What does the law state

Bonstrosity · September 30, 2005, 01:50 PM

We have all these what if situations where you're in a store carrying and someone comes in to rob the store at gunpoint. Or any situation where you are carrying somewhere and SHTF with just one or two suspects. This is probably covered in the CC class but I have not taken that yet so I would like to know... What does the law actually state when you can use your CCW to "control" the situation. Is it when your life and only yours is in danger? is it when yours or a loved one is in danger? or if you feel any innocent stranger is in imediate danger can you take a shot? Just wanted know, I know there there are little exceptions to all rules but what does the law state?

Joel

spacemanspiff · September 30, 2005, 01:54 PM

depends on what state you are in.
in my state i can use deadly force to protect a third party from harm. i can also use deadly force to prevent/stop a felony.

23Skidoo · September 30, 2005, 02:02 PM

The common law standard is your own or a third party's life and most states have incorporated that into their statute. Actually I dont know of any that dont.

VirgilCaine · September 30, 2005, 02:04 PM

Here in Michigan, we have "duty to retreat". I would have to hide and call the law to handle it unless I was personally threatened. We do have a House Bill to change that howvever. The only place i can stay and fight is my house, car, hotel room etc...or if personally in danger. Hopefully Florida will lead the way on this issue.

pax · September 30, 2005, 02:28 PM

Bonstrosity ~

It really depends upon the state you are in.

Generally speaking, if you want to avoid trouble with the law you will draw your firearm only when your life (or the life of someone for whom you are responsible) is threatened. The phrase to remember is, "An immediate, and otherwise unavoidable, danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent."

It has to be immediate, or happening right now. Some guy threatening to come back and kill you later doesn't count.
.
It has to be otherwise unavoidable. Generally speaking, in most places, if you can eliminate the threat in any other way other than drawing your firearm, you have a responsibility to do so. (There are exceptions to this broad rule, but it's not a bad rule. Why shoot someone if you don't have to?) This includes retreating or getting away if you can.
.
The danger has to be extreme: only death or grave bodily harm count. Grave bodily harm means maiming, not just something that might wound you, but rather something that could cause permanent and long-lasting damage.
.
And it has to be to the innocent. If you or your loved one participated in escalating the situation, threatened the other guy, trash-talked, whatever -- you're not innocent. Yeah, you might be able to beat the rap anyway, but it'll be harder than it would be if you did everything in your power to avoid needing to shoot including backing down and trying to walk away.

Generally speaking, you don't want to draw your gun unless you are legally justified in shooting the assailant. Generally speaking, the elements that have to be present for lawful self-defense are the same whether your self defense consists of displaying a gun and threatening to use it, or actually firing it. The only thing that's really different (in most cases, in most places) is how much jail time you're looking at if you get it wrong.

pax

bedula32 · September 30, 2005, 03:48 PM

Spacemanspiff........... I sure hope you understand that has to be a violent or dangerous felony. Can't shoot grandma for selling Avon door-to-door without a canvaseer's license (real FELONY case from Sacramanto, CA).

On a similar note, those of us firearm enthusiasts need to do a lot more to be educated as to what is happening with crimes being designated as 'felonies' and the impact it can have on us. Over the past few decades many, many non-violent, and frankly many non-serious crimes altogether, have been designated as felonies for one of two reasons (perhaps both): 1) Plea bargain extorion (where you are offered a chance to plea guilty to a misdemeanor if you just play ball); and 2) Gee golly, What can't felons do? (Indirect Gun Banning).

There are numerous examples I could give here but will refrain from doing more than a couple at most. The currently accepted definition of a felony is a crime that CAN carry a sentence of more than one year incarceration. Folks are being charged in some jurisdictions with felonies for things like mowing lawns without a lanscaper's license, or an 18-year-old letting his 17-year-old brother take a sip of his beer, or the above mentioned grandma (true case) selling Avon but forgot, or did not know, to get ALL the licenses involved (yes, she had a business license and was paying taxes). The more anti-gun the politicians in any state are the more crimes in that jurisdiction are felonies (go figure - turn everyone into a felon is the ultimate gun control). Benign, non-violent, even things not illegal at all in many other states are felonies in some states. And it also aids in forcing the innocent to plea guilty because who is going to risk a felony conviction when offered a chance to plea to a misdemeanor (even when you are absolutely 100% innocent). So next time you hear someone is a 'felon' try and remember they might have murdered, raped, or robbed someone - or they might have been trying to sell Avon without all the proper licenses.

I think a proper definition of a felony (the way it ought to be) would be a crime that mandates one or more years of actual time served in prison. Frankly, if it was not important enough to ACTUALLY lock the person up for at least a year then it wasn't all that serious now was it. Remember, Martha Stewart is now a felon five times over. BTW, the poster is not a convicted felon though apparently did commit hundreds of felonies while living in California years ago and just did not know it at the time.

Oh and don't even get me started on how easy it is in states like California to get someone put in for an involuntary psych evaluation (go to payphone, call 911 and tell police that your friend John Doe at xxx Street is suicidal) and watch as they can never own a firearm legally again as well even if they are totally vindicated. The anti's are at war with us and we better be aware of their tactics. I know it is hard to talk about these things because people assume you would only be talking about it because you either are a convicted felon or you had been in a psych hospital but the silence is exactly what the anti's rely on. They cannot win otherwise and we are giving them what they need to win which is ignorance and apathy.

atlctyslkr · March 18, 2006, 04:13 PM

A CCW is not a license to practice law enforcement. Most states however allow you to use deadly force to stop a felony where the assailnt is threatening deadly force. You can "step in the shoes" of the person being threatened and elimnate the threat. I know that Tenn. has a "good samaritan law". Other states have them as well but I don't know off hand. In NY you can use deadly force to stop arson.

brickeyee · March 18, 2006, 06:36 PM

You have to review both the statute law and the case law for the state you are in. Neither seperately gives an accurate picture.
And it varies a lot from state to state.

Model520Fan · March 19, 2006, 01:43 AM

Take a real CCW course like Massad Ayoob's LFI-1. The law is only a small part of what you need to consider. ONLY one or two suspects? Even one SUSPECT is a major problem, and may be far more than you can handle, even if you are Rob Leatham. Why? because you didn't know that the guy that is already in the store is the the suspect's unsuspected seeded backup.

Do you know what the stats are in your area on ratio of injury to armed robbery? Do you know whether your interference will improve them?

Neither you nor I are policemen, and if we were we would have a much different set of rules and slightly better equipment (radios come to mind here). As a non-policeman, we are generally best off leaving if possible, shutting up if not, and using a gun only to prevent injury when the likelihood of it is fairly obvious.

DunedinDragon · March 19, 2006, 07:35 AM

Sorry to disappoint you but you're probably NOT going to get an answer to this type of question in your CCW class, depending on the instructor.

In most states the CCW class really doesn't deal with the intricacies of the law, more about gun safety and gun handling. Your instructor "might" know a few things, but then again his knowledge might not be accurate.

I'd suggest you try and get a copy of your particular state's statutes and read them very carefully to under stand what you can and cannot do. It varies from state to state. I personally wouldn't trust anyone's opinion on this unless they are able to back it up with the specific state statutes.

Polydorus · March 19, 2006, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DunedinDragon

Your instructor "might" know a few things, but then again his knowledge might not be accurate.

An instructor might not want to venture an opinion for fear of a civil suit after such a shoot out. CYA

September 30, 2005, 01:50 PM	#1
Bonstrosity Senior Member Join Date: August 27, 2005 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 322	What does the law state We have all these what if situations where you're in a store carrying and someone comes in to rob the store at gunpoint. Or any situation where you are carrying somewhere and SHTF with just one or two suspects. This is probably covered in the CC class but I have not taken that yet so I would like to know... What does the law actually state when you can use your CCW to "control" the situation. Is it when your life and only yours is in danger? is it when yours or a loved one is in danger? or if you feel any innocent stranger is in imediate danger can you take a shot? Just wanted know, I know there there are little exceptions to all rules but what does the law state? Joel

September 30, 2005, 01:54 PM	#2
spacemanspiff Senior Member Join Date: January 16, 2002 Location: alaska Posts: 3,498	depends on what state you are in. in my state i can use deadly force to protect a third party from harm. i can also use deadly force to prevent/stop a felony. __________________ "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

September 30, 2005, 02:04 PM	#4
VirgilCaine Senior Member Join Date: October 29, 2004 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 419	Here in Michigan, we have "duty to retreat". I would have to hide and call the law to handle it unless I was personally threatened. We do have a House Bill to change that howvever. The only place i can stay and fight is my house, car, hotel room etc...or if personally in danger. Hopefully Florida will lead the way on this issue. __________________ "Danger Itself Is The Best Remedy For Danger"

September 30, 2005, 02:28 PM	#5
pax Senior Member Join Date: May 16, 2000 Location: In a state of flux Posts: 7,520	Bonstrosity ~ It really depends upon the state you are in. Generally speaking, if you want to avoid trouble with the law you will draw your firearm only when your life (or the life of someone for whom you are responsible) is threatened. The phrase to remember is, "An immediate, and otherwise unavoidable, danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent." It has to be immediate, or happening right now. Some guy threatening to come back and kill you later doesn't count. . It has to be otherwise unavoidable. Generally speaking, in most places, if you can eliminate the threat in any other way other than drawing your firearm, you have a responsibility to do so. (There are exceptions to this broad rule, but it's not a bad rule. Why shoot someone if you don't have to?) This includes retreating or getting away if you can. . The danger has to be extreme: only death or grave bodily harm count. Grave bodily harm means maiming, not just something that might wound you, but rather something that could cause permanent and long-lasting damage. . And it has to be to the innocent. If you or your loved one participated in escalating the situation, threatened the other guy, trash-talked, whatever -- you're not innocent. Yeah, you might be able to beat the rap anyway, but it'll be harder than it would be if you did everything in your power to avoid needing to shoot including backing down and trying to walk away. Generally speaking, you don't want to draw your gun unless you are legally justified in shooting the assailant. Generally speaking, the elements that have to be present for lawful self-defense are the same whether your self defense consists of displaying a gun and threatening to use it, or actually firing it. The only thing that's really different (in most cases, in most places) is how much jail time you're looking at if you get it wrong. pax __________________ Kathy Jackson My personal website: Cornered Cat

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

September 30, 2005, 02:02 PM	#3
23Skidoo Member Join Date: August 9, 2005 Location: Red State Posts: 89	The common law standard is your own or a third party's life and most states have incorporated that into their statute. Actually I dont know of any that dont.

September 30, 2005, 03:48 PM	#6
bedula32 Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2005 Posts: 229	Spacemanspiff........... I sure hope you understand that has to be a violent or dangerous felony. Can't shoot grandma for selling Avon door-to-door without a canvaseer's license (real FELONY case from Sacramanto, CA). On a similar note, those of us firearm enthusiasts need to do a lot more to be educated as to what is happening with crimes being designated as 'felonies' and the impact it can have on us. Over the past few decades many, many non-violent, and frankly many non-serious crimes altogether, have been designated as felonies for one of two reasons (perhaps both): 1) Plea bargain extorion (where you are offered a chance to plea guilty to a misdemeanor if you just play ball); and 2) Gee golly, What can't felons do? (Indirect Gun Banning). There are numerous examples I could give here but will refrain from doing more than a couple at most. The currently accepted definition of a felony is a crime that CAN carry a sentence of more than one year incarceration. Folks are being charged in some jurisdictions with felonies for things like mowing lawns without a lanscaper's license, or an 18-year-old letting his 17-year-old brother take a sip of his beer, or the above mentioned grandma (true case) selling Avon but forgot, or did not know, to get ALL the licenses involved (yes, she had a business license and was paying taxes). The more anti-gun the politicians in any state are the more crimes in that jurisdiction are felonies (go figure - turn everyone into a felon is the ultimate gun control). Benign, non-violent, even things not illegal at all in many other states are felonies in some states. And it also aids in forcing the innocent to plea guilty because who is going to risk a felony conviction when offered a chance to plea to a misdemeanor (even when you are absolutely 100% innocent). So next time you hear someone is a 'felon' try and remember they might have murdered, raped, or robbed someone - or they might have been trying to sell Avon without all the proper licenses. I think a proper definition of a felony (the way it ought to be) would be a crime that mandates one or more years of actual time served in prison. Frankly, if it was not important enough to ACTUALLY lock the person up for at least a year then it wasn't all that serious now was it. Remember, Martha Stewart is now a felon five times over. BTW, the poster is not a convicted felon though apparently did commit hundreds of felonies while living in California years ago and just did not know it at the time. Oh and don't even get me started on how easy it is in states like California to get someone put in for an involuntary psych evaluation (go to payphone, call 911 and tell police that your friend John Doe at xxx Street is suicidal) and watch as they can never own a firearm legally again as well even if they are totally vindicated. The anti's are at war with us and we better be aware of their tactics. I know it is hard to talk about these things because people assume you would only be talking about it because you either are a convicted felon or you had been in a psych hospital but the silence is exactly what the anti's rely on. They cannot win otherwise and we are giving them what they need to win which is ignorance and apathy.

March 18, 2006, 04:13 PM	#7
atlctyslkr Senior Member Join Date: March 6, 2006 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 613	A CCW is not a license to practice law enforcement. Most states however allow you to use deadly force to stop a felony where the assailnt is threatening deadly force. You can "step in the shoes" of the person being threatened and elimnate the threat. I know that Tenn. has a "good samaritan law". Other states have them as well but I don't know off hand. In NY you can use deadly force to stop arson.

March 18, 2006, 06:36 PM	#8
brickeyee Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2004 Posts: 3,351	You have to review both the statute law and the case law for the state you are in. Neither seperately gives an accurate picture. And it varies a lot from state to state.

March 19, 2006, 01:43 AM	#9
Model520Fan Senior Member Join Date: October 12, 2004 Location: PDR of MA Posts: 164	Take a real CCW course like Massad Ayoob's LFI-1. The law is only a small part of what you need to consider. ONLY one or two suspects? Even one SUSPECT is a major problem, and may be far more than you can handle, even if you are Rob Leatham. Why? because you didn't know that the guy that is already in the store is the the suspect's unsuspected seeded backup. Do you know what the stats are in your area on ratio of injury to armed robbery? Do you know whether your interference will improve them? Neither you nor I are policemen, and if we were we would have a much different set of rules and slightly better equipment (radios come to mind here). As a non-policeman, we are generally best off leaving if possible, shutting up if not, and using a gun only to prevent injury when the likelihood of it is fairly obvious.

March 19, 2006, 07:35 AM	#10
DunedinDragon Senior Member Join Date: March 12, 2006 Posts: 198	Sorry to disappoint you but you're probably NOT going to get an answer to this type of question in your CCW class, depending on the instructor. In most states the CCW class really doesn't deal with the intricacies of the law, more about gun safety and gun handling. Your instructor "might" know a few things, but then again his knowledge might not be accurate. I'd suggest you try and get a copy of your particular state's statutes and read them very carefully to under stand what you can and cannot do. It varies from state to state. I personally wouldn't trust anyone's opinion on this unless they are able to back it up with the specific state statutes.