This is a discussion on Do you have to fight? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Liked your comments sentioch. It is easy to discuss these things while at a computer but I truly believe that "if" and "when" the time ...
Liked your comments sentioch. It is easy to discuss these things while at a computer but I truly believe that "if" and "when" the time ever came that I had to actually use my firearm, I will absolutely, 100% know it in my very heart and soul and be scared sh--less when it happens. Some forum members seem to talk an awful big talk about circumstances where they are ready to blow someone's head off, but I would hope that when it is time to do the walk, they are not so cavalier about killing someone. It will take a really frightening scenario, where I have exhausted every reasonable action to avoid same before I do such a thing, and I trust my judgement to ensure that I have done the right thing and am willing to face up to anyone and anything that says otherwise.
You probably stand a better chance of getting hit by lightening than you do with having to shoot yourself out of a problem. But then Florida does have the highest number of people struck by lightening so that might not hold water. Speaking of holding water, most would probably lose their's if confronted in a way that resulted in having to shoot someone.
Returning to another post of mine under another title, the guy that was just found not guilty of shooting his friend. How many times do you think it crossed his mind while he was sitting in jail or in the courtroom, I should have taken the beating and not have to go through this.
Actually, your odds of being hit by lightning doesn't make the top ten... Dying in a Firearm assault are 1 in about 300...
- 1. Heart Disease - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 5
2. Cancer - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 7
3. Stroke - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 24
4. Motor Vehicle Accident - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 84
5. Suicide - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 119
6. Falling - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 218
7. Firearm Assault - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 314
8. Pedestrian Accident - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 626
9. Drowning - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 1,008
10. Motorcycle Accident - Lifetime Odds: 1 in 1,020
The odds of a family having a house fire (not necessarily deadly) is about the same - 1 in 378 (based on 2.1 people per house, average 377,000 residential fires 300,000,000 population).
So, the next time somebody asks you why you carry a gun... ask them why they have smoke detectors.. or better yet, a fire extinguisher in their home... You're more likely to die in a firearm assault than you are to have a house fire.
It could be worse!
Thank you AZ. All in all, I think the really responsible outnumber the "others" on this forum. I guess there are some who have nothing better to do than "muddy the waters" with ridiculous comments, but I have found that I have learned an awful lot from participating in these forums and they make for a more responsible and knowledgeable CC.
The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
- Frederic Bastiat
I'm not sure about CHL laws in other states... However, in Texas if a CHL holder gets into a fight and her is arrested they will revoke your license.
My two cents...
He's not worth my time to fight him, nor will I stoop to his level. If he's a real BG threating my life, I will draw my weapon.
"Someday someone may kill you with your own gun but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty."
"Leave the gun, take the cannoli."
Well, I am fortunate to live in AZ. We now can display your gun if you feel the situation is imminent to cause harm to yourself or death. You can announce, display you firearm in hoping to defuse the situation.
I believe that's how are new law reads
"When the people fear the government you have tyranny...when the government fears the people you have liberty."
--Thomas Jefferson --
Great post. As always, there is a lot of wisdom on this board & I'm grateful for the opportunity to learn from men as you that talk from real world knowledge & first hand experience.
I like what has been said about having a non-lethal alternative in your arsenal. I also agree that any thing can happen in a fight and irrespective of your experience and knowledge, you can incur injury nevertheless - so none of this is to be taken lightly. There seems to be a difference as to the amount of caution that one would show in regards as to how the whole thing is going to be seen in a court of law and although I think it's bogus that we have to run from here to eternity to justify self-defense, it is the system we have to live with in spite of its flaws. I personally would want to be on the right side of the law and take as many precautions as I could so as to look as "innocent" as I could possibly look in a jury's eyes.
One thing that I found a little odd while reading through the posts and that is the honesty that is portrayed here. Not one person suggested doing something that might be morally deficient. Although there were suggestions about negotiating, not one person suggested that they would lie to their soon-to-be assailant. No one said that they would lie to the perp to get out of a butt whooping. I'm sure if you were in a real pinch, you could think up of all kinds of things to say, "I have HIV and if I bleed on you, you'll get infected", for example. Or you could tell the perp that if he attacks you, your'e going to tell everyone he was trying to rape you. Now by using either example, I am by no means trying to belittle persons that are rape survivors or persons that have suffered or maybe currently suffering from HIV. I also want to say that I am not saying we should lie. I'm only noting that no one suggested a lie; perhaps its because we try to be upright and it doesn't even occur to us to lie?
Another thing that I find interesting is; although some suggested calling 9 1 1 for help, from what I can remember, no one suggested yelling for help. This might not be an option in a bar where there's a lot of loud music but yelling for help could get some attention that your perp doesn't want. This might not be a good alternative because how many people do you think would respond to hearing cries for help that were coming from a bar's men's room? It might be a worth a try nevertheless.
I'm not trying to dismiss the seriousness of this scenario but only wanted to contribute something for thought in regards to the post. Perhaps I should start another post asking if people would lie to avoid a fist fight/physical attack?
Grace & peace,
It's not a question of innocence, but whether you were justified in using deadly force.take as many precautions as I could so as to look as "innocent" as I could possibly look in a jury's eyes.
The situation will NEVER BE THE WAY YOU WANT, it WILL BE THE WAY IT IS. You must be FLEXIBLE ENOUGH TO ADAPT and just "DEAL WITH IT".
Additionally, how perfectly wonderful are your hand-to-hand fighting skills? Are you capable of stopping any and all attackers via hands only? Think about it. Are you capable of halting an attacker's violence the moment he touches you, or is it entirely likely you're going to be incredibly hard pressed from the moment he engages? For myself, my own H2H fighting skills wouldn't make the evening news, not here or anywhere else. As well, I will not tolerate a violent physical attack on my person, not if I can stop it. Thus, if concerned for my life and limb, or those of others with me, due to the actions of the attacker, I would almost surely draw at that moment and suggest in simple terms he seek victims elsewhere. His next moments will depend on how quickly he complies or gets face-down and compliant. But that's just me in that situation. Every situation's different.
In other states, you'll find a legal requirement to exit the area if you're still breathing, or other such limitations on what you're legally allowed to do. Read up on your state's laws in the area of the use of force, use of deadly force, both in terms of what it allows you to do as well as disallows you doing. Legally speaking, it'll basically come down to that.
Above and beyond whatever your own state might legally specify, consider the following concepts: Deadly Force Triangle; Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy (or Jeopardy, Ability, Means).
As suggested by others, the greatest precaution to appear as innocent of wrong-doing as possible that I can take is: to be justified in my actions, always.take as many precautions as I could so as to look as "innocent" as I could possibly look in a jury's eyes.
It appears that I made a mistake when I said that I shouldn't try to look "innocent" but be justified in my actions. I never meant to imply that I wouldn't be justified in any of my actions. Perception, however, in many if not all cases is reality. I have the presupposition that one could very well be justified in his/her actions but may not appear to be innocent in the eyes of a jury, etc. If this is possible, then I not only need to be justified in my action but also appear to be innocent of any wrong doing, etc.
As soon as I log into this forum, I'm met with a video that tells me not to speak with a police officer if I'm ever involved in an altercation, etc. I appreciate the video and find it very informative and completely agree with the content thereof. Irrespective of one being completely justified in his/her action, speaking to the police could result in me appearing to be guilty (not innocent) in the eyes of a jury depending upon the officer's testimony. As is illustrated in the video, anything I say can and will be used against me in a court of law. In other words, the cards are stacked against me because the officer's job is to not give a testimony in my favor.
Any additional comments and or perspective that anyone may want to add to this is appreciated unless the moderator would deem it inappropriate and would instead demand it should be discussed in a separate thread?
Lethal force is justified when their is an imminent, otherwise unavoidable threat of death or grave bodily injury.
If an imminent, otherwise unavoidable threat of death or grave bodily injury is not present, lethal force is not justified.
Your entire question:
Conflict, unless a criminal assault/ambush which does not appear to be the case you are discussing, does not occur in that context unless you are violating 2 or more of the rule of the three stupids:
With them, going there, doing those things is the result of poor risk assessment &/or judgement.
If you are with those people, in that place & doing that kind of thing, a reviewing court would likely consider your rights to use lethal force in self defense extremely limited almost to the point of it not existing.
Simply put, people who get into fights at frat parties, ***** bars or house parties - which is how I forsee someone wanting to fight you, because criminal assaults which justify lethal force usually begin without warning of a fight - where someone "will not let them leave" and use lethal force (or for that matter, any degree of force which injures someone) are considered to have made their bed and being required to lay in it.
In answer to your question above - You tell me.