Four unarmed men - Page 6

Four unarmed men

This is a discussion on Four unarmed men within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; After reading the back and fourth I feel that I would engage the physical assailants attempting to grab my wife, if that failed due to ...

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 113
  1. #76
    Member Array CCWINNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    189
    After reading the back and fourth I feel that I would engage the physical assailants attempting to grab my wife, if that failed due to lack of availiable shot or other reasons then I would go for the driver and the vehicle to prevent there escape. Either way she will not be going with them.
    CCWINNC

    HK P2000 .40SW
    Para Ord Tac 4 .45acp
    XD 9 Service
    XD 9 SC
    Taurus 651 .357 mag


  2. #77
    Member Array Firkin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron View Post
    But, that is the point. Once she is in the van, it is likely too late for me to save her because the driver will take off with his foot to the pedal.

    I am not sugggesting that the driver is more of a threat, but he is going to be the key to my losing my wife if the others are successful in getting her into the van. . . . .
    I think that this is the point that several people have been making. This is a kidnapping, plain and simple. I think that my primary tactical aim would be to prevent my wife from being taken away against her will. Neutralizing the van and/or driver is perhaps the best way to ensure that she is not taken from the scene, a scene over which I have at least some control at the moment. Attacking the driver might remove, or at least lessen, the possibility that the attackers will succeed in getting her outside of my reach.

    As to the legality of attacking the driver, I would remind people that this is a "kidnapping, and not primarily an "assault." While the driver has not assaulted either me or my wife (assuming that he is still behind the wheel, of course,), this does not change the fact that he is involved in a kidnapping. In Texas, I am completely within my rights to neutralize anyone involved in an attempt to kidnap my wife. JMTCW

  3. #78
    Senior Member Array joleary223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,057
    That's easy... looks like a forcible felony to me. Everyone gets shot except my wife unless they cut and run. If I have to unload on the vans driver then so be it, you better believe I would too, if they even got her close to the door and if I had no clear shot because of my wife I would neutralize the driver and anyone that tried to take his place.
    If I got into trouble well... my son still has a mom and it's a good day.
    It may sound a little Rambo but that's the way I see it.
    CRIME..... LAW DEFINES, POLICE ENFORCE, CITIZENS PREVENT!

    FOUR BOXES KEEP US FREE: [1] SOAP [2] BALLOT [3] JURY [4] AMMO!

  4. #79
    Member Array user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Va. & Middle of Nowhere, W.Va.
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by MattLarson View Post
    No, he's not. The individuals who are actually assaulting your wife are an immediate threat - the guy in the van is a potential threat.



    I understand the impulse, but the hard truth is that the driver of the van is not an immediate threat.

    ...
    The quip you responded to was technically correct, the driver is equally guilty of a crime - and if I can fortify your response a bit, I'd add that I'm not a crime-fighter, not even a prosecutor, so the fact that he's equally guilty as an accessory or as a co-conspirator is pretty much irrelevant.

    I don't know what state's statutes were quoted above, but it pretty much codifies the common law. The key question is whether there's a reasonable apprehension, formed on the basis of objective fact, of an imminent threat of serious bodily injury to one's self or an innocent third party. The good faith belief in that threat is all that is necessary, so the issue of whether the four assailants were actually armed is completely irrelevant.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  5. #80
    Senior Member Array KenInColo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    991
    My .02 not required here; most everyone said they would do what I would.
    An armed populace are called citizens.
    An unarmed populace are called subjects.

  6. #81
    Senior Moderator
    Array MattInFla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    4,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron View Post
    But, that is the point. Once she is in the van, it is likely too late for me to save her because the driver will take off with his foot to the pedal.

    I am not sugggesting that the driver is more of a threat, but he is going to be the key to my losing my wife if the others are successful in getting her into the van.

    No disrespect intended here, but I am very surprised that any one would argue that the driver is not a valid target for the use of deadly force.

    From a tactical perspective I am not experienced enough to know what the best approach would be, but I have no doubt that if I elected to take out the driver, it would be a lawful use of deadly force to protect my wife from being abducted into a van and/or being gang raped and killed.
    It could simply be that each of us is reading and envisioning the scenario differently.

    I interpret the "chasing down the two of you as you attempt to evade" to mean there is some space between where the BGs, my wife and I are and the van. Say, 15-20 feet or so.

    If we're right next to the van, I'm still engaging the guys who are actually, physically assaulting her first. If they manage to get into the van, or at the threshold of the door, I agree that the best way to stop the vehicle is to disable the driver.

    But if there is some space, I'm not going to worry as much about the driver as I am about the people who are physically in contact with my wife (and collaterally with me, because I'm not going to stand there as they try to drag her off).

    Matt
    Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
    Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.

  7. #82
    Distinguished Member Array Rugergirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,954
    Again we still haven't made it clear if the driver was one of the 4 who jumped out or a 5th person still in the vehicle. Makes a big difference in response here???
    Disclaimer: The posts made by this member are only the members opinion, not a reflection on anyone else, nor the group, and should not be cause for anyone to get their undergarments wedged in an uncomfortable position.

  8. #83
    Ron
    Ron is offline
    Distinguished Member Array Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    West Linn, Oregon
    Posts
    1,628
    Quote Originally Posted by MattLarson View Post
    It could simply be that each of us is reading and envisioning the scenario differently.

    I interpret the "chasing down the two of you as you attempt to evade" to mean there is some space between where the BGs, my wife and I are and the van. Say, 15-20 feet or so.

    If we're right next to the van, I'm still engaging the guys who are actually, physically assaulting her first. If they manage to get into the van, or at the threshold of the door, I agree that the best way to stop the vehicle is to disable the driver.

    But if there is some space, I'm not going to worry as much about the driver as I am about the people who are physically in contact with my wife (and collaterally with me, because I'm not going to stand there as they try to drag her off).

    Matt
    Given your interpretation of the scenario, I agree.
    "It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."

    J. R. R. Tolkien

  9. #84
    Senior Member
    Array MP45Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    State of Guns and Religion
    Posts
    937
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    Bingo. ^

    BTW even if the state I lived in were so crappy as to convict me of some crime, I would still do same and show nor have any remorse.
    Any state that would send a father to prison for defending his childrens mother from assault by kidnappers would be to my mind a state that is no longer a part of my United States of America.

    - Janq
    I agree with Janq. However, I would not be surprised that in some states this could happen. I just had an inspector come in to my PA office the other day who happens to live in New Jersey. He was saying that they kind of got rid of the Castle Doctrine there and said that you must retreat in your own home and your life has to be in danger before you can use deadly force. He also said they made some test cases out of some folks who actually shot someone in their homes and their lives were allegedly no in danger. Anyone from Jersey know if this is true?

  10. #85
    New Member Array pitbullman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    burlington nc
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by banana View Post
    You and your wife are walking through a quiet residential neighborhood, getting some exercise after a late lunch. A van approaches from behind and slows down next to you as you walk. Four men jump out of the van, chasing down the two of you as you attempt to evade them. The men grab your wife and begin to drag her back to the van. All four men are unarmed. What do you do?

    Assume you are armed with your favorite pistol, but have no
    less-than-lethal means of self defense (oc spray, etc.)
    1-bang
    2- bang
    3-bang
    4-bang
    that should cover it

  11. #86
    Member Array DAGLOCK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Jacksonville, Fl.
    Posts
    22
    This is why you practice, practice and practice. I know until something like this senario happens, one must be mentally trained to instanly evaluate the situation. All BGS are would meet their maker.

  12. #87
    Member Array banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    california
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by pitbullman View Post
    1-bang
    2- bang
    3-bang
    4-bang
    that should cover it
    That's pretty easy to say. In reality, I think you'd find it a little more difficult. Moving targets, wife in super close proximity to the bg's you're trying to shoot, etc.
    When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

  13. #88
    Member Array coltrane59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    94
    Haven't read other responses yet, but you have to be joking right? The answer is as obvious as a spotlight pointed in your face point blank. You use that pistol by all means. My first shot, assuming they were unarmed and near their vehicle would be to take out the driver..leaving a dead guy in the car seat might keep them from getting away. My second shot, and I mean a close second, would be the best shot I could get (without risking hitting my wife) at the one keeping her from being able to escape.

  14. #89
    Member Array banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    california
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by coltrane59 View Post
    Haven't read other responses yet, but you have to be joking right? The answer is as obvious as a spotlight pointed in your face point blank. You use that pistol by all means
    Joking? no.

    Maybe you should re-read the question.

    WHAT would you do?

    Yes, we would all take action -- But there have been many different ways to approach the situation. I don't think there would be 9 pages of responses if the scenerio was as "obvious as a spotlight pointed in your face..."
    When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

  15. #90
    Member Array gogriz91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Middle GA
    Posts
    171
    Disable the van first, then work on the perps? You got a second clip ready to go?
    Desperate people do desperate things in desperate situations.

    Heavily medicated for your protection.

    Kimber Tactical Custom II, SIS Pro

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 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. Traveling in PA unarmed
    By Jumper2501 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: August 13th, 2009, 04:50 PM
  2. Unarmed threat
    By 40CalSW in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: May 20th, 2009, 08:37 PM
  3. I come to you unarmed…
    By Rascaduanok in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: August 29th, 2008, 09:39 PM
  4. Unarmed in NY
    By raysheen in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: July 26th, 2006, 08:20 AM

Search tags for this page

ccw five unarmed guys
,

content

,
jumped by unarmed men concealed carry
,
where to shoot a vehicle to disable it
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors