Do you carry LTL (Less Then Lethal force)

imported post

Openryan seems to think I'm trigger-happy.

Why is every fight a gunfight?

Not everyone is trying to kill you.

Click to expand...

If some bum were to approach me and ask for money, I would make a determination whether or not to give it to him based upon my own feelings of generosity.......or not.

If I choose NOT to give him money (most likely), he better head the other way and ask another person.

CONTRARY TO YOUR OPINION, I DO NOT SHOOT HIM AT THIS POINT.

If he were to continue to pester me, I would INFORM HIM (just in case he failed to notice my large .45 caliber pistol carried in condition 1) that I am armed and will shoot him if he does not cease and desist. Then I walk away.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT PUT ANY HOLES IN HIM.

If he were then still dense enough to CONTINUE harrassing me, he must not be very afraid of Federal Hydrashocks. I would then remove my firearm from it's holster, take a defensive stance, and hold it at the low ready position.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT SOILED MY FIREARM'S BARREL.

If, by some amazing lack of common sense, the idiot still hasn't figured out that he's not getting a dime, and fails to leave, we are at a stalemate.

I STILL HAVE NOT SHOT.

We can stand there all night. He can look at me all he wants as I walk away. He takes any motion towards me whatsoever, HE'S BEEN WARNED ENOUGH......

I'm putting him down......for good.

Most scenarios, I'm guessing the panhandler will take off at the first mention of GUN. If he doesn't, I think you're going to need more than Hot Sauce.

People will ask about someone tackling me, or surprising me, or being too close to carry on the previous conversation.

I am carrying a deadly weapon. When I become unconcious, the other guy has a deadly weapon. Any attempt to incapacitate me becomes a life threatening situation.

imported post

Superlite27 wrote:

Openryan seems to think I'm trigger-happy.

Why is every fight a gunfight?

Not everyone is trying to kill you.

Click to expand...

If some bum were to approach me and ask for money, I would make a determination whether or not to give it to him based upon my own feelings of generosity.......or not.

If I choose NOT to give him money (most likely), he better head the other way and ask another person.

CONTRARY TO YOUR OPINION, I DO NOT SHOOT HIM AT THIS POINT.

If he were to continue to pester me, I would INFORM HIM (just in case he failed to notice my large .45 caliber pistol carried in condition 1) that I am armed and will shoot him if he does not cease and desist. Then I walk away.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT PUT ANY HOLES IN HIM.

If he were then still dense enough to CONTINUE harrassing me, he must not be very afraid of Federal Hydrashocks. I would then remove my firearm from it's holster, take a defensive stance, and hold it at the low ready position.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT SOILED MY FIREARM'S BARREL.

If, by some amazing lack of common sense, the idiot still hasn't figured out that he's not getting a dime, and fails to leave, we are at a stalemate.

I STILL HAVE NOT SHOT.

We can stand there all night. He can look at me all he wants as I walk away. He takes any motion towards me whatsoever, HE'S BEEN WARNED ENOUGH......

I'm putting him down......for good.

Most scenarios, I'm guessing the panhandler will take off at the first mention of GUN. If he doesn't, I think you're going to need more than Hot Sauce.

People will ask about someone tackling me, or surprising me, or being too close to carry on the previous conversation.

I am carrying a deadly weapon. When I become unconcious, the other guy has a deadly weapon. Any attempt to incapacitate me becomes a life threatening situation.

Click to expand...

In your scenario above (based on WA state law) you would be guilty of brandishing/assault the moment you drew your weapon. No threat to life or limb is present, and aggressive panhandling is NOT a felony. It is damned annoying, but not a danger to you, and not a felony in which you are allowed to use deadly force. However, if this guy kept harassing you, even if he started a physical altercation, you could use OC or another LTL tool to "discourage" him from continuing the encounter, and/or to subdue them until the police showed up to arrest this guy for assaulting you. You shoot him and you go to jail for a long time....lose your gun rights......make everyone else look bad. You see where I'm going with this. (If the guy tries to get your weapon, that's a completely different story, and a situation where you are in danger to life and limb, but simple assault or harassment doesn't qualify.)

By all means, if you are within your right to draw and fire, then do so. If not, then it better stay in it's holster.

Those of you who say you'd just fight it out mano a mano.....problem is your arms don't reach the 15 feet that OC does. I personally don't want someone getting that close to even have the opportunity to grab my sidearm. OC gives you the ability to subdue someone without having to go "hands on". This is why the police use OC and the air Taser, cause they don't have to risk a gun grab by scuffling with the perp. Do I think both are used when they don't need to be? Sure, they are abused too often. But I can see where the reasoning comes in.

If I spray the guy and he just keeps coming, well, he's obviously not getting the point and I think I have reasonable suspicion that he is intent on causing grave injury to me, if not finishing the job once I'm down and out. I'm not a fighter, kickboxer, martial arts guru, etc; I shouldn't have to be to defend myself. That's where LTL tools come in, and if necessary, where the handgun comes into play.

imported post

Superlite27 wrote:

Openryan seems to think I'm trigger-happy.

Why is every fight a gunfight?

Not everyone is trying to kill you.

Click to expand...

If some bum were to approach me and ask for money, I would make a determination whether or not to give it to him based upon my own feelings of generosity.......or not.

If I choose NOT to give him money (most likely), he better head the other way and ask another person.

CONTRARY TO YOUR OPINION, I DO NOT SHOOT HIM AT THIS POINT.

If he were to continue to pester me, I would INFORM HIM (just in case he failed to notice my large .45 caliber pistol carried in condition 1) that I am armed and will shoot him if he does not cease and desist. Then I walk away.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT PUT ANY HOLES IN HIM.

If he were then still dense enough to CONTINUE harrassing me, he must not be very afraid of Federal Hydrashocks. I would then remove my firearm from it's holster, take a defensive stance, and hold it at the low ready position.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT SOILED MY FIREARM'S BARREL.

If, by some amazing lack of common sense, the idiot still hasn't figured out that he's not getting a dime, and fails to leave, we are at a stalemate.

I STILL HAVE NOT SHOT.

We can stand there all night. He can look at me all he wants as I walk away. He takes any motion towards me whatsoever, HE'S BEEN WARNED ENOUGH......

I'm putting him down......for good.

Most scenarios, I'm guessing the panhandler will take off at the first mention of GUN. If he doesn't, I think you're going to need more than Hot Sauce.

People will ask about someone tackling me, or surprising me, or being too close to carry on the previous conversation.

I am carrying a deadly weapon. When I become unconcious, the other guy has a deadly weapon. Any attempt to incapacitate me becomes a life threatening situation.

Click to expand...

So you are going to give an unarmed bum a couple of warning, if he keeps following you and asking for money, you are then going to brandish your pistol, as a final warning of course, then shoot him.

Start working out now so you don't get beat up in prison.

imported post

Superlite27 wrote:

Openryan seems to think I'm trigger-happy.

Why is every fight a gunfight?

Not everyone is trying to kill you.

Click to expand...

If some bum were to approach me and ask for money, I would make a determination whether or not to give it to him based upon my own feelings of generosity.......or not.

If I choose NOT to give him money (most likely), he better head the other way and ask another person.

CONTRARY TO YOUR OPINION, I DO NOT SHOOT HIM AT THIS POINT.

If he were to continue to pester me, I would INFORM HIM (just in case he failed to notice my large .45 caliber pistol carried in condition 1) that I am armed and will shoot him if he does not cease and desist. Then I walk away.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT PUT ANY HOLES IN HIM.

If he were then still dense enough to CONTINUE harrassing me, he must not be very afraid of Federal Hydrashocks. I would then remove my firearm from it's holster, take a defensive stance, and hold it at the low ready position.

NOTICE: I STILL HAVE NOT SOILED MY FIREARM'S BARREL.

If, by some amazing lack of common sense, the idiot still hasn't figured out that he's not getting a dime, and fails to leave, we are at a stalemate.

I STILL HAVE NOT SHOT.

We can stand there all night. He can look at me all he wants as I walk away. He takes any motion towards me whatsoever, HE'S BEEN WARNED ENOUGH......

I'm putting him down......for good.

Most scenarios, I'm guessing the panhandler will take off at the first mention of GUN. If he doesn't, I think you're going to need more than Hot Sauce.

People will ask about someone tackling me, or surprising me, or being too close to carry on the previous conversation.

I am carrying a deadly weapon. When I become unconcious, the other guy has a deadly weapon. Any attempt to incapacitate me becomes a life threatening situation.

Click to expand...

Uhhh....I'll second openryan's assessment of your condition. Why not just walk away? (And hurt your mall ninja-pride?) Or kick him in the junk and run? (Are you too much of a MAN to do that?) Or even spray him w/OC, if needed, and use that as a diversion to "get thee out." ("But then I don't get to show off my purdy 1911 to the neighborhood kids at the playground across the street!")

So from your above post, I gander that anyone that looks at you funny, or has a heated discussion with you, you're going to tell them that you have a GUN?!? Get a life.

PS: Federal Hydrashoks are a 20-year old design. Do yourself a favor and go buy some Federal Tactical Bonded or HST. Much better design. The only reason Federal continues to market the Hydrashok is because of name-recognition, NOT because it is the best round performance-wise.

imported post

Hmmmm. Good points.



Too bad for bums and pandhandlers.....I'm not in Washington. I have no duty to be nice. It's called a verbal warning. If someone clearly and distinctly says to you "Leave me alone or I will shoot you", are you going to press your luck? Are you going to see if they are serious?

If they advance, they must not be afraid of holes. It all boils down to whether or not I can prove that "a reasonable person" would be afraid for their life.

If you are pointing a firearm at a person and they are unafraid of you enough to advance, are you willing to let them do it just to see if they might be able to take your gun away?

Not me. If I'm pointing a gun at them and they advance, they must have one of their own, or they want to take mine. I think a reasonable person could assume the same.

P.S. What about Winchester Ranger T's? Are they as good as people claim?

imported post

Superlite27 wrote:

Hmmmm. Good points.



Too bad for bums and pandhandlers.....I'm not in Washington. I have no duty to be nice. It's called a verbal warning. If someone clearly and distinctly says to you "Leave me alone or I will shoot you", are you going to press your luck? Are you going to see if they are serious?

If they advance, they must not be afraid of holes. It all boils down to whether or not I can prove that "a reasonable person" would be afraid for their life.

If you are pointing a firearm at a person and they are unafraid of you enough to advance, are you willing to let them do it just to see if they might be able to take your gun away?

Not me. If I'm pointing a gun at them and they advance, they must have one of their own, or they want to take mine. I think a reasonable person could assume the same.

P.S. What about Winchester Ranger T's? Are they as good as people claim?

Click to expand...

Where did letting the person advance once the gun was drawn come in? If it's gotten to the point where my gun is drawn, no, he's not advancing any further. But it's going to take some demonstration that nothing less than lethal force will stop this attack to make me draw and fire my weapon. Using OC to stop a non-life-threatening attack makes perfect sense, then if that doesn't work, well, it shows a level of commitment that requires a little more force to overcome. But if I had the chance, I'd just get the hell out of there. Isn't that the point of any self defense situation? Remove yourself from the danger of bodily harm as soon as possible, and do what is necessary to facilitate that extraction from that situation. Apparently not in your book.

The reason you carry a gun, apparently, is to be a jerk who threatens people with death whenever they annoy him; somehow I doubt this is really how you act in real life, because it probably would have gotten you thrown in jail by now.

I don't care what state you live in, I know of none that just allow you to shoot a bum on the street because he's hassling you for money. Get real. You need to cool your attitude of "I'm a badass with a gun" before it gets you thrown in the slammer, and makes all of us look bad.

imported post

Superlite27 wrote:

Hmmmm. Good points.



Too bad for bums and pandhandlers.....I'm not in Washington. I have no duty to be nice. It's called a verbal warning. If someone clearly and distinctly says to you "Leave me alone or I will shoot you", are you going to press your luck? Are you going to see if they are serious?

If they advance, they must not be afraid of holes. It all boils down to whether or not I can prove that "a reasonable person" would be afraid for their life.

If you are pointing a firearm at a person and they are unafraid of you enough to advance, are you willing to let them do it just to see if they might be able to take your gun away?

Not me. If I'm pointing a gun at them and they advance, they must have one of their own, or they want to take mine. I think a reasonable person could assume the same.

P.S. What about Winchester Ranger T's? Are they as good as people claim?

Click to expand...

If a bum follows you on the street and you are fearing for your life, well I dunno, maybe in some contexts, but if they are just hassling you and you pull a gun, then tell them if they come closer you will shoot them, I don't know if that is reasonably due force, seems a little over the top to me.

Yes, and now say you have the firearm pulled, and they advance, now you pretty much have to shoot them, and you have escalated the conflict waaaay above what it should have been.

You cannot resort to a gun to stop every type of potential danger. If it happened in this case, you would be guilty of brandishing, and whether or not the person advance, murder.

imported post

Everyone has5 LTLs. They are connected to your torso. But when you carry, you restrict your use of them because you first of all, must maintain control of your weapon...yes, even if that means killing someone. If I think I'm going to have a confrontation with someone I go unarmed. If I am armed I try very hard NOT to have a confrontation. Since I OC, I feel that if a person attacks me, they are deadly serious. So I am deadly serious. My LTL force is employed mainly as a way to give me time and distance to draw my weapon. Now if the BG finds himself with a broken larnyx and staring into the barrel of a .45, it will have been a LTL confrontation, but maybe Close To Lethal. Ace

imported post

ace1001 wrote:

Everyone has5 LTLs. They are connected to your torso. But when you carry, you restrict your use of them because you first of all, must maintain control of your weapon...yes, even if that means killing someone. If I think I'm going to have a confrontation with someone I go unarmed. If I am armed I try very hard NOT to have a confrontation. Since I OC, I feel that if a person attacks me, they are deadly serious. So I am deadly serious. My LTL force is employed mainly as a way to give me time and distance to draw my weapon. Now if the BG finds himself with a broken larnyx and staring into the barrel of a .45, it will have been a LTL confrontation, but maybe Close To Lethal. Ace

Click to expand...

I don't get it.

imported post

You have to understand. I have never gone somewhere planning to have a gunfight.

The confrontations, are board meetings, public political meetings ect. where I don't want to be inhibited by being armed. Ace

imported post

vmathis12019 wrote:

just a guy, with a Glock wrote:

If you are under the impression that the "stand your ground law" that was recently enacted in Alabama authorized deadly force for minor physical disputes you have some research to do. Perhaps you should speak to a criminal defense attorney and have him/ or her walk you through the law word by word.It doesn't make you immune from prosecution if you misuse that .45 nor does it shield you from a tort action.

Click to expand...

Leave the interpretation of Alabama law to me okay pal? I am, after all, a junior pre-law student, who has spent many an hour in a law firm discussing these lethal force and handgun laws. So unless you yourself possess a juris doctorate, which I doubt, and happent to be licensed by the Alabama Bar, I will take your advice like I take my grits, with a little salt.

Click to expand...

Sonny boy (vmathis12019), it appears you have got a lot to learn. "junior pre-law student" give me a break. You put your pants on the same way the rest of us do.

If you carry that attitude into pratice you are going to get your A$$ kicked real quick. Most attorneys don't know jack about law. They know proceedure, barely. Most attorneys rely on paralegals. And a good attorney has a damn good paralegal.

I have learned that most attorneys are frustrated actors. Could not make it on the stage, so lets try the court room.

As you well know most attorneys never step foot in a court room, thank GOD.

[size="-1"]I lost count on how many cases I shepardized that were cited by attorneys that were over turned or was just dicta.

I have been impressed by some on this blog (non-attorneys) that could and would give an attorney a run for his money as to knowledge and practice of the law.

Do you really think a JD has superior abilities?

Don't get my wrong, I respect a damn good attorney. I have worked with a number of attorneys that have excellent win records. (note: I am a free lance paralegal, I deal with federal legislative history, many hours in the national archives)

My point is if you think you know it all just because you are an attorney, you are in for a rude awaking.

Lincoln did not go to law school. It is not a requirement to be an attorney to sit on the U.S. Supreme court. The only person in the federal government that must be learned in the law is the Solicitor General and is the only attorney for the federal government that may go in front of the Supreme court.

Please, for the sake of the profession, reevaluate your attitude.

PS: I mean it in a nice way.








[/size]

imported post

ace1001 wrote:

You have to understand. I have never gone somewhere planning to have a gunfight.
The confrontations, are board meetings, public political meetings ect. where I don't want to be inhibited by being armed. Ace

Click to expand...

Correct on the first part, days I am planning on having a gunfight, are days I keep my butt on the couch at HOME!!!

But seriously, concealed is concealed (I would imagine that you don't go to board mtgs OCing). If you actually get "that heated" to the point that you are feeling that you are needing to slow down (or shut up) BECAUSE you're armed???----you need to take your collection of weapons down to the nearest pawn shop and trade it all in on a stereo or something. Confrontation is a NORMAL thing, it's how things get done, problems get solved and life gets lived. Firearms are a part of my world ONLY for the few instances that normal confrontation gets WAAAAAAYYYYY out of hand. Other than those instances, "normal confrontation" can be kinda fun on occasion. It keeps your mind sharp to get in a debate every once in a while.

imported post

ace1001 wrote:

You have to understand. I have never gone somewhere planning to have a gunfight.

The confrontations, are board meetings, public political meetings ect. where I don't want to be inhibited by being armed. Ace

Click to expand...

....CC

imported post

When I OC, people are very polite to me, and I am very polite also. It is sort of a responsibility, but not difficult. You have a calm discussion not an arguement.

Try it and you will see. The downside is that within a certain group, you are percieved as mentally unstable simply for the fact that you OC. If you so much as raise your voice, they will perceive you as threatening. They will do almost anything to mess you up, and feel that they have done a public service. You know the way that liberals go after police and polititions reputations and jobs. Women are the worst. They perceive almost any direct opposition as a threat. Most would oppose you by talking about you behind your back, not to your face. Many take this into the business world, and I find this very disturbing. OCing gives them the ammunition to run to authorities and say "I felt threatened". Men have this reflex to protect women and to assume that they would never have malicious intent. The law in my state says if a REASONABLE person feels threatened, you are guilty of a crime.:what: Reasonable is very subjective. We have 2 women in the saddle club running to the police over NOTHING. When asked, one said"I have to get a police report in case something happens." I just don't want to give them something to work with when they retell their story with embellishments. Ace

imported post

ace1001 wrote:

You have to understand. I have never gone somewhere planning to have a gunfight.

The confrontations, are board meetings, public political meetings ect. where I don't want to be inhibited by being armed. Ace

Click to expand...

If I was planning on having a gunfight, I'd bring a rifle. Since I'm planning on having a peaceful day, I only carry a pistol. I'm not a good enough guesser to know when I will be in a gun fight, but if you've figured out how to know the future, please let us know. After all, I don't carry a gun because it's comfortable.

You go to board meetings planning on beating people up?

imported post

ace1001 wrote:

... The law in my state says if a REASONABLE person feels threatened, you are guilty of a crime.:what: Reasonable is very subjective. We have 2 women in the saddle club running to the police over NOTHING. When asked, one said"I have to get a police report in case something happens." I just don't want to give them something to work with when they retell their story with embellishments. Ace

Click to expand...

Hey, Ace. It sounds like possibly the women in the saddle club called the cops on someone. Was it you?

What happened?

imported post

Each other in the saddle club.I OC at saddle club meetings and I would NEVER talk to them the way they do each other and to me. Men realize that some things are a challenge and force a fight. Many Women feel there is nothing that they can do or say that will have consequences. Boys are taught to settle their own disagreements and girls are respected for running to the teacher/police.

But I was at a meeting, unarmed by my own choice, of the school board, and a different woman, knowing that I OC had told the police she wouldn't attend unless an armed police officer attended. They did as she wished. I don't think a man could have gotten a police escort, and I think it only reinforces their phobias. I have no criminal record and no reason other than OC to be considered a threat. I have OC at dinner with my state senators and representatives and they felt no need for police protection. They are also women, so I am not including ALL women. Maybe just INSECURE men and women. Ace

imported post

HankT wrote:

Kinda vague....scattered....


But, man, you got this anti-woman thang.....

Click to expand...

I don't know if I'm understanding you, but I don't think ace was being anti-women. He's obviously not a fan of that woman, and I see what he's saying about how society expects a man to deal with a situation differently from the way a woman would, but I didn't take what he said as sexist in any way. Am I understanding you correctly?

imported post

OK folks we are getting off topic, stick to the original topic please.

imported post

a aluminum pointed kubotan attached to my keys anda Surefire E2D flashlight