Do you have to fight?

OldMarksman said:
The question I am posing is not whether Microgunner was potentially wrong or culpable in any way; that's water over the dam, and none of us have been empaneled to decide it or given first hand testimony. The point is is whether we might be able to do better should it happen to us in the future, not because we are any smarter or wiser than he is, but because he has given us a scenario to think about before we do face the same kind of situation.
Click to expand...

The best thing to come from this whole distasteful, but exhilerating experience was that no one had to be shot or injured to defuse the situation. Every cop for miles around was on the scene and the consensus among them, with the aid of an unsolicited witness, was that I acted within Florida state statutes. I have replayed this incident over and over in my mind and am very thankful it ended peacefully.
So yes, it was a learning experience for me.
 
Florida passed the "Stand Your Ground Law" a few years back which in essence means you do not have to run or take flight when you or someone else is threatend with serious bodily harm or death and you have the right to protect youself or them.

The Florida law is a self-defense, self-protection law. It has four key components:

It establishes that law-abiding residents and visitors may legally presume the threat of bodily harm or death from anyone who breaks into a residence or occupied vehicle and may use defensive force, including deadly force, against the intruder.


In any other place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”


In either case, a person using any force permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action and cannot be arrested unless a law enforcement agency determines there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.


If a civil action is brought and the court finds the defendant to be immune based on the parameters of the law, the defendant will be awarded all costs of defense.

I have seen it in action on several occasions locally and each and every time, the State Attorney's Office has followed the letter of the law and not charged the defending individual.

Too bad we, living in a "Free Country", even have to have such a law to fall back on when defending our own lives or our loved ones lives.

Just my 2 cents.......
 
Too bad we, living in a "Free Country", even have to have such a law to fall back on when defending our own lives or our loved ones lives.
Click to expand...

It's our own fault for allowing this mindset into power.
 
All these questions are cleared right up when you actually go through an incident where you have to draw your weapon. Then you become so sober in this understanding of when it's right and wrong.

-fin-
 
There is a thing called the "Harries Principle" legality hinges on dissparity of force. There has to be a big enough difference in size or force to warrant a fear for your life or great bodily injury. Does your opponent have martial arts training? Has he taken a martial arts stance? Are you aged or infirmed? All these things come into play when you go before a grand jury to explain the shooting. There is also a racial/socio-economic/class issue. If the deceased was related to a senator you're finished. If he lives and comes to court with a dream team of lawyers, you're finished. If he is a friend of a corrupt bay area politician, you're finished. If you are poor, you're finished. If you are the wrong color for the occasion, you're finished.
You have to realize that if you are being beaten unconscious, you will not be able to distinguish that from death as the darkness descends.
It is best to avoid the fight so you shoot only if there is no other choice.
 
good thread

I am pro for the 'you might have to draw' argument but you definately need to keep your cool before it reaches that point. going back and forth as a situation escalates is not a good thing while carrying a weapon. However, one should not have to allow himself or herself to be drawn into a fistfight.
 
Can you draw and shoot if the BG won’t move out of your way so you can leave or do you have to fight?
Click to expand...

Not trying to put words in your mouth, but it sounds like you're asking if it's ok to shoot some one so you can leave in order to avoid a fight.

Were you faced with death or serious bodily injury? And don't forget the old retired folks on the jury who don't own guns and who will decide your fate based on whether they would have pulled the trigger had they been in your shoes.

What do you think their answer (verdict) would be?
 
I was in more than my share of fights as a young leo but age and maturity eventually taught me to avoid them. I've learned to smile, be polite and generally convey to them that trying to mess up my day is going to totally screw up theirs, and I'm OK with that.
 
It is always good to use a kind word.

However,,,

"You can get more done with a kind word and a gun, than you can with a kind word alone." - Al Capone

Clearly if the BG is coming at you, and will not back off when he knows you want to leave, and he will not back off when he sees your gun. Then you have a right to fear for your life for he has demonstrated that he thinks he is a superior force to your gun.
 
Remember that in most states deadly force can only be used if you fear death or great bodily harm.

Since I have never been in a situation mentioned I cannot really imagine it could happen to me. I never frequented places where fights and violence occurred. I still don't.

Jerry
 
From Post 89...
High among the guy's problems is the fact that the attackers were unarmed, even though he was outnumbered.

I have a hard time believing that there isn't more to this case than we are aware of. Multiple attackers even unarmed is without a doubt a justifiable use of force should they attack you.
Click to expand...

Two of the three attackers were women.

Also see post 128 (relevant principle) and http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/images/stories/Hickey Booklet.pdf which is a brief on the case.
 
This is the first time I've seen this OP, I didn't feel like reading six pages, I can't imagine there is nothing that hasn't been said or repeated.

I carry pepper/tear gas spray, and a stun gun in that order before I'd even think of pulling my revolver out.
 
I would try to avoid it all together but some people are just looking for a fight.
If I was truly unable to reason with the attacker or get away, I would warn them to leave or they will be shot as I am afraid for my life.

I'm 31 and am disabled with a back injury, if I were to get into a fight I would be in serious crippling pain very shortly after it began. I would have no choice but to end the confrontation with deadly force.
 
If I'm cornered and someone is threatening to beat the tar out of me....and if I think there is a reasonable chance that I'm going to get hurt, I'm pulling my gun and am going to use it.

Amen Brother!;)
 
Now how in the world am I supposed to know that he is unarmed? As soon as he restricts my options I'm drawing and going to low ready, at least. I think that a reasonable and prudent individual would assume that the dirtbag has at least a knife. Let's hope he doesn't make any furtive movements.

I'm getting too old to go hand to hand. Even if there is minimal disparity of force, he might be having a good day on the same day that I may be having a bad day. If words can't settle it I have to up the ante and take control of the situation.
I want to go home at night too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top