Draw? No draw? (Edit added again)

[OldVet]

Why does everyone assume an officer of 40 years is the most competent person to make a decision years after he leaves the force. In fact, why do follks assume he was even a good LEO? LEO's like everyone else have their duds. And LEO's (retired and active) make mistakes just like everyone else.

Forget he is a retired LEO and put in "old dude, possibly stressed becuase of the medical condition of his wife, tired at 3 AM like most folks and more so because he most likely has not got a lot of sleep". Lets see how the coments flow then.

I really didn't want my OP to get bent and distorted but knew it would. I think with a lot of retired, Ex-LEOs old habits die hard, their muscle memory one might say.

It does nothing to say whether it was legally justifiable or not, but on a personal level, I'd be inclined to cut a retired cop some slack on this as well. This is why: Asking for a cigarette has to be the #1 most common way to attract the attention of someone who is about to be mugged. It's happened to me. I was able to subdue the probably 15 year old gang member without drawing my gun. It happened to a good friend of mine who is a Marine officer in Baltimore. One scumbag asked for a cigarette while another approached from behind and smashed him in the head with a 40 ounce bottle. He wound up unconscious in the street. They even took his shoes, and could have killed him. A cop would know this tactic and probably reacted instinctively. But like I said before, IF the smoker guy had seen the weapon and reported to police that he felt terrorized, the retired cop broke the law and could have (if he wasn't a retired cop) been arrested.

This is a good reason to grab that little flashlight too when you grab the gun, on your way out the door. That's the only way of knowing if the shadowy figure 20 feet away has earned a quick draw. Hate to use stereotypes, but a particular type of individual tends to frequent emergency rooms late at night. They don't feel at all awkward asking for things to which they feel entitled; they're used to it. If there's one place people will ask you for something, and mean it, it's late at night in front of the ER.

And for god's sake, if someone you don't know approaches in a public place asking for a smoke, check your six. Criminals are too lazy to think up fresh tactics I guess.

I haven't been around very many smokers who didn't bum cigarettes at one time or another, with no evil intent involved. And no one gave a hint of a suggestion that SA shouldn't be raised to its fullest at 3 AM in a dimly lit place. But as to cutting the retired cop some slack, do you think he would have if it were 20 years ago and the situation were reversed between you and him? I don't think so. You'd have that free ride for brandishing in all likelihood. While I respect what he may have done in his career, he is off the force now and doesn't deserve special priviliges that we lower class civilians do not receive.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[nmbr5ml]

I really didn't want my OP to get bent and distorted but knew it would. I think with a lot of retired, Ex-LEOs old habits die hard, their muscle memory one might say.



I haven't been around very many smokers who didn't bum cigarettes at one time or another, with no evil intent involved. And no one gave a hint of a suggestion that SA shouldn't be raised to its fullest at 3 AM in a dimly lit place. But as to cutting the retired cop some slack, do you think he would have if it were 20 years ago and the situation were reversed between you and him? I don't think so. You'd have that free ride for brandishing in all likelihood. While I respect what he may have done in his career, he is off the force now and doesn't deserve special priviliges that we lower class civilians do not receive.

No, you're right. I just kind of understand how after 30 years of taking reports from citizens who got robbed by someone ostensibly bumming a smoke, he probably immediately thought "Oh crap I'm getting robbed." Doesn't make it right. Only reason I said he probably wouldn't be arrested is I'm a realist and as you alluded to before, we may be equal in the eyes of the law, but not law enforcement. Retired cop probably gets a pass.

[Snub44]

Quite frankly, I believe it does apply, and any exerienced officer, who has faced such situtations will be justified. Why ? Merely because of the experience and his ability to articulate that before a decision making body such as a grand jury. However, as I stated, I know of no officer who would ever pursue the arrest or charge ieven if this had been a CHL holder. Fearlevels for people are based upon esperiences or the lack thereof. Your level of fear and mine maybe miles apart, and all that comes to bear is when one has to articulate why they did something such as draw a handgun fearing something may occur.

Can you tell me your reasons which would lead you to believe this would be considered a crime even if someone observed the retired LEO's actions.

...PC9.04, your cite as to why drawing would have been OK and justified, specifically says : "...is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter..." so to use PC 9.04 to justify why we threatened someone with deadly force...we have to be able to show that deadly force would have been justified by the requirements in Ch 9...if there was nothing done that fit the different requirements listed within Ch9, then we can't use 9.04 to justify threatening someone with deadly force...there is nothing in Ch 9 that fits the scenario described by the OP....so the justification provided by 9.04 does not apply...

...we've already agreed that LEOs(and LEOs by the authority given them by their credentials) have a whole different set of rules and we're not holding them to the same standard...but you cannot extend that to CHLs...

...to justify the threat of deadly force(9.04), we MUST be able to fit 9:31 to our situation...which the OP can't...and only if he could would (9.32) apply...it has nothing to do with fear levels...the laws here carefully lay out what beliefs we must have and under what circumstances they're presumed reasonable...and the OPs scenario doesn't fit any of that...so (9.04) has no place here...

...a LEO or a credentialled retired LEO did not break any law...

...a CHL who did the same thing and wasn't seen doing it didn't break any law...

...a CHL who did the same thing and was observed by the supposed BG or another person, could expect no relief from PC9.04...it doesn't apply to this scenario...as it happened...

[USM1976]

...PC9.04, your cite as to why drawing would have been OK and justified, specifically says : "...is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter..." so to use PC 9.04 to justify why we threatened someone with deadly force...we have to be able to show that deadly force would have been justified by the requirements in Ch 9...if there was nothing done that fit the different requirements listed within Ch9, then we can't use 9.04 to justify threatening someone with deadly force...there is nothing in Ch 9 that fits the scenario described by the OP....so the justification provided by 9.04 does not apply...

...we've already agreed that LEOs(and LEOs by the authority given them by their credentials) have a whole different set of rules and we're not holding them to the same standard...but you cannot extend that to CHLs...

...to justify the threat of deadly force(9.04), we MUST be able to fit 9:31 to our situation...which the OP can't...and only if he could would (9.32) apply...it has nothing to do with fear levels...the laws here carefully lay out what beliefs we must have and under what circumstances they're presumed reasonable...and the OPs scenario doesn't fit any of that...so (9.04) has no place here...

...a LEO or a credentialled retired LEO did not break any law...

...a CHL who did the same thing and wasn't seen doing it didn't break any law...

...a CHL who did the same thing and was observed by the supposed BG or another person, could expect no relief from PC9.04...it doesn't apply to this scenario...as it happened...

respectfully, I disagree...

[Snub44]

...as to the comments equating a seasoned, experienced LEO with other "old guys" or civilians...that's laughable...the years of decisions made in a second and dangerous situations and people you've learned to deal with produce patterns of thought and action that don't evaporate when they stamp "retired" on the paperwork...I'm 63 and haven't been a cop since '79...I'd rather face a hairy situation with a retired cop than any fresh young rookie I trained...and all of mine turned out great and are safely retired...it's not the muscles and reactions I want, but the cool heads and ability to size up a situation and deal with it wisely without escalating it that is important to "keeping the peace"...the years take the toll on the body...sure...but that's more than balanced by the experience...and the "old guy" sees and understands things the younguns look right over...
...give them your respect...they don't need your approval to enjoy the "privileges" their retired credentials afford them...they've EARNED every one of them...and still do...I've been reading accounts for over 40 years of "retired old guys" stepping up and making the difference and saving lives...even though they didn't have to...they're still very much a part of why we can sleep well at night...

[Snub44]

...just readin' the book...which is why we have lawyers...and judges...we don't have to agree here...

respectfully, I disagree...

[suntzu]

...as to the comments equating a seasoned, experienced LEO with other "old guys" or civilians...that's laughable...the years of decisions made in a second and dangerous situations and people you've learned to deal with produce patterns of thought and action that don't evaporate when they stamp "retired" on the paperwork...I'm 63 and haven't been a cop since '79...I'd rather face a hairy situation with a retired cop than any fresh young rookie I trained...and all of mine turned out great and are safely retired...it's not the muscles and reactions I want, but the cool heads and ability to size up a situation and deal with it wisely without escalating it that is important to "keeping the peace"...the years take the toll on the body...sure...but that's more than balanced by the experience...and the "old guy" sees and understands things the younguns look right over...
...give them your respect...they don't need your approval to enjoy the "privileges" their retired credentials afford them...they've EARNED every one of them...and still do...I've been reading accounts for over 40 years of "retired old guys" stepping up and making the difference and saving lives...even though they didn't have to...they're still very much a part of why we can sleep well at night...

Again..you are just assuming this guy is right on with his decision making because he was a LEO. Have you read the OP in the other forum. You explain to me at what point this dude should have felt threatend? Or do you suggest that we all draw our weapon when someone asks us for a cigarette. I mean now that all of us know of this trick we should all be suspicious at 3AM in a hospital parking lot when someone ask for a cigarette.

[Snub44]

...I'm not assuming anything...I'm just reading what's presented here...(and the OP in the other forum)
...I neither justified or condemned the man...
...I DID clearly state that years of dealing with people and situations give insight and experience that books and classes don't impart...and that I'd trust his judgement and intuition about that particular situation...

...had you been working at the ER, and seen what the man did...nothing more...would you have been alarmed in any way once the man showed you his credentials?
...would you feel the same way if you'd seen a civilian with a CHL do exactly the same thing...and showed you his CHL?
...there IS a difference...


...as to the rest of the post...what you choose to do is your decision...and your experience will influence that...peace...

[suntzu]

...I'm not assuming anything...I'm just reading what's presented here...(and the OP in the other forum)
...I neither justified or condemned the man...
...I DID clearly state that years of dealing with people and situations give insight and experience that books and classes don't impart...and that I'd trust his judgement and intuition about that particular situation...

...had you been working at the ER, and seen what the man did...nothing more...would you have been alarmed in any way once the man showed you his credentials?
...would you feel the same way if you'd seen a civilian with a CHL do exactly the same thing...and showed you his CHL?
...there IS a difference...


...as to the rest of the post...what you choose to do is your decision...and your experience will influence that...peace...

Do you know what I would have done if I was the guy asking for a cigarette and I saw a man pull his gun (and this is a no gun area) At 20 feet and if I did not have an avenue of escape I would have been on top the old man pummeling him away assuming he was a BG. Or at least have tried. That would make more sense than the other way around.

If it was not a no gun zone I would have shot him fearing for my life and would have been justified.

And here is a tid bit of wisdom also. The old man could not be 100 percent sure that everyone would not notice him with his gun. Some folks out there are very well trained and observant.

[Snub44]

...those courses of action is why they wrote TX PC 9:31 AND 9:32 so carefully...