I always thought SD training - or any training with weapons - would be a plus legally in any "incident" - in that it would seem you knew what you were doing. (And I know questions to that effect were part of Defense strategy in at least one well-known case involving a CCW shooting since the CCW had had such training - then again the Defense Attorney was horrible and the CCW lost, so maybe it wasn't a good idea. )
Anyhow, when mentioning to an attorney and gun-savvy friend that I had possible plans for some training his response was unusual: "That's nice - but for heaven's sake if you ever get involved in a "situation" don't tell THEM (cops) that!"
His point: "they" could then start to find fault as if you were a professional, "so, why didn't you do this, or not do this" etc. - same in a civil case.
Though odd reaction, I can see his point. We are in the same position as housewife who stabs a would-be rapist/killer intruder with a kitchen knife: we are victims who use a particular means available to stop a lethal attack even if it results in death of the attacker. She is not required or expected to have had "kitchen knife defensive training". Nor are we gun trainng.
Our CCWs are permission to Carry. In NY State and I believe most states there is no mention of shooting anyone. As well, there is no mention in SD Law about shooting anyone. Carrying violations are violations of Gun Law. SD "violations" (inadequate legal reasons) are violations of Homicide Law. And the two don't overlap. You need education in gun safety and gun operation to get a CCW, including knowing how to aim, and that's it - at least in NY. You don't need SD training -nor do you need to demonstrate a particular degree of accuracy. Nor in SD Law is there any such requirement - nor any requirement for proficiency in any means or method of SD, no means are mentioned.
So, I can see that my attorney-friend had a point. Any thoughts on this?
(I'm not negating training for its own sake - for us and our abilities, by the way. Neither was my friend. Point was simply about the way such training could be viewed by others in any "case" we became involved in)
Anyhow, when mentioning to an attorney and gun-savvy friend that I had possible plans for some training his response was unusual: "That's nice - but for heaven's sake if you ever get involved in a "situation" don't tell THEM (cops) that!"
His point: "they" could then start to find fault as if you were a professional, "so, why didn't you do this, or not do this" etc. - same in a civil case.
Though odd reaction, I can see his point. We are in the same position as housewife who stabs a would-be rapist/killer intruder with a kitchen knife: we are victims who use a particular means available to stop a lethal attack even if it results in death of the attacker. She is not required or expected to have had "kitchen knife defensive training". Nor are we gun trainng.
Our CCWs are permission to Carry. In NY State and I believe most states there is no mention of shooting anyone. As well, there is no mention in SD Law about shooting anyone. Carrying violations are violations of Gun Law. SD "violations" (inadequate legal reasons) are violations of Homicide Law. And the two don't overlap. You need education in gun safety and gun operation to get a CCW, including knowing how to aim, and that's it - at least in NY. You don't need SD training -nor do you need to demonstrate a particular degree of accuracy. Nor in SD Law is there any such requirement - nor any requirement for proficiency in any means or method of SD, no means are mentioned.
So, I can see that my attorney-friend had a point. Any thoughts on this?
(I'm not negating training for its own sake - for us and our abilities, by the way. Neither was my friend. Point was simply about the way such training could be viewed by others in any "case" we became involved in)
Last edited: