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.
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.