posted by threegun: Oldmarksman, Just what does the potential threat have to do in your mind to justify pulling your firearm?
The three links in Post #94 should provide some very good background for what is legally required to justify the use of deadly force, and the legal requirements have evolved over the years to match realities of the practical and tactical requirements of achieving the objectives of defending oneself.

You asked about drawing. In most places, the threshold is the same as for using deadly force, though drawing does not usually constitute deadly force per se, and though the situation may suddenly change after drawing and before firing. In Minnesota and Texas, one may draw if physical force is justified, and in Arizona, one may put one's hand on a gun, expose it, or talk about it, under some other circumstances.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old August 2, 2011, 09:25 AM   #100
threegun
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2006
Location: Tampa,Fl
Posts: 4,000
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If they come into your comfort zone and keep on coming after you tell them to stop approaching you then you need to retreat and/or back out of the route of travel of this individual, (because you are the one that is armed).
If he follows you anyway, , tell him to stop or face the consequences. Pull your weapon and warn him again. If he still comes at you, then do what you think is best, (for me personally, I would shoot). Remember, he could have a knife or gun hidden that you can't see. You did your best to avoid this and tell law enforement that you felt your life was threanted and you responded to said threat.
This is how most would handle this situation. IMO it is the correct way and totally legal.

It has retreat. It forces the bad guy to advance or chase you while facing deadly force, exposing ill intent, and making him the aggressor.
threegun is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.13248 seconds with 8 queries