Defensive Carry banner

Fights: to draw or not to draw.

3K views 24 replies 21 participants last post by  NCHornet 
#1 ·
Somebody made what I though was an interesting statement on another thread that I wanted to get some feedback about:

If the person has no way of grievously harming you (I don’t consider a fight grievously harming you, painful, yes, but you’ll live) then I say your gun has no business being displayed or used.
I’ll admit..I didn’t’ grow up fighting. Frankly I’ve never even seen a particularly brutal fight…mostly just a couple of scuffles back in high school. However, I firmly believe that somebody attacking me with their bare hands could easily kill or do serious bodily harm to me in a fight. (Obviously I’d have to believe that the attacker in question is physically capable of doing me serious injury but for arguments sake I’m talking about just your average person of regular size and physical ability.)

Maybe part of my view is that in my world people don’t have “casual fights”. I don’t go places where people get drunk and have shoving matches or take a swing at each other over some stupid issue. If I was ever in a place where somebody was obviously angry enough to attack me physically armed or unarmed then to me that’s enough: the gun’s coming up and I would be willing to fire if necessary.

Is that an unreasonable rule of thumb?
 
#2 ·
Two part answer- yes and no. Given your normal Personal Risk Assessment, if someone rushes out of the bushes at you, you probably need to be in fear for your life.

I don't "believe"in casual fights. I will apologize, backpeddle, etc., etc., to a degree that if homie pursues a fight, I know he's intent on bodily harm for fun's sake.
 
#5 ·
Agreed, very much so.

I grew up fighting and have been in very many fights up into my mid 20s...before I decided that tusseling with folk in the street over slights and being 'dissrespected' is completely silly and makes it all that much more difficult to stay out of the system. I've been very fortunate to that end all things considered.

Today now days my position is damn a fight.
I've got other things to do and other places to be like eating dinner with my family, putting the kids to bed, and at work the next day toward supporting my family. People who fight people in the street et. al. do not have these same concerns, or atleast not as a primary initiative in their own mind.

Outside of a person cornering me personally or assaulting my wife or kids, I no longer have any taste or desire to go fisticuff with a person.
I'll let the jerk off feel like he won and drop it at that, call me a punk or whatever. I'm not going to jail or worst and losing my freedoms or ability to care for my family in exchange for momentary street cred and/or lack of personal emotional self control.

If I'm carrying then the above is doubled.
I'm emotionally prepared (hasn't become necessary yet) to stomach most what ever verbal barbs might be hurled my way by some jerk off(s) as I walk away.

Inversely if I'm pressed and again boxed in to a corner left with no other means of escape be it by verbal/nonverbal deescalation or physical escape, then the results will be very much different.
IMHO fighting in the streets is a game for young bucks, poor folks (with little to nothing to lose), and those who lack sufficient personal self control of their emotions and thus they themselves might not be people who should be carrying concealed weapons. That is pretty much exactly how the law sees things and so would my local permit issuing authority.

- Janq respectfully does unto others as I'd like them to do unto me
 
#3 ·
Maybe part of my view is that in my world people don’t have “casual fights”. I don’t go places where people get drunk and have shoving matches or take a swing at each other over some stupid issue. If I was ever in a place where somebody was obviously angry enough to attack me physically armed or unarmed then to me that’s enough: the gun’s coming up and I would be willing to fire if necessary.

Is that an unreasonable rule of thumb?
Not unreasonable at all - the originally quoted poster's statement is definitely erroneous. The human body has too many vulnerable points that if hit (intentionally or otherwise) can incapacitate it - sometimes only briefly, other times permanently.

At age fifteen, pumped way too full of hormones, I got involved in a fight with a larger, much more athletic classmate. I had virtually no martial arts training, but still managed to take him out quickly. We squared off on the beach, whereupon I kicked sand in his face with my left foot, his hands went up, so I kicked to the solar-plexus with my right foot - knocking the wind completely out of him. He bent over double, right into a guillotine choke, and was unconscious in about ten seconds.

Years later, in my 30's, I was first in line at work to clock out at end of shift. The worker behind me started jostling me, then making rude comments when I turned around to face him. Flash-anger took over, and I back-fisted him to the temple with my left (weak) hand. There was no wind-up or torque behind the blow, just a flick strike. Nevertheless, his eyes rolled up into his head, his knees buckled, and he fell. Would have hurt himself if his friends behind him hadn't caught him and let him down easy. He was only out for 3-4 seconds, but had I followed through, it would have been enough time to finish him off completely.

I don't claim to be any dedicated martial artist, but what exposure I've had clearly shows that unarmed combat can be potentially lethal. I'd never support a position that unarmed fights only "hurt" a little - attacks to the proper points can terminate ones ability to effectively resist. I'd never willingly allow that to happen to me or mine.
 
#4 ·
On a slightly different point

I think it is worthwhile to take the time to learn how to stop an attacker without the gun. While I'm not saying you have to spend two hours a day hitting the heavy bag or sign up for the Gracie program towards a BJJ black belt. What I do suggest is achieving some level of physical competence, if for nothing else than the resulting self-confidence and physical fitness.

Some would suggest that this makes you more likely to engage in physical combat. I respectfully submit that the opposite is true, evidenced by the fact that physical prowess lends calm confidence and reduces agitation levels when one is confronted with a possible hand-to-hand. Basically, if you're not worried about getting your head torn off, you're more likely to mantain control of the situation and avert impending violence. To put a finer point on it, I know I can physically eliminate most unarmed attackers, especially one-on-one; knowing I can hurt someone REALLY badly in a fight pushes that solution much further down the list of possibles...a second-to-last resort, right next to pulling the gun.

Incidentally, I have also had the occaision to use physical force to prevent a situation from becoming MUCH worse, too. Again, like learning to shoot, these are skills aquired specifically to be used as a tool, using such only when all other methods (running, talking your way out of it, etc) have been exhausted. .

Couldn't hurt to learn a little about the ol' rough and tumble, right?
 
#23 ·
I think it is worthwhile to take the time to learn how to stop an attacker without the gun. While I'm not saying you have to spend two hours a day hitting the heavy bag or sign up for the Gracie program towards a BJJ black belt. What I do suggest is achieving some level of physical competence, if for nothing else than the resulting self-confidence and physical fitness.

Some would suggest that this makes you more likely to engage in physical combat. I respectfully submit that the opposite is true, evidenced by the fact that physical prowess lends calm confidence and reduces agitation levels when one is confronted with a possible hand-to-hand. Basically, if you're not worried about getting your head torn off, you're more likely to mantain control of the situation and avert impending violence. [/I].

Couldn't hurt to learn a little about the ol' rough and tumble, right?
Very good suggestion. Also to add, knowing what it is like to get in a physical fight BEFORE having it happen on the street is priceless. With a little training , you will automatically react , rather than have to register , then respond to a attack.
 
#6 ·
I dunno... I would never introduce a firearm into a fist fight unless that firearm was in my hands and pointed at somebody trying to hurt me. I've always got a gun on me and therefore, if somebody still wanted to beat me up after I try to apologize or whatever to get him off my back, I've got two options.... run or draw. If my family was nearby and in potential danger, I'd draw. If not and I've got an escape route, I'd run.
 
#7 ·
I agree with Jang, but remember you can't get in an unarmed fight while CC. A gun will be in the mix whether your attacker knows it or not. If your taken out he then has the means to finish you, with your own gun.
 
#8 ·
Im to old and fat can't run and have survived at least 12 heart attacks that my Doctors know about, At this point in my so called Life
just about ANY kid or dog could take me out. Im not happy about my situation, but I will DOwith my weapon what must be done if need be, If I can walk away , I will but if I can't, So be it.
 
#9 ·
One of the issues in this is disparity of force.

If I am seriously outmatched because the BG is much larger, a martial arts expert, armed with a weapon (bat, knife, gun, etc.), or there is more than one person, then I have reasonable justification to be in fear for my life or grave bodily harm. If I am old, sick, weak, or in some other way incapacitated, then disparity of force again comes into play.

The problem is when none of the above seem to be an issue, and someone physically attacks or threatens to attack, then what?

The last fight I was "in" occurred over a decade ago, and the friend I was with was an Army Ranger. A guy threw me against a wall, and my friend put him down in about 2 seconds (and that was from him standing 20 feet away when the attack occurred). So, I am not an accomplished fighter by any means.

I will walk/run away as needed. Apologize if that is what it takes to get out of there. Call 911, whatever. My LAST resort will be to draw my weapon. But, if I am in fear for my life or in fear of grave bodily harm...I'll draw and be prepared.

My opinion only. YMMV.
 
#10 ·
I'm not trying to start a war or anything, and I agree that fights should be avoided at all costs, but if someone is intent on doing you harm, and you can't talk them down, I feel that running away is not a good option. What if the person catches up to you and now you're tired? You also tend to turn your back to run away, putting yourself at a disadvantage. And plus the added burden of running with a pistol (full-size perhaps) seems like a pain.

As much as I hate fights, I can't image actually running away. I'd feel even more worried at that point.
 
#11 ·
What if the person catches up to you and now you're tired?
Run. Run now, so you won't be tired, when you need to run for real. Get a $10 duffle bag at the army surplus, drop a 40# bag of sand in the bottom and stuff old sleeping bags in it, hang it fromthe garage roof and spend some time hitting it. I'm no "fighter", but I've tried to learn from those that are.

Carrying a weapon is not an "end", it is simply a means. Personal defense should include personal fitness, particularly since our odds of being in a car accident are far higher than being in a gunfight. Higher muscle mass, good cardio-condition, and flexibility are all key components in healing, whether from surgery, an MVA, or a fight. If our goal is "living", it may pay to consider the nature of our investments- time and money.:wink:
 
#12 · (Edited)
This is almost a no win situation when you are carrying. IF you have to fight(last resort). You will not know if you can handle the guy(guys) until it is to late. What starts out as a fist fight can turn ugly really quick before you can do anything. The guy can pull a knife, gun or his friends can show up. Now you have not pulled your gun and you can already be cut, shot or beat up bad. If there is no other out I am not willing to take that risk. I will draw and do whatever the BG dictates at that point. If he stops or runs I will back away and call the police. If he does not back off when you pull your gun, well I am forced to do what I need to do. And just because the BG is smaller than you does not mean he can't hurt or kill you with his bare hands. I hope this scenario never happens but if it does you must be mentally and phsically prepared to protect yourself and yours.

KDD
 
#13 ·
I think pulling your gun in a bar type fight is a gross over reaction. If you are being mugged/assaulted, or outnumbered that is a different story.

I've been jumped in a bar, never even saw the punch coming to the side of the head, everything went dark (i would consider this more of an assault than a fight). When i saw the surveillance tape later, i learned i was choking out the attacker while i was blacked out. I was armed at the time.

Most people that pick fights are idiots with little or no training. You don't really hear of MMA guys picking fights. Training breeds respect and restraint.

IMHO people should train (for however short) the basics of an unarmed fight, it will shed so much light on this, and give you so many more options.
 
#15 · (Edited)
Should I Shoot Someone IF They Are Unarmed?

There are a lot of things to consider with the given scenario "can I shoot an unarmed person if they want to fight me?" You have to decide what you want to do and be prepared for the consequences plain and simple.

If you think doing 3 to 5 years hard time in a state penitentiary for manslaughter is no problem, then by all means shoot that unarmed guy who picked a fight with you because he feels you slighted him somehow.

State prison is full of people who made the wrong decision in when and under what circumstances to use their firearm. They aren't bad people, they just made a poor choice when they thought that using their gun would be on solid ground.

You can sit on the witness stand crying all day long saying how that scary looking guy who turned out was only two years younger than you and considered to be about average size and shape could have hit you in the temple and killed you... may have been able to strike you in the trachea and crush your larynx and all sorts of hypothetical outcomes until you are blue in the face. At the end of the day... the law and the courts "generally" frown on those who pull a gun and shoot an unarmed person who was foolish enough/drunk enough to pick a fight with someone they didn't know was armed.

Now, with that said, are there circumstances where shooting an unarmed person is excusable? Absolutely, but they are relatively rare and few in the numbers of situations. Your hypothetical explanations of "well he could have hit me here and that may have done this to me" is not going to be a satisfactory answer to a grand jury or a jury of your peers.

Getting a broken nose and some bruised ribs or a black eye or maybe a tooth knocked out is "generally" not considered to be a life threatening injury or even a serious crippling injury no matter how much you say that hypothetically you could have gotten a detached retina from the black eye, or you could have choked to death if you swallowed that broken tooth.

These are the facts... You have a gun! The other guy doesn't! You know you have a "stacked deck"... the other guy doesn't know you have a gun until you pull it out and shoot him with it! He believed he was fighting another unarmed guy!

Bullies, drunk or otherwise who like to fight people, don't pick fights with people they knew beforehand to have a gun! Therefore the prosecutor in the criminal case or the attorneys for his estate in the wrongful death case will argue the "unarmed victim" you killed may have been drunk, and may have been a bully... but he thought he was fighting a man "on common ground" and it did not warrant being shot down in a fixed and unfair fight! (May not be 1st degree murder, but probably good enough to send you away for a few years for involuntary manslaughter!)

The courts will hold you to a higher standard of care to avoid the situation, walk away and maybe even going to extrordanary means in not bringing your gun out even if the guy manages to hit you a few times.

Again, are there circumstances where shooting an unarmed person justifiable? YES! But you are on very shakey ground. If you are going to claim there was a "disparity of force" you should have some very compelling reasons that are clear and obvious to the court or grand jury. (Hypothetical explainations are really not going to be acceptable.) Disparity of Force is not just a loose term to throw out in court. You must be able to clearly show the factors that pertain to that disparity in order to convince a jury to excuse you for taking the life of an unarmed person. There has to be some accountability for taking someones life.

It is for that reason I strongly recommend people really understand the laws, how the court system works and know specific details of how lethal force is used and justified.

Massad Ayoob is internationally recognized as a preeminent authority of the legal of use deadly force in lethal situations for both law enforcement officers and civilians. To date, every single judge or attorney who has taken his 40 hour LFI-I Course will emphatically admit, they learned more about the judicious use of lethal force in his LFI course than in any law school in the country. And for good reason. The man knows his subject matter.

His school covers in depth what no other shooting school out there covers regarding the subject. I would highly recommend attending at least his 40 hour LFI-I Course. I think the course is $800 and is offered all over the country several times a year for those who can not travel to his home base in New Hampshire.

If you can not afford his course for a while or want a taste of what he has to offer, I highly recommend, and actually believe it is a "must have" item is to get his Judicious Use of Deadly Force video available in VHS and DVD for $34.95. It is over two hours of lecture straight out of his 40 hr. LFI-I course and it's value is truly worth your life! If you like what you see in that video I would also recommend Physio-Psychological Aspects of Violent Encounters which is another two hours straight out of the LFI-I course.

After that, I think most people will know exactly where they stand legally in most every situation and in every state of the union and most western countries of the world.

To visit his website and check out his courses and videos go here:
http://www.ayoob.com/

To purchase Judicious Use of Deadly Force and Physio-Psychological Aspects of Violent Encounters directly as well as many other books and videos from him and other authors, go here:
http://ayoob.com/cgi-bin/miva?Merchant2/merchant.mv+Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=Ayoob&Category_Code=AMAV

Everyone has their opinions and my post is only my opionion but I feel you will be more than happy with any of my recommended purchases from Ayoob.

Stay Safe! :urla9ub:
 
#17 ·
These are the facts... You have a gun! The other guy doesn't! You know you have a stacked deck... the other guy doesn't know you have a gun until you kill him with it! He believed he was fighting another unarmed guy as well.

The courts will hold you to a higher standard of care to avoid the situation, walk away and maybe even going to extrordanary means in not bringing your gun out even if the guy manages to hit you a few times.

Again, are there circumstances where shooting an unarmed person justifiable? YES! But you are on very shakey ground. If you are going to claim "disparity of force" you should have some very compelling reasons that are clear and obvious to the court or grand jury. Disparity of Force is not just a loose term to throw out in court. You must be able to clearly show the factors that partain to that disparity in order to convince a jury to excuse you for taking the life on an unarmed person. There has to be some accountability for taking someones life.

It is for that reason I strongly recommend people really understand the laws, how the court system works and know specific details of how lethal force is used and justified.
This is excellent advice. In addition to what Bark'n wrote, it is also a very good idea to discuss the issues with a lawyer.

The problem with this scenario it is not as simple as getting a few teeth knocked out and a black eye. A gun is already in the fight even if it is not presented. Some of us are not as fleet of foot or as strong as we once were. I have no problem believing that I would not prevail against a younger, stronger, bigger attacker. As soon as I am down and unconcious my gun is available to the assailant. That does not seem like a good outcome.

So, it might be obvious to the individual that there is a disparity of force that could potentially become a lethal encounter. But that might not hold too much water in court. It remains the responsibility of the person with gun to avoid at all costs this confrontation. If this type of confrontation occurs then one must decide, and take responsibility for, whatever the ultimate choice becomes.
 
#16 ·
for the same reasons that you learn how to carry and use a gun properly, you should learn hand to hand self defense. it's much more likely you'll need to defend yourself without a weapon than with sometime in your life.
 
#19 ·
I believe that we should take a cue from law enforcement on this one, called the Force Continuum.

1. Verbal Commands: Used on passively resistant subjects that refuse to comply with commands but are not physically resisting.

2. Empty Hands: Used on subjects physically resisting and/or whose actions or behavior present a physical threat to others.

3. Chemical Agents/Impact Devices: Used on subjects actively resisting or are combative, overtly attempting to overpower you or their actions are likely to cause minor or mild physical injury.

4. Deadly Force: Used on subjects where the subjects actions are likely to cause death or serious injury.

It's not comprehensive by any means, but it gives you an idea. The main principle behind a force continuum is that an officer must go at or slightly above the level of force that the subject is using or indicates that they will use given their actions or behavior (or past experiences with the subject). Disparity of force usually doesn't come into play with LEOs unless there are many people involved or the subject has a large, but not deadly weapon (in which case LEOs have the advantage of calling or backup while we don't).

I would say when it comes to a fight attempt to disengage from it like many are required to in some states. Demonstrate (loudly, mind you with witnesses) that you are not interested in continuing the argument and that you are finished. At that point start thinking about your own force continuum. Make one up for yourself with the tools you have (e.g. flashlight, knife, gun, OC spray, whatever).

Once you have clearly communicated that you no longer wish to pursue the argument, start at the bottom of your force continuum. Use their actions and behavior from that point (not what started the argument to begin with, start anew) and go up the continuum as needed. This way you can begin to build your case in your head on what justified your actions -- if it comes to it -- what led to the deadly force. Play some scenarios in your head with your new force continuum and judge that way, too.

For example: You are at a party, you accidentally spill your drink on a guy when you bump into them. They are a little wasted and start an argument with you. You say that it was an accident and that you can help them clean it up, etc., etc. They say that's not good enough and that you did it on purpose because he say you "looking at his girl all night". You say that you don't want to fight, that it was an accident (again), you weren't looking at his girl. You apologize and begin to walk away.

BREAK! -- You have just disengaged the fight.

The guy begins to pursue you so you walk out of the party to the outside. You again tell him it was an accident and that you don't want to fight. He continues to swear at you and you ask him to leave you alone. Point 1: You verbally requested that he leaves you alone.

Guy continues despite your request. You tell him to leave you alone. Point 2: You verbally commanded him that he leave you alone. He still continues and begins to get closer. You tell him to leave you alone again and he takes a drunkard swing at you which throws him slightly off balance. You tell him to not come closer or you will pepper spray him. Point 3: He has demonstrated resistance to your requests and commands and has also demonstrated a physical threat.

He continues to attempt to take swings at you but not close enough to actually hit you and you spray him with OC spray and he falls clutching his eyes yelling. Point 4: He has resisted your verbal requests, verbal commands and a verbal challenge where he was issued the consequence to prevent any harm to yourself and despite such, continued knowing the consequence of his actions (e.g. the pepper spray).

At this point you call 911 and advise them of the situation. I can guarantee you that if you articulate your decision-making process like I did above to a LEO in the aftermath that you will be let go and free to go home while he gets locked up for threats and intimidation, assault, etc. (even though he never hit you, that's "battery"). You will likely be detained momentarily and for awhile the EMS people and everyone will seem like they're playing the guy as the victim... However, YOU just created a ton of witnesses by your clearly (and loudly) communicated requests, commands and challenges to the guy and everyone but the guy's girlfriend and close friends will back you up simply because you made it easy (in their mind) to figure out who was the BG and who was the GG.

Cheers.
 
#20 ·
First thing you need to realize BEFORE you get a CCW is that you need to adjust your lifestyle and attitude when you carry. No alcohol (maybe one beer with a meal) Leave your weapon at home if you intend to drink.Do not engage in the testosterone challanges. You need to become a negotiater on your own behalf and learn to keep your mouth shut and mind your own business when that needs to be done. If you have a problem with any of the above, think twice about getting a CCW, you might need to gain a bit of wisdon and go for it later. Chuck.
 
#25 ·
The problem is nobody knows how severe the attack is going to be prior to the engagement. Saying a black eye and busted jaw doesn't justify pulling your weapon. Maybe your crystal ball works better than mine, as I said you don't know if the guy is goin to stop once you are on the ground, maybe he won't be satisfied until your dead. Who knows, that is why you should try and avoid these confrontations at all costs and if the time does come where you must pull your weapon and God forbid use it, you better be able to prove that you were in fear of your life, period!!!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top