CCW Scenario...Opinions Please

Runsalone:

I am not about to start carrying a variety of weapons suitable to any level of threat. I would need a tool belt to do that, and it isn't necessary.

Frank:

You are obviously going to have to get your nose broken before you pull your gun, which is your absolute right. You can take as much of a pounding as you think necessary to convince a jury that you needed to pull the gun and shoot.

I personally don't think you should find yourself in a position to have to worry about it at all - But if you do then do what you think is best for your.

Given the fact that I will have to be physically cornered by a psycho before I pull, and he will still have to attack into a gun before I shoot - then I believe any reasonable person will believe that I needed deadly force at that time.
 
Frank, I don't want to be anal about this, but you sort missed the previous section where it says:
a person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.
AZ courts have interpreted this time and again to mean that a victim is justified in defending himself with deadly force against "unlawful physical force". Obviously a victim has no way of knowing in advance how serious the bodily injury may be and , by the time he does know, its too late. God, I love this state!
 
Frank:

You are obviously going to have to get your nose broken before you pull your gun, which is your absolute right. You can take as much of a pounding as you think necessary to convince a jury that you needed to pull the gun and shoot.
Click to expand...

I've had my nose broken in a fight and never took my gun out of the holster. That's the best place for your gun to be if you're not confronting deadly force. I'll take as much of a pounding as I think is justified before using deadly force against someone, who, up to that point, has committed only a misdemeanor against me. Rest assured, it will take more than just a punch to the face for me to feel justified in shooting someone, like maybe if there were more than just one of them.
 
Frank, I don't want to be anal about this, but you sort missed the previous section where it says:
a person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force.
AZ courts have interpreted this time and again to mean that a victim is justified in defending himself with deadly force against "unlawful physical force". Obviously a victim has no way of knowing in advance how serious the bodily injury may be and , by the time he does know, its too late. God, I love this state!
Click to expand...

I saw the first section just fine. And the link between the first and the second section was AND, not OR.

A person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another:

1. If such person would be justified in threatening or using physical force against the other under section 13-404, AND

2. When and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.
Click to expand...

Can you post the case law that says "unlawful physical force" is the same as
"the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force"? The statute is pretty clear: You can only use deadly force to counter deadly force. If a guy swinging his fist at you is "deadly force", that's up to the judge or jury to decide whether your fear was reasonable. The statute looked pretty clear to me, but I'd like to see the case law.

Obviously a victim has no way of knowing in advance how serious the bodily injury may be and , by the time he does know, its too late. God, I love this state!
Click to expand...

So why not just pull out your gun and shoot a guy who says "I'm gonna kick your a$$!!" After all, you don't know where he's going to stop if you let him start.
 
I'll let you do your own research, Frank. I got my info from a Deputy County Attorney in Phoenix. That's the agency that would decide whether or not to charge you.

You ask
"So why not just pull out your gun and shoot a guy who says "I'm gonna kick your a$$!!" After all, you don't know where he's going to stop if you let him start."

Because I'm adult, Frank. I haven't been in a fist fight since I was 15. Which shows that I must have some skills in getting out of tight spots. But, at my age, if someone physically starts one with me, I'll finish it the best way I can with the least amount of damage to me.
 
"Runsalone:

I am not about to start carrying a variety of weapons suitable to any level of threat. I would need a tool belt to do that, and it isn't necessary."


Sigh.......this is why I never post, I didnt mean to use them all, or wear a tool belt, and I certainly meant no disrespect or was trying to be a smartarse :rolleyes:

My point was there is a VARIETY of other tools to choose from to deal with this very type of situation, without resorting to killing, that could even be deployed before you would bring a pistol into play in the same situation.

If you deem there not needed that only leaves you with a few options fight, run,shoot or have the floor mopped with your rump. Obviously fight and shoot are horrible options you may not be able to run and option four sucks terds. A blast of O.C. to the attackers face(or palm strike to the chin, or a big fat finger in the eye!) might just buy you the extra second or two to exit stage right, and save all parties involved more serious harm. My personal idea is to create a window in the situation however I must then run like the wind blows. Not very Navy Seal of me I know.

I personally do not carry any of the above, just was adding my opinion for some one with the concerns you mentioned. No foulness was meant just trying to participate for a change.

Whatever you choose be safe and get home to yours at the end of the day. ;)
 
Lets examine the dynamics of two men in a fist fight.

Two men meet.
Two men disagree.
Two men agree to not back down.
Two men throw punches.
Two men roll on the floor.
Two men throw more punches and maybe a few kicks.
One man backs down or cannot continue.
One man "wins".

Regardless of the little nuances, that is the gist of a fist fight. So, if you want to avoid a fist fight, either agree to disagree, agree with what you don't agree with, or back down. It ain't rocket science that many men walk this earth without behaving like they are still in elementary school. Your fists do not give you the right to force your views on someone else any more than your gun does.

Runsalone, I appreciated your posts, and they do give a new wrinkle to the whole argument. Makes me think. Still, I tend to use my wits to evade and escape.
 
Runsalone:

I hope I didn't offend, I certainly didn't mean to :).

I have enough problems carrying a pistol and a pocket knife, bundle of keys, cell phone, wallet and briefcase. The brief case often contains a portable laptop, one or two pistols and extra clips and a flashlight amongst other items.

On the other hand Runsalone (nice moniker by the way, sounds kind of Indian) I guess that carrying pepper spray in my brief case wouldn't be much more to handle. I think I will get some spray to carry with me in my brief case and it may come in handy some day.

Good idea!
 
Frank:

Just curious, but how many fights have you been in since you turned say 18?
Click to expand...

Two, why?


You ask
"So why not just pull out your gun and shoot a guy who says "I'm gonna kick your a$$!!" After all, you don't know where he's going to stop if you let him start."

Because I'm adult, Frank. I haven't been in a fist fight since I was 15. Which shows that I must have some skills in getting out of tight spots. But, at my age, if someone physically starts one with me, I'll finish it the best way I can with the least amount of damage to me.
Click to expand...

We're not talking about what you personally would or wouldn't do, we're, at least I am, talking about when you're legally justfied in using deadly force. I think the Arizona statute speaks for itself. I didn't see any duty to retreat in the AZ statute. It looks to me like the statute says you have to be in fear of deadly force before you can use deadly force.
 
Last edited:
There was a thread here or THR about one punch kills. If I've tried to back down, get away, he ain't hitting me! But what I do will depend on the specific circumstance: hand-to-hand, Fox, or Bang!

But the short answer is Fox. Everyone who CCW's SHOULD/MUST carry spray!! (edit) There's a thread about that, too!!

Stay safe.
Bob
 
FranK: Just trying to get a feel for where you are coming from. Two since 18. How old are you now and how long ago was the last one?

As I stated earlier, I haven't been in one since I was 15 and I am 52 now, so that was a ways back. :)
 
41 years old, and the last one was in 1987. I've never been in a bar fight, although I came close when some local tried to bait me into one while I was on my honeymoon at a small bar on Molokai, Hawaii in '95.....
 
Last edited:
I've never heard the comment about spray before...it's a good point, but we're getting into the afore mentioned tool-belt territory here. I think it's safe to say few who carry will carry spray as well (myself included).
 
We're not talking about what you personally would or wouldn't do, we're, at least I am, talking about when you're legally justfied in using deadly force. I think the Arizona statute speaks for itself. I didn't see any duty to retreat in the AZ statute. It looks to me like the statute says you have to be in fear of deadly force before you can use deadly force.
Click to expand...
Yes, and that's the case pretty much nationwide, and it's also the case pretty much nationwide that deadly force includes force reasonably likely to cause great bodily harm (or "serious injury" as put in the Michigan statute, I think), as well as death.
 
No to spray....

Sorry gentlemen but I disagree with carrying spray. Unless you want to practice and take a course in its proper use and deployment. Most of us here who CC, practice at least once a month if not more in drawing, shooting our targets and general firearms safety.

How many of you have sprayed in an enclosed area? If the wind is blowing the wrong direction or if you walk forward into the fine mist after you have sprayed the BG, you too will be affected. Since very few people walk around with googles, it is probably more danger to you than the BG - UNLESS you have training in it. :(

A taser is the probably the better weapon. But my personal feeling is - nobobdy is going to walk around with an arsenal on their belt. Its hard enough to remember to bring your wallet, cell phone etc.

This is a tough question - although most folks here are concentrating on the bar scenario(s) and going up against a drunken person. Lets not forget this orignal post was for ANY situation, so it could be a parking lot, grocery store or even 711.

This is a question for the legal eagles out there: What would your charges be if you were threatened and you shot the person in the kneecap? Or presented your weapon, did not point it @ BG, and it disarmed the situation? Or third question, revealed weapon, did not clear leather, and it made the BG back down?
 
Frank, not to belabor the point, but AZ law, statute & case, basically says you are justified if the BG is about to kill or maim you (or you believe they are). I am informed that under the scenario we are discussing, charges would not be filed.
Az law also states that you can never be justified by verbal provocation only.
Hope this helps.
BTW, what state do you live in?
 
Shooting someone in the kneecap is still the use of deadly force, and if you aim for the knees (and are enough of a crack shot that you can hit the target while your hands are shaking from an adrenaline dump) instead of center mass like everyone has been trained, then a sensible person might wonder whether you really believed that the use of deadly force was necessary in the first place.

Of course, if you were aiming for center mass and hit him in the knee, that's a different story.

Presenting your firearm - a.k.a. threatening the use of deadly force - and thereby defusing the situation, is what happens in some 98% of defensive gun uses, according to statistics with which most of us are familiar. This is how the antis can claim that defensive gun use is rare, by only counting the 2% of instances where the gun was actually fired, and the small subset of those instances where the attacker actually died of his wounds.

Of course, as we've seen over the years, it's best if you're the first one to call the cops if you're forced to draw you weapon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top