good thinking and correct use of a CC weapon

This is a discussion on good thinking and correct use of a CC weapon within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Here is the problem. Your whole arguement is based off being disarmed. If you didn't have a gun, would you still feel a threat on ...

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 105

Thread: good thinking and correct use of a CC weapon

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array ctsketch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,319
    Here is the problem. Your whole arguement is based off being disarmed. If you didn't have a gun, would you still feel a threat on your life was imminent?
    you've never heard of being beaten to death?
    Glock 19
    Kahr PM9
    LMT-M4
    Mossberg 590
    Shodan, Jujutsu

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by Jcabin View Post
    the school of common sense. apparently something that can be practiced in all the states... though some never took that class I see..

    If someone of similar weight and height were to knock you to the ground and start kicking you, what would you do?
    the simple answer...

    probably die if i dont find an effective way to defend myself...in the event i have already been knocked to the ground and am being beaten further it has become quite apparent that i am bound to lose the fight if i continue to rely on my hand to hand skills as they have left me in a seriously disadvantaged position and taking multiple incoming, damaging blows....at that point i have every right to use deadly force to end the attack...

    kudos to you for having the confidence in yourself to get out of the situation using the skills that landed you on the ground getting kicked or having the inner peace to feel the need to report to your maker so as not to break a law that does not exist....i intend to live and in one piece...anyone who intends to take that away from me is a lethal threat and will be dealt with accordingly...

  4. #33
    VIP Member Array TedBeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bay City
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Old School View Post
    Florida State Statute says that deadly force may be used "if you or someone else is in emanate, immediate danger of death or great bodily harm."

    There are numerous incidents of people being beaten to death with the only weapons being hands and feet used against them. One good kick to the temple is all it takes. Yes you will have to articulate your actions to a grand jury but you will be alive to do so.
    In Michigan it's basically the same, you can use deadly force to prevent serious injury. Since I am not from Krypton, someone older than say 8 years old could quite easily blind me, or cause me to fall to the ground, at which point a single kick could render me sterile, unconsious or dead. I'm not waiting to be on the ground before I draw. A 24 year old attacks me, I am defending myself at the first attempt to strike me. Granted hopefully I will have attempted to retreat, warn the person to leave me alone, that I am not looking to fight them, and that I am not the aggressor.

    Any one that thinks they can take on an aggressor just because they are nearly the same age had better know that their hand to hand skills are the best in the world because if theirs are not, the aggressor's just might be!

  5. #34
    VIP Member Array TedBeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bay City
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Jcabin View Post
    Here is the problem. Your whole arguement is based off being disarmed. If you didn't have a gun, would you still feel a threat on your life was imminent?
    No, I think Retsupt99's argument is that any attack shold be viewed as dangerous to your health and life, and if he was able to render you unconcious because you didn't take the threat seriously, then you have no ability to protect yourself, OR retain your weapon. If he wasn't able to kill you with his feet after knocking you out, he surely can shoot you once he finds your gun!

  6. #35
    Senior Member Array boatail's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    va.
    Posts
    696
    If you reverse things, as in do what it takes to stop the threat, even in that addled person's mind, when his victim was down and beaten already, any threat he MAY have mistakenly percieved to himself was over. When he continued to pummel the man on the ground is where that victim obtained the right to shoot and stop the threat to HIMSELF. That would apply to any age, whether armed or not. And to address him being mentally ill ( of course ) and not in control of his faculties,the victim would have no way of knowing this and even if he did, it would'nt matter as far as the threat goes. An immediate threat of severe bodily injury or death can be defended up to and including lethal force in MOST states. Unfortunately, some states are a little confusing and confused in this matter. My opinion is that the shooting was perfectly justified
    Light travels faster than sound...thats why some people appear bright before they speak

  7. #36
    Member Array bsms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by Jcabin View Post
    Here is the problem. Your whole arguement is based off being disarmed. If you didn't have a gun, would you still feel a threat on your life was imminent?
    At the CCW class I took last week, the instructors discussed this. Their point was that when an armed person shoots an unarmed person, you enter a gray area. Half of the class I was in was 70 or older, and they pretty much said an 80 year old man could shoot an unarmed attacker and get away with it. They said most women could, if the attacker was a large male.

    Someone like me - a fairly small (160 lbs) male in his 50s? Maybe, or maybe not. Depends on the DA, the jury...but I was told to expect my actions to be scrutinized carefully. If the guy had a club or steel toed shoes and I was on the ground? Probably. Sneakers, no visible weapon and scrawny? Probably not. One guy in the class was in his 20s, about 6 foot & 200 lbs - he was told he'd better be fighting a REALLY big guy or he would be expected to take a few lumps before shooting.

    I have mixed emotions on this. Just shoving someone to the ground is enough to sometimes kill them. One good kick to the head can kill you. But the courts & DA will look to see if they think you had other options. At a minimum, I'd expect a HUGE legal bill...

  8. #37
    VIP Member Array ctsketch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,319
    Someone like me - a fairly small (160 lbs) male in his 50s? Maybe, or maybe not. Depends on the DA, the jury...but I was told to expect my actions to be scrutinized carefully. If the guy had a club or steel toed shoes and I was on the ground? Probably. Sneakers, no visible weapon and scrawny? Probably not. One guy in the class was in his 20s, about 6 foot & 200 lbs - he was told he'd better be fighting a REALLY big guy or he would be expected to take a few lumps before shooting.
    I'll be sure to pay myself on the back for showing restraint when i'm lying dead on a slab in the morgue. If I am being beaten bloody on the ground I don't think i'll be thinking of "how will a jury see this"

    in this scenario you ALREADY taken your lumps and are on the ground and the beating continues.
    Glock 19
    Kahr PM9
    LMT-M4
    Mossberg 590
    Shodan, Jujutsu

  9. #38
    3D
    3D is offline
    Senior Member Array 3D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    517

    Question So what are your personal required conditions for self-protection?

    [QUOTE=Jcabin;1702262]Here is the problem. Your whole arguement is based off being disarmed. If you didn't have a gun, would you still feel a threat on your life was imminent?[/QUOTE]

    Jcabin:
    [1] Having a gun is not a 'necessary cause' for feeling a threat on my life was imminent. I'm confident many unarmed people can confirm they have felt a threat to their life was imminent.
    [2] In the case cited the threat was not imminent - it was in progress!
    [3] The defender was in JEOPARDY of grave bodily harm; the attacker obviously had the ABILITY to inflict grave bodily harm and was in-fact doing just that which, defacto, demonstrates the attacker had the OPPORTUNITY to inflict grave bodily harm.

    Under those conditions would you wait for mercy from a person who's behavior seems to imply he might be a person who has no mercy?????
    "It is easier to resist at the beginning than at the end"____Leonardo da Vinci 1452-1519

  10. #39
    Member
    Array IWLAFART's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Martinsburg, WV
    Posts
    335
    As a 72 year old senior citizen. If someone pushes me down he better be walking away. If he continues the attack the last thing he will hear is "BANG"
    Member:USCCA, NRA, GOA, WVCDL
    U.S. Navy vet 1955-1959, USS Dashiell DD 659. Glock 19, Ruger LCP, Ruger .357 Mag.
    When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on.

  11. #40
    Member Array yoyomeng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    93
    I can't believe this is being argued on this forum of all places. If your on the ground after fighting, loosing, and still are being beaten and you're still thinking if you should shoot or not then you're either going to die or end up in the hospital.

    Like others have hinted at, the last thing that should be in your head at that point is how much the court bill will be or if you'll get in trouble. Defend yourself! Fighting didn't work, what other option could you possibly have!! If you think running is an option when you're overpowered to the ground and hurt then you should try sparring with someone to find out for yourself.

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array bladenbullet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    englewood, fl
    Posts
    1,751
    Quote Originally Posted by bsms View Post
    At the CCW class I took last week, the instructors discussed this. Their point was that when an armed person shoots an unarmed person, you enter a gray area. Half of the class I was in was 70 or older, and they pretty much said an 80 year old man could shoot an unarmed attacker and get away with it. They said most women could, if the attacker was a large male.

    Someone like me - a fairly small (160 lbs) male in his 50s? Maybe, or maybe not. Depends on the DA, the jury...but I was told to expect my actions to be scrutinized carefully. If the guy had a club or steel toed shoes and I was on the ground? Probably. Sneakers, no visible weapon and scrawny? Probably not. One guy in the class was in his 20s, about 6 foot & 200 lbs - he was told he'd better be fighting a REALLY big guy or he would be expected to take a few lumps before shooting.

    I have mixed emotions on this. Just shoving someone to the ground is enough to sometimes kill them. One good kick to the head can kill you. But the courts & DA will look to see if they think you had other options. At a minimum, I'd expect a HUGE legal bill...
    learn to take what you hear in ccw class with a grain of salt...there is probably more misinformation shared at those classes than anywhere else...when you are on the ground being beaten the last thing on your mind is going to be the weight, height and fashion choices of your attacker....survival is key...if you feel you can fight your way out of it by all means carry on...but if you realize you are on the losing end of the battle you need to be thinking along the lines of actually living through it....not what a jury is going to think...

    i am not advocating the gun as a first defense and i believe that is where jcabin is aiming his responses...having a gun does not make it the end all solution to every situation...but having a gun and being beaten to death or serious injury with no effective alternate defense is better than not having a gun while participating in the same....its not an ornament...it has a purpose and this appears to be one of those times when it may be very useful...

  13. #42
    Member Array bsms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by ctsketch View Post
    I'll be sure to pay myself on the back for showing restraint when i'm lying dead on a slab in the morgue. If I am being beaten bloody on the ground I don't think i'll be thinking of "how will a jury see this"...
    Well, if you've been beaten bloody and the guy is continuing, then you'll probably be OK. If I've been knocked down only, then I probably couldn't shoot and be let off. I'm in my 50s, but I still run regularly, ride horses, haul bales of hay & sacks of feed...I'm not crippled.

    It comes down to proportionate force - and even wars are fought under those rules. In a combat zone, I couldn't gun down a kid for throwing a rock. When I worked targeting, we didn't break out nukes as option one. If military in combat can be expected to show some restraint, then so can cops (see the guy killed in LV at Costco just recently) and so can civilians carrying guns.

    So the question becomes, "What does a reasonable man consider appropriate force?" That answer varies with place & time. West Texas in 1880 had a different answer than now, and I suspect San Francisco juries would give a different answer than Phoenix. If you truly are in fear of your life, shoot. But men are expected to show a certain amount of courage and restraint as well. In this case, it seems the DA agrees the victim - who is NOT the guy killed - used reasonable force in responding to the threat. Good on him. I might be held to a different standard, and a football player to yet another one.

  14. #43
    Member Array PShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    phoenix
    Posts
    125
    Different states weigh this differently but we all have a duty to retain our weapons. If some guy is a real bad-ass and he goes bezerk on me, how am I to know that he won't pop me with my own gun and maybe even unload on other bystanders with my own weapon once he's got the better of me? How would I even know if he is a bad-ass until perhaps once it's too late? Once he takes your gun it is too late for you to shoot an unarmed man but not for him!

    If I start losing the fight I will end the fight with my weapon if I'm able still.

    This is a tough judgement situation I know, but, I might let some family member that I know wasn't going to kill me kick my ass while I'm armed but not a total stranger who I do not know what their motives are.

    Another reason to avoid a fist fight at all costs while packing. Of course, the hands and feet are always ready, none the less.

  15. #44
    Distinguished Member Array INccwchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,786
    If I have been knocked down, and I have deployed my OC spray already to no avail, I think that in order to prevent being beaten further, I would use lethal force to stop the beating, that goes for anyone
    "The value you put on the lost will be determined by the sacrifice you are willing to make to seek them until they are found."

  16. #45
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,957
    Quote Originally Posted by Jcabin View Post
    You realize this is only justified because of the age of the two men and likely the disparity in health conditions.

    I am 24, and if an unarmed 25 year old randomly attacked me and knocked me to the ground, I would have a real hard time proving that I was justified in shooting the person.

    You can't just fall to the ground and claim self defense.
    Ok, I am an unarmed 45 year old who is six foot four, two hundred ninety five pounds. Since I am older than you does that mean I can stomp you into the ground and you would not be justified in shooting me? Or do your theories on the use of deadly force discriminate against "larger" people? Can you shoot me because of my size but you couldn't shoot someone my age that was only five foot six and one hundred fifty pounds? Or can you not shoot me because of my age but you could shoot someone my size who is twenty years old?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Looking for a Good BHP Gunsmith to Correct Hammer Follow
    By hombre gris in forum Firearm Cleaning & Maintenance
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 17th, 2011, 09:49 AM
  2. (Mostly good) Quick-thinking pizza man leads cops to rape/would-be murder victim
    By cyberdogg in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: June 8th, 2009, 11:16 PM
  3. Thinking back to the good, ol', dumb days...
    By limatunes in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: July 12th, 2008, 09:37 AM
  4. GOOD: Man Prevents Further Attacks On Himself By Drawing Weapon - Brookings, OR
    By CT-Mike in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 17th, 2008, 10:28 PM

Search tags for this page

concealed carry at woodland park zoo
,

daniel culotti

Click on a term to search for related topics.