Holding gun on someone

This is a discussion on Holding gun on someone within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Exactly right....

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 79

Thread: Holding gun on someone

  1. #31
    VIP Member
    Array kentuckycarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    2,219
    Exactly right.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Senior Member Array jeephipwr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Triangle, NC
    Posts
    608

    act crazy?

    What kind of message are you going to send to the jury when they hear you were acting crazy?

    Not only will they hear that the man who shot the "BG" was acting weird and nuts, they are now going to wonder if they should allow a crazy acting person to have a CCW. I think this is a fine line that must be approached very carfefully.

  4. #33
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,038
    Quote Originally Posted by robere View Post
    Suppose you draw your weapon and have every right to do so. You tell the BG not to move. Whats to keep him from running away if he so chooses to do so.
    In a phrase: cap a fleeing BG and you'd better have a darned good rationale for doing so.

    If a BG that has threatened my life decides to get off the ground (non-threateningly) and then flee, at that point by definition he's no longer an immediate threat to me. My state (Oregon) does not allow anyone to shoot someone in that case. Certainly, he might veer around and return to attack, and I would certainly be on-guard against just such a possibility. I'd be on the phone to 911 describing him and the situation, in the hopes that he'd be caught soon; and, I would press charges.

    However, every situation's different. Inside my own home with other family members present, where a violent BG has been captured and subdued, if he flinches and attempts to get off the floor ... he's getting put back down immediately by all means necessary, since there is no way in hell that I would allow him to risk the other family members or my ability to defend them. He'd be down in the corner, face turned away, arms out, legs crossed, and he would stay there.

    Is this [shooting a fleeing BG] really something to even consider doing to try to keep someone there at the scene?
    Your district attorney would certainly think not; mine, too. However, again, every situation's different. A run-of-the-mill BG that has "only" attempted to rob you is one thing. Use the gun to warn him to stop, then hold him for police. Fine. However, a BG that you've just seen shoot down one or more folks is at a whole other level. IMO, that BG deserves to stay put at all costs. He has not merely expressed intent, he has actually erased a life and I would have witnessed it first-hand. Likewise, at the other end of the scale, a BG raiding the tool shed who gets caught, lunges toward me threateningly, is stopped and held via firearm isn't a deadly threat to others if he were to turn and flee. IMO, this BG would not justify shooting to stay put.

    ... is it practical to think you can keep someone from running away by pointing a gun at them?
    Absolutely not. A smart BG knows this and, if caught and his crime was something less than rape or murder already, then he's got a reasonable chance of escaping if he simply jumps up non-threateningly and flees.

    It's the nature of carrying a firearm where the state does not distinguish between one person's right to happiness and another's; in other words, all are citizens and have rights to that. Criminals included. Though, there's a line that a BG can cross, obviously, that would warrant someone's defensive posture to elevate high enough to meet the standard required (that your life be immediately and unavoidably threatened) before taking the life of another. Life is seen as precious, even the wayward life of a felon you've just had attack you and, so long as the life of another is not immediately at risk, the law acknowledges that the person has just as much right to life as you. That's the way the laws are structured. To my way of thinking, that basic reverence for life is a good thing. It's what forms the foundation of the laws of self-defense and justifiability in the taking of a life. There are a lot of places outside the USA that don't hold life in such high regard. (It's a bit like freedom having to allow the railing against the government and the burning of a flag, if it's to hold any value for the protection of one's general speech, worship, association.)
    Last edited by ccw9mm; December 8th, 2006 at 09:03 AM.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  5. #34
    VIP Member
    Array kentuckycarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by jeephipwr View Post
    What kind of message are you going to send to the jury when they hear you were acting crazy?

    Not only will they hear that the man who shot the "BG" was acting weird and nuts, they are now going to wonder if they should allow a crazy acting person to have a CCW. I think this is a fine line that must be approached very carfefully.
    I dont mean to act like you're totally insane. I mean use words you would normally use like "stay there and dont you move" etc , but say them in a loud screaming kind of way so he thinks you just might do it if he tried to run.

  6. #35
    VIP Member
    Array kentuckycarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    In a phrase: cap a fleeing BG and you'd better have a darned good rationale for doing so.

    If a BG that has threatened my life decides to get off the ground (non-threateningly) and then flee, at that point by definition he's no longer an immediate threat to me. My state (Oregon) does not allow anyone to shoot someone in that case. Certainly, he might veer around and return to attack, and I would certainly be on-guard against just such a possibility. I'd be on the phone to 911 describing him and the situation, in the hopes that he'd be caught soon; and, I would press charges.

    However, every situation's different. Inside my own home with other family members present, where a violent BG has been captured and subdued, if he flinches and attempts to get off the floor ... he's getting put back down immediately by all means necessary, since there is no way in hell that I would allow him to risk the other family members or my ability to defend them. He'd be down in the corner, face turned away, arms out, legs crossed, and he would stay there.


    Your district attorney would certainly think not; mine, too. However, again, every situation's different. A run-of-the-mill BG that has "only" attempted to rob you is one thing. Use the gun to warn him to stop, then hold him for police. Fine. However, a BG that you've just seen shoot down one or more folks is at a whole other level. IMO, that BG deserves to stay put at all costs. He has not merely expressed intent, he has actually erased a life and I would have witnessed it first-hand. Likewise, at the other end of the scale, a BG raiding the tool shed who gets caught, lunges toward me threateningly, is stopped and held via firearm isn't a deadly threat to others if he were to turn and flee. IMO, this BG would not justify shooting to stay put.


    Absolutely not. A smart BG knows this and, if caught and his crime was something less than rape or murder already, then he's got a reasonable chance of escaping if he simply jumps up non-threateningly and flees.

    It's the nature of carrying a firearm where the state does not distinguish between one person's right to happiness and another's; in other words, all are citizens and have rights to that. Criminals included. Though, there's a line that a BG can cross, obviously, that would warrant someone's defensive posture to elevate high enough to meet the standard required (that your life be immediately and unavoidably threatened) before taking the life of another. Life is seen as precious, even the wayward life of a felon you've just had attack you and, so long as the life of another is not immediately at risk, the law acknowledges that the person has just as much right to life as you. That's the way the laws are structured. To my way of thinking, that basic reverence for life is a good thing. It's what forms the foundation of the laws of self-defense and justifiability in the taking of a life. There are a lot of places outside the USA that don't hold life in such high regard. (It's a bit like freedom having to allow the railing against the government and the burning of a flag, if it's to hold any value for the protection of one's general speech, worship, association.)
    I agree with this. But there is also no gaurantee the BG is going to get on the floor and spread out either. You can't shoot him because he wont lay down if he's unarmed. I agree "if" he does as you say and you can get him on the floor and spread out , its absolutley the best action to take. The situation is different if the guy is armed of course.

  7. #36
    Member Array Maverick7340's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    199
    Help me out here. I'm trying to think of a situation where I would need to pull my gun and not shoot and just try to make a citizens arrest by trying to keep the BG there.
    If a crime is happening in front of me and no ones life is in danger why would I need to pull my gun? If the BG has a knife or any other weapon on someone and it is clear who the BG is and who the victim is then I have the right to use deadly force to save a life. If the vitim has the right to use deadly force against the BG then I am allowed to use deadly force as if I was in the victims shoes.
    If the BG has no weapon and no ones life is in danger then pulling my gun brings deadly force into the situation. At this, the BG then has the right to use deadly force against me now since it is his life that is in danger.
    I will not draw and detain the BG just for property. If the BG is trying to rob me with no weapon why would I need to just give them what they want just because they asked? There is no threat to do so. It is only when there is a threat that my life is in danger that I would feel the need to comply. At this point the need to use deadly force would be warranted. This is why I would need to draw my gun and shoot until there is no longer a threat.
    One of the good things about living in Oklahoma is we have a "stand your ground law" and "Make my day law". This gives me the right to defend myself with deadly force if I need to.
    Last edited by Maverick7340; December 8th, 2006 at 09:55 AM.
    Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway.

    John Wayne

  8. #37
    Member Array MIKEV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    PDRMD
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick7340 View Post
    Help me out here. I'm trying to think of a situation where I would need to pull my gun and not shoot and just try to make a citizens arrest by trying to keep the BG there.
    I believe it is commonly quoted that Handguns are used approx 2,000,000 times a year to prevent violent crime. The majority of the time shots are NOT fired.

    I think if you think for a little you can come up with a senario.

    thanks
    MikeV

  9. #38
    Member Array Maverick7340's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    199
    I'm sure the statistics include a man choking a woman and is stopped by someone drawing a gun and telling the BG to stop and everyone sits around waiting for the cops to show up.


    Once the BG knows you have a gun the element of surprise is gone and you are now in a reactive mode instead of an active mode. What you do now is totally based on reacting to what the BG does until the cops show up.
    For me if someone is using deadly force and a life is in danger I will use the element of surprise and act.
    Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway.

    John Wayne

  10. #39
    Member Array MIKEV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    PDRMD
    Posts
    326
    I do believe that in the context of the OP question the issue is pretty much covered.

    We can sit around all day adding twists and what ifs,... but that's for another thread?

    MikeV
    Last edited by MIKEV; December 8th, 2006 at 10:54 AM. Reason: moved smiley

  11. #40
    Member Array Maverick7340's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    199
    So the answer to the OP is to act like a crazy man to try to keep them from running away? I think I missed the part where it was all covered and resolved.
    My question in post # 36 has to do with the OP. I wasn't looking for stats, I was looking for an answer.
    My point is there is no need to draw unless you plan on using it. It is a last resort not a first resort.
    Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway.

    John Wayne

  12. #41
    Member Array gotammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    443
    if he runs off so what he is no longer a threat let him run, it is not your job to enforce laws protect yourself and leave the hands on your head stuff to the LEO

  13. #42
    VIP Member
    Array kentuckycarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    2,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick7340 View Post
    Help me out here. I'm trying to think of a situation where I would need to pull my gun and not shoot and just try to make a citizens arrest by trying to keep the BG there.
    If a crime is happening in front of me and no ones life is in danger why would I need to pull my gun? If the BG has a knife or any other weapon on someone and it is clear who the BG is and who the victim is then I have the right to use deadly force to save a life. If the vitim has the right to use deadly force against the BG then I am allowed to use deadly force as if I was in the victims shoes.
    If the BG has no weapon and no ones life is in danger then pulling my gun brings deadly force into the situation. At this, the BG then has the right to use deadly force against me now since it is his life that is in danger.
    I will not draw and detain the BG just for property. If the BG is trying to rob me with no weapon why would I need to just give them what they want just because they asked? There is no threat to do so. It is only when there is a threat that my life is in danger that I would feel the need to comply. At this point the need to use deadly force would be warranted. This is why I would need to draw my gun and shoot until there is no longer a threat.
    One of the good things about living in Oklahoma is we have a "stand your ground law" and "Make my day law". This gives me the right to defend myself with deadly force if I need to.
    Just because you have the right to shoot someone doesnt mean you have to. Suppose a BG just had a baseball bat and has hit your car a couple times. You dont want to shoot him as long as he's not coming at you, you've dialed 911 and you want to retain him there for the law. You would certainly have the right to draw your weapon on him incase he was to threaten you personally and come at you. There are lots of situations where drawing on someone doesnt warrent shooting them. I dont think I would even be carrying ( personally ) if I felt i HAD TO shoot everytime i drew my weapon. Many crimes have been prevented just by drawing on someone..I live in Ky and we also have the Castle Doctrine (stand your ground law). So I'm in the same situation..

  14. #43
    Member Array MIKEV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    PDRMD
    Posts
    326
    Maverick

    Your absolutely right! Do not draw your weapon unless you intend to use it! However seeing as the present flows into the future and what caused you to draw your weapon in the first place is now in the past, you always have to contnue to modify how to respond. I mean why would there even be a safety rule that states "keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire.", if you already made up your mind to fire before you drew your weapon.

    What I am trying to say is that just because you decided to draw your weapon, you still have a decision to make. You must then decide to aim your weapon, then you must decide to fire your weapon.

    Let's say that an armed attacker with a knife jumps out from behind a corner 10' in front of you and while standing still and waving his knife back and forth in front of you (please no comments on how dumb this BG is) states "money or blood B---h, you decide!" Your first decision is wether or not to draw your weapon. Up to this point the BG has initiated contact with Deadly Force notably a big knife and a statement of intent.

    You decide to draw your weapon and aim it at the BG. Upon drawing and aiming at the BG, You have a decision to make, fire or not. Let's say that as you are bringing your firearm to bare on the BG you note Pedestrian trafic across the street directly behind the BG. aware of the rule to always know what is beyond your target, you still have a decision to make fire or not. You decide (or at least I would) not to fire. Instead you give the command "Drop the knife or it will be your blood, not mine."

    Now BG has a decision, obey, or advance and call your bluff. For the sake of this scenario he obeys. It goes something along these lines "S---t dude, it's cool, it's cool." and he drops the knife.

    You tell him to get on his knees, cross his feet behind him and put his hands on his head. To your surprise he complies still saying "ok man it's cool, it's cool."

    you lower your firearm to low ready, and with weak hand retrive your cell phone from its belt clip and speed dial 911 all without even taking your eyes off the BG.

    LEO comes cuffs and stuffs BG gets your info and you go about your business. Didn't have to shoot anybody today and still get to go home safe and sound.

    now if the BG decides that instead of taking a knee, he wants to leave, as long as he leaves in the direction that creates greater distance between him and me. Well he can go. I'll just give a real good description of him to the police and hope they can get some good prints off the knife he left behind. I still didn't HAVE to shoot anyone, and I still go home safe and sound.


    (please no what if's, I don't care if you don't think it would play out this way on the street or not I use this as an example of a possible situation in which you decide to draw but not neccessarily to shoot)

    Thanks.
    MikeV

  15. #44
    Member
    Array davyray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    123
    Great discussion. I just want to add a piece in the aftermath.

    What do you do if you draw, the threat level is gone as the BG drops his knife, and runs away?

    A story I heard (can't confirm or deny) is that this type of scenario occurred and the BG went an called LE right away claiming that some guy just pulled a gun on them. Gave a great discription of the CCW holder and his car. Guess who was arrested?

    Moral of the story... be the first to call 911! Sometimes it is harder to undo a "story" even if it is blatantly false. In my own brand of naivete, I believe if we are doing the right thing to begin with, we should continue down the road of doing the right thing and call in the cav. We should have nothing to fear from LE. We are, after all, THE GOOD GUYS!!!!

    Peace,

    Dave.

  16. #45
    Member Array denverd0n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    388
    Quote Originally Posted by davyray View Post
    Moral of the story... be the first to call 911!
    Yes, ABSOLUTELY!!!

    The first person who calls in is the "complainant." The other person is the "suspect." You DON'T want to be the "suspect!"

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 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. Holding an eye closed?
    By DaveInTexas in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 1st, 2008, 01:28 PM
  2. Holding hands
    By ExactlyMyPoint in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: July 11th, 2008, 09:40 PM
  3. Utah not holding to the law
    By GOPony in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: June 9th, 2008, 04:26 PM
  4. Holding a Bad Guy
    By Geo2020 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 12th, 2007, 01:30 AM
  5. Holding at gun point
    By P95Carry in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: April 13th, 2005, 12:00 PM

Search tags for this page

hands on head self-defense
,

how to draw a person holding a gun

,
how to draw a person with a gun
,

how to draw someone holding a gun

,
how to draw someone holding a gun in front of them
,
stand your ground law kentucky front yard
,
what is the crime for holding a gun at someone
Click on a term to search for related topics.