• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Gangbanger Looks Down My .45 Barrel !!!

cbpeck

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
405
Location
Pasco, Washington, USA
I have never been in that situation but I was told by my crazy ccw instructor is if you have to draw and point, you shoot, no hesitation, no conversation. But I would not have drawn unless I saw the gun.

But I can clearly see in your situation it all happened very fast and definately an Oh SH#$ moment for sure.

What made you pause instead of draw and shoot?

He clearly brandished, I think in most states that is considered the same as being armed.

WOW. I totally disagree and - frankly - can't believe any instructor would say that. I believe there are appropriate levels of engagement. As a threat escalates so should your awareness & your response.

Sorry for the Monday morning quarterbacking, but here's how I like to think I would've handled an approaching bad guy:

Bandito: Puts on his bandana and takes his first step forward
ME: "STOP RIGHT THERE!"
Bandito: Ignores my command and continues to advance (hopefully he would stop)
ME: Draw sidearm & yell, "STOP OR I'LL SHOOT!" If moving to cover is an option I'll do that too

At this point, if Bandito turns and leaves then I'll reholster & dial 911. If Bandito keeps coming or attempts to aim his pocket rocket then I'll fire a controlled pair at center mass.

I see a real problem with the training described by Sky1. Waiting to draw until the moment you want to shoot introduces a high risk of shooting prematurely or reacting too late (that means you're probably dead). Neither is acceptable. If you practice mental awareness & recognize an escalating threat as it develops your response should be escalating too. If this concept seems foreign to you please consider giving the following training reports a quick read. I realize they're somewhat ad heavy, but try to look past that and consider the content.

http://frontsight.com/newsletter/html/08-color-code.html
http://frontsight.com/newsletter/html/09-color-code-con.html
http://frontsight.com/newsletter/html/10-combat-mindset.html

One last thought. Obviously situations arise where Good Guys are caught off guard by Bad Guys & the GG has no option but to draw and shoot the BG without warning. In that case, by all means draw and shoot as quickly as you can guarantee hits. I'm not suggesting an obligation to offer a verbal warning, just stating that sometimes the mere sight of a sidearm will deter a BG (this story is a case in point), and that is a far better outcome for all involved.
 

cbpeck

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
405
Location
Pasco, Washington, USA
I'll add that I tend to agree with Outdoorsman1, though perhaps he was a little harsh. The OP would've been much better off not escalating the encounter in the way he did, but he acknowledges that. In the end, the best gun fight is the one that is averted.
 

Outdoorsman1

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
1,248
Location
Silver Lake WI
I thought I was not harsh enough.... Either the B.G. or he who wrote the OP, or both could have ended up DEAD... Or...

The B.G. dead, and the OP either in PRISON or looseing EVERYTHING he owns paying an attorney to keep him out of one and / or either paying it all to the B.G.'s family after loosing a civil suite.... yea I know... could go either way... could be found innocent, but also might be found guilty.... Why even risk it over some graffitti....?

As far as my feelings on a verbal warning... Obvioulsy that would vary based on any given situtation...

A verbal warning could very well save a life if the warning was taken seriously and actually stopped an advance but...

I must say, in a real world obvious life and death situation, I will give no warning... the BG has already made the decision to cause me great bodily harm.. that was his choice... the more surprised he is in my stopping his (armed) advance the better... he should have considered all consequences before making the possible fatal mistake of approaching me or any of my loved ones with the obvious intent of killing us (armed). I see his gun... that is justification... No warning... Just... Bang.... before his has a chance to go bang on me... Here is an excellent read on the subject... The comments after the article are as good or better than the article itself....

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2010/12/giving_a_warning.html

I kinda reference my thoughts on this in my new signature line....

Outdoorsman1
 
Last edited:

cbpeck

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2009
Messages
405
Location
Pasco, Washington, USA
I thought I was not harsh enough.... Either the B.G. or he who wrote the OP, or both could have ended up DEAD... Or...
Outdoorsman1

I get where you're coming from.

I think the OP's post would've been amusing had the subject matter not been so serious. It's disconcerting when someone talks so flippantly about such a dire situation.

As far as my feelings on a verbal warning... Obvioulsy that would vary based on any given situtation...

A verbal warning could very well save a life if the warning was taken seriously and actually stopped an advance but...

I must say, in a real world obvious life and death situation, I will give no warning... the BG has already made the decision to cause me great bodily harm.. that was his choice... the more surprised he is in my stopping his (armed) advance the better... he should have considered all consequences before making the possible fatal mistake of approaching me or any of my loved ones with the obvious intent of killing us (armed). I see his gun... that is justification... No warning... Just... Bang.... before his has a chance to go bang on me... Here is an excellent read on the subject... The comments after the article are as good or better than the article itself....

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2010/12/giving_a_warning.html
Outdoorsman1

I read the article you posted & agree wholeheartedly. A verbal warning is by no means an imperative before pulling the trigger & it isn't a part of my trained response to a threat. If I have the element of surprise on my side & I know he's armed then I'm going to do my best not to make a peep as I quickly draw & pull the trigger. Similarly, if the situation goes really bad really fast (like the church scenario outlined in the article), then I'll draw & fire as quickly as I can. However, if the situation affords the opportunity to offer a verbal warning I think it's an opportunity worth taking. Several of the comments that follow the recommended article support this notion. The best gun fight is the one that's averted.

The point to my initial post is that the decision to draw & the decision to fire should be two separate decisions. Maybe both decisions are made in succession within a fraction of a second, but both decisions need to be made. There are scenarios where the mere sight of a gun will make a BG turn and run. You don't want to have already made a mental commitment to pull the trigger if while drawing you're watching the BG turn to run. If you've trained to draw & shoot with one decision then in such a moment you're likely to end up following through & putting a bullet in the BG's back. :uhoh:

If self defense situations were simple to navigate then we wouldn't be having these discussions. Hopefully doing so hones our mental preparedness & increases our chance of survival. That's a big part of why I post in forums like this, and I appreciate your insight.
 

XD9mmFMJ

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
82
Location
Florida
OP did pretty much everything right. You can second guess it all you like, but when you have some thug who just put a bandanna on and is rushing you full tilt with a hand in his pocket, you will either react or be attacked. Period.

In states like Montana (thank god I'm moving there) it is 100% LEGAL and LAWFUL to present your weapon and warn someone that you are about to kill them if you feel threatened. In states like Florida, you are LEGALLY allowed to "stand your ground" against an attacker, which may also include drawing your weapon if an attack is imminent. I can't see ANY REASON not to draw your weapon in preparation to kill an attacker, as described by the OP here. Your hesitation to do so could get you killed.

I don't give two **** what two little brats might say about their little thug being killed. I care more about being here to take care of my family, than I ever will about all the legal bull, what if scenarios, or anything else. You even blink at me wrong and YOU WILL be staring down the barrel of my gun. A split millisecond more of aggressive behavior, and I will send you to your maker. NO QUESTIONS ASKED.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
The point to my initial post is that the decision to draw & the decision to fire should be two separate decisions. Maybe both decisions are made in succession within a fraction of a second, but both decisions need to be made.

Generally speaking I think the above is correct. However, we must acknowledge that there are times it is a simultaneous decision (or even reaction), such as a mugging, where if you go for your sidearm you are most likely firing as soon as you clear the holster. I don't think that is the majority of self-defense scenarios or we would have a much higher percentage of discharging a firearm in self-defense usage however, it certainly happens (one of the first self-defense usages of a CC sidearm in MO after CC was passed was such a scenario in St. Louis). I think it is more this type of scenario about which Outdoorsman is thinking.

If I ever have to draw my sidearm for self-defense I truly hope, for purely selfish reasons if nothing else, that it is in a scenario where those are two separate decisions and I only have to make the first one because the BG wets himself and goes away. Its not even that I am squeamish about having to shoot another human being in self-defense (my willingness to do so was a battle I fought mentally before I started to carry) although it obviously is not my preference, but rather I just really, really, really do not want to deal with the paperwork.

I know, I know, it sounds insensitive, but really, you have to be interviewed for who knows how long, probably give up your sidearm as evidence for at least some time, likely pay your attorney a bit to be present to make sure you don't say anything stupid, and in a smaller community such as mine, the incident will be in the newspaper and on the local news and I guarantee that people are going to know you are the person involved even if the media doesn't give your name because this whole community is one big rumor mill. Certainly it is worth it rather than being dead or seriously wounded or seeing a loved one harmed and we make that decision when we decide to carry, but really, what rational person wants to go through all the real-world hassle of actually having to use your sidearm for anything besides putting holes in paper and making the metal disk ring?
 

Kirbinator

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
903
Location
Middle of the map, Alabama
I have this nagging feeling that either Frito had a gun in his pocket, or he had a cell phone or some other object. He was either bluffing (which makes no sense when you're confronted with deadly force), or he was armed.

But some of these gang-banger types want to manipulate your actions so that they are the victim. You could have shot him (by most of our accounts, you were in a standoff with what you believed to be a gun aimed in your direction), but if it turned out to be a cell phone...

I do second what the other posters said. I too have a mouth with a mind of its own. I keep in mind every time I'm OC to be careful of people and what they say -- what I say -- and how they react, and how not to escalate the situation. It's not really the "alpha" way to do things, because the "alpha" way is ... all of this (property/space/whatever) is mine. On the other hand, it is "alpha", because you've acknowledged to yourself that you don't have to respond to random challenges by other men, and that you're secure in your person and effects. And younger vs older has been the story since the birth of mankind. My line of thinking is that -- whatever the problem is -- it's not worth dying over today. I brought a gun. Did he? His brain will tell him when he's out of line. He knows the look. It's that reptile part of his brain that will make the decision.

Personally, I think you should have taken the shot. Particularly since his friend pulled him away and said what he said -- that indicated he WAS armed and your response WAS proper. However, it was a failure to de-escalate prior to that. Self-defense yes. On the other hand, he "shot first" ('Han shot first') when he responded to your comment with physical actions.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snip--
The point to my initial post is that the decision to draw & the decision to fire should be two separate decisions. Maybe both decisions are made in succession within a fraction of a second, but both decisions need to be made. There are scenarios where the mere sight of a gun will make a BG turn and run. You don't want to have already made a mental commitment to pull the trigger if while drawing you're watching the BG turn to run. If you've trained to draw & shoot with one decision then in such a moment you're likely to end up following through & putting a bullet in the BG's back. :uhoh:

Respectfully disagree.

I only draw with the intention to fire. There is an immediacy where milliseconds count big time. I still have the option of giving the pause command to my index finger.

That being said, there have been many situations where the perp/aggresor was able to turn between the defensive reaction and the actual impact of the round and was struck other than in the front of his torso - that alone doesn't make it a bad shooting. There are too many variables of time vs reaction.
 

yz9890

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
47
Location
Louisville, KY
I also feel there should be 2 decisions made in these types of situations and I suspect most of us would be able to recognize if the threat level changed to the extent that shooting was no longer required. I draw with the intent to fire but I still decide when to fire (if that makes sense). I wouldn't dream of second guessing anyone in this situation though. and just because someone's back is turned on you doesn't mean the threat is over (it just means a bigger pita afterwards).

this quote from Admiral Woodward comes to mind from his his defense of sinking the Belgrano;

"The speed and direction of an enemy ship can be irrelevant, because both can change quickly. What counts is his position, his capability and what I believe to be his intention."
 

11B2O

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2012
Messages
94
Location
High Point, NC
I will say this, in my experience I will do everything I can to de-escalate the situation before I have to pull the trigger. Not that I will hesitate to pull the trigger, because I have many times before, but I'd rather neutralize the situation without getting investigated. In Iraq in Afghanistan, there were many times where I raised my weapon and had a bead on some local national doing something stupid and didn't have to pull the trigger because they got the picture. And other times I did have to pull the trigger. But even though I was doing my job and even though the guy was a known terrorist, sometimes investigations came down.

Bottom line, if enemy will back down because I draw me weapon, great. If not...when I shoot at someone, I only shoot to kill. Just my training kicking in.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
---snip---

Bottom line, if enemy will back down because I draw me weapon, great. If not...when I shoot at someone, I only shoot to kill. Just my training kicking in.

In civilial self-defense there is a decided advantage to shooting to stop and only esposing that reaction. The result may well be the same, but he intent expressed is totally different and words do have meaning, especially to an overly zealous prosecutor.
 

yz9890

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
47
Location
Louisville, KY
In civilial self-defense there is a decided advantage to shooting to stop and only esposing that reaction. The result may well be the same, but he intent expressed is totally different and words do have meaning, especially to an overly zealous prosecutor.

I don't understand what you said here. Could you rephrase it please?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
In civilial self-defense there is a decided advantage to shooting to stop and only esposing that reaction. The result may well be the same, but he intent expressed is totally different and words do have meaning, especially to an overly zealous prosecutor.

I don't understand what you said here. Could you rephrase it please?

Don't say "kill"

Say "stop". That won't hurt you in court.
 

yz9890

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
47
Location
Louisville, KY
Don't say "kill"

Say "stop". That won't hurt you in court.

thanks.

while I certainly don't disagree with that and would love not to need kill someone if it can be avoided, I think it's possible for someone to focus so much on what may come up in the inevitable aftermath with attorneys etc that they begin to do so at the expense of their own safety. reverse engineering a lawyer friendly shooting is a dead end in my opinion. I'm not suggesting it's not a good idea to educate yourself about scenarios you may find yourself in. Just be careful you don't get so legality focused that you catch a bullet. save your life first. save your ass second. you'll need your own lawyer anyway no matter how well you think you've prepared.
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
I think all Grapeshot is saying that if a prosecuting attorney pulls a transcript from an online forum of you saying "I'd shoot to kill" he would try to present that as if you were wanting to kill someone.

If you say "I'd shoot to stop the threat" it's much harder for them to twist that in an unfavorable light. We shoot to stop the threat, and sometimes death is the result.

The moral of the story is to not give the opposing side any ammunition to use against you if you ever end up in court.
 

yz9890

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
47
Location
Louisville, KY
I think all Grapeshot is saying that if a prosecuting attorney pulls a transcript from an online forum of you saying "I'd shoot to kill" he would try to present that as if you were wanting to kill someone.

If you say "I'd shoot to stop the threat" it's much harder for them to twist that in an unfavorable light. We shoot to stop the threat, and sometimes death is the result.

The moral of the story is to not give the opposing side any ammunition to use against you if you ever end up in court.

I agree with that 100%.

I don't plan on killing anyone's husband, father, son etc. I plan on stopping the central nervous system that's holding the gun or knife on me or my family.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Don't say "kill"

Say "stop". That won't hurt you in court.

+1 Anything else is inadvisable.

Most people, when they say "I shoot to kill!" simply mean that they aren't going to go for the double-femur takedown shot we all practice so much for (see the "Fight" thread).

How it sounds, though, is like a person who's itching for the opportunity not merely to use a firearm in self-defense, but to explicitly, intentionally kill with it.

I shoot to stop. As it happens, I don't have particularly strong expectations than my assailant will survive the encounter. Although I might prefer him to survive. But all that is incidental. At the time, the only thing that matters is stopping the threat.
 
Top