Your home is invaded (broken into) while you are there. You grab your firearm, confront the intruder and tell him to put his hands up/lay on the floor, etc. until the police arrive.
Now here's the question. And this answer is based on not what you WANT to do(I damn sure know what I'd want to do) but what you legally CAN do when the following occurs......
1. The intruder immediately turns and starts to try to leave the house. You do not know if he's armed or not.
2. He lays on the floor like you tell him, but then tries to get up and leave.
Can you stop him? Or do you have to let him leave? And by stopping him does that mean that you must try to physically restrain him or can you shoot him?
In states hostile to the 2nd amendment, say New York, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, etc, or those with a zealous anti-gun district attorney, you would likely face prosecution. And the cost to defend these cases could put you in financial ruin.
Under your facts above, in my state, you would let him go unless you have a reasonable belief that he might be trying to harm someone else in the home. You'd be hanging your hat on the idea that the burglar would be going by the kid's room, for example.
Much as it pains me, if he wants to get up and leave, he's ending the threat, and your best move is to not use deadly force against him under these facts. I don't know Illinois law so give this as a general caution, enough for you to do further research.
I taught deadly force for years, and will suggest that you aren't here to protect the world. Protect your family, you do them no good in a jail cell.
You should learn this from a competent criminal defense attorney in your jurisdiction. Asking a bunch of non-lawyers on an internet site, particularly folks in other states, is extremely foolish.
I can't speak for any other state than my own but my training informs me to never use a firearm if I can't convince LE, a jury and/or a judge that my life or the life of another was in imminent jeopardy.
For instance, in the scenarios in the OP, if you shoot the guy and then tell LE, "I was afraid he'd get away," you're assured free accommodations from the Commonwealth of VA. Even if he was in your house. If however, you say, "It looked like he was reaching for a weapon," you'll be treated differently. You'll still be spending a crap ton of time in government buildings explaining yourself but, at least, you'd have a chance of escaping criminal prosecution. CRIMINAL...From what I am told, civil prosecution is almost a sure thing.
The best qualified advice I ever received relative to the topic is this: make sure there is only one side of the story to tell and ALWAYS explain yourself as though your life - not your welfare or your property - was under immediate terminal threat. That stated, I understand many states do not have the high threshold VA has.
BTW, if you want to have some fun, attend a CC course in a state without the Castle Doctrine or "Stand Your Ground" wherein former LE or a lawyer is teaching. Then sit back and watch the John Wayne types get in heated arguments with the instructor over shoot/don't shoot scenarios.
That is extremely dangerous advice. Remember your audience: twelve jurors, not the Bowsite regulars.
"Depends on your state. In Colorado, you may use deadly force if the person has entered your home illegally and you have a reasonable belief that the person would cause death or serious injury to you or someone with you in the home. In states hostile to the 2nd amendment, say New York, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, etc, or those with a zealous anti-gun district attorney, you would likely face prosecution. And the cost to defend these cases could put you in financial ruin.
Under your facts above, in my state, you would let him go unless you have a reasonable belief that he might be trying to harm someone else in the home. You'd be hanging your hat on the idea that the burglar would be going by the kid's room, for example.
Much as it pains me, if he wants to get up and leave, he's ending the threat, and your best move is to not use deadly force against him under these facts. I don't know Illinois law so give this as a general caution, enough for you to do further research.
I taught deadly force for years, and will suggest that you aren't here to protect the world. Protect your family, you do them no good in a jail cell.
You should learn this from a competent criminal defense attorney in your jurisdiction. Asking a bunch of non-lawyers on an internet site, particularly folks in other states, is extremely foolish."
AND.
"That last post is the kind of advice that will land you in prison. It is not your word against a lawyer, it's your word against the other witnesses and the physical evidence. Typing things like what Memengako wrote will be found, and entered into evidence should he ever be in a shooting. It's an admission...and the DA's closing will be "Make damn sure he speaks no more...." as an intent to commit murder. That is extremely dangerous advice. Remember your audience: twelve jurors, not the Bowsite regulars."
This isn't a game you play on the internet. It's not about macho, which most of us honestly are not. It's about the best decision you can make in a crap situation and the decision is all about your family and whether you will still be there for them. Make the wrong decision in a legal OR a moral sense and they're going to suffer.
Here in Ca the short version is you have to be in fear of your life.
in your scenario, if he is in the process of leaving or getting off the floor to leave...that doesn't qualify.
Now if he has a firearm...thats a different scenario...more of a threat.
if he has say a bat...and you have a firearm....here in Ca you would be in jail.
Same scenario. I get the perp on the floor and then handcuff/cabletie him to keep him there. Same answer?
Or is the best thing just to let him go? That seems insane and illogical. What if the SOB is wanted for other crimes? REAL serious crimes? Are you telling me that the legal system has turned my private home into what's essentially a sanctuary city??
That's beyond insane.
good luck with all that, if you are going to play games
if your home is invaded, shoot to kill, many times
If nothing is between him and the door, and he bolts, well isn't that what you want? He's gone. You and yours are safe. Certainly an acceptable outcome.
If you've positioned yourself between the him and the exit, he will be moving toward you, IYKWIM (and I think that you do).
IN VA, brandishing, "warning shots," and intentionally shooting to wound are all instances that will get the CCP holder in cuffs. Even if one believes any of the above measures could avoid lethal force. (people have a really difficult time accepting these notions).
"Kneecapping" implies lethal force was not required and intentionally shooting someone in that fashion is a tacit admission of recklessness. You'll be prosecuted and then sued in civil court.
Context matters. If you are in an incident, consideration will be given to the speed, location, setting, ect involved. Did the shooter have a chance to deescalate or leave? Did the shooter have time to affect a different outcome? The law does not care if you feel disrespected or that you are fed up with the deterioration of society.
Why put your gun within arms reach of the guy?
MI has a pretty good castle doctrine law. One does not have to retreat.
Lets stop the video right there. I could fill this page and fifty more with variables of a successful prosecution, dismissed charges or the DA electing not to prosecute. You could drop the intruder on the spot if the crime scene can be built to your favor. In what manner was your home forcibly entered? Was there an instrument used to enter the property? Was forced entry through a door, window or other means? Time of day or night? What alerted you to the invasion? Where your firearm was stored and was it loaded or unloaded? Did you travel down a stairway and view the subject while doing so? Your attire at the time of the shooting. The intruders attire (hopefully deceased). Do you wear glasses and were they in place? How far away was the intruder when you fired and how many rounds where fired or spent? Furniture location, and description in relation to yourself and the deceased when fired upon? Where there others inside the dwelling at the time? (women and children carry weight).......again just a few of the simple questions that must be answered. I can go on and on and on with simple and technical questions that forensics will eventually bear out. 1. The intruder immediately turns and starts to try to leave the house. You do not know if he's armed or not. You must allow him to flee in this particular circumstance. Your "wall" was not established at which time you would have no alternative but to defend yourself. 2. He lays on the floor like you tell him, but then tries to get up and leave. Same answer as above but the developing situation in the manner in which he is fleeing complicates your "wall" defense that could rule in your favor. "Tries" to get up could mean you were restraining him or he was injured in some way maybe through the intrusion...lets skip "tries" here... Example...he immediately lays on the floor, jumps up and proceeds towards the door in a fleeing manner, secures your wife in a hostage position while backing out. Your wife struggles to break free and the perpetrator is facing you giving you an open opportunity to end the conflict. This is where a split second decision that I hope you never face or occurs commences. Your confidence and expertise comes to play and you take him down. This example lays the groundwork for your "wall" and it would be highly unlikely any DA would prosecute.
Rewind back to the video. If the intruder used a crowbar or any other instrument of crime to forcibly enter your domain and was wielding or to the lesser unknown to anyone but yourself ,holding that instrument upon your confrontation while facing you, your "wall" once again is established. In fear of your life and self defense your actions can are justified. Every state has a provision for their own particular "wall" and the level to which it must be reached. Now...a disclaimer. There should be only one version of the events that have taken place provided you have performed to your ability. Every word spoken from this point forward to the authorities could be used against you. Every following word other than the obvious " I was in fear of my life and had to STOP him" when authorities appear should be strictly with your attorney and ONLY your attorney. "Stop him." STOP. Then stop talking because you will be too shaken to proceed without error. That is IMO.
All things being equal do NOT kill anyone needlessly.
The Rock
Problem 1 is the intruder in your home. You need to end the threat posed by that person.
Problem 2 is the aftermath of your ending the threat. If you deal with problem one poorly, you will be at best subject to financial ruin, and at worst, to a long stint in prison.
If your goal is to protect your family, you need to handle problem 1 so that problem 2 is not much of a problem, if at all. To suggest otherwise is absurd. Your whole reduction ad absurdum is equally absurd.
Folks like you should never give advice on deadly force. You're writing your stuff like you get a commission when somebody gets sent to prison.
Let me tell you something slick. A very tough 6'2 "dude in dungarees and cutoff jacket who is young dumb and full of cum is no match for a 5'6" double breasted bespeckled man carrying an alligator briefcase and winged tip shoes. Believe me.
This is not about being brave or being a coward. This situation is about being courageous ENOUGH to shoot to kill to protect your family as well as yourself if the situation warrants it, or, to soothe your notion to shoot first without engaging thought, construe the events in your favor. Then you can hope for the best for your family and their welfare while your attorney is preparing your meaningless defense while leaving your family to the devices of welfare....but YOU will be just fine. That is a real hero.
Shoot when a home invasion requires such and shoot ONLY with the intent to kill. Never reveal to anyone, including your spouse, your pre-mediated or instinctive intent except your attorney. Your attorney has now become your new best friend.
The Rock
Do I have to thank the ****sucker too?
I suppose if he trips and falls on the way out he can sue me and wind up owning my house too?
Our legal system (or what's left of it) is REALLY screwed up.
In general, you can't shoot to protect property. If someone is in your home, you are generally given greater leeway. (Except for some liberal jurisdictions, which, in any case, you need to check with a local lawyer...100% of the time.)
But once the threat is ended, such as when the intruder is leaving, many jurisdictions consider shooting at that time to be a crime. In some jurisdictions, it is not, be it with the castle doctrine or the "make my day" laws.
Some prosecutors will take marginal cases to the jury. If they do, figure $100-$200k for a murder defense. Got that amount of money stuffed in your mattress? Most don't.
This is not complicated, folks.
Burglar breaks into your home. You shoot once, justified shooting, and burglar is on the ground, not a threat, wounded, but the injury is not a fatal wound. Because you don't want him coming back, you walk up and put a round right between his eyes.
Shot no. 1: justified, no problem. Shot no. 2 will result in an indictment against you, likely for a murder charge.
How can you protect your family from a jail cell?
If he should trip while fleeing and somehow falls into the stairway where your children or spouse are secured or bedded as previously stated your " ever evolving "wall" comes back into play. Your immediate mental processing may be he is attempting to gain entry to the upstairs portions for violations unknown to your family members. That decision may be based on actual determination of belief or a prefabrication to believe such for you to act. The prefabrication of course, post shooting, is immediately dismissed from mind and conscious never to be thought upon as having ever occurred before or since.
Again the right to defend against a believed imminent threat of bodily harm to yourself or your family suggests you to "STOP" the intruder wherever he may be in that stairwell foreknowledge in place.
The intruder could be fleeing down a hallway in your home, yourself in hot pursuit to rid your family of danger. The intruder while fleeing falls down in the hallway and scrambles to rise placing his hand on the doorknob for support and rises looking at you. When he rises you take him down and out. The "wall" once again enters the picture provided someone was in that room. The variables are endless to support a home invasion where the intruder is shot and killed. Someone may be in a car accident holding a bleeding child while attempting to frantically enter your home. They manage to challenge the door and enter your home screaming for help. In the process you arrive on the scene hearing the ruckus with firearm in hand and shoot the "suspected" intruder.
I hope you can access your 401K because you are going to need every penny of it. IMO.
The Rock
The best advice on this thread is coming from the in-house attorney. Believe me. Please believe me.
The Rock
I'm just trying to get my head around it. It just seems to me that once someone's entered your home, then that makes it a personal defense issue but I guess I'm wrong.
We have some really screwed up legal principles.
God bless, Steve
There is only one way you could PROVE to any man that you will you use your weapon once you have drawn a bead on him.
One way.
The Rock
know the rules of engagement
Going over the different scenarios beforehand is important
I highly doubt anyone here, including myself ever wants to pull that trigger and I also believe most of us understand the gravity. That does not require a law degree. However when we are being told that it is almost a sure thing that under almost any circumstance you are going to be charged and probably go to prison or be bankrupted , Well then sell your guns and depend on someone else for you family's safety./
As far as anyone else agreeing with me , Spike, that includes you. I am still of the opinion that most of you , as much as you talk , are being brainwashed by fear of legal consequence of an actual action situation where, God forbid, You had to actually protect your family. But then no one ever accused me of being politically correct. God bless , Steve
DO NOT SHOOT: wife, son/daughter, houseguest, neighbor, cop, unexpected friendlies
SHOOT: the rest, maybe
I remembered a time, about 35 yrs ago, when a well-meaning youth group from my church came to the house for a 'jail-n-bail' event, one problem...there was a communication error of some sort.
short story long, one (or more) of the kids almost caught a 30-30 to the torso at a very short distance, if not for the restraint of the trigger man.
It was a dramatic event that ended well, it could have been a lifelong mess for a bunch of people
just sayin
Case 1: The prosecutor was laughing so bad at the defense, he took the pretrial motions to the DA annual meeting and told everyone how stupid we were. A little over a month later, he had to choked down an acquittal after a seventeen day trial.
Case 2: The prosecution case in a first degree murder was so beat up at halftime that they offered manslaughter, which would be capped at eight years. Defendant decided to roll the dice. Jury came back with a guilty verdict for first degree murder, result is a life sentence without parole.
We think we know what a jury will do. We may be right, we may be wrong. But if it is your azz in the seat facing decades of imprisonment, you won't feel good about your life being in their hands.
Remember, a jury of your peers won't be packed with Bowsite regulars.
Anony Mouse's Link
Second, there is a Democrat state senator who has introduced a bill to revoke Michigan's castle law. Initially, after passage, prosecutors were reluctant to address shootings under the law; but after it had been in place, it has been rare (and with special circumstances)that a self-defence shooting has been brought to trial. In other words, they saw that it worked.
Now, a typical proregressive Democrat from a liberal college community has shown true colors. She is from the UM/EMU area of the state.
"In the instance I was talking about the gun was not only pointed but the hammer cocked and the person could see that he was going to die if he kept trying to knock the door down. I believe a lot of people , especially criminals can read intent. If you are hesitant they just may call your bluff., That can get you and your family killed. Like you said , He left alive. I do believe though that he thought he was about to die."
You are well liked around here. I would like for you to stay here and blast me when I start one of my ramblings that can't be understood. Well, maybe blast is a poor choice of words considering your mind frame. ;-)
Now. Take an eraser and remove the former paragraph I have entered on this post then blot it clean with acid. Then sit down, relax enjoy a beverage of your choice and NEVER think in those terms EVER again. If necessary use the acid to blot it clean from your mind and memory. ;-)
The Rock
How do you get that? We had a local ranch owner go on trial for 1st degree murder. (I think that was the charge, it's been awhile but I bet BK has the details, this occurred in Eagle County) She had killed her ex, an abusive felon with a history of drug use and domestic violence. You would think that a 110# woman would have never had to face trial for shooting her 6' tall 200# violent felon ex husband but that's exactly what happened. I'm pretty sure she had the money to fully fund her defense but what if she hadn't??
Advice regarding serious and potentially deadly matters is easy from the computer. Thoughtful, stress free, clear thinking. That all changes when under duress and the adrenalin is flowing. I will say this to anyone if they can control their facilities when the time comes and if they can remain calm, in the least as calm as possible. Check your bedrooms for those who should be there. If everyone is in place the next person you encounter is not supposed to be. You are now mentally prepared for the possibility to move to defcom #3. The right to protect yourself and family from danger and harm. Now more than ever 'control' wins the day that could move to defcom #4. Now decisions that may forever alter your life will need be addressed and answered. The heightened situation has now moved from the world of the known to the unknown. A disconcerting sensation no doubt.
I must say this thread was very interesting and the differing views of how we may perceive events that unfold in each of our minds and ultimately our behavior to act.
The Rock
If that is your interpretation of what I wrote, I have serious doubts about your interpretation of everything else. Show me where I wrote that, or admit that you made that up.
How many times have you practiced jumping out of bed, getting to your gun and clearing your home in the dark? Its obvious many commenting have never taken a live fire CQB class [just about the most fun you can have in a weekend, BTW]
I doubt many practice dry fire drills, reloads...or rotate the mags in their loaded weapon.
I'm no Navy seal...far from it actually....but I do practice
Dammit !!!
I was counting on Owl being on the jury and saving me !!!
You have to Remember, Claiming that a Self Defense shooting was justified is an Affirmative Defense. In other words you are saying "YES, I commented a homicide, but there were circumstances that made it something other than a crime". If the Jury doesn't agree with you about those circumstances, you have already admitted to the act.
I too have found this a very interesting thread. I teach the NRA Basic Pistol class necessary here in CT to get you Pistol Permit (which ISN'T a concealed carry permit incidentally), these sorts of discussions come up a lot. NOT thinking through this stuff beforehand is a serious mistake IMO.
CT has a "Castle Doctrine", but not a Stand Your Ground Law, we also have a lot of Liberal prosecutors and you probably can't count on too many understanding gun owners on a jury.
One other thing I noticed, some guys here have said "always Shoot to Kill", personally my perspective is: If you have to shoot, you "Shoot to Stop the Threat", once the threat has stopped, you stop shooting.
Think through this stuff, have a plan, practice, get training and since none of us wants to kill anyone, ask yourself if somebody has grabbed my TV and is running out the door, is that really something you want to take a life for?
Carry On
Illinois (OUTSIDE OF CHITCAGO!!) is actually a fairly friendly state regarding the self defense laws.
Technically, you can shoot someone who is committing something that would be considered a felony on your property. That's the way the law reads. Felony would be breaking into your home and carrying your TV out of your house. Like he said, would in no way recommend shooting someone stealing your stuff. (We were all shocked at this! Even had a lawyer in the class who didn't know the law was that broad!)
The only exception he had to this would be if you saw them carrying your guns out of your house. Most would consider this as stopping a potential threat to someone else, not to mention that you don't know if he found your ammo as well and may have one of them loaded!!
In Illinois, we do not have an official castle doctrine law, BUT there is a law that states you cannot be sued for using deadly force to stop a felony. (Sorry don't remember the exact wording and if it had to be a physical assault).
NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER AND I'LL REPEAT AGAIN NEVER EVER SHOOT TO WOUND!!!!
That is a lawsuit/jail time waiting to happen!!! He said not to even fire a warning shot! Besides the safety factor, it just proves the person was not an immediate threat if you had time to aim to wound or fire a warning shot!!!!!
If you pull the trigger, it better be to stop the threat and if that means death, so be it!
Once you stop pulling the trigger from the initial burst of gun fire. You better have a DARN GOOD REASON to start pulling it again!! Self defense is much much harder to prove the second time around!!!
Now, keep in mind, this was all conversation down around Mt. Vernon so this was in Southern Illinois. Where 95% of homes don't have just one gun, they have multiple guns and the CCW permits per capita are the highest in the state!!!
AND I AM NOT A LAWYER!!!
Ace is correct, one needs to think through these situations. If and when it happens, you won't have time to think should I or shouldn't I.......
Just an aside, this is how close I came to one of these situations last summer..... The bank we use here at work... I went in and made a deposit on a Thursday, Friday at roughly the same time I always go, the bank was robbed!! I know, 24 hours difference, but it definitely makes you think about what you would do!!!
I do. I would also recommend getting a shot timer for your real practice...they have lots of apps for your phone for starters. If you can get to where you can make multiple shots on multiple targets and not be able to tell a change in speed or rhythm when you move from target to target you are starting to get there.
Police officers and the like who follow protocol would be best equipped mentally in these situations. The average person decides and makes those decisions on the fly. Sometimes good. Other times not so good. There are many well meaning good people serving their sentences with regret.
The Rock
For instance....many of us here are likely very good with a shotgun and can shoot multiple moving targets anywhere within range without thought or even really consciously aiming. You can get to where you can do that same thing with any weapon.
You should have the home arranged for tactical purposes. You should have a plan for every family member to be in a safe spot. You should know where you will be positioned to defend the home. Most homes have a limited number of spots to enter, so you consider that, too.
One reason I bought my current home is that access is very limited. Hence, I can position myself so that anyone who comes in illegally will get a very inhosptiable welcome.
And I am well aware that if you do have to shoot it's to stop the threat, which means aiming for center mass until the threat is stopped. I'm not the smartest guy in the world but I do know that shooting to wound is pure Hollywood BS.
You should most certainly know your firearm and know it well combined with your ability to use it. Realize however that the mind and body so in sync at the range addresses a completely different set of circumstances when racing emotion(s) enter the stage that may threaten your very life and or those of your family.
We think we know what we will do when the moment calls for action under extreme stress. Some may. Some may surprise themselves. Yet others may have no idea.
You can't cover all the bases no matter how well you may prepare because you do NOT know where the bases may be placed who placed and how many. To think otherwise or give advice to the contrary is pure neglect of thought. I am surprised at this response and advice to say the least no matter your profession. If I have offended your sensibilities then my post was successful counselor.
The only "nonsense" is that you could ever believe or prepare YOURSELF beforehand for such an intense unknown encounter. Unknown counselor. I could give a damn where the furniture is positioned or how much firewood is on the hearth, entrance or exit ports included.
Law may be your fast lane of which many here would agree including myself. Psychological Strategy to predict the outcome of the future of a yet to be determined event is not one of them in this instance.
The Rock
How do you know what I know, and what I don't know?
Quit projecting your inabilities to others.
"The more I engage the more my doubts."
Joseph McClain 3rd shift Yale&Towne
The Rock
You will learn from the bruises.
See. You are making me go into places that I would rather avoid. Give someone a compliment in one area and they view it as subservient on the planet.
The Rock
So when someone tells me you can't train for this, it's an indication he has no clue about this subject.
And when someone tells me he knows what I know and what I've been a part of, that tells me he's just making chit up.
I just installed a video camera that runs day and night and displays on a monitor. My wife sets it on motion detection and it records every time something goes by it. You can set it to record all the time and just erase from time to time. If you forget to erase it will do it automatically and keep on recording.
I also have a good trail cam that records video or still shots. All my equipment films very well at night with no lights showing. Day pictures are in full color while night shots are black and white. I have another video camera that I haven't installed yet and my set up will handle four cameras.
Not in Nevada!
I am speaking about mental interruptions when faced with the unknowns of a life threatening situation.
This is simply irrational thought to believe you can pre-suppose a hypothetical physical event and apply your practicing of your mental engagement to defend against it. The emotional decisions that will accompany and ultimately rule your physical response is unknown.
How do you practice against an unknown? This is not my opinion it is a fact. Lawyer, Indian chief or beggar.
Speak with a psychologist about this particular set of events as I penned them.
The Rock
The Rock
Ok here are a couple of real life scenarios for the gunfighters among us;
who wants to play? grin
#1 [for brevity of discussion] Guy with a carry permit is one back in the grocery checkout line. An armed robber comes in and hold a gun at the cashier one lane over and demands the manager come to open the safe that was right there [young guys;they used to put safes there in the front of the store]
The manager shows and as he is opening the safe, the permit holder at no more than 15' away decides to shoot as the bad guy is turned away? Good decision?
#1. The guy shoots the robber....but didn't know the robber had an accomplice that was behind the checkout lines. Second bad guy starts shooting it out with the good guy and many get wounded.
Good guy is blamed for the woundings, sued by the ones shot and prosecuted by the cops [it was ongoing during the class i took so no verdict yet- but it was in LA so probably not good]
#2. The 'assailant' was an undercover cop that had caught the woman trying to rip off the small convenience store- the trucker went to jail for a long time.
Of course these are devils advocate scenarios...but it does reinforce the 'know the rules of engagement' those in the know are saying
The rules of MENTAL MENTAL MENTAL engagement are UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN.
Practice that and keep me informed on your progress.
Beendare,
I am attempting to state a elementary physiological FACT. You can not and will not ever know how you will react to an unknown set of circumstances.
Example: What would you do if? If what? What does it matter? You do not have to know. Just answer.
The Rock
Here is a situation that I went thru a number of years ago. I posted it a number of years ago, worth a repeat. It certainly was nothing I was "trained" for, but I wasn't unprepared.
Back in '92 a friend and I were stocking Clark's Creek,a trout stream in Pennsylvania. As we approached the end of our stretch, we were met by five, for lack of a better term, biker dudes. They asked if we planned on putting any fish at the bridge and I mentioned we had run out of fish about 50 yards back or so. Besides it wasn't really good water right at the bridge. The one guy responded "Oh so you only stock the areas you fish." I mentioned that "No, we hit the full stretch and stocked all the good water. 'Sides we normally don't fish this stretch the first day"
Apparently that was the wrong thing to say. I guess it was the "leader" that started with the threats of "just wait till you're out of the water. We're gonna f' you up real good." I stated look we just want to get to our truck for a cold drink, don't want any trouble. The threats continued. They we're going to kick our asses real good. As the five spread out, the leader was about ten yards away when I stopped walking, opened my jacket to expose my SW6906 and spare mag in a shoulder holster. I asked Mr. Big Mouth directly "Is there a problem?" His eyes about popped out. He raised his hands palms towards me, "No, no problem." I kept my hand on the grip until they left. Not sure what the outcome would have been, but Mr. Big Mouth was getting the first two center mass. I drew a proverbially line in the sand at approx. ten yards. If the line was crossed, my firearm would be drawn. Continue to advance at your own risk.
What really shook me up was the fact that I nearly left my weapon at home. I actually picked it up, spare mag. And laid it back down. I thought the last thing I need while stocking trout is a pistol, spare mag and a shoulder rig getting in the way. Ended up taking it anyway.
That was the first and only time I have been in a situation like that. I pray it was the last. One thing I did realize after the confrontation, there was UTTER CLARITY of what the next step would be. Pure focus on what needed to be done had it escalated. In my mind, I decided ten yards was as close as I would let them get. At ten yards, there was no hesitation on my part. My survival and that of my friend was my only concern. Hand on the grip, thumb under the safety. And a quiet simple question...."Is there a problem?"
If you go through 'what if' scenarios, and practice and train with your tools, you will not only be more comfortable with them, and less likely to make a mistake in the heat of the moment, BUT you will be more likely to have them on you should the need arise.
I will gladly lick my wounds on this one and pray for all.
The Rock
I had two attempts at a robbery/carjacking in a 4 month span. In both instances, I had my hand on a Glock 19, and was as calm as I could be, when I suggested that they simply leave before they found out who I was. Both times they wisely left. I didn't have to call 911, and didn't have to deal with an investigation by the Denver PD. Big win for me. And big win for the two idiots who wanted my Jeep Cherokee.
Have your attorney on speed dial if at all possible.
Training makes that firearm an extension of your arm.
Saying, 'you don't know' well of course not but you can prepare for a few scenarios that 90% of defense scenarios fall under.
One drill we did [500x !!!] is a hostage drill. You can buy those paper hostage targets with only a sliver of bad guy showing.
You practice and practice...until you know without a doubt the distance you can drill the bad guy in the head at....everytime! It will vary per the situation...but you can factor that the same way you limit shot distance in bowhunting.
If you stand at a range at 20,30,40 on flat ground, standing upright and shoot groups- THATS not a hunting scenario. Same with practicing with a firearm.
Both are legal in TX if you are threatened and in fear of your life.
It is entirely possible to turn a good shooting into a bad shooting.
Hint...its very low. In a class I took 20 years ago it was 17% nationwide [cops and all].....and the avg gunfight distance is 15 feet.
Another hint; It would benefit you to take a class......as you can learn how to rise above the 17% category.
My understanding is the % of hits has gone way up in recent years due to improved training techniques.
One of his police officers looks to have committed a VERY serious crime which rightly or wrongly cost someone their life. The LEAST he could have done was be upfront about it and SHOW the people that he was interested in the truth and justice instead of talking about it after the fact when the chit hit the fan.
Anything he says/does now just sounds disingenuious.
Laquan McDonald Video Not Dispositive of Police Criminal Misconduct
Posted by Andrew Branca
(Andrew F. Branca is in his third decade of practicing law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. He wrote the first edition of the “Law of Self Defense” in 1997, and is currently in the process of completing the fully revised and updated second edition)
From the link:
"...In fact, based on the available evidence–the dash cam video and the autopsy report–it is simply impossible to definitely conclude that Officer Van Dyke committed the crime of murder in the first degree. Indeed, both the video and the autopsy report are entirely consistent with the lawful use of force by Van Dyke.
Let’s take a look at the video and the autopsy report and see why this is so. Meet the Tueller Drill
Before we do, however, it’s also important to provide some tactical context, as it is within this context that the officers made their decision to use deadly force upon the non-compliant and knife-armed McDonald.
There is a sentiment being expressed “by some” that somehow there exists a great disparity in the lethality of a handgun and the lethality of a knife. In fact, at close quarters a knife is arguably a more lethal instrument than is a gun.
There has also been expressed the notion that because McDonald was not within arm’s reach of the police officers that he represented no imminent deadly threat. This notion is, of course, the result of ignorance.
I expect every police officer in the country has been taught a defensive doctrine called the Tueller Drill. The Tueller Drill was developed by Salt Lake City Police Officer Dennis Tueller, who among other things was a firearms instructor for his department.
Dennis trained uniformed police officers who were armed with pistols and who regularly encountered violent suspects armed with impact weapons, particularly knives.
He recognized that a knife wielder standing beside an officer could surely stab that officer before the officer could clear his pistol from his holster and engage the attacker with fired rounds.
Dennis also recognized, however, that at some greater distance an impact-weapon armed attacker would be too far to constitute an imminent threat to police officer. Absent an imminent threat, the officer would not be justified in using deadly force upon the attacker.
That begged the question, then, of what distance became the threshold at which an impact-weapon armed attacker did constitute an imminent threat of death or grave bodily harm such that the officer would be justified in using deadly force. Was that distance 5 feet? 10 feet? 15 feet?
Dennis knew a pretty good time for an officer to clear his weapon from his holster and strike a target with two center-mass rounds was about 1.5 seconds. Once that time is known, the question of interest becomes how great a distance an attacker armed with an impact weapon can cross in that same 1.5 seconds. Whatever that distance, the aggressor became an imminent threat for self-defense purposes once he crossed that threshold.
After running a great many empirical tests, Dennis found that the distance that an impact-weapon armed attacker could cross from a standing start in 1.5 seconds was not just 5 feet, or 10 feet, or 15 feet. Rather, such an aggressor could consistently cross a distance of 21 feet, a full 7 yards, in the 1.5 seconds it would take the typical officer to draw his holster and engage that aggressor with aimed fire.
That suggested that an aggressor armed with an impact weapon becomes an imminent deadly threat even when he was as far away as 21 feet–a distance that astonished even many experienced law enforcement officers.
To my knowledge the Tueller Drill and its findings are taught in every police academy, and every police officer on the street should be assumed to be aware of the Tueller Drill and its implications in encountering an aggressor armed with an impact weapon such as a knife>.."
One should read the entire piece by Branca before commenting. Not only does he discuss standard training and procedures, but also the politics related to this case. For a number of reasons, this video does not make this an open and shut case.
As he (Branca) concludes, "Finally, one parting thought. Even assuming the worst of Officer Van Dyke, even assuming that he viciously murdered Laquan McDonald under color of law, I note that the officer has, in fact, been charged with 1st degree murder, and he is being brought to trial to be held to account for his use of deadly force.
The system, in other words, is working."
Please, please, please.
How many humans beings have you or anyone else here KILLED other than the military or under a police action?
Who here? How many?
That is how much experience you have and how much experience you have been practicing for.
People must think being a tough guy on the CF and typing anything they want makes them "conditioned" to calmly kill another human being under control.
Here is some ABC type information. It does not work that way people. We, we as civilized man will always sruggle with that act for the rest of our lives WARRANTED OR NOT.
BELIEVE ME....or say whatever the hell you like to believe and kid yourself.
The Rock
A brave 13-year-old Ladson boy fended off two hardened felons who were attempting to break into his house by using his mother’s gun to protect himself while home alone.
(continued at link)
I hope you don't mind....but I won't just stand there in the headlights.
God bless, Steve
Anony Mouse's Link
Like I said who here has shot a man to death or killed a man in any manner in self defense?
Nobody answered so nobody knows except those who have.
The Rock
Self defense is greatly improved by knowledge of what to do...and instant action.
Rockys mental picture of standing toe to toe quickly drawing your weapon is exactly what NOT to do [as taught by the pros in a CQB class.
First rule in a self defense against firearms is to take cover/create distance between you and the shooter- my apologies to Clint and James!
Studies show that many shooting could have been avoided if only the victim would have taken immediate cover...instead of the "frozen deer in the headlights" HE HAS A GUN takes a couple seconds to register and just stand there. So many kids in these mass shooting just stand there and stare while the gunman pulls the trigger.
You are doing your children a disservice by not explaining to them that when faced with a gun, IMMEDIATELY, take cover or create distance from the shooter. So running/cover is always your best first action....hesitation can kill you.
Second rule is to "Aim" if you have to return fire. Both "Cover" and "Aiming" can be conditioned and practiced....learning your self defense skills from the movies is a bad idea....as is the "you don't know what you don't know" philosophy....which is a deer in the headlights waiting to happen.
But remember this: Each state has different standards re. what you can do and what you can't do.
You can do stuff in a state like Nevada and the local DA will say, "Well done." But do the same thing in CA, IL or NY and your life as you know it will be over.
Know the laws in YOUR state and follow that law, not the laws in someone else's state.
The other big BS is when two gunfighters, in the movies, face each other to draw against each other. That too is total BS since the first to draw will win every time if he knows how to shoot. When someone is holding a weapon on you and you decide to move they have to see you start the move and their brain tell them to do something but they will be dead before they even do anything. He who goes first wins. The instructor was a 5th degree black belt marine and he had seen it all. He told me he spent weeks learning to throw a knife. Then they told him never let your knife leave your hand.
Know your weapon and practice often.
BTW we told the students that if someone is holding a gun on you, do what they ask unless you are pretty sure they are going to shoot you.
Back then we would drive to Virginia. We would go across the Bay Bridge tunnel. He knew places where you could buy 1911 A 45's for $50. It was legal and no paperwork required. That was his favorite handgun. He liked the ones made by Singer Sewing Machine company since they were the best. Seems the sewing machine people knew how to build stuff with very good fitting parts. Better than the gun companies.
Detroit Police Chief: Citizens Carrying Guns Makes Detroit Safer From Terrorist Attacks….
Dems force him to retract statement in 3… 2… 1…
Via WT:
Detroit’s police chief says he believes the number of armed citizens in the city would deter would-be terrorists from carrying out attacks similar to those in Paris for fear of return fire.
“A lot of Detroiters have CPLs (concealed pistol licenses), and the same rules apply to terrorists as they do to some gun-toting thug, Chief James Craig said, The Detroit News reported. “If you’re a terrorist, or a carjacker, you want unarmed citizens.”
(continued)
BTW, my favorite jobs were when we went to hospitals to teach the nurses Self defence. They often walked out of the hospital, late at night and needed to be able to take care of themselves. The instructor also taught the state police self defence. They told him if they ever had to arrest him they would shoot him in the knee first. He could kick you up along side the head with ease and he was in his 60's. I quit when I became a diabetic and didn't need any more broken fingers or toes. I will go to my grave with some of the stuff he taught me that wasn't taught in class.
They have studied these critical shooting events for decades and give good insights into Rocks premise of "What you don't know..." Fascinating book i highly recommend.
A couple interesting facts; How many war vets do you hear say, "I pooped my drawers"? Zero
Well it turns out its pretty common as your body knows what functions it needs in a true fight or flight scenario; Eyesight- Yes! improved even,
Mobility/legs-Yes! pumped with adrenaline
Hearing- Yes! improved
Bowel control- No! don't need it, the body turns its focus to more important functions. ___
Then there is the one crazy way to stop these mass shootings at schools [though the author doesn't recommend it!] Teacher/principal yells, "STOP, RIGHT NOW...PUT THAT GUN DOWN"....and crazy enough...some of the shooters have done just that.
How many people have you killed in self defense?
Simple question. Simple answer.
Your a funny dude not be taken seriously. That is unless you answer the question.
Well?
The Rock
The Rock
C'mon. Don't be shy tough guy.
The Rock
I doubt anybody on this forum has had to actually shoot someone whether it be in the line of duty or self defense. So stop being a butt and asking!
Yes, you are correct, we don't know what we will do in such a situation, but training is a way to prepare for it as best we can. Not training is fool hearty and stupid.
If training is a waste of time, then why do police and military do training on a regular basis? Only one cop on our local police force has had to shoot someone, but they all train regularly.
Many of the same affects on the body occur with training, tunnel vision, increased heart rate, etc... Just ask anyone who has done moving, multiple target engagement drills....
Shoot, hunting is good practice.... How many guys have seen a nice buck, their heart rate increases, they get tunnel vision, and they totally don't see the second deer that has them busted. Never getting a shot at the nice one they were locked in on!!!!
Its a fact that shooting is a "muscle memory" action. The more you practice, the better you get at repeating the action. Practice is in no way a waste.
I had never shot drawing from a holster until last Spring. At first the sights were no where near the target and lined up. Now I can draw while moving and my sights are lined up fairly close and I'm on target. I can reload with less thought, etc... But I still need more practice!!!
So again, no one knows how they will react to a situation, but to not train for one is completely stupid. Period.
So, drawing your weapon and having the bad guy run away: victory. Having your hand on a cocked and locked Glock but out of sight of the potential assailant, who gets the picture and decides to leave: victory.
"The supreme art of war is to secure the victory without fighting" Sun Tsu, from The Art of War.
rock50's Link
From the article............
Judon faces up to seven years in prison on charges of possession of a stolen firearm and unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon. He will next appear in court Dec. 31 for a preliminary hearing.
Assistant State’s Attorney Dave Kenny said Judon was inside the upstairs apartment at 1103 W. Nebraska Ave. on Monday when three armed men allegedly tried to force their way into the house. A struggle ensued and Judon told police he fired his weapon at one of the home invaders.
About a block away, the body of Desmun Underwood, 29, was found in an alley, Kenny said in court. It appears Underwood was shot in the head, the prosecutor said.
Kenny said two other people who were in the apartment at the time gave similar statements.
“At this point in the investigation, the information we have received supports the claim that the individual could have been acting in self defense,” Peoria County State’s Attorney Jerry Brady said later Wednesday
LOLOLOL Sorry Rock, not making fun of you, but "DOWNSTATE".......
Peoria is 4 hours north of me and I'm 2 hours from KY. Peoria is hardly "Downstate". Its close enough to Chitcago to still be influenced. Sorry, just had to laugh, the old joke, IL is Chitcago!
But, this would not be a case to base your decisions on!! Both career bad guys, stolen firearm, held by a convicted felon. He may not get the murder charges but they will still hit him with the rest, as they should!!!
My instructor told of a case they dealt with recently...
Car pulls up and starts shooting (hood rats) at people on the porch of a house. Lady grabs a gun and returns fire. The police determined she was justified in returning fire but nobody in the home had a FOID card, so they wrote her up for that. Instructor (a detective) said they all hated giving her the ticket, but with 100 people standing around watching, they had to! Otherwise, it would be open gun season in that area of town. BTW, in all that exchange of gun fire, NOBODY was hit!
In the county where I live, we have 1 Democrat candidate for county wide office..........that's right, 1, and he is the county party chairman who feels that they should at least be on the ballot somewhere, but he has no chance of being elected. It would be interesting to see gun ownership per capita here, too.
Don't misunderstand, I think this guy should be gone for a long time, but it's interesting to see if the self defense theory will hold up. Not the same exact scenario as WW's hypothetical, but home invasion just the same.
I made a wrong turn in Peoria one time and within just a few blocks I realized I was in the WRONG part of town!!! I was getting some looks, I knew I needed to turn around quick!!!
Beendare's Link