Parking lot incident

[MLeake]

I think the issue some of us have...

is not with the readying of the weapon, but with the pointing of the weapon.

The weapon can be readied, and kept out of sight by the thigh, without real risk of assault charges (IE it's not being brandished, just readied as a precaution).

I believe WA indicated he's had a case where he kept his own pistol ready, but below line of sight. I've had one of those, myself.

There was a case last year in south Florida where a driver did shoot a road-rager, and was not charged; however, in that case there were two potential assailants; I believe one had a bludgeoning weapon of some sort; and, a real attempt to open the man's door was made. Witness statements supported the shooter's version of events.

The OP's physical condition would be a factor to consider as far as charging and verdict go, for anything from its effect on his ability to avoid the threat to his ability to sustain damage. Even so, he'd probably need to show more cause for perceiving a threat of serious bodily harm than a fist banging on a window.

Now, if it were a bat or a hammer banging on the window, that would change things up. A firearm, and nobody here would have a question.

 

[scottaschultz]

UPDATE!!!​

I just came back from my local Wal-Mart and I am still alive to talk about it! Somehow, by the grace of god, I did not feel threatened nor did I feel the need to draw my weapon. I am sure this is just an isolated incident since Wal-Mart appears to be such a hotbed of violent activities. I will harder next to try and find some reason to draw my weapon on someone the next time I go.

Scott

 

[maestro pistolero]

I think the issue some of us have...
is not with the readying of the weapon, but with the pointing of the weapon.

The weapon can be readied, and kept out of sight by the thigh, without real risk of assault charges (IE it's not being brandished, just readied as a precaution).

Ready, for me, is cocked and locked in my holster, possibly with my hand on the holstered gun. Next level of readiness would be the "low ready", cocked, unlocked, and pointed downward. I don't like the idea of an unsecured pistol. It's either in my hand, in the holster, or both.

It would take very little scuffling or fast driving for that gun to end up on the floor or wedged between seat and console.

 

[eclipsetactical]

TailGator

Those were some of the points I was trying to make to these guys about him being handicapped and his fear of being seriously hurt was very reasonable after having the perp hit his car and threaten him. But never the less they fell on def ears. I think you made a great point that i have been trying to make. As well you did it in a well thought out and easy to understand manner. I applaud you but I will say none on the other side are going to listen. They are stuck in thier way and would not listen to anything anyone else has to say that does not conform to thier veiw. I think a lot of people need to learn to listen to people more and take in the information and possibly change thier oppinion as things are revealed to them. You can't just take your first opinion and be gun ho on it no matter what is said to explain things to you. You must learn to listen, learn, and sometimes adapt your opinion based upon presented facts. Alot of older people expecially get the attitude that when they have an opinion they are sticking by it no matter what come hell or high water. We as a country and as people in general need to listen and learn more from others, not just block them out because we are set in our ways and not going to back down from our first statement. Sometimes you have to learn to swallow that pride and admit hey I might be wrong or at least partially wrong.

Just the way it is on these forums. Like I said before opinions are like a-holes, everyone's got one and I will add most of them stink. LOLZ

 

[noelf2]

Thats why there are "instructors" (FWIW) out there.

LOL... If an instructor says it, it's a fact...!!?? I've known all kinds of instructors that were all kinds of wrong.

I just came back from my local Wal-Mart and I am still alive to talk about it! Somehow, by the grace of god, I did not feel threatened nor did I feel the need to draw my weapon. I am sure this is just an isolated incident since Wal-Mart appears to be such a hotbed of violent activities. I will harder next to try and find some reason to draw my weapon on someone the next time I go.

Was that supposed to be funny? or sarcastic? Kind of belittles the ops situation I think. Not very mature, but, we're all different.

 

[MLeake]

Note to Maestro Pistolero

Did you read the original post?

He wasn't "driving". He was blocked between the aggressor's car and an old lady's car. I, too, would advocate leaving the weapon holstered if the OP (or anybody else) were driving. In fact, I'd say that the best option, in a moving vehicle, is to move that vehicle rapidly toward a police station.

However, his car was effectively immobilized, ergo the gun wasn't going to get flung about in a collision, and he also could not drive to a safe refuge.

For that matter, did you read my post? Where did I ever say I'd put the gun on the seat? I said, "readied, and kept out of sight by the thigh." Apparently, you've interpreted that to mean dumped on the seat and held in place by the leg ... that is not my idea of "readied." To clarify, I meant "weapon in hand, held alongside the thigh to keep it ready but out of sight." IE a low ready, but modified to keep it out of view in hopes of avoiding escalation.

I'm doing my best to remind myself that you were probably being sincere, and that I probably could have been clearer, but I am having to battle the sarcasm gods...

Cheers,

M

 

[Wildalaska]

Are you certain of that, WA?

yeah OBJECTIVELY I am. And bet you can find a jury that could agree with me. And if he would have shot, he would have been indicted. And the introduction of the gun into the equation made it more likely he would have had to shoot.

And there goes life for the OP as he knows it.

WildbehindglassAlaska TM

 

[Wildalaska]

Alot of older people expecially get the attitude that when they have an opinion they are sticking by it no matter what come hell or high water.

Thats because we "old folks" have seen more of life, are generally more educated, have read more and are less susceptible to thinking with the wrong head.

Those were some of the points I was trying to make to these guys about him being handicapped and his fear of being seriously hurt was very reasonable after having the perp hit his car and threaten him. But never the less they fell on def ears. I think you made a great point that i have been trying to make.

Ever tried a self defense case? Ever seen one presented to a Grand Jury? Ever read an appellate decision of a self defense case? Familiar with the Model penal Code provisions on justification? Read the commentaries to the law of self defense in Florida? ever have a Florida carry permit? You have a carry permit anywhere? Ever taught a course on the law of self defense?

The points about him being handicapped and in "fear" are irrelevant to the scenario as presented and the point some of us are trying to make. The OP acted irresponsibly, and if you think he didnt, then there will come a time when you may act irresponsibly too.

Your nickel, like I said earlier, get some $$ in the bank for your lawyer.

Perhaps a bit more listening to folks who know a bit more will help you.

WildbeentheredonethatgotthetshirtAlaska TM

 

[dev_null]

 

[noelf2]

Perhaps a bit more listening to folks who know a bit more will help you.

Please point me to someone like that. Or, is that supposed to be you??

Op wasn't irresponsible. Anyone who thinks he was should save their $$. You might need them for medical expenses (deductibles, etc) if you ever take a couple of punches before you decide to stop an attack. Might even come in handy for a coffin.

 

[OldMarksman]

Op wasn't irresponsible. Anyone who thinks he was should save their $$. You might need them for medical expenses (deductibles, etc) if you ever take a couple of punches before you decide to stop an attack. Might even come in handy for a coffin.

????

"Stop an attack"? No attack had occurred. Nothing to stop. Yes, there were words. Yes, someone banged on a window. Do you think that constituted an attack? If so, why?

Do you think one could lawfully point a gun in anticipation of an attack?

Now, in Florida, had the glass been broken, the display of a weapon, and even it's use, might well have been justified. Lay opinion.

Now, being prepared would be very prudent indeed, but actually pointing the gun without the existence of imminent peril could buy a one way ticket to "downtown."

Perhaps you have an objective reason to argue otherwise, and perhaps you have reason to believe you could convince a Florida charging authority, grand jury, and/or trial jury otherwise, but you haven't provided it here.

 

[Wildalaska]

Now, in Florida, had the glass been broken, the display of a weapon, and even it's use, might well have been justified. Lay opinion.

Under the facts as exactly related by the OP, glass breaks, use of weapon justified.

WildlegalopinionAlaska TM

PS....

Or, is that supposed to be you??

Among others, yep.

 

[Kyo]

an attack did occur. the attack scared the OP enough to pull the gun. no one else was there, how do you know if it was an attack or not?
Like I said, he got out of the car and started banging on the window. assault. period. the cops even agreed, so who are you to say there was no attack?
This is ridiculous. Scream that he's wrong all day, it makes no difference that you are wrong. None. He's not in jail, the cops said he's fine, and obviously the guy in the other car started this idiocy. But please ignore all that and still claim you are right for no other reason except to argue and annoy. Good job. Guess what? OP was right, law says so. Deal with it. :barf:

 

[MLeake]

No, Kyo, the police on scene chose not to make an arrest.

That doesn't mean a DA won't take a different view after reviewing the case.

And if it turns out in his favor, in that particular jurisdiction, it doesn't mean it would turn out so favorably in Coral Gables, or St Augustine, or other "blue" areas of Florida.

It's better not to point a weapon unless one really has to. A fist that doesn't break the glass (side windows aren't all that tough, you can push through one with minimal effort with a center punch), probably is being used for dramatic effect and not for actual attack.

The weapon can be readied without being pointed, in case the fist does become more intent.

 

[MLeake]

I just reread the OP...

... and am very surprised it turned out so well.

The belligerent pounded his fist on the rear window glass as he walked past the back door.

He commenced yelling outside the driver's door. No further mention of pounding on glass was made by the OP from this point, just screaming and general idiocy by the belligerent.

I am amazed the police didn't take a more unfavorable view on the pointing of the firearm in response to verbal antics and an angry posture.

 

[OldMarksman]

Like I said, he got out of the car and started banging on the window. assault. period.

You apparently believe that an assault justifies the use of deadly force for self defense--which, by the way, is the requirement in Florida for producing the weapon.

Where do you get the idea that the fact of an assault constitutes the existence of imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm?

the cops even agreed, so who are you to say there was no attack?
This is ridiculous. Scream that he's wrong all day, it makes no difference that you are wrong. None. He's not in jail, the cops said he's fine,

Actually, he's not "fine" until he is tried and acquitted, or until the statute of limitations applies.

The fact that he has not yet been charged is irrelevant.

 

[noelf2]

Do you think that constituted an attack? If so, why?

Yes, I believe that pounding on a car and THREATENING TO CAUSE SERIOUS BODILY HARM (the part people seem to forget about, or try to belittle by saying things like "words were spoken" ) constitutes an attack and a warrants drawing and pointing. We've been through this already. Read earlier posts for definitions of an attack and try to remember all of the criteria regarding the op's experience.

Now, in Florida, had the glass been broken, the display of a weapon, and even it's use, might well have been justified. Lay opinion.

Exactly, a "lay opinion" just like mine. I doubt the Florida law needs glass broken before it could be called an attack. That seems only to be a requirement in the minds of some people and not based on any law or definition of an attack.

Do you think one could lawfully point a gun in anticipation of an attack?

For God sakes man, YES. If my dog starts barking (doesn't like prowlers, good doggie ), and I see someone moving around outside, I'll draw and point, and I'll be prepared to take lethal action if he breaks my window and starts climbing in. Point is, I draw and point before the glass is broken. I didn't take lethal action yet. Do you think it's appropriate for a police officer to draw and point his/her gun in anticipation of an attack? What's the difference? If you go up to a police car and bang on his window and threaten to kick his butt, do you think he'll draw his weapon or patiently wait for you to break the glass?

Now, being prepared would be very prudent indeed, but actually pointing the gun without the existence of imminent peril could buy a one way ticket to "downtown."

OP believed he was in imminent peril. Who are you to say otherwise? You weren't there and neither was I. I'll base my opinions on what the OP said, not what I want to think.

Perhaps you have an objective reason to argue otherwise, and perhaps you have reason to believe you could convince a Florida charging authority, grand jury, and/or trial jury otherwise, but you haven't provided it here.

And you haven't proven that any of that would have to transpire. Facts (as OP said) are that police were called to the scene. The OP had pointed his gun and he WASN'T ARRESTED, because he WAS ATTACKED. Remember, I agree with him drawing and pointing, not shooting (yet) but being prepared to. Some think that drawing means you must shoot. I find that idea to be pure BS.

 

[Zilmo]

UPDATE!!!

I just came back from my local Wal-Mart and I am still alive to talk about it! Somehow, by the grace of god, I did not feel threatened nor did I feel the need to draw my weapon. I am sure this is just an isolated incident since Wal-Mart appears to be such a hotbed of violent activities. I will harder next to try and find some reason to draw my weapon on someone the next time I go.

Scott

Gosh. That's really funny.

 

[MLeake]

Pointing the gun constitutes assault in virtually every jurisdiction in the US

So, if you point a weapon at somebody, you have to have an affirmative defense.

If you can't justify the use of the weapon, it's an assault charge, so you'd better be able to justify that action.

Just because the police didn't arrest the OP in this instance, doesn't mean that a DA couldn't decide to charge him later.

 

[noelf2]

Where do you get the idea that the fact of an assault constitutes the existence of imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm?

Read this after my last post. You can't be serious! You make me smile...

Just because the police didn't arrest the OP in this instance, doesn't mean that a DA couldn't decide to charge him later.

Well that's a stretch. Highly unlikely to the point of being kinda silly. Can you give an example of such a thing?