Almost drew my gun yesterday

[JD0x0]

Even if he beat the crap out of your car, you still do not have justification to kill him over property damage.

How do you differentiate the difference between someone 'beating the crap out of your car' and someone trying to break into your car to hurt you?

People seem to assume everyone drives a big escalade or SUV.

I drive a first generation Mazda Miata. It's a very small car and if someone was to beat up on my car, they'd be dangerously close to me. My car wouldn't offer adequate protection in most cases. There's no where for the driver and passenger to hide or take cover.



Even if the guy was just smashing my headlight, he'd be an arms length away from being able to break one of my windows and harm me.

[indie_rocker]

My thoughts were similar. I felt that if he was outside the window, he was too close. Ever see those emergency vehicle tools? Seatbelt cutter and window breaker in a compact hammer design. It's easier and faster than some might think to shatter auto glass.

There are almost endless if this then that possibilities. I'm a CPL holding Iraq veteran and that was my reaction. I did NOT draw my weapon, but I sure as heck was prepared to. I know Michigan is not the big sandbox and I understand the difference between war and civilian life. I will protect myself and the people I care about, combat zone or city street, makes no difference to me.

As said previously, I appreciate all the input. It gives myself and possibly others a lot to think about.

[OldMarksman]

45_auto said exactly what I was about to say.

[.22lr]

The lawful citizen is not in jeopardy of grave bodily injury or death until they are in jeopardy of grave bodily injury or death.

The threat has to be immediate. Someone is attacking the hood of a car can be a completely different matter than the same person attacking the passenger compartment.

The threat to one's life will be easily communicable if it exists. Until that threat exists (not the possibility, but the actual threat) there is no justification for deadly force.

[colbad]

To the question,...I think the distinction between trying to "break into the car and get you" vs "beating the crap out of the car" is fact specific as to the threat to your person. One jumping up and down on your hood/roof denting it in or breaking your headlights, kicking side etc (while you are secure within the vehicle) is quite different than coming at you or your window with a tire iron or visible weapon.

I think most of us would feel pretty mad and scared to have some 300lb monster jumping on our hood/roof (as an example) expressing his rage.....and REALLY want to shoot him. However, still need an objectively reasonable set of facts to show threat of death or grievous bodily harm.....not just property damage.

[colbad]

Kind of reminds me of a story concerning one of my female Soldiers in Iraq. She was a small 110lb pretty young blond w/ blue eyes (typical female infidel). She was driving a duce through a small village when the convoy halted. At that time she noticed the men at a small cafe were looking, pointing and talking in here direction (good situational awareness). Apparently the men had some muslim issues with her looks and one approached and jumped up on here running board (window was down, poor tactics). Almost as soon as his feet set, he found a 9mm Beretta pressed against his forehead and was politely asked to step down. I think he must have spoke english (or the international language of "gun at your head") because he was happy to comply (good response with a happy ending).

[Claude Clay]

Suppose the guy is hearing impaired, and cannot hear your commands?

--->that is on him. after all, if he is speaking at me, a valid assumption is that he can have a 2-way conversation


But he is walking towards you and obviously upset? Would a reasonable person fear for their safety just because someone is upset at them?

--->depends on so many factors that unless you are there, it is all supposing.

---------

I am with 45 and will add...

your friend needs better driving skills. if one can not stop with enough room to go around a crazy than reverse, even if it means tapping the vehicle behind you BEFORE going to gun. prove to those who may be judging you that you tried your best before having to do your 'worst'.

[indie_rocker]

He definitely needs better driving skills, I agree 100% there.

[40-82]

You, Sir, may or may not have been justified in your willingness to react. I don't know. I wasn't there. I do know that you're not good at explaining your justifications. Most of us, frankly, aren't, especially under that kind of pressure. If you do ever have to follow through, when the police arrive, point out any physical evidence that you know about: weapons, spent casings, anything like that, but don't try to explain yourself. Let a lawyer do that. Based on your short post you could easily convince the police that a justifiable case of self-defense was something less. Stand your ground is an important law. The 21-foot rule you describe is a significant piece of tactical knowledge, but the way you put the two together may well leave an impression with an investigator that you overreacted.

Some in depth reading on justifiable use of force are in order. A place to start without much investment in time and money would be stickies on this site.

[spacemanspiff]

Thanks for all the input. Some is taken with a grain of salt, but it is truly appreciated.

I feel like it's one of those "you had to be there" situations. It's hard to describe thoughts and feelings of an event that happens so fast. To be clear, the last thing I would want to to is shoot to defend. But I would if I had to. The way this guy was acting and driving was very aggressive. If he had gotten out of his car and started to approach us with the same aggressive demeanor, I would have felt threatened.

A grain of salt? Tell me, what response did you expect to recieve? A bunch of 'attaboys' and pats on the back? Your tune seems to have changed. At first your tale of the account indicates that you are willing to use deadly force on people who are aggressive and within a specific distance of you, no matter if they have actually made any threat against you or produced a weapon of any sort.

Once again, I will ask, was there NOTHING else that could have been done to dissuade the other driver if he had approached the vehicle? Can you think of ANYTHING at all that you or your friend who was driving could have done that does NOT involve drawing a weapon out and presenting it?


edit - By the way, has the thought occurred to you that most of the input here so far is actually based on our own real life experiences in similar situations? And that our understanding of the laws of self defense in the states we reside in has been thoroughly researched?

[markj]

Sooooo, you would shoot an unarmed man 21 feet away just cause he yelled at you?

Do this and you will certainly go to jail for a very long time.

[motorhead0922]

The last place you want to be if there is a serious threat is in a car. You will have difficulty with drawing, moving, aiming, etc. And if you do have to pull the trigger, you may never hear anything again.

So, I do not see a problem with the OP exiting the car. For whatever reason, his car could not move. The potential threat was exiting his car. The OP was not yet justified in drawing his weapon however. But how do you know the threat would not have a weapon on him? I think exiting the car and being ready (without drawing) in case the situation escalated would be proper.

[mehavey]

If you exit the car, you cannot escape in the car.
This is not a good time to invoke your SYG rights.
Get away unless absolutely trapped.

(...and firing on a person as yet 20+ feet away and who has exhibited no weapon will be a very (very) tough sell to a jury)

[2123]

Road rage can happen to anyone, at anytime, for most anything. Just knowing that in advance and being aware of it, puts you a leg up.

If someone obviously angry makes any attempt or motions for me to pull over, if I do so, it will be my decision, and I will choose the location. And, I'll only do that if the situation is so dire that I don't have any other option(s).

I don't drive in such a manner to hack others off. But who knows, maybe you don't have to drive irresponsibly to hack others off. Maybe the other driver is psychotic and doesn't need a valid reason to go off.

Being armed or not can and does make a difference. If armed, you still have to know your rights and how to act within the law. Most people have a cell phone with them. Best thing to do is call 911 and let them in on what's going on.

Bottom line is that you simply cannot cover all scenarios that could happen to you. The best advice is to drive carefully and politely, don't engage others if they are enraged with you, keep driving until you arrive at a public place and honk your horn to draw the attention of others (witnesses).

[Mainah]

I've been in situations like this a couple of times, road rage isn't limited to any specific region. It happens everywhere now. You were the passenger, that gave you the ability to use your phone.

The driver of your vehicle should have put as much distance between you and the aggressive driver as possible while you were on the phone with 911. Others have pointed out the legal consequences of shooting in those circumstances, and I agree that you would be facing a world of legal problems if you had engaged with a gun in that situation.

Even if he wasn't deaf, he could have been carrying too. Or maybe in the heat of the moment you didn't notice the other person who may have been with him. Bottom line- if you can get away just get away. Some loser's anger issues aren't worth ruining or ending your life.

[Corrections Cop]

I would have stayed in the car and called 911. Even if you are in a Yugo you still have more protection than just standing their. Its not going to look good to a jury if you exit the safety of your car and shoot someone who you do not know is armed at 21 feet, just because he was yelling at you. I would read up on the SD laws, also you should try as hard as you can to avoid conflict when you are carrying, taking a life should be the very last resort.


It could have ended like this!

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headline...rage-incident/

[Willie Lowman]

The situation was escalating and you were prepared, good for you.

"you had to be there"

We have all been in road rage incidents. Very very few require shooting anyone. Some do.

I would have felt threatened.

The long and short of this thread is feeling threatened and actually being threatened are not the same thing. If you shot some guy because he was coming toward your friend's car to shout, you'd go to jail. He might have had a weapon doesn't cut it in most courts.

I would have shot him if he got within 21 feet

I don't know what state allows for use of deadly force simply because someone is mad and within 7 yards. You had better read your state's laws or consult with an attorney if you are going to go around thinking you can shoot people based on their proximity.

[Mainah]

If nothing else can we agree to rename the "21 foot rule"? Let's call it the "Raylan Givens Rule".

[mehavey]

...or like Vern Smalley
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i.../t-230073.html
... who was my field-grade Division Chief when I was a junior officer so long, long, ...long ago.
He was the last guy I'd ever expect to read about in such a situation.

In these days of SensationalismSellsNewsprint, do not count on the Truth will out.
Witness Florida of late.
You will a commodity...
not a righteous victim

[wild cat mccane]

enter cognitive dissonance:

1. "I support stand your ground"
2. "You reacted to extreme"

[.22lr]

Dennis Tuller explains the significance of time and distance when facing an opponent with a contact weapon.

The "21' rule" or "Tuller rule" is a very catchy way of almost completely missing the point.

[.22lr]

"Stand your ground" laws generally remove the duty to retreat. At no point does stand your ground alleviate the requirements of self defense.

There is no cognitive dissonance, merely ignorance of the law.

[stephen426]

I really don't understand some of these responses.

1. The other guy is in front of you and you have to get closer to him to get past him and away from him.

2. You are sitting IN A CAR. I don't know how many of you drive armored cars, but you are basically a sitting duck in your car. You have very little room to move and your position IN THE CAR is well known. You have practically NO COVER if the other guy were to draw a weapon and start shooting into your car.

3. If the guy walked in front of the vehicle and you approached him, he could plausibly draw a weapon and claim self-defense because you "tried to run him over". While the castle doctrine does not protect an aggressor, you may not be around to give your side of the story.

4. As for calling the cops, how long do you think this whole incident took? How fast do you think they could respond? I would call the cops and have 911 on the line as an audio witness, but what was that old saying that the cops are only minutes away when seconds count???

5. Just because you did not see a weapon does not mean he was unarmed. If you waited till he approached and then he drew, you would be way behind the reaction curve. I have drawn several times and not presented my weapon when I felt someone was highly questionable and possibly ready to attack me. I had some punk kid run right towards my open window in the middle of the night. I had my gun drawn and low ready by the time he was at my window. He claimed to be screwing around and just got kicked out of a club (this was Gainesville, FL). If it occurred in Miami, I probably would have rammed the barrel of my gun down his throat before asking politely what the "F" he wanted. There was a massive rash of car-jackings in Miami so I would not be out of line (especially late at night and running up to my car).

6. The mere action of reaching for a weapon may have diffused the situation. Maybe that hot head decided he didn't want to deal with an armed adversary.

Remember that situation in New York were a bunch of bikers got really aggressive with a SUV? One idiot brake checked the SUV (Darwin Award) and the SUV hit him. The other bikers got very hostile and the SUV hit a few of the bikes to get away. That was perfectly justified in my opinion, and in the opinion of the courts as well.

I am not going to guess someone's intentions nor their armed status if they decide to approach me in a highly aggressive manner (as described). I will avoid conflict as much as possible, but I will be ready to defend myself and move from the vehicle to gain a better position.

Oh, and by the way, no where in my post does it say I intend to shoot an unarmed person. I would draw my weapon and have it in the low ready position. I would then issue a VERY firm warning to get the F back in the car and that the police have been called. If the person continues to approach, I would point the weapon at them. In my opinion, only a psychotic person would continue to approach someone with a drawn gun. If that person continued approaching, I would seriously consider firing a warning shot at the ground.

[Theohazard]

Originally Posted by motorhead0922

The last place you want to be if there is a serious threat is in a car.

Originally Posted by stephen426

You are sitting IN A CAR. I don;t know how many of you drive armored cars, but you are basically a sitting duck in your car.

Originally Posted by stephen426

You have practically NO COVER if the other guy were to draw a weapon and start shooting into your car.

This is all bad advice. In this situation, being inside your car with the doors locked and the windows up is a very good place to be for the following reasons:

• You're protected from impact weapons until they manage to breech your car. And if you have to shoot someone who manages to breech your car with an impact weapon, the damage to the car will provide evidence to the fact that they were threatening you with that weapon.
  
  
• The car does provide some cover from gunshots, especially from the front.
  
  
• The car provides a means of escape. Despite the OP's claims, I highly doubt he was truly boxed in. Unless the car in front of him and the car behind him were each less than 6 inches away, he could have escaped. And even then, it's not hard to push another car with your car unless you have a small car or a small engine.
  
  
• Getting out of your car shows a desire to confront the other person, which can hurt your legal claim of self-defense.

In the Marines, I was taught to get out of a vehicle when it was hit. Back in the late 90s and early 2000s we didn't have armored Humvees or 5-tons, and the worry was that we'd get hit with rockets or other explosives. But civilians and law enforcement officers rarely have to deal with explosives, so inside a car is often the best place to be.

I have worked with a few law-enforcement instructors, and when I told them that my first instinct was to get out of my car if I'm getting shot at, they pointed out that being inside a car can be a good defensive position in a gunfight.

[JD0x0]

You're protected from impact weapons until they manage to breech your car. And if you have to shoot someone who manages to breech your car with an impact weapon, the damage to the car will provide evidence to the fact that they were threatening you with that weapon.


The car does provide some cover from gunshots, especially from the front.

Not in my car. You must be assuming that everyone drives large vehicles.

My vehicle I wouldn't not be reasonably protected from impact weapons. The width of my car puts my face, and my passenger's face extremely close to the side window. The follow through from a baton, bat, crowbar, etc. hitting a window would likely strike me, especially if I have a passenger as I would not have room to lean away from my window enough to ensure safety. It actually seems safer to exit my car, because you could keep yourself on the opposite side of the vehicle as the BG. Oh did I mention the convertible top? If it's down. NO COVER, it leaves me wide open, might as well be outside, where I can move, get behind cover, or run. If it's up, it's easily plausible that a heavy impact weapon could strike someone through the canvas, or even collapse the top and possibly trap people in the car. The hardtop adds a little more security, but not much. It's fiberglass, and not very thick, and it's plausible an enraged person could break through it with a heavy impact weapon.

Cover in my car, from gunfire, even from the front would be minimal. As I've mentioned, not much space to duck, and even if I could, the car is low enough that the BG could shoot directly down at me from the front, unless he/she was standing very far from my car and/or is extremely short. The way the cockpit is designed it does not allow someone to hide effectively. The vehicle was designed to comfortably seat 2 averaged sized men and not much more. And by 'comfortably' I don't mean luxury car 'comfort' I'm talking about 'sports car comfort' which means if you're about the size of a average size Asian man, you've got room for your legs, and not much more.
Again, this is assuming you're trapped. It'd just be plain silly, to leave your vehicle, if it was possible to drive away.