lets say im at wal mart and some crazy person.....

Status
Not open for further replies.
As far as the "facts", I am reporting what was presented to us at our required CCW classes. I will see if I can get some answers because that is a good question, agreed.

As far as the statute goes, you're missing the point entirely. There is no statute. In civil cases, the purpose is to assess blame and recover/obtain money for some action or wrong (as perceived by someone else, not you) on your part. It is clear to me there is a lack of understanding between the differences between criminal court and civil court. As an extreme example and not related to this, but for the purpose of showing the difference, look at OJ Simpson. He was found innocent of criminal charges but was guilty in the civil court (big time). How can that be ? The answer is there are two very different court systems. In the criminal courts, the plaintiff is the government and the burden of proof is very high. In the civil court system, the plaintiff is a civilian and the burden of proof is considerably less. Again, right or wrong or legal or not has little to do with it. It is about assessing blame. Nicole Simpson was dead....so how could OJ be sued ? The answer of course, was her surviving family sued (to answer someones question).

Somehow this thread has been turned around and it would seem my position is not-to-shoot in the original scenario at WalMart. Not true. I cant say what I would do based on a few sentences on the internet describing a life or death situation until I was in that situation. What I can say now is what I am prepared to if needed. And pulling that trigger does not make me immune to subsequent reactions both criminal and civil. The laws and interpreation of the laws are not absolute... thats why there are trials, lawyers and judges.

I fully support CCW, the 2nd ammendment and the whole nine yards. I hate the bastards that rob, kill and hurt as much as the next guy. All I am saying is that being aware of possible outcomes will make you better prepared if you are unfortunate enough to be in such a situation. Is there an argument against having too much information ?
 
We can play these what if situations and legalities all day but if it comes to having to use my gun the last thing I would think about is the legality of if. It would be a matter of life and death and if I draw my weapon I have fully decided to use it. I don't go to Wal-Mart often but every time I go it is quite crowded. Since most stats show that a 50% accuracy in any shoot out is very high I figure that if I start trying to shoot the BG I am probably going to hit a bystander. The OP said three shots in the chest but if he is facing the cashier instead of you, how are you going to shoot him in the chest?

I am not at all saying stand idly by but take everything into consideration. Is the BG going to kill people? Unless someone interfers with his plans it is unlikely. If you try to shoot him are you going to hit him and stop him before he gets a shot off? If you are sure you can save a life by takin him out the go to it but be prepared for things to go wrong just as the BG's plans have changed. If you are worrying about what the laws are before you pull your gun then leave it in your holster, the situation doesn't warrant that action.
 
It is clear to me there is a lack of understanding between the differences between criminal court and civil court.
Click to expand...
It is clear to me that you have missed my several references to living in Fla and the fact that in this state if it is a good shoot there is no civil remedy
If you had read that maybe it would be clear to you that I do understand the difference
OJ has nothing to do with this, unless you can think of a reason to call this justifiable homicide
Was that an apples to oranges comparison or just a good old fashion strawman?
 
I have no intention of getting into pissing contests and I realize you are completely right and there is just simply no other valid opinions. My mistake, how careless of me to engage in a healthy debate with experts.
 
My mistake, how careless of me to engage in a healthy debate with experts.
Click to expand...
If you want to debate you have to accept that others will have differing opinions
You also have to expect to asked to back up your argument and not just be bowed down to

It seems you are the only one that expects to be heralded as the all knowing expert


Every damn time school lets out for the summer
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I figured I'd ignore all the arguements above and go straight to answering the asked question, "What would you do?"

I'd take a quick look around to see if I could spot any accomplices or, hopefully, a Law Enforcement Officer. If I don't see either I slip behind the nearest cover, draw, point my pistol center mass and yell loudly, "DROP YOUR WEAPON NOW!"

Either he'll listen or he won't, but his attention is pretty much going to be focused on me at that point. If he drops the gun I give him further directions in a loud, firm voice that will have him face down on the ground until LEOs arrive to take custody of him. If he points the gun at me, I drop him (the assumption here is that I have clear line of fire).

Fact is he is committing a felony and threatening people with a deadly weapon (if it's a dumb kid with an airsoft I don't know that...to the best of my knowledge it's a deadly weapon and force is justified if I feel that I, or someone else, it in danger of death or severe injury).

I don't cooperate with criminals. Period.
 
1. Why do you say if he points the gun at you - you will drop him?
2. If he has the gun pointed at you, he is probably shooting you at that time.
3. Why do all internet posters, assume they will hit the target and the shot will be immediately incapacitating?

Just asking about the hidden assumption of gunfight success that is usually found in these threads.
 
Let me preface this with a summary of Florida's SD law. In Florida you are allowed to use deadly force, to prevent or stop a forcible felony. You can use deadly force if you also have a reasonable fear for your life. Armed Robbery (even if it's a BB Gun or some such) is such a felony. Also our law has been tested in court and has stood even in a case where I think the CCW'er went too far.

First I would analyze the situation, look for any accomplices in the store. I would also watch his actions and see if he was a threat. If my gut says he's a threat I would shoot first, yelling, or some such only gives him time to target you.

When deadly force is needed you need to apply it, as accurately, as quickly as possible. Watch your back stop, and watch for others that might be armed.

Remember if the situation is such and using deadly force would present injure and death to bystanders, or you are outnumbered you can always retreat out a fire exit. It would get yourself and your family out of danger, and would alert help if it hasn't already been called for.
 
Because the service desk area of 99% of all retail stores is video taped (from multiple angles) for surveillance purposes, I am sure that my justifiable shooting of the BG will be a pretty easy case for me to make in court. I would only pull and shoot when I could do it without the BG seeing it and I am very sure that I would be able to drop him with one or two shots.
 
Stay out of it unless he starts shooting, then make damn sure you hit him and not someone else, and that you are positioned so you can do so. If he has an automatic weapon, don't attempt a shootout unless you can be sure you'll take him down before he can open up.


By the way, NRA has self defense insurance that will automatically provide you with a 50K retainer if you need a lawyer. My guess is that you wouldn't need one if you did everything by the book, but you never know.

There was an incident a couple of years ago in a New Mexico Walmart where I guy started stabbing his girlfriend and a retired cop blew him away. The girl lived, and no one else was hit but the BG.
 
This is the problem guys.

You did not get your CCW for the Defense of Innocent People, as someone, mattro I believe pointed out. If you want to protect innocent people, and stop crime, become a LEO. (thats why they get a badge, and not a CCW) ;)

It is not your duty, priority, or are you legally justified (in some states) to use your CCW to take the law into your own hands. You have that for self defense.

And for those of you who have said you would flat out ignore, or not consider the letter of the law before you act in certain situations, doesn't that make you, morrally and ethically, NO DIFFERENT for the other guy there who is disobeying, or disreguarding the LAW!? I thought thats how we seperate US (the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS) from THEM (THE CRIMINAL LAW BREAKING SCUMBAGS)?

I mean hell, correct me if I'm wrong.

Some of you have that Rambo attitude, and by your words and posts you give the impression that you are almost eager to be given the chance to be in one of these situations. I would bet that most who post in this cavalier manner haven't been in that type of situtation, cuz if you had, you would not be so eager beaver for it to be repeated.

Its nice to say kill the bad guy, and it appeals to our sense of pride and honor to do it, but I PROMISE YOU, it is not an easy thing to get over watching someone die violently. Especially if YOU DID IT. Even if it is a bad guy. Some of you need a reality check.

That being said, as I said before, the situation and players in it will determine my course of action on an individual basis. If I think it can be defused without loss of life, I will try. If not, and violence must happen, then so be it.

Either way, I will have to live with or suffer the outcome of my decision. If I make the wrong one and an innocent dies, I will have to live with that, just the same as if I blow away some scumbag.

I wish some people would think about what is really at stake before giving their best big bad wolf impression....
 
I mean hell, correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
You are wrong
I know of no state that allows for self defense that restricts it to defense of yourself and family or that mandates that you can not shoot first if they are presenting a viable imminent threat

It's nice to say that I am only responsible for myself and love ones but I PROMISE you that, if you are any kind of decent human being ,watching an innocent die violently especially when YOU COULD HAVE AT LEAST TRIED TO PREVENT IT will haunt you at least as long

It has nothing to do with taking the law into your own hands, especially when there is no law around to respond to the threat. It has to do with the personal morality of being apart of the human community
 
Last edited:
"1. Why do you say if he points the gun at you - you will drop him?
2. If he has the gun pointed at you, he is probably shooting you at that time.
3. Why do all internet posters, assume they will hit the target and the shot will be immediately incapacitating?

Just asking about the hidden assumption of gunfight success that is usually found in these threads."

In reply:

1. Because if he points it at me I will?
2. Why do you assume he'll pull the trigger before me?
3. I don't assume I'll hit the target. I assume that if I do, multiple .45+P rounds will cause enough damage to end the threat to my person.
 
i believe that you would be in a lot of trouble.. do to the fax that you can not carrier a ccw in Wahl-mart ? i know the law dose not permits you to carrier a gun in a place that does not allow ccw in their place of bussnes.....just my thoughts
 
do to the fax that you can not carrier a ccw in Wahl-mart ? i know the law dose not permits you to carrier a gun in a place that does not allow ccw in their place of bussnes.
Click to expand...
Wrong on both counts

Wal-Mart corporate does not have a no CCW policy
In Fla even if they did it wouldn't mean that you could not carry.
It would only mean that they would not like it

In other states there are specified posting protocols that must be followed for it to ba a legal notice
 
Joab wrote:

I know of no state that allows for self defense that restricts it to defense of yourself and family or that mandates that you can not shoot first if they are presenting a viable imminent threat
Click to expand...

There are states that give you factors, such as distance from threat, and force you to attempt retreat, unless you are inside your home.

It's nice to say that I am only responsible for myself and love ones but I PROMISE you that, if you are any kind of decent human being ,watching an innocent die violently especially when YOU COULD HAVE AT LEAST TRIED TO PREVENT IT will haunt you at least as long
Click to expand...

As I have said in nearly every post in this thread, I could not stand by and do nothing while an innocent person died. Just playing devil's advocate here. BUT, the question will arise, I PROMISE YOU, if you fire first, that you CAUSED the violence by opening fire in a crowded shopping center, when it was clear the guy just wanted the money. I absolutely guarantee you that it will be the number one cry in the air if you open fire first, and some people die. YOU will be held just as responsible, in the eyes of the general public.

It has nothing to do with taking the law into your own hands, especially when there is no law around to respond to the threat. It has to do with the personal morality of being apart of the human community
Click to expand...

I do agree with you in part. But there is always the chance, (and its a HIGH ONE) that if you open fire, more than just the BG could die, and alot of innocent people get hurt.

What happens if the both of us (ccw) are in the store, unknown to each other, and you whip out your gun and start rambo'ing away, and as a result of your actions, one of my family or friends dies, and in my rage and grief, I shoot you, either thinking you were one of them, or because your foolish actions directly resulted in the death of one of MINE?

Add that to your scenario.....
 
Last edited:
There are states that give you factors, such as distance from threat, and force you to attempt retreat, unless you are inside your home.
Click to expand...
But the question was do they mandate that you only protect yourself or family, do they dictate that he must start shooting people before you can react and do they specify that you must shoot from the front after warning him giving away your advantage?
BUT, the question will arise, I PROMISE YOU, if you fire first, that you CAUSED the violence by opening fire in a crowded shopping center, when it was clear the guy just wanted the money. I absolutely guarantee you that it will be the number one cry in the air if you open fire first, and some people die. YOU will be held just as responsible, in the eyes of the general public.
Click to expand...
Clairvoyance aside you can not possibly make that guarantee.
The guy that tried to stop the shopping mall shooting was called a hero for attempting. I believe he was shot after he gave away his advantage by waiting to get a frontal shot or by telling the terrorist to drop his gun
No matter how you react there will be people that disagree with your actions, so what?
But there is always the chance, (and its a HIGH ONE) that if you open fire, more than just the BG could die, and a lot of innocent people get hurt.
Click to expand...
Which is why I have repeatedly said to take the shot if it is safe to do so
Aslo why I referenced putting a round in his ear or the back
If I am not worried about return fire I can make a more deliberate shot than I could trying to duck his shots or trying to out-react his reaction to my warning

What happens if the both of us (ccw) are in the store, unknown to each other, and you whip out your gun and start rambo'ing away, and as a result of your actions, one of my family or friends dies, and in my rage and grief, I shoot you, either thinking you were one of them, or because your foolish actions directly resulted in the death of one of MINE?
Click to expand...
Add this to your scenario
I get there late and find out you just sat there with one thumb up your butt and the other in your mouth swappin every once in awhile while my family was slaughtered due to your cowardice when you had the means and opportunity to help

A lot of your what if's sound very much like rationalizing away the fact that you are just too damn scared to get involved. That's why the constant Rambo references, typical projection
( I wouldn't do that therefore anyone that says they would is just trying to be macho)
If that is the case fine, but don't try to sugar coat it with simplistic what-ifs

Sometimes you just do what you have to do because it is the right thing to do
Some people find it hard to believe but there are people still left in this country that live by a code of honor that can't be swayed by current popular opinion

Just playing devil's advocate here.
Click to expand...
Just responding to that argument
 
joab: Add this to your scenario
I get there late and find out you just sat there with one thumb up your butt and the other in your mouth swappin every once in awhile while my family was slaughtered due to your cowardice when you had the means and opportunity to help

A lot of your what if's sound very much like rationalizing away the fact that you are just too damn scared to get involved. That's why the constant Rambo references, typical projection
( I wouldn't do that therefore anyone that says they would is just trying to be macho)
If that is the case fine, but don't try to sugar coat it with simplistic what-ifs

Sometimes you just do what you have to do because it is the right thing to do
Some people find it hard to believe but there are people still left in this country that live by a code of honor that can't be swayed by current popular opinion
Click to expand...

:D :) :p ;) :eek:
Wow that was funnny, and right on the money !!

Going, Going --- - - GONE - over the fence !
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top