Posted on 12/26/2019 9:24:50 AM PST by w1n1
The decision to carry a concealed firearm is a personal choice that can either be a lifesaver or a "life taker." It is a choice that may leave you taking the life of a fellow human being or disfiguring them. Therefore, how you conduct yourself will determine whether you protect yourself or put others in danger. Whatever you do, you should never make these mistakes while carrying a concealed gun.
-Leaving the concealed carry permit at home
The first mistake, especially for veteran concealed carriers, is to leave their licenses at home. You can talk yourself out of situations, but police officers will hear none of it. Unless you are in a state that allows the free use of guns, always have your permit.
-Buying a holster without testing it
Many first-time carriers fall victim to this mistake. When you purchase a holster and fail to check it, you will be subjecting yourself to potential physical and financial pain. Make sure you buy a holster that fits your body comfortably.
-Removing your handgun to show-off
The importance of concealed carrying is to keep it unseen. That implies that irrespective of how excited you feel about having a gun, you must not show it off.
-Fire warning shots
Apart from not showing off your firearm, you shouldn’t fire warning shots. There are many tense, ambiguous situations out there. You don’t have to use your gun in all of them. If you feel threatened, it is okay to act accordingly, and that is all it goes down to.
-Getting drunk and carrying
Some states prohibit the habit of getting drunk while carrying a gun. Others stipulate that one must not go into an alcohol-selling shop with a concealed weapon. Firearms and alcohol don't mix. Read the rest of concealed carry: should never do.
I have a seriously sharp sword at arm's length as I type this.
Swords have some advantages around the house. Guns have to be secured when there are children in the house, but children learn at a young age what "sharp, don't touch" means. Plus, with a sword, you have more control over how badly you hurt the person you stab or slash. Finally, somebody might decide to rush a gun, but nobody charges a sword.
Heh! Some dude was rolling up on me in a grocery store parking lot when my Sons were younger. I saw him long before he approached.
He seemed to increase his walking speed as he got closer and I assumed a defensive, “Shooter Ready,” stance. He immediately slowed down and started to ask for money. I interrupted him with a direct and loud, “CAN’T HELP YOU,” and he quickly walked away.
Never showed my gun. Just prepared my hands and feet to pull my shirt and get moving.
I think he got the point.
If I draw down on someone, I know exactly where my sights will be. I’ve practiced enough so that I won’t even have think about it. My decision-making brain will be free(r) to process other tactical decisions.
If others on this thread want to input other things to process, such as which body part to shoot at, I guess that’s their right.
Same here. We had one tell us that it’s not the permit holders that scares him. It’s the ones he doesn’t know about that do.
If you aren’t aware of the 20 foot rule regarding edged weapons, you should familiarize yourself with it.
Again, circumstances dictate. If your “assailant” is threatening you with an edged-weapon, you may be justified.
The problem I see with your scenario of the perp giving up at the sight of a weapon is it doesn’t take into account the totality of the circumstances.
For example... you’re in a parking lot, late at night and someone approaches you with a gun and you pull your weapon to defend yourself. The perp beats feet out of the area and you have the classic situation where “brandishing” a weapon has saved the day. However, what isn’t taken into account is the perp MAY have had a very realistic air-pistol that simulates a real weapon (look at what Sig Sauer offers in air pistols). The perp knows his gun isn’t real and isn’t about to find out if your’s is.
You may also have the classic thief that takes a “knife to a gun fight”, he approaches you with a mean-looking knife, you pull your weapon, and he suddenly realizes your full-house beats his pair and takes off.
The only continuing theme is simple, under the totality of the circumstances, do I have the right to use deadly force in THIS situation. If I do, then I’m on pretty solid legal ground. If I don’t, then expect the worst from responding LEO’s and prosecutors. And regardless, that doesn’t resolve the civil question regardless of the circumstance/outcome.
My guiding philosophy. I vividly remember: "Carrying a gun? Are you expecting trouble?" - "If I'm expecting trouble, I don't go where it is. I carry for the unexpected."
It doesn't matter if the assailant has an air pistol, or if it's unloaded. If a reasonable person would assume he was under deadly threat, then that justifies deadly force.
You’re right, point is legal terms. In the grand scheme of things, the cop has to take a report and the crime has to be classified correctly to be reported to the FBI for the national crime reporting database. He was probably trying to determine if you were in the vehicle when your wallet was stolen as it makes a difference.
So while most people don’t know the difference and say their car or house was robbed, to the law enforcement professional, it does make a difference.
You’re right and that was not the point. She was referring to instances where “brandishing” a weapon has had the desired effect. The initial post talked about shooting in an extremity as opposed to center of mass.
Oh, stop it!
“if you have to pull your weapon in order to defend yourself or others”
When I carry, I often carry some pepper spray in my pocket too. I don’t want my only option to be a gun.
Only pulled in self-defense once. 8 of them. 1 of me, and many miles from help. When they started to surround me, I pulled my 22 revolver and waited. I would only have had time to get off one shot, but no one volunteered to be #1 - so I arced off and around them and left in one piece.
If someone intends violence against you, there aren’t a lot of good answers. Having options improves the odds of finding a ‘good enough’ answer.
In my state the threat of grievous bodily harm is enough to justify the use of deadly force. Also deadly force can be used to stop or prevent forcible felonies being committed against others as well.
Brandishing when you think your life is endangered is fine! However, if you feel such a threat, why not simply fire. So many other factors surrounding the event will be critical, however. But shutting down the threat by brandishing may be far better then actually firing and facing all the costs associated therewith.
Having been in a similar situation on the job, I can empathize. The problem is in some jurisdictions, chemical devices (Mace) are also illegal. In our municipality it was covered under our long-gun ordinance. So you have to be careful no matter what happens.
In your scenario, I could see a defense attorney argue that just because you were surrounded by 8 subjects, it may not justify the use of deadly force. Especially, if none of the 8 were armed with a weapon. As hard as that is to believe, a good defense attorney will argue that the other 7 were there by “happenstance” and were only there to “watch”.
There are no easy cut and dried answers which is why pulling a weapon should only be a last resort response.
A handgun is what you carry when you do not expect to have to use it.
If you KNOW the probability of a gunfight is high, you carry a semi-auto rifle or shotgun, and bring as many armed friends as you can.
In my scenario...a lawyer could argue anything he wanted. When 8 guys start to surround you and you are many miles from help, what a lawyer could argue in court doesn’t matter. And let’s face it, no one picks a fight using a 6-shot 22 LR against 8 guys....
As it was (decades ago), I left and never filed any report. I seriously doubt they did. They didn’t strike me as liking cops, so to speak. I’ve never come close to pulling a gun in self-defense since.
The best battle is the one you don’t have to fight. Sun Tzu
You must be Very
Popular with the
Ladies!
You were very lucky to have escaped harm.
The problem is with the election of left-leaning prosecutors funded by people like Soros. There is no guarantee that what may previously be described as self-defense will be seen in the same light going forward. When you have states like Virginia making threats to nationalize the National Guard to confiscate “assault rifles” from law-abiding citizens, all bets are off.
If you pul it, use it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.