Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32

Thread: My self defense stories

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, ,
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post


    I have used a gun in self defense 3 times in my life. The first time I was in heavy traffic and the guy behind me was trying to speed and get around me, but we werer going 20 mph and there was no room to do anything. He would zoom up onto my back bumper and lay on the horn. He kept getting more aggressive and closer, when I felt he was getting too aggressive, I pulled my .45acp out of the glove box. It was still in the holster, I held it up so he could see it, then slapped it down onto the dash, it got very quiet behind me at that point and I did not have any more problems.
    The second time I was in a drive thru line waiting to order when a homeless man that I refused to give any change to minutes earlier tried to launch his pitbull at me thru my El Caminos' window.The pitbull was not able to get thru the window, but it's head was inches from my face. I had a 9x18 Hungarian PA-63 under my seat, I don't remember pulling it out, but I had it out of the holster and aimed at his chest and was screaming at him to get the F*ck away from me or I was going to shoot him, I had to repeat it several times, but he pulled the dog out of the window and took off. I did not want to shoot the dog, as it could not get to me, but the owner was telling it to attack, so that is why I drew on him. I still have the scratches on my door from the dog.

    The 3rd time I was at home and was in my living room with the front door open, when I heard a bicycle crash at the end of my walk. I saw it was the 5 yr old boy that lived next door. I then heard growling and saw the boys dad run up and put the boy behind him and hold the bike out in front. I had a .380 pistol that I grabbed and went out the door. I saw 2 pitbulls advancing on the father and his son, they were head down and growling and walking forward. I asked the dad if he knew whos they were and he said no, and I had not seen them before. I tried to distract the dogs but they kept advancing, and when the lead dog started to attack I fired one shot that went thru the dogs neck and sent them running. I don't like killing and was shaking afterwards. I called the PD and told them what had happened and a officer came out and we found the dogs in a back yard, but the owners would not allow the cops to see the dogs. I went back to the house and the 5yr old was out and he came over to thank me for saving him and his dad from the dogs.
    In 3 self defence events I was in, 2 time I only had to display the weapon, and those 2 times involved people, the only time I had to fire the weapon was involving a animal.
    It took the police 30 minutes to arrive after the dog was shot, and another time I called involing a break in, it was 2 hours.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Pullman, Washington, USA
    Posts
    99

    Post imported post

    I'd be careful showing off your pistol if you're just dealing with an aggressive driver.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chandler, AZ/Federal Way, WA, ,
    Posts
    536

    Post imported post

    You broke the law when you pulled your pistol out of the glove compartment. It's called brandishing.

  4. #4
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Post imported post

    here in washington we dont brandish, but were not allowed to intimmadate! maybe we whould just carry an 8X10 pic of the gun, we could show that! i dont think it would be unlawfull
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    132

    Post imported post

    Those are three of the most un-descriptive stories I've ever heard. I might also add as others have that you made some egregious errors during these confrontations.

    1. Brandishing is against the law.
    2. If that guy had a gun he knows your packing and now you have no element of surprise.
    3. if you threaten to shoot the homeless man because his dog was attacking you you are an idiot. (even if he did order it to attack, as you said you were in no immediate danger of the dog biting you.)

    really look over this site to learn about the laws and proper way to handle situations, you sound like a loose cannon that will surely make the news someday.

    -Brian

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona, U.S.
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    Scenario 1: Sounds like you were the one who was out of place. If a person is desperatly trying to get by, maybe they are in a hurry, maybe it is an emergency, and maybe you should utilize some courtesy and change lanes. I have zero tolerance for drivers that endlessly hog the left lanes of freeways and highways. You are supposed to pass on the left. If someone is trying to get by (regardless of speed) and you are not in the right most lane, you move over. It may not be a law but it is common courtesy. People have the right to honk (it is free speech). Tailgating is stupid because it can cause an accident so that driver was clearly being aggressive there. Waving a gun because someone is in a hurry is not appropriate and it is illegal.

    Scenario 2: I'm with you on this one. I probably would have taken it a step further. If someone is threatening me with their pit bull, I will tell them one time to get the dog away from me. If the dog is so close that it is in my face, it will be going to the pet cemetary. In this case, the man was using his dog as a deadly weapon. Dogs can be rabid (although unlikely) and they can quickly cause serious bodily injury or death. That dog could have ripped your neck open causing you to bleed to death. I would quickly put the dog down and potentially the human as well depending on the circumstances.

    Scenario 3: This seems reasonable as well. Unleashed and aggressive dogs or their owners do not have my sympathy. I don't want to kill an animal or a person but if I'm being threatened or someone else is, then circumstances may warrant it. Dogs that are aggressively coming toward children may have to be put down. I don't care if the owner says that the dog wouldn't hurt anyone or that he was a good dog or that they didn't mean for the dog to get out. Tough. You should have thought about that first before your "nice dog" nearly mauled a child or senior citizen to death. It is called personal responsibility. If you can't take care of your personal property, your children, your land, or yourself and it starts negatively impacting other people's health, safety, freedom, and quality of life, guess who needs to be liable for it? YOU. Enough of this coddling and political correct crap. With freedom comes responsibility. America needs to stop acting like children and start taking personal responsibility.



  7. #7
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    here in washington we dont brandish, but were not allowed to intimmadate! maybe we whould just carry an 8X10 pic of the gun, we could show that! i dont think it would be unlawfull
    IMHO - anything used to convey a threat of bodily harm could be considered assault, so as cute as this might seem, it doesn't seem to be a good idea.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  8. #8
    Lone Star Veteran Ian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    712

    Post imported post

    In regards to the first encounter, you are an IDIOT. You don't pull your weapon UNLESS you are in fear of SERIOUS BODILY INJURY OR DEATH. If there is someone tailgating you get out of the way! Guns and road rage do not belong together.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    First encounter and second encounter were fail. Both illegal, quite likely.

    The third encounter sounds like a good shoot.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    caldwell, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    great stories.. i choose not to be a couch commander and criticize ur actions.



  11. #11
    Regular Member frommycolddeadhands's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Knob Noster, MO
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    Thanks for the stories. I don't really have any feedback on whether no 1 was legal or anything like that. I probably would have shot the dog in no2 if his head was inches from my face (which I really hate to say, I'm a dog lover, I've got 2 dogs myself) but the second that fido starts growling, biting, etc. (especially with an owner telling it to attack) the dog becomes a rug. Number 3, good job helping out the guy and the kid, again it sucks that the dog had to take one in the neck, but hopefully the owners learned a valuable lesson on leash laws.
    God is the one driving this stagecoach, I'm just riding shotgun.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Where am I, WA, , USA
    Posts
    191

    Post imported post

    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:
    here in washington we dont brandish, but were not allowed to intimmadate!* maybe we whould just carry an 8X10 pic of the gun, we could show that! i dont think it would be unlawfull
    Do not let your kid take that 8x10 pic of a gun (any gun) to school or he will get suspended. You will be called to talk to school administrator. Don't get mad at me...first time I heard of this kinda thing I was incensed. Pictures of gun, tiny GI Joe sized gun 1/4" size is BREAKING THEIR BS RULES. (gun free zone)

    Seriously tho showing an aggressive driver a holstered 45 would be brandishing in WA state I think. I CC 24/7. I would have moved over to next lane at 1st opportunity. Let ******* get 25' in front of you. Get his tag # just in case. Put some space between you and EL Jerko. If it was open season on every jerkoff tailgating road raging puke in America the rest of us would run outta ammo before we got round to shooting the asswipe politicos that REALLY DESERVE IT!!

  13. #13
    Regular Member frommycolddeadhands's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Knob Noster, MO
    Posts
    451

    Post imported post

    noname762 wrote:
    2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:

    Do not let your kid take that 8x10 pic of a gun (any gun) to school or he will get suspended. You will be called to talk to school administrator. Don't get mad at me...first time I heard of this kinda thing I was incensed. Pictures of gun, tiny GI Joe sized gun 1/4" size is BREAKING THEIR BS RULES. (gun free zone)

    Schools are just getting crazier and crazier with this #$%#. I just don't get it. I used to carry a pocket knife to school when I was a kid. Nothing special, just a little red MacGyver stlye boy-scout knife. Most of the time it stayed folded up on my pocket unless I needed it to tighten a screw, remove a splinter in shop class, or decided to whittle down a stick at lunch time. If a kid triedto do that these daysthey'd probably wind up on some sort of 'terrorist watch list' and the school would be evacuated. The whole world has gone nuts.

    God is the one driving this stagecoach, I'm just riding shotgun.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    As a fellow Phoenician I can appreciate the lack of love for the way most Arizonans seem to drive, but I do have to concur with the consensus. In Arizona (at least until the defensive display law takes effect in about a month) that was brandishing. Had the 'wave' portion been eliminated, then you would have simply been moving from CC to OC, which IS legal in AZ, and then the brandishing aspect would be moot.

    Not saying that I would've kept my gun hidden (it's either holstered on my hip or in my center console when I'm driving, and I surely would've made it ready if the situation warranted it) but making a point of holding it up to be seen wouldn't be my first choice.

    On the flip side, I do have to agree with Hiredgun30 that judgement based on a short internet post can also be a bad idea =)

  15. #15
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    I was wondering if I could ask a quesion about "brandishing". Touching the weapon is brandishing? I own my own shop. During the summer I OC there. I own the property as well. In the winter I CC, on my shop property, and in the building- winter, and cold require a coat. My "plan" to diffuse a situation, before it escalates, or to keep an event from happening at all is to (step #1); simply take off my coat, let them see the harness, and the hardware hanging there under my arm. Visual deterrent so to speak. Is that brandishing?

  16. #16
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164

    Post imported post

    In Oklahoma, that would not be considered brandishing. We are CC only, but on your own property, you can carry any way you like.

    I had a guy accost me at 10:30 p.m. one night on my personal property. As he "stepped into me" from about 5' I dropped into a defensive stance and placed my hand on my weapon that I carried at 4:30 which means he never saw the gun, but recognized the move. He called the cops on me for "brandishing." When the Detective called for my side of the storyand Iexplained what happened and my actions, they had nothing else to say about the situation and did not proceed with any charges.
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613

    Post imported post

    In Virginia making a deliberate show of your CCd gun may bring you a brandishing charge - same if putting your hand on it.

    Reaching inside you coat or behind your back with non-dominate hand (no weapon there) wont - leaving dominate hand free to move if needed.

    OC avoids all of these particular problems.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    519

    Post imported post

    Guys, lighten up on Dragonflydf! No need for name callng or unnecessary rudeness. Dragonflydf is pretty new to the forum.

    While it does seem, from the info given, that displaying the gun in the first incident *might* be characterized as brandishing, one might argue that it was justified. And it DID end the confrontation without shots being fired and without injury.

    In the second incident with the homeless guy, I might well have drawn and pointed my firearm as well. You never know how strong glass is, or what else the homeless guy might be packing besides a pit bull. The homeless guy could have broken the glass with a pipe, or even his bare hands and tossed the dog in. Again, Dragonflydf's actions ended the confrontation without shots being fired.

    I don't think anybody would argue with the third incident. I'm disappointed that the police didn't take any other action in regard to the dogs or their owner.

  19. #19
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    S1) everyone else has said it, your an idiot. Simply brandishing a firearm is assault with a deadly weapon. In a few states he would actually be within the law to kill you simply for brandishing at him.

    S2) If this was a shitzu, you'd have a hard time explaining yourself, however pitbulls are recognized as potential attack dogs, and therefore someone threatening you with one is the SAME as assault with a deadly weapon, however killing the man would not be excusable because it wouldn't remove the threat. Shooting the dog is ok, but having done so you have effectively 'disarmed' your assailant and can't justify shooting him unless he brandishes another weapon. You could lawfully detain him until the authorities arrive but thats a whole new bushel of difficulties.

    S3) You don't need to prove anything to anyone. The only crime you could be thought to have commited is discharge of a firearm (if where you lived even had that law). Its only distruction of property to kill a dog, and if the dog is not contained on a leash or its trespassing or on public access land it doesn't matter if its a toy poodle you can shoot it for growling. Most animal protection laws are only against inhumane and cruel treatment (killing is ok though). Obviously check laws in your area.

    A note on S3: Aggresive dogs are NEVER acceptable. Even the best guard dogs in the world, properly trained, should never act like this. A real guard dog will 1)never leave its property / immediate area of its 'people' to confront someone. 2)generally DON'T bark alot. 3)does not treat all strangers as immediate hostile threats. (if in a public area and you walk by a guard dog and its human it shouldn't address you unless you address its person first)

    everyone should keep that in mind when taking in their environment because any guard-type breed you encounter that violates these rules you need to raise your threat level because it is -not- normal behavior.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    In Virginia making a deliberate show of your CCd gun may bring you a brandishing charge - same if putting your hand on it.

    Reaching inside you coat or behind your back with non-dominate hand (no weapon there) wont - leaving dominate hand free to move if needed.

    OC avoids all of these particular problems.

    Yata hey
    Not in Arizona where the OP is from:

    A.R.S. §13-421. Justification; defensive display of a firearm; definition

    A. The defensive display of a firearm by a person against another is justified when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
    B. This section does not apply to a person who:
    1. Intentionally provokes another person to use or attempt to use unlawful physical force.
    2. Uses a firearm during the commission of a serious offense as defined in section 13-706 or violent crime as defined in section 13-901.03.
    C. This section does not require the defensive display of a firearm before the use of physical force or the threat of physical force by a person who is otherwise justified in the use or threatened use of physical force.
    D. For the purposes of this section, "defensive display of a firearm" includes:
    1. Verbally informing another person that the person possesses or has available a firearm.
    2. Exposing or displaying a firearm in a manner that a reasonable person would understand was meant to protect the person against another's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
    3. Placing the person's hand on a firearm while the firearm is contained in a pocket, purse or other means of containment or transport.

    IANAL but I dont think road rage would be a justifiable cause for this. I dont believe there is a road rage law only the violations that come with it (i.e reckless driving). Although one could argue on the whole vehicular aggravated assault thing. But I dont have the funds to be a test case so I probably won't be trying this one on road rage incidents. Glad all went well Dragon

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    316

    Post imported post

    Klown wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    In Virginia making a deliberate show of your CCd gun may bring you a brandishing charge - same if putting your hand on it.

    Reaching inside you coat or behind your back with non-dominate hand (no weapon there) wont - leaving dominate hand free to move if needed.

    OC avoids all of these particular problems.

    Yata hey
    Not in Arizona where the OP is from:

    A.R.S. §13-421. Justification; defensive display of a firearm; definition

    A. The defensive display of a firearm by a person against another is justified when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
    B. This section does not apply to a person who:
    1. Intentionally provokes another person to use or attempt to use unlawful physical force.
    2. Uses a firearm during the commission of a serious offense as defined in section 13-706 or violent crime as defined in section 13-901.03.
    C. This section does not require the defensive display of a firearm before the use of physical force or the threat of physical force by a person who is otherwise justified in the use or threatened use of physical force.
    D. For the purposes of this section, "defensive display of a firearm" includes:
    1. Verbally informing another person that the person possesses or has available a firearm.
    2. Exposing or displaying a firearm in a manner that a reasonable person would understand was meant to protect the person against another's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force or deadly physical force.
    3. Placing the person's hand on a firearm while the firearm is contained in a pocket, purse or other means of containment or transport.

    IANAL but I dont think road rage would be a justifiable cause for this. I dont believe there is a road rage law only the violations that come with it (i.e reckless driving). Although one could argue on the whole vehicular aggravated assault thing. But I dont have the funds to be a test case so I probably won't be trying this one on road rage incidents. Glad all went well Dragon
    The OP doesn't specify, but I very much doubt the timing matches up for the above law to apply since it didn't go into effect until 42 days ago (September 30th.) Prior to that, there was no such thing as justified defensive display. If you so much as touched the weapon, you sure as hell better have shot the person, otherwise there was no justification.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    Gotta go with fail on #1 also, Now if he is driving a semi that could seriously
    do some damage to you and car you have a little more wiggle room.
    But encroaching isn't a brandishing defense.

    #2 - if he is ordering the dog to attack, shoot the dog, the next victim won't have
    a gun to defend themselves. How do you know onstar doesn't sense the danger
    and lower your window remotely, or the window regulator jumps track and drops.
    Vicious dog attacking at owners orders, he might get the double tab himself.
    But i'm a cat person so have no problem with removing Vicks next money maker.
    If it's good enough for officer friendly it's good enough for me.

    #3 Lassie should have known better. I am surprised with shots fired they still
    took their time. I would think the mere temptation to harass someone who
    dares have a gun and won't use it on them would be to much to pass up.


    But since you are alive and not in jail you can't find much fault. Just added
    experience for future encounters.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Phoenix David's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Glendale, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    629

    Post imported post

    S1 - IMO bad move. "Hello 911 do you have an emergency?" "Yes I am behind this car on the I-17 and there is this dude pointing a gun at cars!!!"

    S2 - IMO probably a bad legal move, but I was not sure was the dog's head inside your car or just at the glass trying to get in? If it's head was inside the car would have been good to go on shooting it.

    S3 IMO good move but wrong caliber. .380 is for aluminum cans, don't shoot at any steel cans cause they will just bounce off
    Freedom is a bit like sex, when your getting it you take it for granted, when you're not you want it bad, other people get mad at you for having it and others want to take it away from you so only they have it.

  24. #24
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    Phoenix David wrote:
    S3 IMO good move but wrong caliber. .380 is for aluminum cans, don't shoot at any steel cans cause they will just bounce off
    Please. The .380 is insufficient argument is a little played with the newest bullet technology.

    Try
    Cor-Bon 90g JHP
    Cor-Bon 80g DPX
    or if you can't shoot hot loads in your pistol
    Federal 90g JHP
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  25. #25
    Regular Member Phoenix David's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Glendale, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    629

    Post imported post

    simmonsjoe wrote:
    Phoenix David wrote:
    S3 IMO good move but wrong caliber. .380 is for aluminum cans, don't shoot at any steel cans cause they will just bounce off
    Please. The .380 is insufficient argument is a little played with the newest bullet technology.

    Try
    Cor-Bon 90g JHP
    Cor-Bon 80g DPX
    or if you can't shoot hot loads in your pistol
    Federal 90g JHP
    The limited research I have done on the issue just makes it IMO a sub standard defense round. As I don't own anything in a .380 it kind of makes it a moot point but my personal power floor is .9mm/38+P.

    We could discuss this for days but it's just my opinion and worth every penny you paid for it
    Freedom is a bit like sex, when your getting it you take it for granted, when you're not you want it bad, other people get mad at you for having it and others want to take it away from you so only they have it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •