This is a discussion on Immunity from civil action after a shooting? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Marty Hayes But, there are many which are not simple nor clear cut. And, while the defender may have been justified, he ...
Also, Marty, it looks like your cited cases make MY point. If you observe the Rule of Three Stupids very carefully, and never pull out your gun if there is absolutely any other option, you're likely never going to get prosecuted nor need a fancy-pants lawyer like MitchellCT to get you out of hot water. Even in the RARE event you need your ccw for self defense.
Seriously though, I see less harm in ALCDN than I do in say DEFENSE SHIELD... if for no other reason than the cost... If you want to join a group of like minded individuals, get education and training in firearms use at a discount, for a few bucks a year, good on you... If you want to spend multiple hundreds of dollars a year for the same thing, well, go ahead... a fool and his money, and all that...
The only thing ALCDN is missing is a forum (I think) and their journal is available for anyone to read, member or not... and has articles written by Ayoob and others.
Marty has apparently done some expert witness testifying... Can't say the same for Tactical Tim...
Either way, I'd say that joining is not necessary... Knowing the laws of your state is. Knowing a good lawyer can't hurt.
As to the rule of 3 stupids... stupid is relative... and I choose to live life. Arguably the safest place to be is in your own home, in your bedroom, with guns at the ready... anything else could be considered "stupid" or "dangerous".
It could be worse!
I did mix them up.
I wanted to point out that, basically, we are talking about extremely remote possibilities here. Along the lines of Steve Irwin getting killed by a ray.
And before I get beat up by the DC Cliche Team, I know anything can happen to anyone at any time. It's always about likely outcomes and tradeoffs. That's where the imprtant disctinctions are made.
I am not bashing our friends at ACLDN or even Tactical Tim the YouTube Warrior. I am just pointing out that there are sensible precautions to take, and then there's just nuttery.
Leme be usin simple words: If you make a several hour long statement to the police in which you contradict yourself multiple times, you will leave the police with no choice but to conclude you were lying to them, and in such instance, having discharged a weapon at another person, then being less than completely honest with the police in your statement, the case will likely be referred to the prosecution for court action.
Harold Fish talked himself into the defendant's chair.
My previous statement RE: Tequila; and this statement above is limited to the scope of Mr. H. Fish & his statements alone.
Insert sarcastic smile here.
And, I only used the Fish case as an example because the details are so widely known.
Even without politics, if you "lie to the police" it starts the ball rolling in ways you don't want it to - thus, our professional disagreement on the issue of statements from previous forums/posts/what not.
I'm not sure I'm right, I'm not sure you are wrong, but everyone brings their experience to a discussion (except those with only speculation...) and people who have a different background will see the same things differently.
However...in my view, Fish, by rambling, opened up everything, and without it, their would be very little for a prosecutor to have used against him.
Even the "10mm" BS at trial was just that. a trial tactic. It wasn't a substantive issue in the prosecutions theory. It's like biting when you are in a grappling match.
You prepare by conditioning, learning technical moves and making weight...then if you end up in the tangle and things are up for grabs, and you get a hand in bite range...sure. Why not? Go for it!
Same thing with a 10mm. Prosecutor probably didn't know what a 10mm was other than 1cm till he read the report...and when it comes time to put someone in jail for killing someone else, he used what he had.
Had it been a 9mm Glock, he'd have gone with a Bruce Willis movie line about undetectable guns.
I think Mr. Fish would be the first one to agree that his statements to police without an attorney present was not a good idea. And, for the record, ACLDN also advises never to sit down with a police/prosecutor and give a formal, tape recorded statement without counsel present too.
Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
While I would never advocate shooting unless you believed you were in extreme danger Oklahoma law says that anyone who breaks in is presumed to be there to do you bodily harm. It would be up to the State to prove otherwise should they decide to charge you.Originally Posted by oakchas
If I'm in my living room, and someone barges in the front door and they are between me and the safe room (whichever that is; bedroom, gun room, safe room), I can kill them where they stand as long as they can harm me with some sort of force (whatever they broke in with, crowbar/bat/jersey boot, what have you). If they are just standing there, I can't kill 'em as long as they are not demonstrating the ability to use force against me.
lots of respect going around the table... good stuff.... thanks to every one