Is firearms training a legal liability? - Page 2

Is firearms training a legal liability?

This is a discussion on Is firearms training a legal liability? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Personally, I wouldnt lose any sleep over it. About the only thing the training does is provide some reference to your skill and education level. ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 45
  1. #16
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    Personally, I wouldnt lose any sleep over it. About the only thing the training does is provide some reference to your skill and education level. I have been to several training classes over the years, and I regard them as being intellectually useful, but the placards on the wall are worth about as much as the "M" card I earned in USPSA years ago.


    About .2c
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry


  2. #17
    Senior Member Array Duisburg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Duisburg, Germany
    Posts
    754
    I agree with P95, lawyers can and will say anything to represent their case, client and side. What matters most is YOU and YOUR life my friend! Get as much training as you'd like and protect you and yours :)
    I am sworn to protect the Constitution of the U.S.A. from all threats both foreign and domestic.

  3. #18
    Member Array gotammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    443
    I was told to keep a log of training and range time as it shows you are not some gun toting waiting to shoot someone nut.
    I attended a class given by a retired LEO and he said that in court if I say it was do to my training he would have to explain why he taught, told me to do something in a given situation.
    Training is never a liability not training is, I would rather be around to explain my actions than to be another unsolved case because of my training.

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Miller View Post
    In other words, if I have to shoot a bg and he ends up suing me will some attorney make it out to the jury that I'm held to a higher standard because I've had the training? If so, what is the likelihood that it'll have an impact. BTW, I live in the PRC.
    I would say no. I am going to keep it simple. If you have gone through the training process in Texas and have obtained your concealed carry permit, and in the course of your actions engage in a lawful use of force to protect yourself, then you can not be sued from my understanding of our law. So in this state, training is a good thing.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array tns0038's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,163
    Spin doctors aka attorney’s can put a spin on anything you do.

    But I would see training as beneficial.

    The same reason LEO’s have to go through so much training today is not only to improve their marksmanship, and tactical abilities, but because of the continuing training they are better prepared to think of options, instead of resorting to lethal force.

  6. #21
    VIP Member Array Rob99VMI04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NOVA...200 square miles surrounded by reality
    Posts
    3,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Skygod View Post
    Would any training even need to be disclosed ?

    If I where an attorney I'd leave those facts to remain between you and me and not the DA or a jury until which time it may be needed to demonstrate a level of proficiency with firearms. Let the facts of the case stand on their own merit. If a shooting takes place and BG is wounded with a permanent disability then just be happy that you live in a state with castle doctrine law.

    If your state has adopted similar legislation and the shoot is cleared "clean" then you don't have to ever worry about a civil lawsuit or an attorney spinning your training into a "wannabee assasin" presentation.
    I don't think Need to be disclosed is the question.

    It most likely will be disclosed.
    “Are you a thermometer or a thermostat, do you reflect or become what is happening in the room or do you change the atmosphere, reset the temperature when you come into the room”?--Chuck Swindoll

    Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!

  7. #22
    Senior Member Array cwblanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    835
    Having tried several shooting civil cases I have fun with this one. There is no perfect answer. If I am representing you we will make it fit regardless of which end of the case you are on.

    It reminds me of a civil rights case where a deputy shot a dangerous criminal in the neck as he was trying to escape. The first claim was that he discriminated against the bad guy because he did not shoot a juvinile who had escaped a month earlier. When he got no where on that one, he contended that the deputy should have shot him in the leg instead of the torso.

    "And Mr. Bad Guy, would you agree that if you had been shot in the leg as you suggest, it is quite possible that your lawyer might have had to wheel you up to the stand to testify instead of your walking up there like a man?"

    In summary, train well, and use common sense. If you pattern your life around some dumb question that a lawyer might ask, you are in deep do do. It is like the question of whether to use defensive rounds or not. If I am on the other side, I will get you on something, regardless of which ammunition that you decide to use. In the long run it is up to the judge and jury and not the lawyers.

  8. #23
    VIP Member Array MitchellCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    I don't post here anymore...Sorry
    Posts
    2,333
    In a criminal proceeding you have no duty to disclose your strategy to the prosecution, but you are obligated to notify the state of your witnesses and any evidence you intend to admit at trial.

    If you fail to notify the state as to what evidence you intend to offer, the judge can sanction the defense up to and including forbidding such evidence from being introduced.

    What would be needed at any trial is a fact specific matter which is highly individual to the case.

    In a civil case interrogatories and request for production of documents and evidence will be filed by each side.

    These are questions to be answered under oath, and if they are deliberately answered incorrectly or material facts left out, you can be sanctioned up to and including perjury charges.

    Additionally, parties, witnesses and experts have to be disclosed and deposed, so your training will come out if the case has anything to do with a shooting.

    False statements in depositions can subject someone to perjury charges separate and above destroying credibility.

    If the incident involved a shooting, your level of training will come out.

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array cwblanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    I would say no. I am going to keep it simple. If you have gone through the training process in Texas and have obtained your concealed carry permit, and in the course of your actions engage in a lawful use of force to protect yourself, then you can not be sued from my understanding of our law. So in this state, training is a good thing.
    You understand incorrectly. Of course you can be sued, and if you act negligently or unreasonably you are likely to lose, whether it be a civil or criminal case.

  10. #25
    Senior Member Array cwblanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by Skygod View Post
    Would any training even need to be disclosed ?

    If I where an attorney I'd leave those facts to remain between you and me and not the DA or a jury until which time it may be needed to demonstrate a level of proficiency with firearms.
    In a civil case you will have to disclose these facts in advance of trial (assuming that you have a reasonably competent lawyer.

    If your state has adopted similar legislation and the shoot is cleared "clean" then you don't have to ever worry about a civil lawsuit or an attorney spinning your training into a "wannabee assasin" presentation.
    I have tried more than a few shooting cases, and have never heard of such a statute which gives you a "clean" finding so that you cannot be sued. If there is one in your state, I would appreciate it if you could direct me to the statute [not kidding, I really would like to know].

    Even an acquittal in a criminal case does not clear you for liability in a civil suit. O.J. has learned that one.

  11. #26
    Ex Member Array FN1910's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,235
    I have been on jury duty several times and contrary to what you hear juries are not a dumb as you would think. However you can never tell what they will consider but usually they try to give the accused every benefit of doubt and take their role seriously. Every jury I have been on would see right through any such arguement as training should have made you a better shot or similar unless you were to try to pass yourself off as some expert.

    In almost every jury I have served on the attitude demonstrated by everyone involved was discussed. If you come across as argumentative and a butthole you are going to get hung. I was the only male juror on one case where a lady was trying to pass herself off as a pillar of the community and kept telling about all of her good deeds. (Speeding case) I voted not-guilty and those ladies almost ran me out of the jury room.

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by cwblanco View Post
    You understand incorrectly. Of course you can be sued, and if you act negligently or unreasonably you are likely to lose, whether it be a civil or criminal case.
    Maybe you should reread my post.

    and in the course of your actions engage in a lawful use of force to protect yourself

    I don't think that negligent or unreasonable fits the lawful use of force in Texas law.

    Am I missing something or does not the new Castle Doctrine that was passed this year make immue from civil liability someone who acts within the law?
    Last edited by farronwolf; November 20th, 2007 at 02:51 PM. Reason: I believe it is Texas SB 378 that passed and gives immunity
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  13. #28
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    It could be a liability sure... but I think its a far greater liability not to train.
    Yep and agreed.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  14. #29
    Senior Member Array Skygod's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob99VMI04 View Post
    I don't think Need to be disclosed is the question.

    It most likely will be disclosed.
    I disagree.

    Why would an individuals weapons training even need to be called
    into question ? Fact of the matter is, civillians are held to a slightly lower standard than LEO"s in the line of the duty. You may disagree, but nothing in my CCW permit application asked nor required me to prove any training beyond the one day state approved carry concealed course, of which delt with use of force, legal issues, legal pitfalls etc. the last half hour was spent with the firearm.

    It is simply bad legal strategy to have your attorney marching into the court room with a handful of tactical firearms training cetificates. Especially if your facing an probable indictment and jury trial. This is akin to showing your hand before you throw your chips into the pot.

    If I'm facing a jury trial, or for that matter a grand jury for the indictment, then I'v probably already ignored something in the use of force continuim when I took the shot. Something just ain't right with the case or the DA is totally ignoring the state law for use of force. Assumming I "feared for my life" The BG attempted an aggravated burglary, agg car jacking etc. Something has to be fishy if I'm in a court room in a state with Castle Doctrine laws passed.

    If for some reason any additional training that I've recieved comes into question, then I'm forced to provide documented proof of such training. Until then, all I need is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and it's protection under the Second Amendment.

    If I've screwed up, the additional high speed training course is just going cause the jury to hold me to a higher standard. I'd prefer the lower.
    Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array cwblanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Am I missing something or does not the new Castle Doctrine that was passed this year make immue from civil liability someone who acts within the law?
    I have discussed the castle doctrine with several Texas criminal defense attorneys. The consensus seems to be that the castle doctrine statute does nothing more than codify the old common law doctrine (a body of law developed through court made interpretations for self-defense). However, there are some cases which imposed a duty to retreat. To that extent any duty to retreat seems to have been abolished.

    Still though, the castle doctrine will not be interpreted to allow someone to shoot someone for the hell of it. An example would be where a burglar has been caught, is laying on the floor with hands up stating "I surrender," please don't kill me. One might have difficulty relying on the castle doctrine under that scenario, when good judgment might suggest that it is time to call the police rather than saving society the expense of prosecuting the SOB.

    In your message you used the word "lawful use of force" correctly implying that the law of common sense will still be applied.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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. Firearms Liability Coverage
    By DaveH in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: December 29th, 2011, 07:37 PM
  2. Chicago could require gun owners get training, liability insurance if handgun ban ove
    By Sgt Z Squad in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: May 25th, 2010, 11:38 AM
  3. 12 Elements of Firearms Training "The dozen critical elements of modern firearms trai
    By DCJS Instructor in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 4th, 2009, 03:32 PM
  4. Where is it legal to discharge firearms?
    By BRTCP88 in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 10th, 2009, 04:49 PM
  5. Firearms Liability Insurance
    By Pikachu711 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: July 3rd, 2009, 11:31 PM

Search tags for this page

firearm training liability

,
firearm training liability issues
,
firearms training liability part 1
,
handgun training liability
,
legal liability gun
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors