Friend pulled gun on two guys.

Yep, and I guess the police would have to arrest my sorry butt in North Carolina.

I have been told that I look like a big, scary, nasty guy. To a certain extent that is a true impression.

If two punks came at me that way, I would pull with no problem. They instituted a threat, and anyone with any street sense would see it as such. Additionally if I COULD NOT SEE THEIR HANDS (not in the original post), I would absolute introduce them to Mr. Smith and Wesson.

After it was over, call the police (unless I was in NC).
 
Not to say that the police would care though. According to the law, force can only be met with equal force, and deadly force can only be brought out when deadly force is already on the table.

There was no deadly force in that scenario, so the gentleman was not legally allowed to draw his gun (in North Carolina).

Course, technically, since he was not yet under attack, he had the duty to retreat as well.
 
GRD, take a chill pill.

With regard to my earlier post, I simply stated the time for the benefit of Eghad since he stated it as being "late a night". It doesn't change the situation as described . . . just getting it right.

As far as fearing for his life, perhaps he feared for his life when he got his gun . . . maybe that is why he got it. Was he justified in shooting or displaying the gun at that time?

Perhaps when he first saw them, he feared for his life. Was he justified in shooting or displaying the gun at that time?

When they started to "taunt" him, perhaps he feared for his life then. Was he justified in shooting or displaying at that time?

Clearly there is more to it. I don't disagree with what he did. Could he have made different choices at the start of the situation and avoided the whole thing? Maybe he could have walked off the mall property instead and found a phone. Don't know. We don't have the information to know.

I hope that addresses your questions. I am not interested in a pissing match but felt I should respond to your questions.
 
He Did the Right Thing

Blind Tree, I don't know what part of North Carolina you live in but I suggest you check the statutes prior to making that out and out statement. What would be the basis for an arrest? 14-34 would be a pretty big stretch - even if he did point it; 14-32 would be even a greater stretch; you see I live in North Carolina too and for 7 years was a police officer in that state. When I received my training part of the focus was on mens rea (a guilty mind) meaning intent. Intent is a basic element in common law and applies to most criminal acts. I am also a handgun instructor and am comfortable in saying that the circumstances AS DESCRIBED fully met the standard for him to draw his weapon - SHOOTING THEM IS ANOTHER MATTER ENTIRELY! Check out 230 N.C. 54, "a person may use force against another when the amount of force he uses appears to him to be reasonably necessary in order to protect himself from the other person's assault, even when the other person's assault is not deadly....."

I am not an attorney and am not giving legal advise, consult your legal counsel for case by case advise. If you live in North Carolina and wish to better understand the legal issues involved in carrying a concealed weapon perhaps it would be good to obtain a copy of the book used to train the police- "North Carolina Crimes - A Guidebook on the Elements of Crime" edited by Benjamin B. Sendor and published by the Institute of Government. My copy is pretty old, but I have no reason to believe that it is completely out of date. And YES, I would have done exactly what the man described did in Alabama. I might not have waited until he did either.

John
Charlotte, NC
 
See, I disagree due to there isn't anything in that scenario that immediately authorised deadly force to be used, so at that point, he's guilty of brandishing his weapon.


BUT

I can't find this clause in the Statutes, so it's a moot point.
(5) Deadly Force MAY NOT Be Used:

(a) To Stop a Simple Assault.
The exact point in time a simple assault becomes deadly is often unclear. Repeated
blows to vital body areas, choking, continued beating on a helpless or weakened
victim, are some indicators.
(b) Because of the Use of Violent Language
§ 14-277.1. Communicating threats.
(c) Because You Are a Victim of Past Violence and Fear Future Violence
(d) Because a Trespasser Refuses to Leave
(e) To Arrest a Criminal or to Prevent a Criminal's Escape
 
Deadly Force?

Blind, disagree all you like. It is of little consequence. The man in question did not discharge his gun, I don't believe he even pointed it at the two poor misguided youths, so you would have one he-- of a task talking a magistrate in North Carolina into jailing this guy. If you feel that he was not justified, then, given the same circumstances, take your chances. While you are recovering, if you are lucky enough to recover, you might contemplate the difference between a deadly weapon and deadly force.

Any reasonable man would, in my very limited view, have done exactly what was done. And that is close enough to the case law for me. And, having some famillarity with Alabama, I would be willing to bet you a "Bud Lite" that no police officer in the state would think otherwise. But I believe you stated that in "North Carolina" where you and I live, not the state the incident took place in. I happen to think you are wrong. And, try as I may to see your point of view, I can find nothing in any guidelines that I possess that supports your statement. Perhaps you are just working from emotion?

Correct me if I am wrong. In the meantime, just remember, Assault by pointing a weapon (14-34) is a MISDEMEANOR punishable by 6 months max. And self defense is a valid justification.

John
Charlotte, North Carolina
 
The man in question did not discharge his gun, I don't believe he even pointed it at the two poor misguided youths
Click to expand...
discharging the gun should not matter at all, but you are correct, I thought the original post said that he pointed the gun at one of the gentlemen. In that case I have no problems with it. As soon as that gun is raised towards either of the two men, I feel he is in the wrong. I thought about that about 20 minutes after my last post and wasn't able to get back and check that.
 
Correct me if I am wrong. In the meantime, just remember, Assault by pointing a weapon (14-34) is a MISDEMEANOR punishable by 6 months max. And self defense is a valid justification.
Click to expand...
Misdemeanor doesn't mean not illegal. Just means a minor offense.

But as far as self defense as the reason goes, and again, this is based on the passage that I've seen multiple times in reference to the law (both in my class and on packing.org) but cannot find in the law about simple assualt, I don't see where you can pull a gun for a situation that hasn't elevated to deadly force yet. The cops might not care, when they show up and let the victim go, but we'll ignore that for now and just assume everyone is being a hardass and sticking the law to them. The "assailants" had no visible weapons. They could be screaming up and down that they are going to kill the guy as they approach, but as I was taught by the officers teaching my CCL class I am not yet authorized to use deadly force. I could draw the gun so it is prepared, but I cannot yet aim it at them.

Course, the other problem is, as I recall from the discussion at the course a few months ago, they can have a weapon on or near their person, but i am still not authorized to use deadly force until it is in their hand. I specifically asked about a scenario where a gun is right next to a guy on the table and he is threatening me, but until that gun is in his hand, I am in the wrong. This is a problem because, as I see it from those discussions, once I draw the gun, I have brought deadly force into the situation and if they were to shoot me and call the cops, they'd be fine because i'm laying there with a drawn weapon.

But anyhow, the assailants are approaching with no weapons. As per the legal definitions as I recall, this is still a simple assualt and I cannot bring in a weapon in my defense. If there is a gross size difference I might be able to argue that I had reasonable reason to believe I was in bodily danger, and deadly force was authorized, but that's up for a lawyer to argue for me.

I seem to see a theme in this thread that there was no option to retreat because they were on the phone and the car was dead 200 yards away. Considering that it is very rare that I've ever seen a mall in the middle of no where, I find it hard to believe that there wouldn't of been other phones around. I don't see why the option of continuing to approach a dangerous area would be encouraged when a tactical retreat may be less confrontational. If they continue to follow, you have an easier time arguing the bodily harm (as they are clearly pursuing you now) and if they don't, you are out of the situation.


Either way, John, I just want to say that I have no hard feelings towards you on this matter, and appreciate the correction on details that I noticed I missed (where the gun was pointed for example). The posters friend does not appear to be as in violation of the law as I thought he was. I do think that he was in a violation of the spirit of the laws in some ways (I feel that the law really wants that gun to stay far out of the situation until someone needs to die, hence, no brandishing either), but **** the spirit, it isn't written down.
 
This is totally ridiculous.

Late at night, (don't read that part)
A man in less than peak physical condition is physically and verbally harassed by two larger men in a (dark here either) deserted area demanding money and positioning themselves in a classic attack formation.
And some here, on a gun rights board, think he was wrong.

Anybody that would not have drawn in the situation should seriously reconsider carrying outside their home.

Perhaps with experience and the development of street smarts they will see things differently.

If not then someday some thug is going to exploit their unwillingness to defend their life and take that gun and use it on some other person.

as I was taught by the officers teaching my CCL class
Click to expand...
Now that you have told us what somebody else has told you. What does your own research tell you, can you provide examples or links to statutes
as I recall from the discussion at the course a few months ago, they can have a weapon on or near their person, but i am still not authorized to use deadly force until it is in their hand. I specifically asked about a scenario where a gun is right next to a guy on the table and he is threatening me, but until that gun is in his hand, I am in the wrong.
Click to expand...
That is the single most ridiculous thing I have heard today.
IF that is true move to a free state or learn to quick draw like Matt Dillon
 
Last edited:
Per the previous post:

"Late at night a man in less than peak physical condition is physically and verbally harassed . . ."

The story just keeps getting better. The original post happened in the afternoon. There was no mention of the person's physical condition or that he was being physically harassed.

Pretty soon the one-armed wheelchair bound man with one eye was working his way through a high-crime area when two massive body-builders with martial arts skills . . .

Read the original post and stick to the facts presented.
 
Read the original post and stick to the facts presented.
Click to expand...
Read subsequent post #99 for added details
He's middle aged and kindly round. Bad knees too.
Click to expand...
These thugs were bout my age, early twenties he said.
Click to expand...
But I'll give you the afternoon vs late night. I was transferring my own history or maybe it was another reference to late night.

But I don't care if it was high noon in front of the downtown post office on a Monday.
The guy was within his rights to defend himself

Pretty soon the one-armed wheelchair bound man with one eye was working his way through a high-crime area when two massive body-builders with martial arts skills . .
Click to expand...
Still can't find the post that refer to this, but I did see where they were much younger and bigger.
 
The law is the last thing on my mind when I encounter a perceived threat. I'll deal with the chief and the DA later, and I'm sure I'll come out on top, esp. here in good ole Virginny...
 
Joab, sorry . . . I missed the update. Thanks for pointing it out.

The additional post certainly clarifies his options as far as successful retreat.
 
When to Draw?

BTFrog, I did not take offense; I was concerned, however, that someone reading your post and taking it at face value might end up either hurt or be forced to shoot someone. I hope you will continue your classes and, if your community has a ride along program, do that too. If you spend any time talking with police officers you will find that they are just like the rest of us. They have opinions and are not always right. In fact, it was not uncommon when I was on duty to hear another officer on the radio asking Dispatch whether something was illegal or not. They are "generalists" with a lot of laws to enforce, use good public relations with citizens and attempt to keep a lid on an ever growing problem crime. Admittedly it has been a few years ago for me.

I am not aware of NC having a brandishing law. But then the Legislature meets every year and there is no telling what they end up writing into law!
Good luck.
John
 
Problem is, there is a difference between what a lot of people FEEL is justified, what the law SAYS is justified, and what would happen in court in a given county.

Pretty scary that being mugged is not justification for pulling your piece. During the mugging the perps will most likely find it, etc. Bad news.

Another good reason to carry pepper spray. They get too close, spray em. A lot less legal hassle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top