Did I do the right thing? Or should I have used force?

Showing a gun in North Carolina can get you arrested for going armed to terrorize the public. It all depends on who calls 911. Pointing it can also get you charged with "assault by pointing a gun." There are multiple misdemeanor assault charges that can be filed if you point the gun.
Click to expand...

Pointing a gun at someone who is putting you in fear of death or grave bodily injury is not a crime.

It absolutely DOES NOT depend on who calls the cops first. Just ask Microgunner as it happened to him. He articulated to the police why he was forced to pull and point his firearm at the bad guy and they did nothing. The facts are whats important not who has the fastest dialing finger.

He handled the confrontation properly.
Click to expand...

The confrontation began as he was being followed. He did not handle it properly. He survived despite his mistakes and without having to shoot which was a blessing.

My advice is that certain behaviors be modified to prevent him from ending up there again.

The point is to learn so that you don't create the situation again.
Click to expand...

One these two points we agree.
 
Anybody remember what happened to Reginald Denny the truck driver that got pulled out of his semi during the LA riots and was hit in the head with a brick? Almost died if it weren't for a good samaritan. I don't think anyone would have blamed him if he defended himself with lethal force.

That being said, you did the right thing. I've been hit a few times in my life where I didn't do anything except stand there and bleed. It made me more aware that there are bad people in the world. More cautious. Not a bad thing to learn. You ended the fight and got out alive. No shame in that.

But you don't have to live with the decision that you took someone's life. How would you feel then? Probably worse.
 
As others have already mentioned you win by having come out of the situation without shooting anyone.

Not stopping retreating before someone opened your door however would have been better than the position you were in.

The main thing is that you're OK and have learned a few things along the way.
 
The OP was stupid, plain and simple. He was not aware and it cost him a fat lip. I don't know what 3 gun is trying to prove but any half-ass prosecutor would have torn him up had he decided to use his firearm because 1 guy punched him in the mouth. The thing I am left with out of this entrie thing is that the OP needs training.

Why anyone would not simply back up and drive away is beyond me. The only explanation that makes sense is that the OP wanted a confrontation (whether in anger or not) and he got what he wanted. As far as legal expertise, in many states you cannot use deadly force against an invader in your home unless they pose a threat to you or another persons life.:eek:
 
I don't know what 3 gun is trying to prove but any half-ass prosecutor would have torn him up had he decided to use his firearm because 1 guy punched him in the mouth.
Click to expand...

How do you know that the three men rushing your vehicle and trying to assault you are only going to give you a fat lip? Seems you didn't read all my posts and you are prosecuting this incident with the luxury of hind site.

I'm not trying to prove anything. However if three guys bail out to assault me and I cannot escape I will draw down on them and explain the consequences of breaking my window. If you think that is wrong then I can only thank god that you aren't a Florida prosecutor. One that forces me to take a beating first.
 
Dougu said:
Why anyone would not simply back up and drive away is beyond me. The only explanation that makes sense is that the OP wanted a confrontation (whether in anger or not) and he got what he wanted. As far as legal expertise, in many states you cannot use deadly force against an invader in your home unless they pose a threat to you or another persons life.
Click to expand...

You should look up the legal term disparity of force and learn about it.

While things turned out okay for the OP, he did make a couple of mistakes that are easily corrected through education and training. We, as readers, should also be cognizant that sometimes these events occur in a matter of seconds, without time to think up creative solutions.

Three men in a car, forcing me to the side of the road then exiting and approching my vehicle are potentially a lethal threat. Condition Red.
Why?
  • People don't go forcing cars to the side of the road just to have a "civil discourse" on their driving habits. It's a "hostile" act.
  • All three approaching at the same time is intimidating and threatening.
  • I might be able to watch two at once and keep situational awareness high. But not three of them.
  • Even with no weapons seen, 3-on-1 means I'll take serious damage if they decide to inflict it.
  • Because I haven't seen a weapon, does not mean one of the three doesn't have one - gun, knife, hammer, etc.
  • Criminally, three people are more likely to commit a crime than 2 people because of the group dynamics. 4 or more would be even worse.
Throw in men acting in a rude, angry or threatening manner and there is plenty of justification for displaying a firearm or pointing it. You're not "brandishing" it, you're simply informing them that you are armed and prepared to defend yourself.

Certainly backing up is a viable solution unless traffic precludes using it to escape. However don't be surprised if someone in the OP's position overlooks a viable escape route once the men begin approaching. Tunnel vision and prmary fight fixation can cause them to eliminate certain plans of action because they literally cannot see it
 
If this narration is accurate,

Amen to those who say the OP handled the situation badly. Very badly, I'd say. It all ended well only because he was very, very lucky, IMHO.

Amen to those who say his gun should have remained holstered,as it did. That is about the only thing he did right, again IMHO.

In the first stance, he should have avoided the road rage episode. We don't know how he could do that, or even if he could... but I would bet it was avoidable.

And once he was blocked, he should have backed out ASAP. Waiting until the aggressors were at his car and actually opened up his door was borderline suicidal- almost unbelievable, in fact. He got very lucky.
 
Sounds like an attempted car jacking to me. At least one of them would of had some bullet holes in him if they had tried to pull me from my car.
 
Bill has it!. It's the disparity of force coupled with the fact that you can't forecast the future that makes it necessary to use whatever means are necessary to defend yourself! The OP could just as easily been beaten to death on the road.:(

Obviously the ideal solution is not to be put in that box. But once in the box, one has to deal with the situation at hand. Certainly, if you get in that box and defend yourself, the opposition is going to maintain that you made a conscious choice to be there, and wanted the conflict, to defend the perps. If that in fact is the case, well, this group won't defend you, I don't think.:eek:

All that said, this OP got out with a fat lip and nobody died. Not a bad result! Unfortunately for the perps, not a learning experience either.
 
Last edited:
You're alive. Unharmed. Car has minimal damage. Bad Guys have no idea who you are or where you live. You have no legal fees. You are not charged with any crime, or even being investigated for one.

You thought about using your gun, but decided against it. Whatever happened, whatever split-decision assessments you made, whatever defensive moves you took seemed to have worked out for the best. What could have been a better outcome? Would there have been a better outcome had you used your gun?

I think the answer in your particular situation is that whatever other defensive tactics you decided to use worked better than had you decided to use your gun.
 
I've been behind drunk drivers before. I never pass them. I think it is easier to avoid a collision if I can keep them in front of me. I also use that opportunity to call the police and give them a description/license number.

With that being said, there is nothing wimpy about running away. Juries like that. If you run and they catch you, you are golden.
 
Rifleman 173 said:
Sounds like an attempted car jacking to me. At least one of them would of had some bullet holes in him if they had tried to pull me from my car.
Click to expand...

There's no telling exactly what was on their mind, other than it would not have ended well for the OP if he had gotten out of his car.

First order of business, if escape isn't practical, is to let them see you're armed and prepared to defend yourself. If the sight of the gun doesn't dissuade them or cause them to pause, the level of concern gets ratcheted up a notch or two. When one attempts to open the door or break the window, he gets to look at the muzzle whilst being told to go away.

If the door/window barrier is broken or someone produces a weapon is when things change from an "encounter" to an "incident".
 
With that being said, there is nothing wimpy about running away. Juries like that. If you run and they catch you, you are golden.
Click to expand...

I agree with the sentiment, but I would never use the word "golden" to describe your situation if you're set upon by some thugs, you attempt to flee, and then they catch you.
 
I would have called 911 to report a drunk driver immidiatly. Far better to do that than get to witness (or be caught up in) a serious accident. For the same reason, I probably would not pass them.
 
You did good by getting out of there without using your weapon.

No wimp factor involved, not one bit.

Next time someone in another car cuts you off, don't let them get out and approach. Get out of there. If you can't leave, lock up and arm yourself.
 
You did not wimp out.

You conquered your emotions and continued to think your way out of a bad situation.

One concept that all persons who might ever use a firearm in self-defense must understand is that the only justified use of deadly force is to end an imminent deadly or of great bodily harm threat. Use of deadly force is not justified to vent your anger or to get revenge.

Would you have liked to have the driving skill to back out of there fast and execute a 180 degree turn, to leave them in the dust? Defensive driving school.
 
Last edited:
One concept that all persons who might ever use a firearm in self-defense must understand is that the only justified use of deadly force is to end an imminent deadly or of great bodily harm threat. Use of deadly force is not justified to vent your anger or to get revenge.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like if the OP pulled and fired it would be to avenge a fat lip and not end a three on one attack.
 
Whether or not the shooting would have been justified is irrelevant IMO. The OP should have locked his doors, and should have bugged out as soon as the BGs moved to block him... but in the end he proved himself the better man. Everyone went home with their lives, if not their dignity intact. Every mistake has a lesson hidden inside it... avoiding those sorts of situations is one such lesson.

Remember that not everyone has the option of legally carrying a gun. Road rage happens plenty often, if not more, in states where CCW is forbidden or restricted to the social elite. If this happened to me tomorrow, all I'd have is a can of pepper spray. Getting out of a bad situation is always better than merely getting through it... because sometimes fighting isn't an option at all.

I remember the encounter that 'enhanced' my awareness... I was leaving a friend's house late at night in Chester, PA- unarmed, as I was returning to NJ that night. A man approached my window at a stop light (between cars but not really boxed in), and I really didn't know what do do. Turns out all he wanted was bus money- I dropped some change into his hand out the top of the window, which was barely cracked open. I didn't know he was there until he was literally right next to my car. That's when I started locking my doors, and that's about when I started carrying a can of pepper spray in the car (in addition to the one on my person, which is the best I can do in NJ). I'm also one hell of a lot more aware when I'm stopped, for any reason, especially at night.

I'm just lucky as hell that the guy who gave me that wake-up call was just some poor guy who needed change for a ride- if he'd been a carjacker or some other lesser life form, I'd have been totally screwed. I thought I was playing it pretty safe, but here some dude who wasn't even trying to be sneaky caught me by surprise so badly that it didn't even occur to me to punch the gas and run. This was a few months after I got my FL CCW license. The only reason I wasn't carrying is because I was heading for home, in NJ; I'm legal to carry throughout PA. I honestly don't know if I'd have drawn my weapon if I'd had it on me.

Sometimes the shock of realizing that yes, this is happening to you is enough to cause hesitation. Realize what that hesitation could cost you, and try not to make the same mistakes twice. If that means drawing down on a threat, then do so... but also realize that you might not always be able to do that. You might not always have your CCW with you; you might not be legally able to carry any weapon at all. Sometimes running is not just an option, it's the only viable option.

So, speaking as someone who couldn't have drawn and fired in the same situation in my own home state (or even in neighboring states if I'm only there briefly), the OP made a good call. The worst mistake he made was waiting too long to make it, but in all likelihood he saved himself a trip to the hospital- or worse.
 
threegun

Mello2u
One concept that all persons who might ever use a firearm in self-defense must understand is that the only justified use of deadly force is to end an imminent deadly or of great bodily harm threat. Use of deadly force is not justified to vent your anger or to get revenge.
Click to expand...
You make it sound like if the OP pulled and fired it would be to avenge a fat lip and not end a three on one attack.
Click to expand...
If you think my stating the fundamental concept of use of deadly force in self-defense makes firing under the described circumstances seem unjustified; just think what a prosecutor could do who is advocating for the conviction of a person who has been arrested for taking such actions.

A prosecutor who decides to indict has a high probability to get an indictment. This would mean that the one arrested and charged with a crime would need to come up with considerable assets to pay a competent criminal defense attorney and funds to secure a bond as well. In addition to the financial stress, the emotional stress of being a defendant in a criminal proceeding is probably great. Lesser stresses have contributed to divorce and other detrimental life changes.

So even if a person is not convicted of a crime, the financial and emotional cost can be devastating. Thus, it should be part of the calculation you make now while you can calmly consider the various ramifications of your actions before you find yourself in a situation where you might be justified in using deadly force in self-defense but have the means to safely retreat.

Is it better to use deadly force justified by self-defense when you can safely get away, and risk getting arrested and prosecuted for a felony? Or is it better to control your emotions and get away without using deadly force?

These sort of posts are valuable to the readers here because they can help us consider how we should act. We can calmly consider in the fullness of time what our best goals should be.

My quote that threegun referenced was not in any way a comment upon razorburn's actions. My only comment on razorburn's actions as related by his original posts was:
You did not wimp out.

You conquered your emotions and continued to think your way out of a bad situation.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top