Install this. Tell them it goes Bang.
This is a discussion on Borderline situations within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by P95Carry What if the young guy had wanted trouble and come over to start something? There I was on the porch - ...
Install this. Tell them it goes Bang.
If the situation escalates from where GoodGuy tells BadGuy, "Hey, leave that thing alone!" to where BadGuy comes over mouthing off, menacing, and maybe even throws a shove or a punch, I don't agree that GoodGuy would be accurately said to have initiated the conflict (and therefore couldn't claim self defense). To have gone over, rolling up sleeves, making BadGuy think right off the bat that someone's coming to give him a physical hard time, that's different.
I disagree with the notion of going out to meet the vandals open carrying! The fact that the firearm is visible means it is ALREADY A FACTOR in this altercation, whether it is in-hand or in-holster. You go out there knowing that the BadGuy knows about your gun, as opposed to you being the only one who knows about the gun. In the latter case, you have to remain aware that if you start tussling, he can get control of your gun, should he discover it. But in the former, you go out there knowing that IF he is so inclined, he knows about your gun and may try to take it.
I think that going out there open-carrying v. going out concealed-carrying could end up making all the difference in the world regarding whether you are viewed by the Law as having escalated the situation.
This is a case of know-your-state-laws.
In TX at least, the law reads like this: If you confront someone, even if they did nothing at all to provoke it, and then make a clear attempt to disengage from the situation, and they pursue you and do not allow you to disengage, you would be justified in defending yourself to the degree required.
So basically, if you lived in TX, you could go yell at "them dadgum kids scateboarding on your lawn" (to pull out a stereotype), and if they come over to make something of it, you would have to make it clear that you didn't want a fight and it would probably be a good idea to duck back inside. If you stood your ground and shot them as they walked up, no matter how threatening they were, you would have no legal justification.
This is exactly why reading and knowing your state's force and self-defense laws is so important. Gray situations are the ones most likely to turn what seems like a good shoot into a bad one.
I might have walked over to MY mailbox and inspected it for damage. After all, how can you call into the locals what "damage" is being done to the boxes, if any, without first verifying there is need to call them to begin with.
Now out here in the free state of Az, we can carry openly with no permit and concealed with one. If I'm open carrying when I inspect MY property for potential damage based on my intelligent reasoning that damage may have been incurred on MY property, in front of my wife, then I see no issues whatsoever.
I'm carrying lawfully, open or not. If the punks want to create or as some have mentioned escalate into an argument of physical confrontation, seeing I'm armed if open carrying, THEY have escalated, not myself.
I have every right to inspect my property at any time, day or night, and to determine if someone has damaged it in anyway, whether they are there or not at that time. I also think I could inspect my neighbors box at the same time, it's called investigating suspicious activity to determine if the police need to be called or not.
I'm lawfully allowed in the road like the punks are. It's a public road, is it not? Just because I'm carrying a firearm does not take away any of the rights I would have were I not carrying a firearm.
If the punks escalated verbally only, I could ignore them and dial 911 at that time, in their presence. I would be happy to describe them to the dispatcher over the phone while they were within earshot and ask that a cruiser be sent to find out who they are and where they live as well as investigate the nature of the damage if there were any to the boxes.
Without being politically correct here, if I see someone damaging my property in any way by investigating my suspicions based on their actions, I'm likely to do things that others here might find unreasonable, imprudent, and not PC, right then and there.
One thing I'm not going to do is go back into my own home, dial 911 and wait 40-60 minutes or longer for a deputy to show up while I peek out the windows and watch them destroy/damage my property. That will only ocurr when I a lot older and less physically capable. It will hapeen one day, no question, but it won't be today or tomorrow, or even next year IMO.
Typically, the standard for justifiable actions is "what would a juror do?" . If you act in what most juries would consider reasonable, it should be enough. Being on the line with 911 during the confrontation would be good recorded evidence of your demeanor and verbal exchange. Having a CCW and gun mean letting small stuff go.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset
Typically, the standard for justifiable actions is "what would a juror do?
Thats the way it is, unfortunately. The liberalization of this country has soccer moms and touchy feely's up in arms [ pun intended ] about anyone actually doing anything against another and thinking that we should all be the sheep they are and just walk away from any potential confrontation.
It's also one of the reasons there are bills in session to pass a law you can't even spank your kid or be arrested in a few states. If more were disciplined when they needed it, there would be less of what we are talking about here in this thread.
It's not what this country stood for in the past. Whats reasonable to one is unreasonable to another. Guess you gotta find jurors who have punished their children for wrongful acts who would understand that YOU have the right to protect what yours from others who would make it theirs.
Well I tend to agree with you, but here's the thing... It doesn't matter what you think, and it doesn't matter what I think. Our opinions are worth absolutely nothing, unless we happen to be on the jury deciding such a case.Originally Posted by peacefuljeffrey
What matters is how a prosecutor will present it and what a judge or jury might think. And you can bet your last dollar that there are prosecutors out there who would be more than happy to make the argument that GoodGuy either initiated or escalated the conflict. And the plain fact of the matter is that there ARE GoodGuys out there who have gone to jail in the past because the jury decided that they were involved in initiating or escalating a conflict. Remember, the jury is going to be made up mostly of sheeple who sincerely believe that the ONLY proper thing to do in any conflict situation is to hide in your closet and hope the police come soon!
If you do ANYTHING to escalate the conflict you are ASKING for a one-way ticket to the pokey.
Well that's the key. If you can stand there with your mouth shut and call the cops then I think you're on solid ground. And if they escalate it to a physical confrontation then you're probably going to be exonerated. Depending on the jurisdiction you're in you may be charged, and that means you have to spend time and money on your defense, but if you honestly did nothing at all to escalate the conflict then you're probably going to go free in the end.Originally Posted by AzQkr
But how many people can hold their temper that well? Keep their mouth shut? Not try to physically stop the guys? Frankly, I don't think I could. And that's why, for me, it would be best to stay inside and call the cops from there.
But how many people can hold their temper that well?
If a person is carrying a gun lawfully, he best be able to "hold their temper" or else they should not be carrying to begin with IMO.
If you can't control yourself and have restraint, more restraint than one who doesn't carry, you should not carry. If you can't control yourself and you carry a gun, it's only a matter of time before you'll find yourself in more trouble than it's worth.
I agree. Perhaps I should have asked, how many people--who feel compelled to rush outside and confront the boys--can hold their temper that well? See, I think anyone who actually CAN hold their temper that well will probably not feel the burning need to initiate a face-to-face conflict. I certainly wouldn't.Originally Posted by AzQkr
A real tough decision. Do you stand up for your rights and confront the punks, or do you stay back because the situation may excalate?
What about if you are unarmed and you go out and confront the punks and ONLY one of them decides to mix it up with you. The others stay back away from the confrontation. Obviously, this is not a lethal force situation.
Now. . .add the gun. The same scenareo except now you are fighting with the punk while wearing a gun. As we know, you cannot lose the fight or the gun may be used against you. Should the fact that you chose to be armed excalate the fight to a lethal force situation?
What if from the safety of your home, you saw the punks at the mail box and they were carrying AK-47s? Would you still go out and ask them to leave the mail box alone?
I know it sucks but I really think that when we decide to wear a gun, we have to exercise great restraint. We need to examine the likelyhood of such an encounter turning deadly. I personally would like to slap the punk upside the head, but in reality I probably won't even say anything to him.
fortiter in re, suaviter in modo (resolutely in action, gently in manner).
I would also point out that the laws vary greatly and in many states the fact that you are on your own property makes this a COMPLETELY different scenario than if you were not. Maybe you can go out and confront the boys without having it mitigate against you. Or maybe you can't.
Again, as has been said so many times before, the most important thing is to understand what the law says and how it is enforced in your jurisdiction!
I agree with AZQKR. if you can't control your temper you have no business carring a gun. A lot of common sense and the abillity to let small things go is a good start. A ccw permit has made me a better driver due to the fact that I dont get mad and let things go. A lot of responsibility goes along with that permit.
In michigan there are clauses about excalation. Example, if I get into a fistfight with someone evenly matched, I wouldn't be able to shoot them(no disparity of force,). If they escalate and pull a weapon, my right to self defense is restored and I can shoot them(even if I started the fight).