November 20th, 2007 05:19 PM
Amen to that. He who insults the collective intelligence of the jury is a fool.
Originally Posted by FN1910
November 20th, 2007 05:54 PM
Les Baer 45
N.R.A. Patron Life Member
November 20th, 2007 07:23 PM
Originally Posted by cwblanco
I don't think anyone here is implying any such scenario as you are. I am sorry but adding scenarios that nearly all of the members here would think are unjustified use of force to a thread that is about whether or not training is good or bad in the event that we did have to use lethal force to defend ourselves doesn't benefit anyone.
I have looked up the new law and will post it for those that have not actually read the law as it applies to the use of deadly force in Texas after September 1, 2007 as it relates to civil liability. There was more to the law enacted than the simple stand your ground that most associate the Castle Doctrine with. This small section relates to the civil suit issue.
Originally Posted by Dusty Miller
The premise of this post is that the use of force is justifiable, not some act of recklessness by a person with disregard for the law.
SECTION 4. Section 83.001, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 , Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant's use of force or deadly force, as applicable.
SECTION 5. (a) Sections 9.31 and 9.32, Penal Code, as amended by this Act, apply only to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act. An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is covered by the law in effect when the offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose. For the purposes of this subsection, an offense is committed before the effective date of this Act if any element of the offense occurs before the effective date.
(b) Section 83.001, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as amended by this Act, applies only to a cause of action that accrues on or after the effective date of this Act. An action that accrued before the effective date of this Act is governed by the law in effect at the time the action accrued, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose.
SECTION 6. This Act takes effect September 1, 2007.
BTW, I will continue to train, and recommend that others do as well.
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
November 20th, 2007 07:53 PM
Really the only training the DA would know about is what was required by the state. And I cant imagine the DA pushing your buttons because you complied with the laws.
As to "higher standard" - mostly that is involved when you dont shoot. As if some guy shoves you (assault) and you shove back (assault with d.w.). Even having the pistol holds you to a higher standard, even if you dont draw it.
November 20th, 2007 07:59 PM
Originally Posted by Skygod
Maybe because your judgment and actions in the use of force situation is likely to be called into question and its beneficial to your defense that you can show that you took training beyond that which was required by law to show that your standard of care exceeded the standards required by law, and that the experts from whom you took training are the same experts to whom the court would look to in order to evaluate the correctness or incorrectness of your actions, and your action in conformity with such training could only serve to underscore the appropriateness of your use of force?
November 21st, 2007 09:20 AM
Excellent points. Even though it's possibly the longest sentence in the form of a question that I've read.
Originally Posted by MitchellCT
I'm just not sure I'm ready to hold myself out as an "Expert" unless it's deemed necessary by my attorney and with agreement by the client, me.
If faced with a deadly threat encounter I can only hope that beyond "tactical style weapons handling" training I have spent just as much time examining the use of deadly force issues as I have learning to hit a two inche circle at 25 meters with 100% consitency.
The discussion probably requires a more in depth look at probable and possible scenarios that fall out of the window of a simple home invasion burglary scenario.
I agree that if faced with a jury trial any training recieved may be helpful in demonstrating a level of situational awareness beyond what we've been taught in a simple carry concealed permit class. Your post has strong merits that slipped my fingers while hitting this silly keyboard.
However, I stick by my statment that running into the court room with a stack of tactical training certificates of completion before the case if fully explored and researched by my attorney/s I might not want to paint myself as a "pseudo self trained high speed commando" Jury's just may find that as an obsessionary type behavior is not a responisble gun owners decesion. Jury's may be of "our peers" but "our peers" are not alway's very intelligent, or for that matter even may be pro gun control advocates. I'd to hate be sitting in front of 12 unemployed liberal college students with little understanding of the law and or our Bill of Rights.
Just some more thoughts.
Last edited by Skygod; November 21st, 2007 at 12:38 PM.
Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.
November 21st, 2007 10:49 AM
November 21st, 2007 11:25 AM
If you use a 1911, he will say that you chose the pistol of Delta Force because you thought it would make you a better killer. If you use a colt SAA he'll call you a vigianlte cowboy.
Use of expanding ammunition clearly shows that you planned on killing someone. Use of ball ammo means your a military wannabe.
Use an AR15 and your a SWAT wannabe. Use your deer rifle and its overkill.
No matter what, an ADA or DA with a cause will use anything against you that they can. All you can do prepare for it pray it never happens.
November 21st, 2007 12:22 PM
As I have said earlier. There will be no right answer. However, I have confidence in juries (maybe not in Kalifornia, but as a general rule even in California), that when all is evidence is presented from all perspectives, a proper and fair interpretation will be made.
Originally Posted by Zach S
The adversary system in litigation may not be perfect, but when a case is fully presented by reasonably competent lawyers, it still is the best system for arriving at the truth, because all evidence and theories, good and bad, will be properly challenged and tested with no stone left unturned.
November 21st, 2007 12:33 PM
O.J. Simpson Trial come to mind ??
Originally Posted by cwblanco
Even now, it's a 50/50 bet that will O.J. will walk again for his latest shenanigans. I don't trust the justice system, all that much, and I certainly don't trust lawyers. (No offense, but they've earned that all on their own)
Perhaps your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.
November 21st, 2007 12:42 PM
im not jag or any kind of legal professional just a reasonable potential jurer. but the way i see a "training liability" approach going
BG lawyer: so mr bobcat you have had plenty of firearms training, why didn't you simply shoot the gun out of my clients hand?
bobcat: thankyou for acknowledging my training as for the question of my shot placment anyone should be able to tell you if you fire at the weapon you increase your chances of a bullet or peice of the weapon striking an innocent. in addition it could cause your client to have discharged his weapon at me or an innocent. therefore i acted as my training dictated and aimed for center mass.
this is also the recomended way of handleing the situation in the book "armed response" by david kenik.
"Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result."
Every well-bred petty crook knows: the small concealable weapons always go to the far left of the place setting.
November 21st, 2007 01:02 PM
It's not like you were trained for a semester and graduated with honors. You went through a course that was required for concealed carry 8 - 10 hours. If the BG hadn't been in my living room stealing and had that knife charging at me there would not have been a problem. If the BG hadn't been trying to rape that woman everthing would have been cool. etc He put his self in that situation. "Your honor I contend the deceased commited sucide by commiting a felony. Another words his wanted to duke it out with deadly weapons and he lost, Justice Was Servered."
"We are Texas Rangers sent by the Governor Himself and our jurisdiction is anywhere we happen to be." Agustus McCrae
Got A Problem? The Odds Aganist You? Call The Equalizer 212-555-4200
NRA Member S&W M&P .40, Glock 17, Glock 19, Glock 22
November 21st, 2007 01:17 PM
Yep. If I was prosecuting you (thankfully I'm not a lawyer or, God forbid, a defense attorney), I'd point out that you'd sought out and paid for training in how to kill another human being. You weren't out to protect yourself...you were waiting for a victim to come along so you could live out your macho fantasy. You're a wannabe cop and a menace to society. You're a vigilante and a murderer.
Originally Posted by tns0038
He could just as easily paint you in a bad light as an untrained buffoon.
So don't worry about what the scumsucker will say while you're on the stand. Learn to defend yourself and do it if you have to. And be prepared to hear crap like what I wrote above if it comes down to it.
November 21st, 2007 01:42 PM
That sounds okay to me. If our vehicles should ever collide, it will be okay with me if you cannot find a lawyer that you trust.
Originally Posted by Skygod
November 21st, 2007 04:07 PM
As to the run on sentence...yeah. Well...sorry. It just kinda came out...
Originally Posted by Skygod
As to the training certs...
You don't "Run in" with a stack of the training certifications.
They are disclosed in the discovery phase of the case or you loose the ability to use them at trial should you need them.
The disclosure of the training happens months if not years before the case even gets on the trial list in a criminal or civil action.
I don't think you have a good understanding of how the actual mechanics of a criminal case is handled.
In a criminal matter your case is going to be discussed with the prosecutor several times, then discussed with the judge again while your counsel tries to get the charges dropped.
During that phase, your training certificates, among letters from your pastor, neighbors, employer and people you know like your doctor and the old guy you help with groceries are going to be submitted to the prosecutor to show that you are, in fact, a nice, normal guy who doesn't get in trouble, loves his wife, pays his taxes, goes to church, raised 4 kids, and happens to carry a handgun with a permit...oh, yeah...and he just so happens to be rather well trained with it.
Along with that, I'd be submitting every article I could find from every published source to show that your actions in the situation were "textbook" or as close to them as possible in an effort to show the judge "You couldn't have asked for someone to do anything differently...he isn't just a dick with a gun, he is a responsible citizen who was forced to defend himself... Also, please read the letter written by the guy who trained him stating that his actions were correct. Please have the DA's investigator talk to him and have the police department's gun guy review this letter too."
Then I'd ask for 2 or 3 weeks for a report back and see if we can get this case dismissed.
That's going to happen anyway, because someone from the state needs to read all the material I submitted and check out the stuff related to training, how your actions and shooting was textbook, and how nobody could have legitimately expected you to do any better.
None of this is anywhere near a courtroom, unless you count that little room in the back of the courtroom with the conference table and the vending machines where the state's attorney meets with everyone around "the bucket" containing the 250 files he is responsible for that morning. That's the little room where the arguing, pleading, begging and dealing take place.
If we don't get a good disposition in that room, we go to the Judge's chambers for a supervised pretrial where we ask the judge to offer his opinion.
If the judge still isn't going to weigh in favorably, THEN...after about 4 or 5 court dates over the course of several months leading up to this point, would we get on the trial list.
Then...we do disclose our expert witnesses, both you and the state.
Then we depose them.
Then we talk again and see if the state still wants to pursue the matter.
If they still want to, we wait for a date and you get to see the inside of a courtroom for your case.
In a civil case plaintiff's counsel would file interrogatories and requests for production.
One of the questions in the interrogatories may be "Please describe in detail any and all firearms training you have received, and from whom" in which case you will disclose any and all training you have taken.
Willful failure to do so will be considered a misrepresentation, subject you to sanctions, forbid you from using it or referring to it at trial or subject you to prosecution for perjury.
Of course...if nobody asks any questions related to training, then its not getting disclosed yet.
At some time in the civil case a judge or trial referee will call a settlement conference. At this conference the merits of the case will be discussed. (Plaintiff's counsel will say "Your client should pay lots of money" and defendant's counsel will say "See my motion to dismiss and my motion for summary judgment. If your case survives those motions, I'll discuss the issue of offering your deadbeat scumbag client a few thousand to go away. After you take your fee, he will have enough for a dime bag and a cup of coffee")
In addition to the legal talk (see above) the attorneys will set dates for disclosure of witnesses and depositions for parties involved.
Your experts are disclosed with a little description of what they are testifying to, like "Firearms trainer to testify to the use of force in the incident of 1/2/2007".
If your expert witness list appears to be the "who's who" of the tactical world, expect at your deposition to be questioned at length about your training.
Again, you can chose not to disclose any training...but if it comes out you lied or willfully omitted facts...we don't want to go their.
If you do go their, your attorney tends to get very irate with you. So Irate that a motion for leave to withdrawal based on your misrepresenting facts to him may be served on you.
Thats how your training would be disclosed.
If you don't want to disclose any training, feel free. Just deal with the consequences of it.
By DaveH in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: December 29th, 2011, 07:37 PM
By Sgt Z Squad in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: May 25th, 2010, 11:38 AM
By DCJS Instructor in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
Last Post: December 4th, 2009, 03:32 PM
By BRTCP88 in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
Last Post: October 10th, 2009, 04:49 PM
By Pikachu711 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
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.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors