checkmyswag
New member
Where do I start reading about concealed carry "rules" of engagement (for lack of a better term).
when to draw when to shoot
This is true. The link provided by fiddletown covers the use of deadly force for the defense of one's person almost everywhere in the country.You will also need to review your EXACT local statute law AND case (common) law.
It varies by jurisdiction in many important ways.
Excellent advice!The first thought should ALWAYS be 'How can I escape safely without resorting to lethal force.'
It is a last ditch thing. It needs to stay the last line (unless you are looking for government housing and meals for the long term).
A very important one is that YOU MUST STOP USING LETHAL FORCE WHEN THE DANGER HAS PASSED.
If the attacker runs away or is incapacitated the threat is OVER.
YOU WON. STOP.
The link provided by fiddletown covers the use of deadly force for the defense of one's person almost everywhere in the country.
Posted by Brickeyee: It [UseofForce.us) omits many very important things Virgina common law incorporates.
Things like words before the event.
Exchange words beforehand and you have a harder self defense argument to make in Virginia.
You must not have invited the events IN ANY WAY to make one of Virginia's allowed self defense defenses.
If you exchange words and then CLEARLY INDICATE your intent to end the hostilities by WORD AND ACTION, you may be able to make the other type of self defense claim.
Fail to indicate your clear intent to end the incident and then resort to lethal force and you will not have ANY claim to self defense.
It would be mutual combat and murder.
The use of force against another is not justified: ....
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted
use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly
communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing
he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts
to use unlawful force against the actor;
Engaging in a fight, or consensual combat—in other words, a brawl where all parties willingly (even if implicitly) agree to be involved—strips all participants of any justification for the use of force.
That is really not one of the things that vary very much from one jurisdiction to another. The basic principle applies in all states.
if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted
use of unlawful force
Do you know of any municipalities in the country that have ordinances that cover the use of force by civilians? Any that have appellate courts that can establish case law?Posted by brickeyee: The nuances do indeed vary between states and even cities within states.