Beginning carry question...

C

chlor

New member
Hopefully this is in the right forum, but here goes:

I have my CCW permit and will start carrying in the following weeks...

Is it advised that before doing so that I speak with a lawyer? I've read somewhere about it being recommended and figured I would ask.

Not to seem like I'm intentionally looking for trouble, I pray I never have to use deadly force, but if I was forced to, I would imagine it would be a good failsafe to have a lawyer in waiting that you're familiar with.

Any suggestions or comments on the matter?

Appreciate it,
chl
 
Absolutely THE most valuable advice in the world....

"Talk to a lawyer BEFORE you do anything."

At worst you'll be out the consultation fee. At best you'll know who to call when you need someone on your team.

Some questions to ask are things like: Siezure of your firearm after an incident - what to do to protect yourself and your property; What to say and what not to say to LEO after an event; When to call after being arrested; Bail; etc.
 
Depending on what state you live in, you have probably taken a CCW course if you are going to start carrying a firearm. Was there any information covered regarding the legal use of force, duty to retreat, self defense, etc? That's usually a good starting point.

If you want to talk to a lawyer, it wouldn't hurt; but be sure that he is well versed in the above information. Personally, I studied the pertinent statutes and relevant case law online before I even took my CCW course. I learned more before the class than during it.

Give a look to www.packing.org for more information about the laws in your state.

-Dave
 
Yep, I'd think you were given documentation about the laws from the state but I'm sure they're all different. Any lawyer would love to have your money for something so simple. It's free information that you can look up online even and save lots of money for more toys. :D
 
I'd say if you can afford it then go for it. Then again, you end up shooting someone in self defense of course. If you were charged then the prosecuters or lawyers hired by the so called victim's family would use you speaking to an attorney against you somehow. You're on the stand..... Mr. Smith, i understand you seeked an attorney's advice on what happens when you shoot someone? Why would you do that Mr. Smith? You hoped to shoot someone one day didn't you sir? Just something to think about. You have to do what you think is right. :)
 
Again, I wouldn't say it's a waste of money if it gets you on the client list before you need to be on the client list. And you never know when you'll need an atty until after you need an atty so it's always a good thing to have someone to call with your one phonecall from jail.

The fact that someone sought legal advice is absolutely irrelevant to anything with the matter at hand. It's like asking an expert witness if he is being paid for his testimony. OF COURSE he's being paid, he's an expert witness and the fact that he's being paid is irrelevant (and the jury will be so instructed). Same deal with seeking legal advice because people get legal advice every day and there's NOTHING which can be inferred from that.

If it were brought up, your lawyer would object & the judge would sustain the objection. He would instruct the jury to disregard the question totally and not infer anything from it or the fact that there was an objection nor the fact that there is no answer to the question.

I also believe it would be reversible error on appeal if the judge allowed the question but don't quote me on that.
 
IMHO, CC goes far beyond putting a gun in your belt. Most thoughtful people confront the realization "If I shoot someone, no matter the justification, it will not be good" (aside from still being alive). I was taught in drivers education to play through scenarios in my mind while driving so when that other driver comes into my lane I am prepared to act reflexively. I found myself doing the same with carrying a firearm. I came to the conclusion I would use deadly force only to defend my life, my family, and my clients if I am acting as a bodyguard. I will be a great witness if I see a crime committed but I will not be a "hero". I believe anyone who is carrying deadly force must predetermine under what circumstances will I kill another person. There are a lot of other thoughts I have had over the years and I believe I have defined my personal actions prior to and after discharging my weapon. One line I have rehearsed in my mind is "I will gladly give a statement in the presence of my legal council". This is the answer to every question asked by law enforcement after a discharge no matter the circumstances.;)
 
go and talk to a lawyer for about 5 minutes.
GET his/HER card.
Ask the legal eagle if you have a problem can I call you to get me out.
Put the card right behind your CCW.
If it ever hits the fan, pull out that card and call!!!

AFS
 
Romeos Tune, I don't know about that. Aren't questions about what you discussed with your lawyer off-limits, both to police and to the court?
 
The CHL Course I did was done by two law Enforcment Officers who were also the firearms instructors for the local sheriff's department and are qualified to teach the CHL Course in Texas.

Went over use of force from verbal to deadly force.....

very good training on escalation and descalation of force.

The older one told us that his criteria for using his sidearm is if he feels that his life is in danger or another persons.....
 
Oh of course,

A lawyer for the opposing side could never subpoena another lawyer's records or a Dr's clients records. It's done every day in court folks. As far as a judge striking such evidence from record? Get real. Be really careful about giving bad legal advice that someone might follow too.

If you go to seek advice on what would happen if you shoot someone and it's found out by prosecuters it will be used against you. Whether or not the jury or judge finds it relevant or not is the question. Believe what you will, but this is 2006 and times have changed. The criminals have a lot of rights these days it seems.

Ask any lawyer if his records or a Dr's records can be subpeoned in court. :D
 
A lawyer for the opposing side could never subpoena another lawyer's records or a Dr's clients records. It's done every day in court folks. As far as a judge striking such evidence from record? Get real. Be really careful about giving bad legal advice that someone might follow too...

...Ask any lawyer if his records or a Dr's records can be subpeoned in court.
Click to expand...

Romeo, I AM a lawyer and I'll tell you straight out that my client files are confidential and priviledged and generally CANNOT be subpoened as evidence. The closest that will happen will be the judge gets to review the files "in camera". Which means he gets to see them for the purposes of determining if there's any admissible evidence in the file. The mere fact that my client came to see me is NOT relevant, NOR admissible, NOR something which will get my files reviewed even "in camera".

This would not be the same thing as a doctors records since the records would be required to prove injury and IS directly relevant to the matter at issue.

As for giving "bad" legal advice: First, there is no legal "advice" being given here. All information is generalized and merely a recommendation to seek legal counsel. Secondly, I am more leery of those who give inaccurate advise without holding a JD than those who have that privildge and burden.
 
I'm not trying to be an ass here by any means. But what you say here proves my point. If the judge gets to see them and determine whether or not they're admissible then do you suppose sometimes that judge decides that they are admissible? In other words Good Cause. Please don't tell me that this hasn't been done more than a few times and make me go searching for cases. Unfortunately, I don't have a legal assistant to do that for me. lol In the meantime give Phillip Morris a call and ask how the attorney-client privelege worked for them. ;)

Romeo, I AM a lawyer and I'll tell you straight out that my client files are confidential and priviledged and generally CANNOT be subpoened as evidence. The closest that will happen will be the judge gets to review the files "in camera". Which means he gets to see them for the purposes of determining if there's any admissible evidence in the file. The mere fact that my client came to see me is NOT relevant, NOR admissible, NOR something which will get my files reviewed even "in camera".

This would not be the same thing as a doctors records since the records would be required to prove injury and IS directly relevant to the matter at issue.

As for giving "bad" legal advice: First, there is no legal "advice" being given here. All information is generalized and merely a recommendation to seek legal counsel. Secondly, I am more leery of those who give inaccurate advise without holding a JD than those who have that privildge and burden.
 
Jake, give your local bar association a call and see if they have a referral service. If not, let your fingers do the walking.

Romeo, I will admit that atty/client priviledge isn't a total bar to admission of atty files. However, in most cases it is. The only times it wouldn't be priviledged would be in lawsuits between the client and the atty (malpractice etc) or in the corporate world when both the company AND the officers were named and the officers used the company atty for legal advice (ie, the Phillip Morris type case). It's also not priviledged if it's between elected officials and gov't lawyers. The judge will review the file in camera (that also means by himself with no one else present - not even the attys) before deciding if there's any information in the files that is admissible. ONLY that evidence will be admitted and the rest of the file will be kept out.

But for your average auto accident, gun accident, slip & fall, etc. the files WILL BE confidential and nonadmissible and the fastest way I can think of (well maybe not THE fastest) to get sanctioned and reported to the state bar would be to try to subpoena confidential atty files and use the powers of the court to try to enforce the subpoena. It just ain't allowed or done.
 
You know...maybe if it wasn't for the defense attorneys' protecting the criminals rights or the trial attorneys' stellar work on their civil claims we might not need to be worrying about having to have a CCW? Not a reflection on anyone here, but a thought on the times we're in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top