imported post
Interesting stuff. Most if not all OC'ers are going to at least think about this and it really is an important topic even if it is extremely unlikely to the point of absurdity. Its one that is used to argue against us time and time again.
Scalce, without meaning any disrespect to your question, its just that it happens to be about a topic that is used very often to paint a broad picture of danger about OC that has virtually no evidence to back it up. Anti gun activists propagate this fear that most of us feel is unjustifed that the threat of OC'ers losing control of their weapon to a bad guy is enough of a public safety hazard to prohibit us from carrying openly. Again, this explanation isn't aimed in any personal way towards you or your question, I just want to explain a little bit as to where some angst may come from.
I've thought about this question alot, as have many other OC'ers. We take a big responsibility on ourselves being armed with deadly force out in public.
Even if there isn't data to show it, I will admit I have a little bit of fear of that scenario playing out especially with my wife carrying while shes alone. I think she could be ambushed from behind and incapacitated if a bad guy wanted her weapon. Actually, with a brick smashing into the back of my head, the same could be true for me as well.
I don't think it would happen because someone wants my wallet. If my wallet is what they are after, then they will go to the much softerand less deadly target. You may hear of LEOs losing their gun but you never hear of LEOs losing their wallet. If someone were to take my gun, it would be strictly to take my gun. They would have to be a lunatic to try something like that, but there are lunatics that walk amongst us. Still, I would never concede in general that the fear justifies a prohibition on open carry.
In my state, you can defend yourself with lethal force: RsMO 563.031.
2. A person may not use deadly force upon another person under the circumstances specified in subsection 1 of this section unless:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself or herself or another against death, serious physical injury, or any forcible felony;
That right there says enough for me. Physically trying to manhandle my gun from me, means I can shoot you for it.
Now, another very important rule is that the burden of proof to justify the shooting, will land squarely on my head. If I am charged with the assault, manslaugther or murder of that individual, I will have to prove my innocence by proving I was justified.
5. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
That right there is enough to make me hesitate should I get the draw on the attacker. It sucks but its true. I may have to stop and think if I can actually get out of the situation without firing and that right there puts me in harms way. I can end up in prison with a life sentence, I can end up just losing my firearm, I can end up losing my life. I will take precaution first with my life but still if its just him and me and no neutral witness or one favorable to me, I gotta try to avoid killing this person as much as possible if he is unarmed.
The main thing though is that we can "what if" it to death. We can think of fictional scenarios and how they might turn out which I feel is constructive. Each situation is its own with so many contributing factors that its really impossible to play out any hypothetical for sure.
