I hope I did the right thing...

The problem with CCW

In my younger days I was involved in Karate for many years and although
I'm not real big physically (5'8', 165) I'm still pretty fit and feel that I can take care of myself better than the average drunk. As I see it though, If I were to be carrying a concealed handgun I would avoid any hand to hand type of confrontation. Even a drunk (or two) can get lucky and I certainly would not want to be shot with my own gun or have my gun taken from me.
It seems to me that your actions were perfectly acceptable and thankfully nobody got hurt.
Hopefully those guys will think twice the next time they are feeling rowdy.

Ricky
 
OldMarksman:

According to a treatise that I looked at, the majority of states allow the defendant to stand his ground and not retreat. That said, it doesn't matter what the majority rule is. It only matters what the rule is in the state where the events take place.

As to the burden of proving an affirmative defense, I believe it wil vary by state. In some states, you are no doubt correct. All the defendant would have to do is produce sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue and the prosecution would have to negate it by the usual standard of "beyond a reasoanble doubt." In other states, the defendant might have to prove his defense by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning it's more likely than not true what he claims. Again, it doesn't matter what the majority rule is, only what applies in the state where the events take place.

But even where the standard is to produce sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue, that may mean that the defendant is forced to take the stand to provide it, and many a defendant has been convicted as a result of taking the stand and being a terrible witness when cross-examined.
 
KLRANGL: Thank you for replying to all those messages it saves me time!

As I think about the situation more I think I did the absolute right thing. What if one of these fools got a lucky hit on me and got me to the ground. I'm only 5'8 150 lbs both of them were noticeably bigger then me and easily could of gotten a hold of my gun if it were still residing in its holster.



Again just try clarify with everyone I did contact the police right after it happened and I was just arriving at the bar too pick up my friends, I hadn't consumed any alcohol. Also when I drew my gun I told them "To get away from me". That was their warning, maybe next time I should make them better aware that I'm drawing a firearm on them, in such an intense adrenaline filled situation one doesn't think of warning somebody they just react. Thats my humble opinion..
 
Ricky:

Here in Fla. engaging just using Karate could be considered assault with a deadly weapon if they found you had training in the art. Sort of like a professional boxers fists are determined to be a weapon. Seems the more training you have the less options you have to avoid the "deadly weapons " trap. It puts an even higher emphasis on situational awareness and confrontation avoidance.

Bob
 
Again just try clarify with everyone I did contact the police right after it happened and I was just arriving at the bar too pick up my friends, I hadn't consumed any alcohol
Click to expand...

If I would of taken the time to read your response on post #6, my question would of already of been answered. Apologies.

Knowing that, you did the right thing.

maybe next time I should make them better aware that I'm drawing a firearm on them,
Click to expand...

The quicker you are at unholstering your weapon, the better. If a man does not know when to stop when he's looking down the barrel of a gun, there's nothing you can say that will stop him, other than pulling the trigger.
 
If a man does not know when to stop when he's looking down the barrel of a gun, there's nothing you can say that will stop him, other than pulling the trigger.
Click to expand...

If he's drunk and doesn't know he's looking down the barrel of a gun, a loud and clear warning may deter him, and if it does not, the warning, particularly if heard by witnesses, may provide a more objective basis for determining that the shooter had a reasonable fear of great bodily injury.
 
From Ricky B:
According to a treatise that I looked at, the majority of states allow the defendant to stand his ground and not retreat.
Click to expand...

May be.. Missouri is listed in wikipedia as having a stand your ground law, but I was referring to one that would apply outside. From Wikipedia: "States often differentiate between altercations occurring inside a home or business and altercations in public places; there may be a duty to retreat from an assailant in public when there is no duty to retreat from one's own property, or there may be no duty to retreat from anywhere the shooter may legally be."

That said, it doesn't matter what the majority rule is. It only matters what the rule is in the state where the events take place.
Click to expand...

True fact.

As to the burden of proving an affirmative defense, I believe it wil vary by state. In some states, you are no doubt correct. All the defendant would have to do is produce sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue and the prosecution would have to negate it by the usual standard of "beyond a reasoanble doubt." In other states, the defendant might have to prove his defense by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning it's more likely than not true what he claims. Again, it doesn't matter what the majority rule is, only what applies in the state where the events take place.
Click to expand...

We still need a lawyer.

An attorney friend of mine says the burden always falls to the prosecutor in a criminal case.

And to my lay understanding, the distinction between the reasonable doubt and preponderance of the evidence criteria has to do with the difference between a criminal trial and a civil suit.

But even where the standard is to produce sufficient evidence to raise a triable issue, that may mean that the defendant is forced to take the stand to provide it, and many a defendant has been convicted as a result of taking the stand and being a terrible witness when cross-examined.
Click to expand...

Or as a result of the evidence of being convincing.

Don't take this as argument. I think we agree on the principles here.
 
First; Thank you for sharing this! I'm sure a LOT of us would wonder what we'd do in similar circumstances.

I think the fact that you went home alive, and the Police let you do so, is testimony that you did the right thing.
 
Yes, you did the wrong thing and here is why.

You dont know how the judge, the police, the jury or the district attorney will react to an incident like this. If you are arrested, count on your side of the story not being heard and everything taken out of context. Even if you believe you are in the right, everyone else will most likely believe you were in the wrong.

An arrest or conviction will be public information. An offense with a firearm usually carries a jail sentence of months maybe years. You might not be able to survive a background check (or even a Google check) of your name and finding employment in the future would be rough.

There are things you could have done in this situation. Once you saw these guys, you could have distanced yourself from these individuals and not looked in their direction. Was there anything you were doing to instigate this fight? Even drunkards usually need a reason to fight and chances are you gave them one.

Lets say the drunkards did manage to lay a few fists on you. What would have been the result? A struggle, probably a few bruises and maybe a broken bone or two. That is a far better result then being placed in jail and becoming a marked man.

In the future, when you see trouble like this, then distance yourself. If you are in a bar, then move closer to the bouncers who might assist you in such a situation. Do not instigate the fight with stares or looks.

If you display your weapon, then you will most likely be arrested and the police will not be understanding. You will most likely spend the night in jail and go up in front of a judge who has a lesser understanding then the police.

When you point that weapon at someone then think of the result. Months in jail and possibly years. Ask yourself each time would the end result be worth it?

Also, dont pay attention to the laws. The law only matters as much as the judge cares to take it. I have been in and out of court on certain civil matters many times. I thought the law was clear in many cases, but it isnt clear until the judge says its clear. The judge may disagree with you on your interpretation. I have seen all kinds of judges. One judge was from Vietnam with a bad accent...another judge seemed to be a much older man who moved slow and delayed in approach...yet another was a firey younger individual...you never know who you going to get on that stand and how they will react to your logic.

I know retreating away may not be the prideful thing to do, but its better then spending time in the jail or in front of a judge or having your name paraded around online like you are a criminal. Just distance yourself next time.
 
Last edited:
Good point about drunks usually needing a reason.

I personally think I really slipped up here and I replied to their drunken rant and I simply said "excuse me"
Click to expand...

You say that you replied to their shouts and "simply said 'excuse me'".

I think perhaps we should explore this a bit further by asking...and be honest: Did you say 'excuse me' in a deferential way...as in "pardon my intrusion.". Or did you ask this in a challenging way...as in "what the hell did you say to me?".

I ask because you say that you really slipped up...making me think you asked it in a challenging way.
 
JohnH1963
Once you saw these guys, you could have distanced yourself from these individuals and not looked in their direction.
Click to expand...
In the future, when you see trouble like this, then distance yourself. If you are in a bar, then move closer to the bouncers who might assist you in such a situation.
Click to expand...

From the opening post
I went to a local bar to meet up with a few friends inside. As I was stepping outside of my car
Click to expand...
It sounds as if he was 1/2 in 1/2 out of his car .One cant retreat fast when 2 people are closing in fast!

Lets say the drunkards did manage to lay a few fists on you. What would have been the result?A struggle, probably a few bruises and maybe a broken bone or two.
Click to expand...

1 punch kills do occur
this happened locally

New Details: Tuscola County Teen Death

Written By: Sam Merrill

Edited By: Sam Licavoli II

Some witnesses say eighteen year-old Andrew Haas provoked the Cass City man who killed him with one punch at a party last fall, according to prosecutors. "Some blame Haas as being the instigator," said Mark E. Reene, Tuscola County 's prosecutor, who wants John P. Bulla sent to jail, not prison.

Bulla, twenty, who lives near Cass City, pleaded no contest Monday February 28th, to attempted involuntary manslaughter in connection with the Nov. 13, 2004, death of Haas, a Cass City High School senior who lived in Ubly.

A plea of no contest is not an admission of guilt, but is treated as such at sentencing. Reene said an "exhaustive investigation" by Tuscola County Sheriff's Department detectives Glenn Skrent and Patrick Woidan involved interviews with numerous witnesses. But the opinion of forensic pathologist Dr. Kanu Virani proved key to the case, Reene said. The punch that struck Haas in the head was not really characterized by Dr. Virani even as a violent blow, according to Reene. "It was simply the angle the blow came from, and the victim's reaction."

Reene said Virani's opinion is that Haas "was not braced for the blow" when he was punched at an outdoor party in Tuscola County 's Elmwood Township . "It was simply the reflex of the head and neck, due to the blow" that caused Haas' fatal injuries, Reene said. The prosecutor said Bulla didn't intend to kill Haas, though witnesses told police the two men had argued at the party before

"That night, the two went back and forth, verbally," Reene said. "Whenever you have a situation like this, you'll have witnesses with various alliances on the side of the victim and on the side of the defendant, and you have to sort through the bias to find out the truth." Bulla had been charged with involuntary manslaughter, which carries a maximum sentence of fifteen years in prison. But Reene allowed Bulla to plead no contest to the lesser charge, which carries a maximum sentence of fi

Reene plans to ask Tuscola County Circuit Judge Patrick R. Joslyn to sentence Bulla to no more than one year in jail, combined with a term of probation. The court hasn't set a sentencing date yet.


Do you think 2 drunks in a rowdy mood are going to stop after a few punches.
 
As I was stepping outside of my car two men in their early 30's walked by shouting and cursing at me.
Click to expand...

SD: When the two men charged you, could you have gotten back into your car and locked the door before they reached you?
 
Ok. In that case, dump your friends who drink or go into bars. Life is too short.
Click to expand...
you cant argue with someone who talks like that... you make it sound like people who drink are bad... Just... wow...

JohnH1963
I like how you gave this whole fire and brimstone speech about the possibilities of an event that has already happened and didnt turn out the way you predicted...

While I understand your concern, I think you are putting too much fear into people, making them second guess themselves even if they are justified in pulling a weapon...
I think the OP was justified in pulling his weapon, and apparently the cops did as well...
 
This may shed some light on things:

http://floor9.com/central-pa/pas-laws-on-self-defense

Relevant excerpts, emphasis added:

imagine you’re walking down Third Street and a voice behind you says “I’m gonna kill you, mother$#@”. A strict interpretation of the Pennsylvania code states that you have an obligation to run away — if it’s safe to do so — before resorting to deadly force. And I agree; deadly force should unconditionally only be used as a last resort. But being the imperfect human beings that we are, we all make mistakes. What if that voice sounds familiar — what if you think it’s a friend playing a joke, and you turn around? What if the attacker takes a swing at you and misses? A jury will have to decide whether saying “I’m going to kill you” followed by a physical attack constitutes an imminent threat of “death (or) serious bodily injury” (PA 18§505).
Click to expand...

And the law itself:

http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/crimes-and-offenses/00.005.005.000.html

Relevant excerpts from 18-505 (emphasis added):
The use of deadly force is not justifiable under
this section unless the actor believes that such force is
necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily
injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force
or threat; nor is it justifiable if:
(i) the actor, with the intent of causing death or
serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against
himself in the same encounter; or
(ii) the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity
of using such force with complete safety by retreating or
by surrendering possession of a thing to a person
asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a
demand that he abstain from any action which he has no
duty to take,...
Click to expand...

The law goes on to say that you have no obligation to retreat if you are within your dwelling or place of business. A later section limits the duty to retreat in cases where the safety of a third person would not be ensured.

I hope this proves helpful.

Do not take this as legal advice.
 
I apologize if I might have sounded like an alarmist in my reply, however, I feel its a healthy assumption that when you draw your weapon then you have to face the possibility of jail time no matter how the event went down. There is also a possibility that someone watching you pull your weapon might believe that you are the person causing trouble and then draw a weapon (and fire) upon yourself.

Therefore, you have to weigh all of the other available options before drawing a weapon in public.

Could you have gotten back into the car? Could you have retreated around the car? Were there any other options?
 
About 1 yr. ago. A man in west palm Bch. Fl. shot two gang members he had trouble with earlier in the day. he was found not guilty of all charges.
Unfourtunatly he spent months in jail. While in jail more gang members burned down his house, the county had his dogs put down, and of course his job was gone.
Weather right or wrong you were lucky
 
John, well we agree on that for sure...

I just think its unfair to say he did the wrong thing

There is no reason to carry a weapon for self defense if you are so worried about legal ramifications... if you believe your life is in danger, pull... If you are afraid your lawful actions will get you into legal trouble, dont carry...
 
KLRANGL makes a good point.

A corollary might be: If you are worried about the legal ramifications, then you probably are not feeling threatened enough to be pulling a gun. Or, if you feel threatened enough to pull you gun in self defense, then the legal ramifications are moot.

That is the basic choice we all make if we choose to carry. Are we willing to risk legal complications or consequences in order to protect life and limb? It's a dangerous world out there in more than just the physical sense. Personally, I would choose to protect myself and my family from grievous harm regardless of the legal shenanigans.
 
A corollary might be: If you are worried about the legal ramifications, then you probably are not feeling threatened enough to be pulling a gun. Or, if you feel threatened enough to pull you gun in self defense, then the legal ramifications are moot.
Click to expand...

Very well said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top