question on a defensive scenario

Not shooting was the right thing to do. It takes lots of training to do it right and not hurt bystanders. The FAST, Firearms Simunlator Training will prove that to you. Another fact to glean from this senario is how most people will hesitate when it comes time to actually pull the trigger and kill another human being (yes even scumbags are humans). If things had gone properly the draw cycle would have been quick, clean and ended with the trigger breaking. The scumbag did not hesitate to fire which shows that he would kill you without hesitation. He just couldn't shoot well, which is fortunate. The simple presentation of the gun did stop the crime though.
 
I'm afraid I'm with Rgrundy on this one:

My last act in presentation is the trigger pulled in as many multiple times as it needs to end the threat.

Hesitating at the end of the draw stroke: "OK, . . . bad guy, . . . now we both got guns, . . . do you want to lead, dance, follow, . . . or just run?" is the kind of actions that can easily escalate to the good guy getting shot.

Whether is was Baton Rouge or Fiddletown is unimportant, . . . there was enough of a threat to warrant a pulled weapon, . . . therefore there is enough threat to warrant 230 grains of copper jacketed hollow point answer, . . . mulitples if needed.

I would probably have not shot at him though, if he was running away. As he turned to go, . . . my foot would have smashed the gas pedal to the injector, . . . and I would have been out of there.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
May I add the following caveat? Should you or I ever find ourselves in that situation, might want to ponder being the first to call the gendarmes to report said ner-do-well would be car jacker with gun... as opposed to him calling first and reporting you as the bad guy in question.

Not that he would. But that he could... and your world is all of a sudden topsy turvey and getting really expensive fast.

I'd agree with those that call it a "no-shoot" scenario, even if that leaves ner-do-well out there to do the same to another potential unarmed victim. I am not the worlds saviour.

YMMV obviously.
 
This is why everyone needs a dog in the back seat :) chase him down and make him suffer. Naw, I woulda just called 911 and gave the best description I could. Maybe a camera pic? seems everyone has these nowadays. I see guys riding bikes have cameras on the bill of their hats.

Shooting at the guy only increases the chance of a miss and hit on a innocent person IMHO.
 
Yes, he certainly would have been justified in shooting. Just because the bad guy's aiming poorly doesn't mean you have to sit there and hope one of his bullets doesn't hit you. Of course, as in all self defense scenarios, there are a million variables.
 
Hmm very good question. I would say no but then again he is firing on you with what i guess would be called a cheap suppressing fire. But then again he fled. This is a very posing question.
 
As always, I feel if you can avoid shooting someone, you should do just that.

But each situation is different.

If the guy was just running away, just let him go. But, in this case, he essentially is running around and shooting randomly (albeit in a specific direction). If I saw just this action I feel I would have a justification to use deadly force.

Knowing full well that there will be a defense attorney in my future :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top