How would an attacker know you were armed unless you pulled your weapon? In some states that would considered “brandishing” a weapon and the perceived attacker could stop and call the cops on you for doing that. Then you’d be the one arrested. I guess you have to be actually attacked first (i.e. Zimmerman) before you could “brandish” your weapon. Anyway, just saying.
There is one major rule for weapons.
Never pull one unless you have the courage and intent to use it.
“How would an attacker know you were armed unless you pulled your weapon? In some states that would considered “brandishing” a weapon and the perceived attacker could stop and call the cops on you for doing that. Then you’d be the one arrested. I guess you have to be actually attacked first (i.e. Zimmerman) before you could “brandish” your weapon. Anyway, just saying.”
Your still better off that getting attacked. And besides, it’s the threat of bodily harm that triggers self defense... It’s what the victim perceives.
“How would an attacker know you were armed unless you pulled your weapon? In some states that would considered “brandishing” a weapon and the perceived attacker could stop and call the cops on you for doing that. Then you’d be the one arrested. I guess you have to be actually attacked first (i.e. Zimmerman) before you could “brandish” your weapon. Anyway, just saying.”
Two ways. In Arizona we passed a “Defensive Display” law that says you can display your firearm to let a potential attacker know that you are armed, and you cannot be charged with a crime for that. We pushed for it because criminals who were thwarted in their attacks were calling the police and claiming that they were the one’s assaulted.
The second way is to openly carry a firearm. It is legal in some way or another in 44 states, I believe. Arkansas has a new law that decriminalizes open carry, but it is just going into effect, and Democrats are fighting it.
http://my.opencarry.org/?page_id=103
Read your state laws.
If a person is in fear of “great bodily harm” from an attacker they are justified in using deadly force to prevent that. Most state statues read such as this example:
“Great bodily harm” means bodily injury which creates a probability of death, or which causes significant serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a significant permanent loss or impairment of the function of any bodily part or organ;
Great Bodily Harm”
“The term `great bodily harm’ as used in statute stating when an assault and battery becomes aggravated, is not susceptible of precise definition, but implies an injury of a graver and more serious character than ordinary battery. Herrington v. State, 352 P.2d 931, 933 (Okla. Cir.).”(15)
“Great bodily harm” means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or which causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ or other serious bodily injury.”(16)
See:
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2012/04/us/table.selfdefense.laws/
One does not need a weapon to be a threat. Concealed carry laws aren’t just for us to defend ourselves against gun-toting bad guys. Look at St. Skittles. His hands were deadly weapons. Then there’s always this: I’d rather be judged by 12 then carried by six.
In my own experience the attacker gets to call the cops, if he actually wants to, after he’s face down on the ground with my foot in the middle of his back. Giving an attacker a chance to mea culpa is not productive. Once he’s shown his hand and the threat is clear, he must be grounded and held-———Then he can bellyache to the cops about how “misunderstood” he is, after they cuff him.