Drew today. I hope that's my last time ever.

[protector84]

imported post

An ex-police officer advised me that if you are going to open carry a gun that you should alsocarry a concealed backup switchblade knife on your other side. For one, you don't have all of your cards out on the table and second while a street thug is trying to get your weapon away (rare but it can happen), you can draw your backup knife and start slashing at him until he retreats. Always have a backup plan was this guy's advice. A cat may have claws but it also has teeth.

 

[emsjeep]

imported post

I really don't see how you can say "lock your doors and roll up your windows and hope nothing happens" last time I checked my Jeep didn't come with armor and bullet resitant glass. If it comes to the point where he is outside of your window and draws on you he has the advantage, not only are you unable to shoot properly but are confined by a seatbelt and the seat and may not be able to draw in time. My initial thoughts upon reading this were:

a) drive away if possible, I always leave enough room to jump into another lane or the shoulder if available.

b) if you are confined and unable to retreat exit the vehicle ASAP, cover behind the door and order the unarmed suspect down or away. If he continues to approach, "Stop or I'll shoot," and if he still doesn't stop, draw, and if he makes a motion for a weapon draw and fire.

If you risk a physical encounter with someone who may be stronger than you and have no backup immediately available to help you subdue the person with non-lethal means then you have just offered your weapon up to the aggressor. If he gains control of you, he gains the weapon and therefore a threat of any physical violent contact would reasonably put you in fear of your life. Not that I advocate drawing on and shooting everyone, but if they violate your safe zone it becomes a physical threat, and there is a good chance that they could get your weapon if any sort of physical confrontation were to ensue.

Keep in mind I have a decent amount of defense training, including training in the disarming of subjects with guns and knives, but if I can avoid it I do not intend to let him get close enough to me with a weapon to be able to disarm him if I have a definitive means of defense. Also, I am well aware of my physical limitations. I could probably take down most people if it came to it but one punch in the wrong spot or one mistep on my partand that could be it, once you are out they have your weapon and you are dead.

 

[marshaul]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote: [/b]

Let me sum it up as this is real simple....YOU WERE BRANDISHING A FIREARM!!! ......... You got real lucky.

If you, LEO 229, were in uniform and on-duty, and some angry dude came aggressively towards your vehicle, what would you do? Cops draw on (apparently) unarmed people all the time. At what point would you draw?

Just curious.

 

[mvpel]

imported post

I'm curious too.

If someone jumps out of their car in the middle of traffic in a screaming rage, they're already way, way, waaaay beyond the pale - completely out of control. And any reasonable person would come to the conclusion that they are about to commit physical violence against you.

Woman Beaten in Road Rage Attack
http://www.nbc5i.com/news/17666557/detail.html?rss=dfw&psp=news


Driver Killed in Road Rage Attack
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...age-attack-row-motorist-hard-shoulder-M1.html

Road Rage Attack with Baseball Bat (Video report)
http://au.truveo.com/Road-Rage-Attack/id/2673123861

Man, 87, Punched in Road Rage Attack
http://thewantedblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/man-87-punched-in-road-rage-attack.html

"Justifiable self-defense" to draw and make ready? HELL YES!!!

If you wait until he rips your car door open or breaks your window and punches you, it may be too late.

Cops probably throw out the "brandishing" card because they don't have any idea who's telling the truth when they arrive on the scene.

 

[David.Car]

imported post

protector84 wrote:

I do personally find it a bit concerning that so many people want to carry steel around but have no interest in carrying anything non-lethal or training themselves in non-lethal force. Such people run the risk of using deadly force whennot justified or not using any force at all when required. There is a reason that police officers and military carry different types of weapons. Self-defense is not one-size-fits-all. If all you carry is a pistol and nothing else, I strongly suggest coming up with action plans on how you are going to defend yourself with non-lethal force if needed because when some crackhead comes up and hits you in the mouth several times, you will regret having fired ten rounds into his chest especially when you realized too latethat it wasn't a smart thing to do.

Can I pistol whip him? I kid I kid!

There are many things even a normal person can use in help of self defense. Keys at the bare minimum. Pocket knife (less lethal than a bullet for sure). Small flashlight.

 

[mvpel]

imported post

protector84 wrote:

I do personally find it a bit concerning that so many people want to carry steel around but have no interest in carrying anything non-lethal or training themselves in non-lethal force. Such people run the risk of using deadly force whennot justified or not using any force at all when required. There is a reason that police officers and military carry different types of weapons.

Yes, and that reason is that the police have a legal obligation to pursue, confront, and using the least amount of force necessary, take into custody, both violent and non-violent criminals.

The reason I want to carry my sidearm is as an emergency rescue device, used if necessary to keep myself alive, by STOPPING a violent attack in progress, until backup (the police) can arrive.

I have no obligation to chase a criminal, no obligation to confront a criminal, and no obligation to take a criminal into custody.

My non-lethal backup plan is to calm the violent person down if possible, or get the hell out of there if possible.

 

[Prophet]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

The OP gave no indication that an assault was pending.

Could it happen? Yes.

Could he have had his gun ready but hidden? Yes.

But...

Could the guy just be blowing off steam? Yes.

Could the OP lock the door and roll up his windowto prevent easy access to him? YES!!



If theOP was about to be attacked by the guy reaching in to cause him harm...would he be justified in pulling out his gun and pointing it at the guy? Hell yes!

But NONE of this happened!!!

The OP pulled it out and never even pointed it at the guy. This says.. he feared something "could" happen but knew at that moment "nothing" was happening to justify pointing his gun at the man.

What he probably did not realize is that the simple displayand the pointingat the guy is brandishing just the same.

He tipped his handtoo early and he knows this now.

So if I follow you correctly LEO,Bubb should have hadhis gun hidden and ready...and when the road rager pulls a weapon then Bubb should shoot him. That is a better outcome in your mind?

I think that the display of a weapon acted as a deterrent and as such stopped the situation from escalating. I mean...isn't that one of the reasons we Open Carry?

 

[emsjeep]

imported post

I would carry a Tazer, but it's illegal in more places than my pistol...and not just illegal to carry, but illegal to own. Being a NY resident I cannot own one so the state has effectively prevented that means of less than lethal force and if you think I'm going to rely on being upwind of the guy and it not raining so that I can use pepper spray, you've got another thing coming.

 

[TechnoWeenie]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Let me sum it up as this is real simple....

Since there was no need to shoot the unarmed man standing outside your vehicle and he was doing nothing but yelling at you....

YOU WERE BRANDISHING A FIREARM!!! 

And yet.. a SWAT team shoots an unarmed, compliant man 'on accident', and no charges are filed...


an officer is in the same situation, and kills the man, and then says 'SEE! he had a gun!' after they find out he had a CPL/CCW and a pistol on him...

What's good for the goose is good for the gander...

Someone running up to my car is not going to be wanting to sit down for tea, and will NOT result in me just sitting there, wether it be running the red light (when safe to do so), striking him with my door (he's already too close!), or 'brandishing' as you call it, the situation dictates the tactics.

The whole purpose of ANY situation is to escape unharmed, first priority is to evade/escape if possible, fight is only a last resort. In heavy traffic, you have nowhere to go, exiting the vehicle gives you maneuverability, but also opens you up to greater harm, staying inside the vehicle with your weapon drawn prepared for a threat seems to be an acceptable solution.... The consequences of NOT preparing could be death.

Officers have shot people for much less and have been cleared of any wrongdoing...

You have your gun out pulling over a suspicious vehicle, with a taillight out A-OK. But someone who has his vehicle rushed by a mad man in dense traffic isn't OK?

 

[TechnoWeenie]

imported post

nitrovic wrote:

You are technically right LEO, but what if (and I know we hate what if games) the other driver attempted to pull the OP out of his vehicle. I don't think a reasonable person in the OP's situation would think the other driver merely wanted to chat with him. If he got out of his car, came up to the OP's car, AND attempted to assault him, I think the brandishing would be justified. Just throwing it out there.

This case is also an example of the police officers right not to arrest for a misdemeanor. I have some some on this board who believe the police have too much power in deciding when to arrest vs. not to arrest. I think the officers did the right thing in this one.

TY!

I think the officers used common sense. A shitty situation that luckily, ended without injury. Everyone goes home @ the end of the day...

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

emsjeep wrote:

I really don't see how you can say "lock your doors and roll up your windows and hope nothing happens" last time I checked my Jeep didn't come with armor and bullet resitant glass. If it comes to the point where he is outside of your window and draws on you he has the advantage, not only are you unable to shoot properly but are confined by a seatbelt and the seat and may not be able to draw in time. My initial thoughts upon reading this were:

a) drive away if possible, I always leave enough room to jump into another lane or the shoulder if available.

b) if you are confined and unable to retreat exit the vehicle ASAP, cover behind the door and order the unarmed suspect down or away. If he continues to approach, "Stop or I'll shoot," and if he still doesn't stop, draw, and if he makes a motion for a weapon draw and fire.

If you risk a physical encounter with someone who may be stronger than you and have no backup immediately available to help you subdue the person with non-lethal means then you have just offered your weapon up to the aggressor. If he gains control of you, he gains the weapon and therefore a threat of any physical violent contact would reasonably put you in fear of your life. Not that I advocate drawing on and shooting everyone, but if they violate your safe zone it becomes a physical threat, and there is a good chance that they could get your weapon if any sort of physical confrontation were to ensue.

Keep in mind I have a decent amount of defense training, including training in the disarming of subjects with guns and knives, but if I can avoid it I do not intend to let him get close enough to me with a weapon to be able to disarm him if I have a definitive means of defense. Also, I am well aware of my physical limitations. I could probably take down most people if it came to it but one punch in the wrong spot or one mistep on my partand that could be it, once you are out they have your weapon and you are dead.

I am not telling you what to do here... I am only putting out ideas and you can take from it what you like.

From your logic.... I should walk down the street with a gun in my hand so that any people that "might" hurt me will be warned.

Because that is what you have in the OP's case. There was no threat to him. The guy was yelling and screaming. People do this all the time.

Can you imagine if we were in an argument and when YOU raised your voice to me... and I pulled out my gun!! Just in case you decided to come at me?? You would freak out!

The brandishing code is clear. If there is a threat of danger.. OK... but yelling and screaming is NOT a threat of danger.

Even if your windows do not roll up.... it does not give you any more justification to display a gun. You have to KNOW he is going to attack you.

As I said... it would have been better to draw and keep it hidden. The moment the threat is made... you can deploy it.

But the OP used it to scare. He reacted and was trying to scare a man yelling at him to prevent any further problems.

The OP was WRONG.. and even admitted to his mistake.

Do not try to justify what the OP knows is wrong. :lol:

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

Prophet wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

The OP gave no indication that an assault was pending.

Could it happen? Yes.

Could he have had his gun ready but hidden? Yes.

But...

Could the guy just be blowing off steam? Yes.

Could the OP lock the door and roll up his windowto prevent easy access to him? YES!!



If theOP was about to be attacked by the guy reaching in to cause him harm...would he be justified in pulling out his gun and pointing it at the guy? Hell yes!

But NONE of this happened!!!

The OP pulled it out and never even pointed it at the guy. This says.. he feared something "could" happen but knew at that moment "nothing" was happening to justify pointing his gun at the man.

What he probably did not realize is that the simple displayand the pointingat the guy is brandishing just the same.

He tipped his handtoo early and he knows this now.

So if I follow you correctly LEO,Bubb should have hadhis gun hidden and ready...and when the road rager pulls a weapon then Bubb should shoot him. That is a better outcome in your mind?

I think that the display of a weapon acted as a deterrent and as such stopped the situation from escalating. I mean...isn't that one of the reasons we Open Carry?

Again....

From your logic.... I should walk down the street with a gun in my hand so that any people that "might" hurt me will be warned.

Brandishing is not a gun in a holster. Brandishing is making a threat to use when not necessary. This is what the OP did.

How about this then..... if OCing is a deterrent.. why did the OP not step out of his car so it could be seen and done so in a non-threatening manner.

People.... I guess I am not getting through to you...

Read the brandishing code and learn what is allowed.

What the OP did was not. He could have been charged and I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE CHARGED HIM!

If the other guy had a gun concealed... he could have been justified in shooting the OP!!!

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Let me sum it up as this is real simple....

Since there was no need to shoot the unarmedman standing outside your vehicle and he was doing nothing but yelling at you....

YOU WEREBRANDISHING A FIREARM!!!

And yet.. a SWAT team shoots an unarmed, compliant man 'on accident', and no charges are filed...


an officer is in the same situation, and kills the man, and then says 'SEE! he had a gun!' after they find out he had a CPL/CCW and a pistol on him...

What's good for the goose is good for the gander...

Someone running up to my car is not going to be wanting to sit down for tea, and will NOT result in me just sitting there, wether it be running the red light (when safe to do so), striking him with my door (he's already too close!), or 'brandishing' as you call it, the situation dictates the tactics.

The whole purpose of ANY situation is to escape unharmed, first priority is to evade/escape if possible, fight is only a last resort. In heavy traffic, you have nowhere to go, exiting the vehicle gives you maneuverability, but also opens you up to greater harm, staying inside the vehicle with your weapon drawn prepared for a threat seems to be an acceptable solution.... The consequences of NOT preparing could be death.

Officers have shot people for much less and have been cleared of any wrongdoing...

You have your gun out pulling over a suspicious vehicle, with a taillight out A-OK. But someone who has his vehicle rushed by a mad man in dense traffic isn't OK?

Geezzz!!! Here we go again..... This just shows how dangerous it can be when you draw your gun.

Imagine if the OP pointed it and got spooked... he could have shot the guy who was unarmed.

Not good for anyone.

The police draw theirs when they are making arrests. It is done so often that a mistake is going to eventually happen.

Part of the job where you have to take a risk. So why draw down on this guy yelling at you??!!!

No need to do it!

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

marshaul wrote:

LEO 229 wrote: [/b]

Let me sum it up as this is real simple....YOU WEREBRANDISHING A FIREARM!!!.........You got real lucky.

If you, LEO 229, were in uniform and on-duty, and some angry dude came aggressively towards your vehicle, what would you do? Cops draw on (apparently) unarmed people all the time. At what point would you draw?

Just curious.

Create distance!!!!

If I cannot do that... I step out and use the force necessary for what I have.

Voice, Mace, Hands On,Taser, Baton, Gun.

If the guy is unarmed... I certainly will not be shooting him!! Bad enough to do it by accident... To do it on purpose!! Oh My!!

I do not pull my gun unless I am ready and willing to use it.

Would it be an effective tool to get him to stop? Probably. But what it I need to only go hands on?? Now I have a gun that I have to holster! Not good!!

Then we fight over the gun I pulled out. I still need to have some justification to shoot the guy. That would come AFTER a fist fight and he was winning.

The OP would not be able to even fight the guy off one handed. He would have shot him and I am confident the people would find his actions as wrong.

He had other options available.

 

[bayboy42]

imported post

Before I started carrying a gun...my uncle told me "Boy...that gun ain't there to keep you from getting an ass-whippin". Turns out its a simple but true piece of advice.

Hows this for an alternative solution for this particular situation...probably something I would have done:

I would have removed my holstered weapon and either held it across across my lap or beside my right thigh. THis would have put me in a position to:

a) analyze the potential threat that the man presented

and

b) quickly aim at the COM should the situation escalate

all without the crazy guy even knowing I was armed....

The other thing I find interesting in this thread is the use of the term "justifiable brandishing"....is there such a thing in the eyes of the law?

 

[bayboy42]

imported post

mvpel wrote:

I'm curious too.

If someone jumps out of their car in the middle of traffic in a screaming rage, they're already way, way, waaaay beyond the pale - completely out of control. And any reasonable person would come to the conclusion that they are about to commit physical violence against you.

Woman Beaten in Road Rage Attack
http://www.nbc5i.com/news/17666557/detail.html?rss=dfw&psp=news


Driver Killed in Road Rage Attack
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1022240/Driver-killed-road-rage-attack-row-motorist-hard-shoulder-M1.html

Road Rage Attack with Baseball Bat (Video report)
http://au.truveo.com/Road-Rage-Attack/id/2673123861

Man, 87, Punched in Road Rage Attack
http://thewantedblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/man-87-punched-in-road-rage-attack.html

"Justifiable self-defense" to draw and make ready? HELL YES!!!

If you wait until he rips your car door open or breaks your window and punches you, it may be too late.

Cops probably throw out the "brandishing" card because they don't have any idea who's telling the truth when they arrive on the scene.

Down here in VA....we can't shoot somebody for punching us.

Along the same note, the threat of physical violence doesn't provide the right to respond with deadly force.

 

[Sonora Rebel]

imported post

'Never pick a fight with an old man... he'll prob'ly just kill you.'

 

[emsjeep]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Prophet wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

The OP gave no indication that an assault was pending.

Could it happen? Yes.

Could he have had his gun ready but hidden? Yes.

But...

Could the guy just be blowing off steam? Yes.

Could the OP lock the door and roll up his windowto prevent easy access to him? YES!!



If theOP was about to be attacked by the guy reaching in to cause him harm...would he be justified in pulling out his gun and pointing it at the guy? Hell yes!

But NONE of this happened!!!

The OP pulled it out and never even pointed it at the guy. This says.. he feared something "could" happen but knew at that moment "nothing" was happening to justify pointing his gun at the man.

What he probably did not realize is that the simple displayand the pointingat the guy is brandishing just the same.

He tipped his handtoo early and he knows this now.

So if I follow you correctly LEO,Bubb should have hadhis gun hidden and ready...and when the road rager pulls a weapon then Bubb should shoot him. That is a better outcome in your mind?

I think that the display of a weapon acted as a deterrent and as such stopped the situation from escalating. I mean...isn't that one of the reasons we Open Carry?

Again....

From your logic.... I should walk down the street with a gun in my hand so that any people that "might" hurt me will be warned.

Brandishing is not a gun in a holster. Brandishing is making a threat to use when not necessary. This is what the OP did.

How about this then..... if OCing is a deterrent.. why did the OP not step out of his car so it could be seen and done so in a non-threatening manner.

People.... I guess I am not getting through to you...

Read the brandishing code and learn what is allowed.

What the OP did was not. He could have been charged and I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE CHARGED HIM!

If the other guy had a gun concealed... he could have been justified in shooting the OP!!!

Understood.

Well not exactly walk around with your hand on your gun, actually, not at all. If you can't get away in the car, getting out of it allows you to not be in the disadvantaged position of shooting across your body and below him where he can shoot down into you.

The door and glass provide no protection, but if need be you can put a firewall and engine between you and him.

One can yell and scream from a distance. Approaching the vehicle to impose himself physically while screaming is threatening behavior, physical violence is imminent..."you don't put on a condom unless your going to F*&%" (Crimson Tide). Brandishing the weapon as a first reaction to the threat is not a good idea. Position yourself defensively where you can go mobile and find cover if need be, issue a verbal warning, issue a second verbal warning letting him know you are armed, draw, and if he comes close enough to initiate physical contact or draws a weapon...well, when you shoot him all of the people around you in traffic will be able to say, "Oh yes officer, the irate asshat received three verbal warnings and still attempted to assault and disarm the helpless civilian". Retreating from the roadway on foot may or may not be a viable option, but if it is available make sure you locked your car before you left...on the other hand if you leave the shield which is your car, he is liable to get back into his and run you over. So keeping the vehicle between you and him and not retreating may be a good idea.

This is all assuming that you cannot drive away...I am not condoning the actions of the OP, but getting your ass kicked isn't a viable option because if that weapon gets away from you, you're dead, period, you do everything to avoid that, brandishing or not, it may have just saved your life.

 

[mvpel]

imported post

Because that is what you have in the OP's case. There was no threat to him. The guy was yelling and screaming. People do this all the time.

Tell me where you live so I'll know NEVER to move there. :shock:

You can't be serious, can you? Someone jumps out of the car in the middle of the street in a screaming rage over some minor non-contact traffic mistake all the time?

Down here in VA....we can't shoot somebody for punching us.

In Virginia, as in every other state, you can shoot someone for putting you in reasonable fear of imminent great bodily harm or death. Unless you're going up against a 100-pound grade-schooler, that can mean one punch.

I don't want to fight with anyone. I don't want another person to punch me. If they insist on trying to, and I can't get away, I'm not going to let them get a few licks in just so I can say they did, if I have any other alternative.

May 23, 2006 -- The New Jersey man found lying in a pool of blood in the middle of a Chelsea street early Sunday died from a single powerful punch to the head, police sources revealed yesterday.

The knockout blow was enough to kill business school graduate Thomas Whitney Jr., 25, of Hoboken, who died at Bellevue Hospital more than 12 hours after he was found on 19th Street near Sixth Avenue at about 4:30 a.m., the autopsy showed.

LAKEWOOD, Ohio - Derrick Dykas threw one punch at Matthew Hockey. It was enough to kill him, authorities say.

Derrick Dykas is charged with murder after he landed a fatal blow to another man in a fight outside a bar, authorities say. Hockey, 30, died of a head injury that police say came during an altercation outside Johnny Malloy's bar in Lakewood, Ohio, near Cleveland, early Saturday morning.

One guy who was set upon up in Manchester by a group of youths spent nine months drooling before he finally died - "great bodily harm," in other words.

 

[mvpel]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Read the brandishing code and learn what is allowed.

Excusable or justifiable self-defense is allowed.

So if you want to charge the victim of an attack, you certainly can, Mr. Officer, but you'd need to persuade a jury that a man in a blind rage coming towards you doesn't call for self-defensive actions.