Question of the day: firearm self-defense "rules of thumb"

xsquidgator · October 21st, 2006, 01:07 AM

Being a FL resident and CWP'er, I own, have read, and continue to read the Gutmacher FL Firearms Law book.

A few days ago I started a thread asking for opinions on using less than lethal force, such as chemical sprays (and the arguments still go on, there's not a single opinion on that issue).

Today's question or dicsussion topic involves some self-defense "rules of thumb" a friend of mine from TN told me - he says an experienced sherriff or sherriff's deputy friend of his told him these rules of thumb. For me these 3 rules of thumb are easier to recall than the detailed "do's and don'ts" of the Gutmacher book, so I keep these in mind will trying to absorb the book.

I know laws will vary by state, but what does everyone think of these easy to remember rules for self-defense use of a firearm? This according to a LEO amounts to a lot of what he says LEOs will cue on when called to a scene...

1) If you have to shoot someone, don't shoot them in the back (hard to argue self-defense for you).
2) If you have to shoot someone, they'd better not be more than 20 feet away (hard to argue self-defense for you).
3) If you have to shoot someone in self-defense, you'd better stop the guy and it'll be better for you if he's not in shape to fib on you and say you instigated it. Kinda along the lines of better if he's not going to be talking, period.

#3's a doozy, I thought about editing it but that's what 'he said, he said'. #3 departs from the self-defense arguemnt and starts sounding a lot more like manslaughter or worse even though I'm not a lawyer.

But, I thought the first two rules were sensible, and although over-simplistic, they do seem to condense down many recommendations I think I've read on firearm and self defense law. What's everyone here think about these? Any more good simple rules to remember before doing anything drastic in a situation?

Redneck Repairs · October 21st, 2006, 01:09 AM

If you have to wonder if you should draw and or shoot you shouldnt .

edited to add:

I take exception to #3 , I will shoot to defend myself , and i will continue to shoot untill the b/g stops doing what made me shoot him in the first place and no longer . All else is not imporntant to me .. i could care less what his physical condition is at the end of the confrentation .

peacefuljeffrey · October 21st, 2006, 01:42 AM

The big thing about #3 is that you have to balance the desire to have him be eternally silent against the need to not fire more than will be considered reasonable by a grand jury, prosecutor, or jury.

I suspect that many a good shoot has gone bad because the shooter plugged the guy one more time, when he was on the way down or doing down, so that forensics indicate to a jury that the threat was ended and the firing continued.

DO NOT shoot him one more time when he's on the ground just to silence him, even though you know you don't want to have to contest his b.s. story in court. You'll go down for murder then.

peacefuljeffrey · October 21st, 2006, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redneck Repairs

I take exception to #3 , I will shoot to defend myself , and i will continue to shoot untill the b/g stops doing what made me shoot him in the first place and no longer . All else is not imporntant to me .. i could care less what his physical condition is at the end of the confrentation .

You can take exception all you want.
It doesn't change the fact that you can end up with a world of trouble if the guy is in a condition to lie in court about how HE didn't start the altercation, YOU did...

It's not an argument to murder; and that's not what I or xsquidgator are saying. He merely pointed out a truism; and that is, it's probably better for you if your attacker is not able to be telling lies about you in court, which he will surely do if able.

It's not an instruction to eliminate witnesses, dude.

Miggy · October 21st, 2006, 02:06 AM

Quote:

1) If you have to shoot someone, don't shoot them in the back (hard to argue self-defense for you).

Baloney.... and I'll tell you why: You cannot predict the scenario which you will face. What if the guys is on top of a loved one and the only shot you have is to his back? Are you gonna ask him pretty please to turn around so you can shoot him in the front?
Scenario two: The BG comes at you with a machete, you draw your weapon and fire as he swings and misses you making the bullets hit him on his side and back.

Quote:

2) If you have to shoot someone, they'd better not be more than 20 feet away (hard to argue self-defense for you).

Baloney again and for the same reason, you can't predict the scenario you will face. BGs are less than helpful in that matter.
Scenario: BG is on a shooting spree at your family reunion. You are behind the only hard cover available but it is a 20+ feet away from the BG who also happens to have his back turned.

Quote:

3) If you have to shoot someone in self-defense, you'd better stop the guy and it'll be better for you if he's not in shape to fib on you and say you instigated it. Kinda along the lines of better if he's not going to be talking, period.

You just advocated murder in a roundabout way. You shoot the BG, he drops the gun but he is still alive, what's next? A coup de grace so he doesn't lie?

Cops are not stupid, they will reconstruct what happened and will compare your story with his and the evidence. However, if you lie even if you were truly defending yourself, you are opening yourself to a legal nightmare.

UtahRSO · October 21st, 2006, 02:27 AM

The best thing to do is make sure you're the first one to call the police after a shooting. Then the BG becomes the defendant. And as Miggy says, make sure everything you say is the unvarnished truth.

But limit what you say, mostly just that you were afraid of being killed or badly injured. It's best to have the counsel of an attorney before you go into any detail. The police will encourage you to immediately talk about what happened. Politely say that you will be glad to cooperate after you have spoken with your attorney. Then shut up.

ccw9mm · October 21st, 2006, 04:29 AM

If you were to pick simple "rules of the road" for justified self-defense using lethal force, I'd say it would have to be the principle of the "Deadly Force Triangle," which requires three criteria be met: (A)bility, (O)pportunity and (J)eopardy. This is the standard promoted by the U.S. Federal Bureau Of Investigation, The Lethal Force Institute (Ayoob), and many other organizations.

The Deadly Force Triangle:

Ability -- An attacker must posess the power to kill or inflict crippling injury on the innocent;
Opportunity -- An attacker must be capable of immediately employing that power in an attack. It's a function of many factors, including distance, time, barriers (ie, a door, wall, car between you); and
Jeopardy -- An attacker must be acting in such a manner that a reasonable and prudent person would conclude that the attacker had manifest intent to kill or inflict crippling injury.

In one phrase, essentially, justified use of lethal force requires that the innocent be in immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm.

If these standards are met, if the use of lethal force is justified, then frankly it doesn't matter whether you use a knife, gun, baseball bat, car, or your bare hands ... lethal force is lethal force. And it wouldn't matter if you shot at the head, heart, pelvis, pinkie finger, or the back ... lethal force is lethal force.

Of course, that's theory. The reality is, you're on the hook at all times to justify and explain your actions to those around you. I would think you should want to have a set of standards that are generally recognized as close to morally-unassailable as it gets. Because, even if you're completely justified to the highest standard, your actions are going to be scrutinized six ways from Sunday.

For a simple run-down on the basic principles involved, check out this useful summary put together by the Champaign County [IL] Rifle Assn, page 9, as promoted by LFI; or, the FBI's Law Enforcement Bulletin; or get a copy of Ayoob's book, "In The Gravest Extreme."

profshadow · October 21st, 2006, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xsquidgator

1) If you have to shoot someone, don't shoot them in the back (hard to argue self-defense for you).

Well, actually, if he has a gun, nothing keeps him from shooting over/under his shoulder at you.

"Graduated" from the FBI Citizens Academy recently and this is one of those scenarios they mentioned when we talked about deadly force.

Stop the threat, and when the threat is stopped, stop. That's the simplest rule. And of course, be the first call 9-1-1.

Biloxi Bersa · October 21st, 2006, 09:31 AM

Practice, drill, rehearse. Train, train, train.

Extensive training sharpens mental skills. It provides the CCW person the opportunity to immediately recognize the level of threat and respond according. It also means better shot placement to end the threat quickly and clean.

There are numerous case studies where BG ends up with wounds to back or side because they turned after seeing the weapon or ready to flee after being hit with the first shot. Probably more common with small caliber weapons with less stopping power. Pumping a couple of extra rounds in the guy to keep him from testifying will get you locked up for a long time.

P95Carry · October 21st, 2006, 09:43 AM

I would have to be real boring and repeat my mantra - ''Plat it as you see it''.

A situation can have so many variables that the permutations are near endless and there is no time probably to even contemplate rules of thumb. If your life is in jeopardy for real - even a moment's hesitation (perhaps considering rules of thumb and legal issues) could be too long, which is not to say we should act in extreme haste either - the ''just in case he is armed" sort of deal!

A BG can attack in so many ways - you could shoot him and he'll fall but still be actively engaging you, he may have an accomplice at a greater distance shooting at you - variables, permutations - you have to use best judgement and because you were in fear of your life, and the threat has to be neutralized.

October 21st, 2006, 01:07 AM	#1
xsquidgator Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Florida Posts: 275	Question of the day: firearm self-defense "rules of thumb" Being a FL resident and CWP'er, I own, have read, and continue to read the Gutmacher FL Firearms Law book. A few days ago I started a thread asking for opinions on using less than lethal force, such as chemical sprays (and the arguments still go on, there's not a single opinion on that issue). Today's question or dicsussion topic involves some self-defense "rules of thumb" a friend of mine from TN told me - he says an experienced sherriff or sherriff's deputy friend of his told him these rules of thumb. For me these 3 rules of thumb are easier to recall than the detailed "do's and don'ts" of the Gutmacher book, so I keep these in mind will trying to absorb the book. I know laws will vary by state, but what does everyone think of these easy to remember rules for self-defense use of a firearm? This according to a LEO amounts to a lot of what he says LEOs will cue on when called to a scene... 1) If you have to shoot someone, don't shoot them in the back (hard to argue self-defense for you). 2) If you have to shoot someone, they'd better not be more than 20 feet away (hard to argue self-defense for you). 3) If you have to shoot someone in self-defense, you'd better stop the guy and it'll be better for you if he's not in shape to fib on you and say you instigated it. Kinda along the lines of better if he's not going to be talking, period. #3's a doozy, I thought about editing it but that's what 'he said, he said'. #3 departs from the self-defense arguemnt and starts sounding a lot more like manslaughter or worse even though I'm not a lawyer. But, I thought the first two rules were sensible, and although over-simplistic, they do seem to condense down many recommendations I think I've read on firearm and self defense law. What's everyone here think about these? Any more good simple rules to remember before doing anything drastic in a situation?

October 21st, 2006, 01:09 AM	#2
Redneck Repairs VIP Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Colorado Posts: 5,141	If you have to wonder if you should draw and or shoot you shouldnt . edited to add: I take exception to #3 , I will shoot to defend myself , and i will continue to shoot untill the b/g stops doing what made me shoot him in the first place and no longer . All else is not imporntant to me .. i could care less what his physical condition is at the end of the confrentation . __________________ Make sure you get full value out of today , Do something worthwhile, because what you do today will cost you one day off the rest of your life . We only begin to understand folks after we stop and think . Criminals are looking for victims, not opponents. Last edited by Redneck Repairs; October 21st, 2006 at 01:16 AM.. Reason: additional thought

October 21st, 2006, 02:27 AM	#6
UtahRSO Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: near SLC, Utah Posts: 117	The best thing to do is make sure you're the first one to call the police after a shooting. Then the BG becomes the defendant. And as Miggy says, make sure everything you say is the unvarnished truth. But limit what you say, mostly just that you were afraid of being killed or badly injured. It's best to have the counsel of an attorney before you go into any detail. The police will encourage you to immediately talk about what happened. Politely say that you will be glad to cooperate after you have spoken with your attorney. Then shut up. __________________ "None who have always been free can understand the terrible fascinating power of the hope of freedom to those who are not free." Last edited by UtahRSO; October 21st, 2006 at 02:32 AM.. Reason: More detail.

October 21st, 2006, 04:29 AM	#7
ccw9mm VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Oregon USA Posts: 8,387	If you were to pick simple "rules of the road" for justified self-defense using lethal force, I'd say it would have to be the principle of the "Deadly Force Triangle," which requires three criteria be met: (A)bility, (O)pportunity and (J)eopardy. This is the standard promoted by the U.S. Federal Bureau Of Investigation, The Lethal Force Institute (Ayoob), and many other organizations. The Deadly Force Triangle: Ability -- An attacker must posess the power to kill or inflict crippling injury on the innocent; Opportunity -- An attacker must be capable of immediately employing that power in an attack. It's a function of many factors, including distance, time, barriers (ie, a door, wall, car between you); and Jeopardy -- An attacker must be acting in such a manner that a reasonable and prudent person would conclude that the attacker had manifest intent to kill or inflict crippling injury. In one phrase, essentially, justified use of lethal force requires that the innocent be in immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm. If these standards are met, if the use of lethal force is justified, then frankly it doesn't matter whether you use a knife, gun, baseball bat, car, or your bare hands ... lethal force is lethal force. And it wouldn't matter if you shot at the head, heart, pelvis, pinkie finger, or the back ... lethal force is lethal force. Of course, that's theory. The reality is, you're on the hook at all times to justify and explain your actions to those around you. I would think you should want to have a set of standards that are generally recognized as close to morally-unassailable as it gets. Because, even if you're completely justified to the highest standard, your actions are going to be scrutinized six ways from Sunday. For a simple run-down on the basic principles involved, check out this useful summary put together by the Champaign County [IL] Rifle Assn, page 9, as promoted by LFI; or, the FBI's Law Enforcement Bulletin; or get a copy of Ayoob's book, "In The Gravest Extreme." __________________ Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it. Thoughts: Justifiable self defense. Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims? Deal with evil through strength. Affirm the good in Man through trust. NRA. GOA. OFF. Last edited by ccw9mm; October 21st, 2006 at 04:43 AM..

October 21st, 2006, 09:43 AM	#10
P95Carry Assistant Administrator Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: South West PA Posts: 25,468	I would have to be real boring and repeat my mantra - ''Plat it as you see it''. A situation can have so many variables that the permutations are near endless and there is no time probably to even contemplate rules of thumb. If your life is in jeopardy for real - even a moment's hesitation (perhaps considering rules of thumb and legal issues) could be too long, which is not to say we should act in extreme haste either - the ''just in case he is armed" sort of deal! A BG can attack in so many ways - you could shoot him and he'll fall but still be actively engaging you, he may have an accomplice at a greater distance shooting at you - variables, permutations - you have to use best judgement and because you were in fear of your life, and the threat has to be neutralized. __________________ Chris - P95 NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member. "To own a gun and assume that you are armed is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!." If a BG dies as the result of pointing a gun at me, then he has merely succumbed to an occupational hazard of being a thug

October 21st, 2006, 01:42 AM	#3
peacefuljeffrey VIP Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: south Florida Posts: 3,169	The big thing about #3 is that you have to balance the desire to have him be eternally silent against the need to not fire more than will be considered reasonable by a grand jury, prosecutor, or jury. I suspect that many a good shoot has gone bad because the shooter plugged the guy one more time, when he was on the way down or doing down, so that forensics indicate to a jury that the threat was ended and the firing continued. DO NOT shoot him one more time when he's on the ground just to silence him, even though you know you don't want to have to contest his b.s. story in court. You'll go down for murder then.

October 21st, 2006, 09:31 AM	#9
Biloxi Bersa Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Biloxi Mississippi Posts: 384	Practice, drill, rehearse. Train, train, train. Extensive training sharpens mental skills. It provides the CCW person the opportunity to immediately recognize the level of threat and respond according. It also means better shot placement to end the threat quickly and clean. There are numerous case studies where BG ends up with wounds to back or side because they turned after seeing the weapon or ready to flee after being hit with the first shot. Probably more common with small caliber weapons with less stopping power. Pumping a couple of extra rounds in the guy to keep him from testifying will get you locked up for a long time.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode