Scenario: Unarmed assailant advancing

[Cowboy_mo]

Tough question and in the event the would be assailant is killed as described by the OP, could go either way.

First, I would be trying to communicate with the encroacher long before he reached a 7 yard range. Then I think Don has the best advice. If the person breaks the 7 yard bubble, the firearm comes out and if he continues after that, a trigger press in in order.

Now that is all presuming that you are in fear for your life because that is the test in Missouri. If you are defending your life, you are within your rights to fire.

[zincwarrior]

Quote:
You better believe you are on fairly shaky legal ground. You just committed a felony. If you shoot you just committed murder.

Zincwarrior, you really are caught up in this mentality, aren't you?

I think you are not accurate in this way of thinking. Not all cases are the same, and not all cases are an immediate undertaking of a crime. In the OP there is the element of being attacked, again.

If it was a crime every time someone pulled a gun from a holster we'd be operating under a whole different set of circumstances with regard to being able to carry guns at all.

I don't think you understandhow the law functions in this instance. IT IS A CRIME.

You may have a legitimate defense to the crime, but it is a crime.

In this circumstance, you don't have a legitimate defense. On the limited story board here, no court of law will say you were reasonably in fear of life or severe harm. To the hoosegow with you! Barney lock him up.

[mavracer]

Originally Posted by secret_agent_man

The deaf mute has a cell phone

gotta know why on god's green earth you think a deaf mute is gonna have a cell phone.

[Skadoosh]

If displaying my handgun doesn't stop his approach, I would wait until he pulls a weapon or makes a move to physically attack me. Pretty simple really.

[Maxem0815]

1 off shore around here usually means the Atlantic can't walk there.
2 you are open carry do nothing ask him "can I help you?"
3 you might just be on his land and it's posted.
4 Finally if you draw at any time on a defenseless person you are in the wrong, if on the other hand you know this guy is 6'10" and is a professional fighter ask him what he wants before you do anything but put you hand on your gun and be ready.

As for me I do not open carry unless I am on my land, or in uniform.
Mace

[serf 'rett]

Mentally note avenues of escape.
Slight lateral movement if possible to see if they track with you.
Upheld hand with palm outward is a fairly universal signal to stop.
Command of "Whoa thar hoss!" reinforces hand signal. Back away.
If the person's actions appeared to be projecting a threat, I think release of retaining device and getting a good grip on the weapon will telegraph your intent to react/resist without the necessity of actually needing to draw.
The open carry works for you in this scenario. There may be one, but I don’t know of any law against preparing by getting a grip on your weapon. I think it’s when the weapon is drawn that things get dicey.
I can’t subscribe to the Hollywood mentality that one needs to wave a weapon to let you know they mean business or they’re serious. A defense stance and grip on a weapon should suffice. The last time I started getting out of my vehicle and the LEO responded with a command and grabbed his pistol grip, he had my undivided attention. (I miss the old days when you met law enforcement officer at the rear of your car to discuss why his patrol car’s lights are flashing.)
If after all this, you feel compelled to draw your weapon, you must understand you’ve crossed the Rubicon.

[serf 'rett]

The offshore adds a different element. Was the walkup person already in the water? On land, but entered the water? Was the offshore part there to limit the potential avenues of escape?

If I’m sure I’m not trespassing, the approaching cat better have a fishing pole.

Oh, wait a minute. If I was trying to get close, I'd have a pole to throw you off scent.

[C0untZer0]

Are cherry bombs really powerful enough to stun fish?

I didn't think they were...

[Evan Thomas]

mavracer

gotta know why on god's green earth you think a deaf mute is gonna have a cell phone.

I'd imagine that to a deaf-mute, the ability to send text messages might be, um, life-changing. Even face to face, what a boon to communication that would be.

Originally Posted by serf 'rett

Mentally note avenues of escape.
Slight lateral movement if possible to see if they track with you.
Upheld hand with palm outward is a fairly universal signal to stop.
Command of "Whoa thar hoss!" reinforces hand signal. Back away.

All of the above.

And the OP was also asking about what his girlfriend should do in a situation like this. There's going to be a legitimate disparity-of-force issue pretty much any time a woman is confronted by an unarmed attacker. The general size and strength difference between men and women means that any adult male is a potential lethal threat, armed or not.

As a woman, if I've retreated from an advancing male, asked him what he wants, told him to stop both verbally and with gestures, and he keeps on coming... am I now reasonably in fear of my life? Yes. In an isolated place in the mountains, I'm probably carrying bear spray rather than a gun, and I'd have no hesitation about using it and getting the hell away. If I am carrying a gun -- which I would be if I were traveling alone -- that's the backup to the bear spray, and I'll draw and use it if the gentleman turns out to be one of those psychotic, PCP-addled deaf-mutes on whom bear spray has no effect.

[cracked91]

Cracked91,

I strongly suggest, that before you ever go on a fishing trip or a hike or a camping trip, you take a course or three in armed self defense, including instruction on how to judge a situation and how to react properly before needing to draw and possibly fire your weapon. The scenario as described by you is very indicative that you are unaware of how to properly react and then act once such a situation may arise and that you do not even know what signs to look for that an attack may be imminent and therefore you would testify, in essence, against yourself if you ever went to trial and decided to take the stand. Just to have drawn your gun because someone walked up to within 21 feet of you, without you doing anything else to take precautions and to avoid trouble, except telling him to stop, is very telling that you are not knowledgeable enough about: self defense, the legality of when you may threaten someone with deadly force, what to do if you perceive a threat, what constitutes a potential threat, how to describe the threat, how to react to a threat, how to change reaction into action, and by extension - when you can use deadly force.

Sure, in the scenario as first described, you should have your hackles up but draw your gun? There were a lot of other things you could have and should have done had you been in a situation like that before drawing a firearm. Commanding someone to stop may be one of them, but why didn't the person in your made up scenario move to safety, move to put cover between himself and the other person, describe what else about the guy such as height, weight, actions such as avoiding eye contact but always watching your hands and your gun (before you drew), crouching a bit as walking as if stalking you, clenched fist or clenching and opening and clenching again, long steps, or short very determined steps, walking quietly even though the ground was littered with dry twigs and other debris, hands up in a ready to fight position as opposed to him with hands folded twiddling his thumbs, what he did when you moved (if you moved did he adjust to keep coming at you), what he did when you started to walk away faster (if you did walk away faster, did he speed up).

Your scenario is seemingly that of a scared person, a very scared person who thinks the gun is the answer to everything as you described. The fact is, as others have mentioned, there could be many reasons this guy was approaching you other than with nefarious intent. For you to think up such a situation and for you to allow the scenario to develop to the point that it did, without the person who felt endangered first having made numerous other observations and assessments and without that person having taken appropriate other actions before drawing, shows me that you are ill prepared to be in such a situation. That may sound harsh but the reality is based upon what you have told us and if that is truly the way you think, I believe you need to get a better education about being an armed citizen than you could do at this forum. I also base my assessment upon well over 30 years of carrying a firearm for self defense, several training courses I have taken, several articles I have read by experts in the field of firearms and self defense, several real life situations I have read about in the news, situations I have winessed first hand, situations that have arisen both on and off my job, having been in several situations wherein I realized I was in danger, having also been in situations where I realized I was not only in some type of possible danger but that I was about to be seriously harmed or possibly killed if I did not act properly, having been in several situations where I had to fight actually to protect myself - including using weapons to defend myself, and including once having to shoot someone. Based on all that and what I can assess of your mindset as evidenced by your scenario, and your follow-up post, I strongly recommend you take some good self defense with firearms courses, or that at least you read some good self defense with firearms books, ones that cover the basics of how to recognize danger, how to avoid it if possible, if not then how to react to it, whether or not you should go to your gun or something else first, how to act to take control of the situation legally and safely.

All the best,
Glenn B

Glenn, I am confident in my own abilities to judge and react to situations.
I took 2 years of law enforcement at a vocational school (4 hours a day) during high school. Our instructor being a former Marine and Sheriffs deputy, and an active CCW intructor, he loved to run us through shoot/no shoot situations (though we were normally role playing as officers). The toughest one to call was always getting beat down by someone, or multiples, fists alone.

And the OP was also asking about what his girlfriend should do in a situation like this. There's going to be a legitimate disparity-of-force issue pretty much any time a woman is confronted by an unarmed attacker. The general size and strength difference between men and women means that any adult male is a potential lethal threat, armed or not.

Thank you!! That seems to be an area where there is alot of confusion here.
This scenario does not concern me about my own safety for many reasons, the first being that I am never alone in the deep woods, and that I can handle myself very well in a physical confrontation, but was one that concerned/interested me about my weaker/female friends and relatives.

For the sake of the argument, lets say the assailant has a major physical advantage on you. As in if he could get his hand around part of your weapon, he could wrench it out of your fingers easily. His body language and approach speed indicate aggression, but his face remains cool and collected, maybe even smiling. You have made eye contact. You have already attempted to speak in a polite way, ignored, then in a commanding tone, with gestures, as he gets too close, ignored.

I think Vanya's option of bear spray is the best bet. Anything else seems to have a high level of risk attached.

[m&p45acp10+1]

quote from mavracer

Why on earth would a deaf mute have a cell phone?

Well they have these things called smart phones. They usethem to send text messages with. Also they have a TTY mode on them so a deaf person can use them with a TTY (Phone for the deaf) some of the newer ones fold up and will fit in a pocket.

I have several family members that are deaf, my hearing is not too good these days either.

Now to awnser the question I am in the camp of sounds like I would have my pepper spray out. I carry it mainly for dogs, though in this case it would work. It may be considered assault. I would rather be in court explaining why I sprayed some one with pepper spray, rather than for shooting them.

[ZeSpectre]

Scenario : You are fishing off the shore at an isolated lake in the mountains, in the distance you see a man approaching you. You are openly carrying. He has no apparent weapons, and is walking rapidly, but not in a necessarily threatening manner. As he gets close to you, you turn to face him, and he continues approaching, closing in closer than 7 yards. You tell him to stop, he continues approaching, as if he did not hear you. You draw your weapon and point it at him while yelling at him to stop. He continues approaching.

You hesitate because you don't want to go to jail for murder and THATS when the zombie lurches forward and you are lunch!

[AH.74]

I don't think you understandhow the law functions in this instance. IT IS A CRIME.

You may have a legitimate defense to the crime, but it is a crime.

In this circumstance, you don't have a legitimate defense. On the limited story board here, no court of law will say you were reasonably in fear of life or severe harm.

You're out alone. Someone is coming at you and has ignored your warnings, and keeps coming at you. You are in fear of attack. That means you are in fear of great bodily harm or death.

Are you supposed to let them come all the way to you, then batter you? Let them stab you with the knife they could pull out?

Have you done any reading on the Tueller scenario?

I will not risk someone laying hands on me in that type of situation. I will not allow myself to be battered before I attempt to defend myself.

AFA the bolded part- are you so absolutely sure about that? I'm not.

[zincwarrior]

I will not risk someone laying hands on me in that type of situation. I will not allow myself to be battered before I attempt to defend myself.

AFA the bolded part- are you so absolutely sure about that? I'm not.

1. Yep I am.
2. Remember you have to prove what you did is correct. the presumption is you're guilty and going for the long walk. They've proven their case at this point.

You're alone, except you're by a lake. Likely there are other fishermen there or coming there. But under this mantra the fisherman who sets down next to you is going to get shot. Really? Unless he owns the land he has no presumption some stranger is not going to plump right down next to him.

Thats my view and its the correct one for my jurisdiction. Yours may differ and thats fine.

[cracked91]

You're alone, except you're by a lake. Likely there are other fishermen there or coming there. But under this mantra the fisherman who sets down next to you is going to get shot. Really? Unless he owns the land he has no presumption some stranger is not going to plump right down next to him.

Not the scenario I described at all, but thats okay.

I would like to thank those who given their best advice to the actual situation I presented, and not labeled me as a person who is just looking for an excuse to shoot joggers.

[AH.74]

You're alone, except you're by a lake. Likely there are other fishermen there or coming there. But under this mantra the fisherman who sets down next to you is going to get shot. Really? Unless he owns the land he has no presumption some stranger is not going to plump right down next to him.

Presumption of guilt. Really?

Keep on changing the details to suit you, fine. I won't engage in those types of games with someone who can't keep things on the same level.

[Sport45]

What if the approching man was in shock because he and his wife had just been attacked (by bear or other predator). He is the sole survivor and is in a daze. He may not even realize you have a gun pointed at him.

It'd be a shame to shoot him just because he walked towards you...

This case, however unlikely, is probably more likely than him being a deaf-mute with evil intentions.

[youngunz4life]

on an isolated lake, I am alone except for a rapidly moving person approaching from a distance, and I am openly carrying:

there is no way he is getting within 7 and I do not think all the things you mentioned in the original post would happen in the final 7

that being said as I got the just+you relayed a good scenario with many unknowns which would be there if this happened - I would be noticing him as to whether it was possible he had a weapon and I would communicate from a distance. if I had to, the communication would be much more clear & firm(but not hostile)so as I knew something was wrong if he kept advancing. that should be enough but it is always possible depending on the location that he has a buddy near too*Always expect the unexpected. If he just ignored me and kept rapidly advancing, I would definately draw and try once more to "reach him" as he advanced. In the great wide open, I would have time for all of this.

all the best

[youngunz4life]

a deaf guy will see the gun, so I don't shoot an innocent, nice person trying to 'reach me'

*always expect the unexpected

...but never wait for it to work out the good way because your life might depend on it...

[jason_iowa]

The thing that comes to my mind first in any open carry situation is weapon retention. Keep yourself in a position where you can always protect your weapon and if they make an attempt to take it you use whatever force you have to to neutralize the situation. I only open carry a side arm when I have a long gun out while hunting for that very reason. Having a weapon in open sight makes you a target for the crazies.

[JohnKSa]

What would you do?

The grounds for legal use of deadly force are pretty straightforward with only a few twists.

I would use the following general criteria for determining if the person posed a deadly threat to me.

1. Do I reasonably believe that he has a motive and/or clearly intends to attack me?
2. Do I reasonably believe that he has the means or ability to do me serious injury or cause my death?
3. Do I reasonably believe that an attack is imminent?

If I reasonably believed all of those things were true I would use the following general criteria for determining if deadly force was warranted.

1. Do I reasonably believe that there is no other reasonable means of preventing the approaching person from doing me serious injury or death than the use of deadly force?
2. Do I reasonably believe that the deadly force is immediately necessary to stop or prevent the approaching person from attacking?

If I reasonably believed all of those things then I would use deadly force against the approaching person.

As far as drawing, if all of the above were satisfied then it would obviously be legal to draw.

However, in my state, I would also be justified in drawing (but not shooting) if I reasonably believed that the approaching person was going to use unlawful force (even if it's not deadly force) and that there was no other reasonable option to prevent that unlawful use of force against me but to immediately use force to prevent it.

In TX, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, constitutes force but does not constitute the use of deadly force. So drawing would be legally justified if force were justified.

Scenario: Unarmed assailant advancing

The scenario should be called: "Unarmed person advancing". By labelling the unarmed person an assailant you created a scenario that begs the question of whether the person in the scenario should respond with deadly force. Basically the entire uncertainty of how to respond in the scenario hinges on whether the person in the scenario determines that the advancing person is an assailant or not. But you state up front that he's an assailant which answers the question before it's asked even though no evidence that he actually is an assailant is presented in the initial scenario statement.

[Pond, James Pond]

I have to say, I fail to see the point in trying to examine this entirely hypothetical and biased situation.

To invent a scenario that reads like a thriller is kind of loading the question towards one answer/reaction. Unless that is already the prefered reaction, in which case others' input is a bit obsolete.

On top of that, the thread title is "Unarmed assailant approaching". Hardly conducive to a reasoned evaluation.

For what its worth, the behaviour described sounds like acute disorientation. If in the woods that would be likely to be shock, some sort of trauma, or even hypothermia, given that crack cocaine addicts don't tend to go trekking.

If members like to review events that happened to them, or in the news to see if they or whoever had taken the best actions, fine: learning from someone else's experiences.
However, I really don't see how this would ever have any real world use, other than to make someone immediately fearful of some random bloke walking in the woods, who may actually need your help, not a bullet in Centre of Mass.

NOTE TO SELF:
Read previous poster's comments before posting: I have just essentially repeated what JohnKSa said in his last paragraph...

[AH.74]

John- thank you for your excellent post and getting things back on track.

I take exception to the fact of someone saying repeatedly, and wrongly, that drawing your weapon is a felony, period, in situations when someone is attacking you.

If it were, none of us would ever be carrying.

[JerryM]

Move out of the way so that if the person is intending to attack you it will be obvious. Not sure how these scenarios come about. Having fished, hunted and hiked in such places I have never encountered such.

A fishing rod with a lure with hooks on it would help to keep another person from getting too close.

Jerry

[MLeake]

AH.74, what you fail to grasp is that the scenario doesn't establish that you are actually being attacked.

So, while it is legal in many jurisdictions to draw in order to thwart an attack, even in Texas it is not legal to draw if that attack is not imminent.

Other than the thread title, which includes the word "assailant," what other cues can you identify that would convince a jury that a reasonable person would believe an attack were imminent?

Some strange person is approaching.

Great, could be an attacker. Could be some guy who's been lost in the woods for days, suffering dehydration, and not fully lucid, who is approaching the only person he's seen, looking for help.

Going back to my earlier points, watch for his body language cues; present self-confident body language of your own; position yourself for possible evasion/weapon retention; be ready.

And, as I often add, some training in hand-to-hand would help buy time if somebody actually tries something. It also helps in the body language presentation.