Brandishing

i think the thing you need to remember, as far as a legal standard in all 50 states, is always going to be: "Were you in fear for your life?" if you can honestly say that you were in IMMINENT fear for your life, then yes, you can use deadly force. of course, remember the grand jury or D.A. also has to agree with you given the same set of circumstances that you were put in.

ill give you a recent incident while i was in CA last week, and yes i was carrying. i was at a gas station in Fremont off of I-680 in the Bay Area pumping gas. that always is a vulnerable area because the damn pump is in your car and the BG knows you can't go anywhere. i was also talking on my cellphone but still vigilant and had my back to the gas pump.

anyway a see a lowlife 18 year old kid hanging around the gas station with no apparent business. he is doing the "crook walk", walking around in circles with no apparent destination. almost like an animal looking for prey. there is another guy in a Jeep closer to him pumping gas. he goes up to the guy in the Jeep and asks him something. that guy was also eye-f*cking this kid so no dice. kid then sees me eye-f*cking him hard. let him know you're looking at him. he started approaching me and the only stupid thing he could say was, "Can I borrow your cellphone?" ***. im talking on it and even if i wasnt why would i give a stranger my cellphone? idiot. i told him very sternly, "NO. I HAVE NOTHING FOR YOU." i was between my car and the gas pump and he could not see my right hand, which was already clearing my jacket to expose my Glock 31C. personally i would have had no problem drawing down on this guy, proning him out in the middle of the lot, and driving off, had he come any closer since i already told him that i had nothing for him, so he really had no reason to further approach me. if you break down the circumstances:

1. person with no apparent business loitering around a gas station at night (around 9 pm)
2. person having no rational behavior, just walking in circles
3. person approaching and asking something out of the ordinary (asking to use my cellphone while i am using it - not a rational thing to ask. also the business is open and there are pay phones visible).
4. already told the person NO and that i had nothing for him

if this person continued to advance i think i could articulate that i felt he was up to no good and at that point i'd assume he was about to commit a robbery or carjacking. i think at that point i could justifiably exhibit a firearm in self-defense since a rational person would probably believe that he was up to no good.

i am glad that he just walked away and continued to dog me from afar. i was driving my relatives' 2006 Toyota Camry (loaded out) and i figured he was probably considering taking the car. he wasn't a big guy so i dont think he was looking for a fight, but was looking to take something. he did look at the car several times too. maybe he was just waiting for me to fill up the tank before he tried to take the car...who knows. and i was about 100 feet from an interstate on-ramp.

this is a different scenario, but i think i would be able to articulate that i was justified under CA Penal Code (417) to brandish if the BG continued his advance.

Indeed. I haven't been in a fistfight since I was in the army in Europe. (These fights were mostly at concert festivals.)

We should not start grading what is an 'acceptable' level of violence. That's like asking what is the acceptable level of rat feces in peanut butter. There is no ACCEPTABLE level. Everything we do should be about avoiding all violence by any means necessary.

Outlaws said:

That is very true. But this whole thing about legal or not legal has more to do with a situational thing. If you are outside a packed bar and someone gets in your face and you draw a firearm, there may or maynot be witnesses who don't care one way or the other if you were in the right or not.

Click to expand...

See, here is part of the problem. In the first place, we are far from the original post. Let's change this, let's change that to make a point. This is not the original poster's scenario.

In the second place, since you brought it up, why would anyone want to be somewhere where they are going to run the risk of a fistfight? Yeah, yeah, I know, night life, got to boogie, and all that. I like a cold beer as much as the next guy, but as far as I am concerned, bars and guns don't mix, and since I carry a gun, I don't go to bars. Bars are full of stupid drunk people. I do my drinking at home sitting on my own porch or in my own living room. I don't feel the need to go associate with a group of strangers with questionable judgement or behavior. And if I happen to be walking by a bar when some drunk wants to stagger out and take a poke at me, I think I will have the edge, gun or no. Whether or not I decide to pull my gun, he is not going to hit me.

i think it's not a matter of whether he is allowed to hit you or not before you can pull a gun in self-defense. everyone, each individual person, is going to have their limit on when deadly force, or the threat of deadly force, will be used. my limit may be different than that of a 18 year old female college student. she may resort to deadly force much quicker than me in some situations, and i may in others. the bottom line is can you unequivocally say that you were in imminent fear for your life? if you can say yes to a punch, then that's fine. if not, then maybe you can take a punch or two before you ask yourself the same question.

personally, if someone hits me, i am not going to pull my gun immediately. i think i can take a lick or two, or maybe even look for an exit route, before i resort to deadly force. but what i do may be different than what you do. just be prepared to have it scrutinized when it is all over.

See, here is part of the problem. In the first place, we are far from the original post. Let's change this, let's change that to make a point. This is not the original poster's scenario.

In the second place, since you brought it up, why would anyone want to be somewhere where they are going to run the risk of a fistfight? Yeah, yeah, I know, night life, got to boogie, and all that. I like a cold beer as much as the next guy, but as far as I am concerned, bars and guns don't mix, and since I carry a gun, I don't go to bars. Bars are full of stupid drunk people. I do my drinking at home sitting on my own porch or in my own living room. I don't feel the need to go associate with a group of strangers with questionable judgement or behavior. And if I happen to be walking by a bar when some drunk wants to stagger out and take a poke at me, I think I will have the edge, gun or no. Whether or not I decide to pull my gun, he is not going to hit me.

Click to expand...

Sometimes threads cover a wide section of a subject inorder deal with the issue at hand and explain the difference. And you not going to bars has nothing to do with it because you don't have to go to a bar to be outside one. Haven't you ever been to a resturant that is next door to a bar? Ever been to a gas station that is nextdoor to a bar? Just because you are past the age staying up after 10pm doesn't mean we are somehow asking for trouble. Please mind your own business and don't tell us that we are asking for something becasue we like to stay out at night.

Just because you are past the age staying up after 10pm doesn't mean we are somehow asking for trouble.

Click to expand...

First of all, you have no idea who I am or what my habits are. Second, if you are in bars at night, especially late at night and into the early morning, you are asking for trouble. It is that simple. Whether or not you agree does not change that fact. If you are carrying a gun in said bars, then you are asking for a lot more trouble than I am in stating my intended course of action if confronted by a drunk or a gang member - or a wet behind the ears kid who thinks he knows better.

you are asking for trouble. It is that simple. Whether or not you agree does not change that fact. If you are carrying a gun in said bars, then you are asking for a lot more trouble than I am in stating my intended course of action if confronted by a drunk or a gang member - or a wet behind the ears kid who thinks he knows better.

How again is it that you "know for a fact" that carrying in a bar is "asking for trouble"???

It is YOUR OPINION period... I happen to be a person with friends who like to go to bars and drink and have a good time. I don't drink most of the time so I'm the DD, and when I am not drinking, I carry. How on earth you come to the conclusion that carrying in a bar is asking for trouble, I don't know, but some places you are statistically more likely to run into trouble. That doesn't mean that if you are prepared for it, that you are asking for it.

Please go back and learn what a FACT is and what an OPINION is, and I might suggest that you go back and examine exactly why it is that you carry.

Trouble can find you at any time, at any place, I choose to be prepared for it.

Trouble can find you at any time, at any place, I choose to be prepared for it.

Click to expand...

+1
Furthermore, I choose not to live in fear. I do whatever I enjoy doing. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

All I was stating is this....
A fast an easy example.

Driving to the store after work, unintintionally cut someone off on the freeway because they are in your blind spot. You wave to show your apologies and the rest of the ride is uneventful. When you arrive at the grocery store, you see the car that you cut off pull up behind your vehical and the car door opens. The driver approaches you in a aggressive manner, NOT CARRYING a weapon of any sort ( and there could be no mistaking this). The driver calls you some choice names and seem to be advancing to a fist fight.

Brandish? this is the reoccurring theme in this thread. As a female, MAYBE. As a grown man? hmmm.... Pennysplinker and one or two others seem to think this is an acceptable course of action. I am guessing they would feel their life being threatened. Is that what a reasonable person thinks? A juror? What happens if they continue to approach AFTER YOU have drawn your weapon? What if they retreat to their car, get in begin to drive away AND SHOOT YOU IN REASONABLE FEAR OF THEIR LIFE.

Once the weapon is drawn - Any other person in the ENTIRE PARKING LOT CAN SHOOT YOU IN PROTECTION OF SOMEONE ELSES LIFE.

Comon people!!! THINK. A gun as a deterent is a can of worms waiting to infest your life with the legal system in the simplist forms.

Good luck to you Pennysplinker and others who feel this is acceptable.

ON another note, this is why I enjoy a pocket carry. Sits in my jacket pocket, LOADED, POINTED, wating to see if it is needed, and most importantly - NOT BRANDISHED.

Indiana Code 35-42-3-2: A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect themsleves or a third person from what he/she reasonably believes to be immenent use of lawful force. However, a person is justified in using deadly force only if he/she reasonably thought that the force is necessary to prevent SERIOUS BODILY INJURY to themselves or a third party or a FORCEIBILE FELONY. NO person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of ANY KIND whatsoever for protecting themselves or the third party by reasonable means necessary.

1. Does the subject(s) have the ability to seriously harm you or another
2. Does the subject(s) have the oppertunity to seriously harm you or another
3. Does the subject(s) place you or another in serious bodily harm or life in jeopardy?

A few moderate frame people CAN in the above statements place lives in jeopardy! People get beat to death everyday.

He went on to talk about getting beat up a little was also no justification to draw a deadly force type weapon

Click to expand...

If violent criminals think they have a free pass to commit assault on permit holders they will profile for them. That gun is worth more than what a busload of people carry in cash. Does the state really want loaded handguns handed out to violent criminals? Why? More profit growth and job security for their bloated justice sytem?

Nobody can predict in advance how serious a beating will be. Violent crime needs to be prevented from happening. That is the right thing to do. Sounds to me like your instructor was implying you shouldn't wait around for the cops or report the incident afterwards.

In a TRULY dangerous situation:

1) Wax the BG, if he's really a threat
2) Wait for the cops to come.
3) comply with police, and stating ONLY "I was in fear for my life."
4) shut up until you get a lawyer

P.S. this advice from a coupla lawyers I talked to.

I have seen some serious fights. I have seen one hit knockouts that drop someone to the ground unconscious and the attacker then begins to stomp on the person's head and face. At this point there is nothing they can do, the options they held are gone, they didn't know it beforehand be but all the power over the outcome is in the hands of the attacker and perhaps those onlookers who see it and are willing to stop them. Perhaps I am biased after spending some time working with powerful violent criminals who pride themselves on being physicaly fit and dangerous, but 1 hit knockouts against someone that never saw it coming are a lot more common than I once thought. These people are not wearing a padded glove like a professional boxer, and have much of the same upper body strength and form in delivery, meaning less force is required for the same result. They then proceed to make as much of an example of the victim as possible before being stopped, up to and including killing them. I imagine a group of such ex cons would be a very significant threat even if completely unarmed, especialy once they found a loaded firearm on the victim.

I think too many people are overly familiar with the image of teenage schoolyard boys exchanging punches, or two drunk men having trouble standing nevermind connecting punches etc when deciding how dangerous strong thugs who even if not formaly trained are street/jailhouse trained to do a lot of damage and incapacitate/injure in a short time. However a juror is likely to have that same image, of people exchanging multiple punches with little more than a bloody nose, maybe a black eye or cut lip and a bruised ego. This is not always accurate, but it is what a juror is likely to see as the danger you faced. This means lethal force, or brandishing which is threatening lethal force would not be legal.

I don't mind the wandering from the original post, some very good post & ideas in the responses. I particularly like the post about LEO's have their hand on there guns while making a traffic stop. To me, having my hand on my gun in the ready mode when someone is approaching in a way that makes you "on alert" should not be considered brandishing. I don't mean in an overly threatening manner, just ready. I am careful where I go & pay attention to the people around me. But examples like filling up your car, you may have started that with a perfectly normal looking scene, things can change fast.

Click to expand...

As long as no one knows your hand is on your pistol, you are fine. But just remember it is illegal, like it or not, to reveal your concealed pistol like that. Cops have a different set of rules and everything Bottom Gun posted in that post has been debunked with other links. Plus, if you display a weapon without much reason other than a "what if" situation you have going on upstairs and they feel threatend, they are now legal to draw/fire on you.

I assume you are an adult and can make your own decisions about what a situation requires. Everything is case by case. Good luck.

Attorney: So Mr. DigitalWarrior, you, a former marine, were afraid that a single very old man was going to kill you?
Me: HELL YES!!! He-(cutoff)
Attorney: Did this 80+ year old man have a gun, or a sword, a grenade, a knife, or even a stick?
Me: no, but-(cutoff)
Attorney: So you said this old man, possibly an escapee from a nursing home, calmly said "I am going to kill you", and you shot him again and again until the gun was empty, reloaded and resumed firing?
Me: HE WAS STILL WALKING TOWARDS ME SMILING!!!
Attorney: Remind me never to smile at you. nofurtherquestions
Me: Oh Dear.

Since there is legal open carry, I'd be ok to have the gun visible/accessable as long as it was visible before anything was started..Right?

Click to expand...

Is your hand on it? Then no.

As for just opening your jacket or something, that still depends. There is a thin line between transitioning from concealed carry to open carry, and concealed carry to displaying a firearm. I wouldn't listen to anyone on that subject unless they can provide something to a legal website.

If you do it at a supermarket register it is illegal because the cashier isn't going to be ready for it. (that goes back to the link "an unsuspecting person") There doesn't have to be an arguement to make it illegal. I would think if your general surrounding is clear you could transistion, but again, you really need somekind of affirmation from someone other than me or anyone else on this forum to know the boundry for that question. It is written in the law, but it is very vague.

I would contact a CCW instructor again and see what he really knows. As you can see he wasn't neccessarily wrong in what he told you interms of law.

No one said you have to get beat up. If you have a wife or family there, you would be protecting them, you just can't be flashing for the sake of getting some "scary looking person" to walk around you by 20 feet instead of 10 feet...or to keep a "scary looking person" from asking you for change at a gas station at 2am.

This may sound weird...but instead of brandishing...what if you just said?
I have a gun, stay back???
yes i see the bad results of this, on the other hand it may work...

Seems to me that this discussion has strayed rather far from the original question. The issue of "taking a punch" (or two, or three, or ...) depends a lot on circumstances. If one is engaged in a verbal altercation, drawing a gun is perhaps unwise if you can walk away from it. The necessity to occasionally eat humble pie is part of the responsibility that comes with a CCW permit.

However, being surrounded and shoved by a bunch of thugs is not an "argument" or an "altercation." It is, pure and simple, an assault. And the laws of pretty much every state allow you to use force to defend against an assault. And if you are in fear of loss of life or severe injury, the laws of pretty much every state allow you to use deadly force to defend against the assault or threat thereof.

Let's not confuse an argument between two drunks at a wedding reception with being surrounded by five unknown gang bangers on a public sidewalk. They just aren't analagous situations.

I chased down a punk beating up his girlfriend in his truck, he pulled into an alley and I followed to get his plate number, by the time I turned the corner to pull into the alley, both the punk and his girlfriend were out of the truck
and standing behind it where his hands were not visible. As I came to a stop appr 30 feet behind his truck he came out around with something in his hands. I opened my car door stood up, and he began to walk towards me, I grabbed my pistol from my car seat, and unholstered it. While keeping the weapon in a low ready position, I advised the punk that I was armed and to stop and drop what had in his hands.

He clearly saw the weapon, and stopped, but did not drop the object. I pulled my cell phone and called 911, I informed the operator of my situation, and made sure to tell her that I feared for my life. I pulled out of the alley and waited for PD. By the time the officers arrived, the punk had left the area on foot, but, they had his vehicle and the girlfriend, so they knew who he was. The responding officers were both women ( which I believe was a plus), they took my story, checked my weapon, put it in the trunk of my car, and went to look for the punk.

2 months later it went to court, where he acted as his own counsel. I was a witness so while on chair, he was asking questions about my authority to carry a gun and tried to make me look like a criminal for pulling my pistol. I told him I was a citizen, at that point, the judge shut him down so I could testify. He was convicted that day, and I went home.

By the way, I don't have a CCW. I don't need permission to be armed

waterdog in AZ

I'd bet there isn't a cop or lawyer or judge in the state that would insist your right to draw required getting a "little beat up first". Methinks your instructor should not be an instructor. Or maybe that "instructor" is imaginary.

Click to expand...

Somebody prosecuted Hamilton Fish. And that was in Arizona, too.

I'd bet there isn't a cop or lawyer or judge in the state that would insist your right to draw required getting a "little beat up first". Methinks your instructor should not be an instructor. Or maybe that "instructor" is imaginary.

Click to expand...

That wasn't what the instructor was saying. The instructor was saying that if the worst threat you see is 'getting a little beat up', then it's not a reason to draw your weapon.

The threat of a black eye or broken nose isn't enough. A major beating on up is.

Now, the scenario mentioned would be threatening enough to me, because people have been beated to death in those kinds of situations. Allowing yourself to fall into the power of thugs who outnumber you is a bad situation.

It could go something like this.

ME:Sorry gangbanger, didn't know i was dissin your hood, we'll be going now.

Gangbanger(s): Homie don't think so...(multiples start cutting off escape routes) time for a ass whooping city boy.

ME: C'mon fellas, we're leaving.

Gangbangers - no u ain't, you gonna have to fight your way out of this one.

ME:Honey, please hold this while I duke it out with these gangbangers that are smaller than me and we start to work our way out of this mess, stay close, remember, it's chambered. If one produces a weapon, well, don't hit me. Let's go.....

Like that would work. However, I could slip her my 45 unnoticed in a simple reach into her pocket and address said gangbangers in fisticuffs. I was pretty good at fisticuffs even though I've only been in two encounters. But for me, I am a big guy at 220 and 6'2". Two meth'd out gangbangers at 120 lbs each are not going to convince a judge I needed my gun. Karate training of any kind will be helpful in situations like this, and I have some. Which puts me at an advantage to typical gangbangers, and is real helpful for multiple attackers.

But really, what dfaugh said. If he/they are really a threat and there is no escape, wax him. I'd personally hope to draw early enough to allow him a chance to have a change of heart so I don't have to shoot him, but only as the very last resort, which is what it's for. It's not for show and tell, it's for defending my life. If multiple gangbangers attack my wife and I, it might go straight to being drawn if the circumstances fit. We've got four pages of conjecture, it's obviously entirely dependent on the actual circumstance as always.

Three premises will be needed by the perp MEANS, OPPORTUNITY, INTENT. Without all three, you lose and the papers and the local news have a heyday ruining you.

My dad sat on a jury where some thugs beat up on two people and a firearm became involved on the good guys side. It was used as blunt force object and smacked into a guys chest to attempt to stop his violent attack. One good guy already had his arm broken. It went off and winged another thug. They decided to leave. They successfully dragged the good guy into court and releived him of over $100,000 dollars and the court stripped him of all his firearm privileges....for defending himself, on his own property. These thugs were involved in another case where they were obviously the problem and their history for starting the fights and beating up on innocent citizens was flatly ignored by the judge. Sad, but true. So, with that, be damn sure they have means, opportunity and intent. And after the fact, SHUT UP and GET AN ATTORNEY. Do Not discuss ANYTHING with the LEO's!!! They will try to get you to talk, it is their job, you have the fifth amendment on your side, you will need to use it. They cannot hold what you say against you when you don't say anything.

And if you use that firearm, it will change your calendar for a good long time, and it's not fun social stuff either. It's watching how well the system protects the criminal element as the court case gets drawn out for months on end and you hear how you violated some gangbangers rights while he was ignoring yours and pummelling you. How you stomped on his rights out minding your own business and how he was a such a good fellow that just needed more time to work out his agressive tendencies, stuff like that.

jeepmor

Lots of good posts on this subject already, so I'm responding to the original post. My apologies if that takes the thread OT.

LT1coupe said:

The instructor was giving examples of when you would be justified to draw your weapon & that's were he & I were at odds. He gave scenarios where gang members were surrounding you & your wife, threatening your life, getting right in your face & shoving you. They had no visible weapons so you might get bruised up a little but since there were no visible weapons so you would not be justified to draw your weapon to enable a retreat. He went on to talk about getting beat up a little was also no justification to draw a deadly force type weapon & suggested we carry pepper spray as a first response.

Click to expand...

As with all things, it depends. 2 gangbangers vs. 2 citizens is a whole lot different than 5 gangbangers vs. 2 citizens. Who the citizen is and who the gangbanger is also varies a lot and significantly alters the situation. Husband and wife might both be serious martial arts practitioners. Others might not have that advantage and a 2-on-2 fight might well be a life threatening matter.

Then there's the matter of kids. Wife and I have 2 little ones, and even a weakling adult could easily inflict deadly injuries on a small child. A pushing match with BGs might well be deadly force in and of itself.

BGs behaving like AHs mouthing off, pushing, shoving, etc. are one thing. Once they physically cut off one's avenue of escape, then it becomes much more ominous and threatening. Refusing to allow one to leave imparts the intent to do harm. It's more certain than the words, "I'm going to kick yer a**". Actions speak with greater volume.

Similarly a simple punch or kick becomes deadly force when one is pressed up against a wall, floor or other solid object. Shod foot is the term in some jurisdictions.

LT1coupe said:

AZ just recently passed a stand your ground law that allows you to defend yourself in your own home instead of option B of leaving your home instead of endangering the BG's life

Click to expand...

SB1145 contains a Castle Doctrine component extending to either one's "residential structure or occupied vehicle".

Now law ARS 13-418
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00418.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS

LT1coupe said:

I left the class a little disillusioned, or is it just me?

Click to expand...

It isn’t you. I would feel a bit disillusioned as well.

When I lived in North Carolina and had to take state approved and required training, the state provided video of "what if" scenarios seemed intentionally and knowingly obscured and ambiguous.