I'll look into your posts, but you wouldn't be the first person to troll OCDO bashing OC in favor of CC and its "element of surprise" and other unsupported tacticool defense benefits. Carry as you find comfortable, but carry responsibly. Also, I said 2nd Amendment hypocrite, as I have yet to see anything on your behalf that would imply you are an anti. You merely appear to be a "my way of carrying is the only true and correct way (a la Yeager and Pincus)" type of person, as well as a "civilians don't need to own or carry around 'assault rifles'" person, often closely associated with either statists or LEOs with the "only ones" mentality.
Not once have I said anything against open carry, element of surprise, or any other comments against OC. I have been a member of this board, an OC dedicated board, going on two years now. I have had my CHP since 1998, and carry daily, anywhere I am legally allowed. I started trying OC when I joined here, and have done that on numerous occasions. For me personally, I prefer to conceal more than OC simply because I prefer to not draw attention to myself. I don't CC for any element of surprise. I still OC occasionally, and am thrilled to see others who OC whenever I'm out and about. As for the "my way is the only way of carrying" comment, well that is nonsense, and I don't really know how you came to that conclusion form this thread which has absolutely nothing to do with OC in general. As for the comment that I appear to be a "civilians shouldn't own 'assault rifles' type person" again, I have no idea where you came to that conclusion. I own a two AR15, an AR10 and an SKS, among other things, but unfortunately no assault rifles.
First of all, Chuck Norris wouldn't use a firearm, knife, or other object as he IS a deadly weapon.
I cannot argue that point. Bad analogy on my part.
As for the gun-grab, I said the OP's first reaction should be to clamp down on the firearm (actual RETENTION technique) and follow up with a quick assessment seeing as one can't always tell what a person's intentions are.
Then I'm not real sure why we're even debating, because I never said I felt he shouldn't have protected his firearm. My issue comes with his lack of any further assessment before whipping out a knife and pointing it at the guy's chest. First off, the story sounds a bit too mall ninja for me to take seriously in the first place, especially considering it was exactly three days prior to this thread when he made a thread talking about looking for a weak side knife to fend off a potential gun grab, and now, lo and behold, he has a great story of how he came close to gutting a coworker for playing a joke. Call me skeptical, but I've been on the Internet long enough to know the anonymity of the Internet brings out some serious mall ninjas. I may be wrong, but this story has my BS meter pinging hard. Still, the fact he's telling it tells me he thinks this was an appropriate response, and based on the supportive responses he's received tells me there are a few folks here who also share a similar warped sense of reality.
I know I'm repeating myself, but the fact is, the story he told, the picture he painted, did not warrant breaking kydex with his knife. I would bet a paycheck that had a police officer witnessed his action, he would have been proned out and wearing a pair of shiny bracelets, because he immediately resorted to drawing a lethal weapon in a situation where it was not justified. He clearly said he saw the guy, and knew he was a coworker. The coworker was in a group of other coworkers who all approached the OP in a social, non-threatening manner. He clearly said the guy reached over and tugged his gun. He didn't say the guy ran into him and started forcefully yanking at his firearm, he said he tugged at it. Bad joke? Yeah. Did it warrant a knife to the guy's chest? Hell no. He was wearing a duty style retention holster, so it's not like the guy was going to get the gun out without some serious effort if he had really tried. All that was warranted in this situation, was a hand or elbow on the weapon and a quick turn toward the guy to ask him why he would think putting his hand on the gun was appropriate. Like I said, what if it had been a kid who didn't know any better? What if it was just some guy who wasn't paying attention and happened to bump into the OP's gun side? I can tell you if I accidentally bump into someone, and he immediately spins around with a knife pointed at my chest, it would be a clear case of self defense on my part. You see, there's a big difference in a guy whipping out a knife at the first hint that someone might be grabbing for his gun than there is with having a knife pulled on you. The guy with the knife at my chest is a real, valid lethal threat, and I would have no worries of justifying my reaction to a DA.
Honestly, if I were in the group of coworkers, and I saw this guy flip out like he did, whipping out a knife on another coworker, I would have probably called the police. I sure as heck would question his mental status.
Especially when reaching for a gun. I'll admit, I failed to clarify that the assessment and weak side reaching for the weak side knife (or second pistol for double-wielding OCers) should be simultaneously carried out. If the threat of a gun-grab is imminent and continues beyond that point, I believe the OCer in the situation would now have adequate knowledge of what intentions the aggressor has with respect to his person.
The problem is, when you reflexively or immediately pull a knife or a gun at the first sense that someone may be grabbing your gun, you have escalated the situation. It doesn't matter if you don't cut or shoot, pulling the weapon when lethal force is not justified is against the law in most, if not all states. No different than if some guy came up behind him and tapped his shoulder, and he spun around with a knife on his hand because he felt he might be getting attacked.
So your question in regards to whether or not the OP was justified in pulling out a weak side knife out is slanted, seeing as even the OP admitted to stopping once he realized the INTENT of the grab did not amount to a life-death self-defense scenario.
I refer you back to my comment regarding the picture the OP painted, which was not one of a legitimate gun grab attempt. Any rational, responsible gun carrier would have assessed the situation prior to escalating the situation by pulling a knife, not after pulling a knife.
So my questions to YOU are:
Are you asking whether or not it would ever be reasonable to pull a weak side knife/pistol without seeming "excessive"?
If so, under what circumstances?
I'm pretty sure I've covered this above.
As I stated in my previous post, the outcome may have been different if the victim was armed and the 300 lb juggernaut had more sinister intentions. I chose the first example to illustrate that you may not always know the person, and you would expose yourself to more danger if you assume everyone that comes up to you has friendly intentions. I was trying to address your faulty argument that because the OP assumed the aggressor (coworker) to be a "friend", any self-defense reaction was automatically "excessive".
But the problem with your example is it is not even remotely similar. The guy in the costume probably doesn't walk around all the time in condition orange or whatever. He was having fun with friends, so why wouldn't his initial though be that the guy that just grabbed him was probably a friend? Most people who find themselves under attack go through an initial reaction of denial or "surely this isn't really happening" so I can fully understand the guy's comment that he thought it was one of his friends until he hit him. Again, this is nothing like the OP's case where he clearly knew the guy, and based on the story told, should have clearly known the tugging wasn't a legitimate gun grab.
The second example was to address you implied argument that it should be acceptable for a civilian to allow a coworker to pull off such asinine behaviour. Any given firearm is a firearm, whether it is on the OP's hip, my hip, or a LEO's hip. It has the same capability, which may or may not be fully exploited by the user, who decides the goals and motives at his/her own discretion. I know my firearm is no danger to anyone while it is in its holster, so I would like to do everything possible to keep it that way unless I am given no other option.
Again, I feel you could have picked a much better example to make your point. Surely you don't feel the guy's actions were deserving of being beaten to death, do you? The only way this case related to the OP was in that the officers clearly did not take time to assess what was going on, and instead resorted to lethal force, which seems to be more a case of street justice for a perceived wrong towards one of their fellow officers. I sincerely hope those police officers' vigilante justice was punished, but considering where it took place, it probably was treated as justified. I can almost hear them as they beat the guy, probably yelling "stop resisting!" like so many officers like to do when using excessive force.
I will, however, venture to say it is you who may not yet understand exactly what constitutes the use of force and the use of deadly force, and are the liability.
You see, this is where you sound like you're just not getting it. I have been extremely clear that my problem with this story was the OP's immediate response to the situation by pulling a knife (aka lethal weapon) at a guy he knew to be a coworker for tugging at his gun. To even remotely suggest my understanding of what constitutes use of deadly force is lacking, because I feel the OP was wrong for drawing his knife makes it look like you don't see what was wrong with his response. Oddly enough, you actually seemed to indicate above that you didn't suggest immediately drawing, so it's a bit difficult to really determine your stance. So which is it? Are you seriously questioning my understanding of use of force because of my assertion that the OP was excessive and premature in his response? If that is the case, then I would recommend you read the law in your state regarding the use of deadly force before you get yourself in trouble. The fact is, in the eyes of the law, the OP pulling his knife would have been treated the same as if he had pulled a gun and pointed it at the coworker's chest. Had a police officer witnessed it, I truly believe he would have found himself staring down the business end of the officer's gun. If anyone here doesn't see the problem with that, I seriously hope you get some additional training.
Now, after typing all of that on my ipad, I will say that unless there is a response that I haven't already clearly covered above, I will simply scroll on down, slowly shaking my head in disbelief.
