Road rage scenario - what would you do?
- Thread starter dave3006
- Start date
- Status
sanchezero
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 555
Ahh, Ron (is it you Ron? if not, uh, disregard) if only that were the case. Don't try to apply common sense to scenarios on the internet
.Unfortunately, that much yelling often tends to drastically affect your ability to function mentally unencumbered. It seems that people become more intent on finishing their sentence than actually dealing with the threat. If you're gonna shout, try to limit it to a phrase thats shorter than your drawtime. Usually it's best to have just one word like "No!" or "Stop" or "Gimme your wallet"
, I mean uhhh...if the threat immediately de-escalates then you can shift gears and begin with your prepackaged speech of civil righteousness.Again, you really shouldn't be drawing your weapon unless you're in immediate fear of your life. If thats the case, you should probably be pulling that trigger as soon as the bore is pointing where you need it to be, yelling or not.
Certainly there are plenty of cases where a handgun is used simply as a deterrent (I'd submit that in these cases, 95% of the time it happens because the CCWer is too stupid, stubborn or prideful to retreat unobtrusively. if you have time to draw and deter, you could probably leave) but there are certainly cases where that person deterring the criminal is charged with brandishing a firearm.
synoptic
Member
In Texas you can't shoot just because you're scared. He may mean no more harm than to get in your face and yell at you. Until he draws a weapon or draws back to punch you (with a closed fist, an open hand is not considered a threat to your life here but a closed fist is) you can't shoot him. This doesn't mean you can't use force, it just can't be deadly force.
BerettaNut92
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2002
- Messages
- 9,723
I don't think junior high kids should be driving
Seriously, he says he's unarmed but I don't carry a metal detector, so I don't know. This is when mr Fox Labs comes in handy
If I had a legal CCW, I would not draw, cell phone 911 first. Get kids in car, if he keeps coming I'll apologise. If the "assailant with deadly weapon" does not de-escalate then I'll draw say "drop your weapon", if he does then we go from there, if he does not then I'll feel my life and my kids lives are in danger.
OEF_VET
Member
If I were alone, I'd most likely attempt to apologize, de-escalate the situation, and retreat.
If I were with my son, and this jacka$$ had threatened him, I'd probably draw and tell him to stop. If he failed to stop, I'd probably give him two warning shots, COM as Tallpine suggests.
Being an asthmatic, it is difficult at best for me to run away without putting myself into more jeopardy. Afterall, when I run out of steam in 200 yards, it'll be a lot easier for him to beat me senseless.
TN requires that you make every effort to retreat, if possible when defending yourself. However, the 'Good Samaritan' clause doesn't require that you attempt to retreat, you're coming forward to save another person. As my son is present, has been threatened by an adult, and is way too young to defend himself against said adult, I feel I'd be within my rights to use whatever force necessary to defend him.
You've been threatened with blunt force trauma, you've drawn a firearm, and told him to stop. Instead, he drops the visible weapon and continues his threats against you, while moving towards you and a drawn gun. My instinct would be that he has no fear of me or my gun. I am of the opinion that only a mentally imbalanced person would be void of fear in this situation. Therefore, I feel that my life is currently in danger and I'd fire.
Just my opinion. Hopefully nothing like this will ever happen.
Frank
If I were with my son, and this jacka$$ had threatened him, I'd probably draw and tell him to stop. If he failed to stop, I'd probably give him two warning shots, COM as Tallpine suggests.
Being an asthmatic, it is difficult at best for me to run away without putting myself into more jeopardy. Afterall, when I run out of steam in 200 yards, it'll be a lot easier for him to beat me senseless.
TN requires that you make every effort to retreat, if possible when defending yourself. However, the 'Good Samaritan' clause doesn't require that you attempt to retreat, you're coming forward to save another person. As my son is present, has been threatened by an adult, and is way too young to defend himself against said adult, I feel I'd be within my rights to use whatever force necessary to defend him.
You've been threatened with blunt force trauma, you've drawn a firearm, and told him to stop. Instead, he drops the visible weapon and continues his threats against you, while moving towards you and a drawn gun. My instinct would be that he has no fear of me or my gun. I am of the opinion that only a mentally imbalanced person would be void of fear in this situation. Therefore, I feel that my life is currently in danger and I'd fire.
Just my opinion. Hopefully nothing like this will ever happen.
Frank
Edward429451
member
It would take a special kind of idiot to advance on a drawn gun.
Not enough info to be able to tell what I'd do. Maybe I'd shoot him, maybe I'd retreat around the other side of the vehicle with the kids while yelling for the police in the same breath that I told him to stop.
His demeanor and actual speed of advance would dictate my actions. You can't retreat very far with kids present. It's his choice.
Not enough info to be able to tell what I'd do. Maybe I'd shoot him, maybe I'd retreat around the other side of the vehicle with the kids while yelling for the police in the same breath that I told him to stop.
His demeanor and actual speed of advance would dictate my actions. You can't retreat very far with kids present. It's his choice.
mrming
Member
pistol whipping is probably considered assualt with a lethal weapon..
you've already screwed up. door locks exist so you can maintain control over when your passangers get out, and who can get in. You failed to notice a vechile tailing you, that someone became irrate over your behaviour etc... even worse, you introduced a firearm to the situation before it was absolutely needful to save your hide.
Don't pull till he's close enough to be bashing on you, your not actually endangered until then. If he is wailing on you, there isn't any questions and its time to hault the encounter. If its a more lethal or ranged weapon, adjust accordingly. If he discards the bat and goes for your weapon, intent is still pretty clear. If he has time to discard the weapon and close, you pulled far too soon.
Could OC have stopped the entire situation? Pretty much and I hope your ready for the civil suit from the excessive force useage. The person will probably windup owning you, your first born son and daughter, and be pimping your wife. You may not have wanted to, you may not have been prepared for it, but other alternatives did exist. Its your job as the gun carrier to explore them.. remember, your carrying to protect life not to take it.
Remember also, it only takes one of us to screw it up for all. What if this fellow was a youth chaplin, and was frustrated out of his mind because one of the battered teens at the shelter he was counsiling had gone back to an abusive older boyfriend? You shoot, you kill or cripple him, you feel justified. Media gets ahold of how a good man was killed by someone with a ccw despite other options being open.. how justice isn't being done, lots of shots of his 2.3 kids and fashionably overweight wife.. battered teens testifying what a great person he was. 3 months later we could all find ourselves forfieting our handguns and it taking an armed revolution to restore them.
you've already screwed up. door locks exist so you can maintain control over when your passangers get out, and who can get in. You failed to notice a vechile tailing you, that someone became irrate over your behaviour etc... even worse, you introduced a firearm to the situation before it was absolutely needful to save your hide.
Don't pull till he's close enough to be bashing on you, your not actually endangered until then. If he is wailing on you, there isn't any questions and its time to hault the encounter. If its a more lethal or ranged weapon, adjust accordingly. If he discards the bat and goes for your weapon, intent is still pretty clear. If he has time to discard the weapon and close, you pulled far too soon.
Could OC have stopped the entire situation? Pretty much and I hope your ready for the civil suit from the excessive force useage. The person will probably windup owning you, your first born son and daughter, and be pimping your wife. You may not have wanted to, you may not have been prepared for it, but other alternatives did exist. Its your job as the gun carrier to explore them.. remember, your carrying to protect life not to take it.
Remember also, it only takes one of us to screw it up for all. What if this fellow was a youth chaplin, and was frustrated out of his mind because one of the battered teens at the shelter he was counsiling had gone back to an abusive older boyfriend? You shoot, you kill or cripple him, you feel justified. Media gets ahold of how a good man was killed by someone with a ccw despite other options being open.. how justice isn't being done, lots of shots of his 2.3 kids and fashionably overweight wife.. battered teens testifying what a great person he was. 3 months later we could all find ourselves forfieting our handguns and it taking an armed revolution to restore them.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
two words...furtive movement
I have just two words for y'all on this issue and these two words would likely help the intended father victim in this scenario quite well if things were to go to court. More over, these two words and what they represent probably will be hard to defeat even if there are witnesses to the event that actually see the bad guy drop the bat and charge the intended victim. In the course of charging the intended victim, the bad guy is going to do a variety of things with his hands that will involve passing by his pockets.
When asked what he shot the unarmed charging bad guy, likely all the justification needed beyond the situational context is "furtive movement" and that the intended victim believed the charging bad guy was attempting to produce another weapon secretted in a pocket.
Combine that with the initial threat with the baseball bat, the fact that the bad guy is the one who charged, and with the fact that the intended victim was protecting his kids as well as himself and 'furtive movement' is going to go a long way to justifying his need to shoot.
Edward, you are right, it would take a special kind of idiot to advance on a drawn gun. Nobody in their right mind would do that. Therein is the problem. The person obviously isn't in his right mind. It may be due to a natural chemical embalance, induced chemical embalance, brain tumor, psychopathy, delusions, etc. Hell, the bad guy may think he is superman.
I am sure y'all saw the thread on the guy with the butcher knife that called 911, said he had killed his whole family and would be waiting for the cops in his back yard. The cops arrived and he advanced on them with his knife and they did their duty. It was a suicide by cop incident of a person with mental problems. His family was inside and quite fine.
I have just two words for y'all on this issue and these two words would likely help the intended father victim in this scenario quite well if things were to go to court. More over, these two words and what they represent probably will be hard to defeat even if there are witnesses to the event that actually see the bad guy drop the bat and charge the intended victim. In the course of charging the intended victim, the bad guy is going to do a variety of things with his hands that will involve passing by his pockets.
When asked what he shot the unarmed charging bad guy, likely all the justification needed beyond the situational context is "furtive movement" and that the intended victim believed the charging bad guy was attempting to produce another weapon secretted in a pocket.
Combine that with the initial threat with the baseball bat, the fact that the bad guy is the one who charged, and with the fact that the intended victim was protecting his kids as well as himself and 'furtive movement' is going to go a long way to justifying his need to shoot.
Edward, you are right, it would take a special kind of idiot to advance on a drawn gun. Nobody in their right mind would do that. Therein is the problem. The person obviously isn't in his right mind. It may be due to a natural chemical embalance, induced chemical embalance, brain tumor, psychopathy, delusions, etc. Hell, the bad guy may think he is superman.
I am sure y'all saw the thread on the guy with the butcher knife that called 911, said he had killed his whole family and would be waiting for the cops in his back yard. The cops arrived and he advanced on them with his knife and they did their duty. It was a suicide by cop incident of a person with mental problems. His family was inside and quite fine.
griz
Member
If it's just me I would have got back in the car instead of pulling the gun, but the post says the KIDS ARE ALREADY OUT OF THE CAR. Trying to get one kid, much less a couple, back in a car is like herding cats.
Do you guys know how close 20 feet is? I'm a middle aged fat man and I can cover that distance in less time than it takes to say "stop or i'll shoot." Combine that with a couple kids and the guy is going to be shot until he stops.
Do you guys know how close 20 feet is? I'm a middle aged fat man and I can cover that distance in less time than it takes to say "stop or i'll shoot." Combine that with a couple kids and the guy is going to be shot until he stops.
SapperLeader
Member
I would have probaly drawn when he got a little closer. Either way, with kids involved, I think this would be a clean shoot.
Shaughn Leayme
Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 245
The intent to apply lethal force has been established on his part, the fact that he discards the bat and has the presence of mind to inform you that , since he doesn't have a weapon, you can't shoot him, would be a pretty good indicator that he may have done this before.
Is he alone? Is this a set up to get your children? Is he armed? Is he trying to get close enough to stab you with an as yet unseen knife. Is he/ was he a professional boxer or maybe a high level martial arts practitioner or extreme sports fighter.
I have a pistol, I am quite capable of adequately defending myself hand to hand,BUT I am not going to get into a struggle where I might lose control of said weapon or have it accidentally discharge, even if I drop the magazine, there is still one round under the hammer. Since it is staring him in the face he knows you have it, why give him a chance to take it away from you?
I will tell him to stop or I will shoot, based on the reason if I get disabled he now has my weapon and there is no one to protect my children (I don't have any, but I do have nieces and nephews).
Being a reasonable person, I have to base my decision (to shoot or not) on the actions and the perceived intent of this individual and based on what I have witnessed so far..I will give him the chance to break off, if he is not disuaded from his present course of action.......then shooting may be the only option left.
If possible I will remove myself and other from the situation, but sometimes that just isn't possible.
Is he alone? Is this a set up to get your children? Is he armed? Is he trying to get close enough to stab you with an as yet unseen knife. Is he/ was he a professional boxer or maybe a high level martial arts practitioner or extreme sports fighter.
I have a pistol, I am quite capable of adequately defending myself hand to hand,BUT I am not going to get into a struggle where I might lose control of said weapon or have it accidentally discharge, even if I drop the magazine, there is still one round under the hammer. Since it is staring him in the face he knows you have it, why give him a chance to take it away from you?
I will tell him to stop or I will shoot, based on the reason if I get disabled he now has my weapon and there is no one to protect my children (I don't have any, but I do have nieces and nephews).
Being a reasonable person, I have to base my decision (to shoot or not) on the actions and the perceived intent of this individual and based on what I have witnessed so far..I will give him the chance to break off, if he is not disuaded from his present course of action.......then shooting may be the only option left.
If possible I will remove myself and other from the situation, but sometimes that just isn't possible.
TheLastBoyScout
Member
If my kid's there-- the idiot is going to die. period. If he closes to melee range, I stand a chance of being disarmed-- a lethal threat that justifies a lethal response. Beyond that, there's no way in hell i m letting an out of control, violent man who's already pissed at me anywhere near my (presumably very young) kids.
When he was ordered to stop, he had his chance to walk away from the situation. He might get another -or- depending on how quickly he moves he might get shot... repeatedly.
When he was ordered to stop, he had his chance to walk away from the situation. He might get another -or- depending on how quickly he moves he might get shot... repeatedly.
Three elements of a justified use of deadly force are ability, opportunity, and jeopardy. Let's see how this scenario would stack up for me.
Disparity of force is present. He's male, I'm female. He therefore possesses the ability to kill or maim me.
Opportunity is present. He's almost close enough to kill me, and getting closer.
Jeopardy may be problematic, depending on what kind of jury is looking at the case. However, I heard him say he was going to kill me, while he was holding the baseball bat. He's still coming at me, and I doubt any reasonable person would believe he intends to do me good and not harm (he has changed the means of attack, but the attack itself has not ceased). By advancing, he is offering me force. By verbally threatening me, he makes it plain that it is deadly force he is offering (disparity of force being present and all).
Because the three elements of a justified use of deadly force are all present, I know that I can shoot if I need to. That confidence will show in my voice and my point of aim will not waver as I tell him, "STOP right there! Please don't make me shoot you! Go away!"
If he doesn't stop, I shoot.
pax
The way to fight a woman is with your hat. Grab it and run. -- John Barrymore
Disparity of force is present. He's male, I'm female. He therefore possesses the ability to kill or maim me.
Opportunity is present. He's almost close enough to kill me, and getting closer.
Jeopardy may be problematic, depending on what kind of jury is looking at the case. However, I heard him say he was going to kill me, while he was holding the baseball bat. He's still coming at me, and I doubt any reasonable person would believe he intends to do me good and not harm (he has changed the means of attack, but the attack itself has not ceased). By advancing, he is offering me force. By verbally threatening me, he makes it plain that it is deadly force he is offering (disparity of force being present and all).
Because the three elements of a justified use of deadly force are all present, I know that I can shoot if I need to. That confidence will show in my voice and my point of aim will not waver as I tell him, "STOP right there! Please don't make me shoot you! Go away!"
If he doesn't stop, I shoot.
pax
The way to fight a woman is with your hat. Grab it and run. -- John Barrymore
mrming
Member
PAX, original situation clearly stated the person is of the same size as yourself. Maybe I'm just being contrary, but is the gender difference alone sufficent for your first criteria despite equal size and strength, which is stated?
WonderNine
member
LBS, you have kids? Damn. You just made my 24 year old single a$$ feel like a really old bachelor.
airborneranger
Member
Hi im new here, and as a lawenforcement office I was faced with a similar situation except the guy had a knife, not a rambo knife but a regular pocket knife with about a 3 inch blade. He came at me and I told him to drop the weapon and stop he took a couple more steps I put 2 in his chest. It was ruled as a good shooting, The whole thing was recorded on my in car camera. My point is he is intending on doing u bodily harm, as this guy was me then u have the right to defend yourself and your family. Yes I had OC spray but it never crossed my mind to use it. You can sit and ponder on what you would do in certian situation, but until it axually happens its just all speculation, I just hope that no one has to go thru that type of situation. And like someone else said it dosent take long to close that 20 foot gap so you have to make a split second decision if u hessitate then the guy could be using your head for batting practice.
WonderNine
member
Well airborneranger, it sounds like from your post that the other guy didn't give you much of a choice.
If what you say happened as you say it did, OC spray would have been the last thing on my mind as well. I don't even consider OC effective, I don't bother carrying it. I think a real bright Surefire like a G2 with a 120 lumen bulb shined in the face has a MUCH greater guarantee of being effective against a doofus should the need arise.
Welcome to THR.
If what you say happened as you say it did, OC spray would have been the last thing on my mind as well. I don't even consider OC effective, I don't bother carrying it. I think a real bright Surefire like a G2 with a 120 lumen bulb shined in the face has a MUCH greater guarantee of being effective against a doofus should the need arise.
Welcome to THR.
seeker_two
Member
You don't know if BG has a second weapon, but BG has displayed intent to use deadly force already. You have a moral & legal duty to protect your child from harm. This situation is clear--shoot until slide locks back.
If arrested, make sure that you have a good criminal attorney--preferably one who knows the public relations game, too. A press conference or two could swing the media to your side.
Better to be tried by twelve than you & your child be carried by twelve...
MrFreeze: the case mentioned in your last post is a travesty to morality. If that's what Florida is telling their CCW's, then they need to put a few DA's to pasture...
If arrested, make sure that you have a good criminal attorney--preferably one who knows the public relations game, too. A press conference or two could swing the media to your side.
Better to be tried by twelve than you & your child be carried by twelve...
MrFreeze: the case mentioned in your last post is a travesty to morality. If that's what Florida is telling their CCW's, then they need to put a few DA's to pasture...
airborneranger
Member
Wonder no he didnt, but the bottom line is that im going home to my wife and kids at the end of the day, I hate that it had to be done but that was his decision, a fatal one but his all the same. As a combat veteran (2nd ranger Battalion 88-91) combat whether it be in the military or law enforcemet is not something that I whish to go thru again. There is nothing fun or glorious about it. It can affect you physically and mentally and if not for a wonderful supportive wife and family I would probably be a alcaholic or maybe worse (like 6 ft under). But I do strongly believe if u are put in that life or death situation you need to meet their force with more force (superiority by overwhelming firepower) and neautralize the threat before it gets within strickin distance of you. Thanks for the welcome.
ksnecktieman
Member
Do we need a little touch of reality here? If and when you use a firearm against another human being, you ARE going to JAIL. That is the duty of the police. They do not determine guilt, innocence, or justification. Their job is to arrest someone when a crime is committed. If you think you are going home after a shoot, you should get your head out of the clouds.
Everyone has to determine for themselves when it is appropriate to shoot, and then they have to defend that choice in court.
I have my line drawn. I will not be hit. I will stay away from areas where trouble could be expected. I will walk away or run away, or hide, if possible, The kids in this scenario gives my choice no flexibility. When the man threatens with the bat I will be in condition four(red?) (danger imminent, threat identified, pistol drawn, decision made to fire, awaiting proper target). His abandoning the bat only means he has identified me as a sheeple (mistakenly), and is anticipating an easy victory.
If memory is accurate, it was Jeff Cooper that created the situational awareness levels.
one (white) blissfully unaware of surroundings
Two (yellow) alert and aware of surroundings, including people in the area
Three (orange) Aware that you are in trouble, and evaluating threat and your required response.
Four (red) Immediate response is required, threat is identified, gun is drawn, and target is acquired.
In my opinion, when he presents the bat, and a verbal threat, he has pushed me from orange into red. He has declared intent to do grave bodily harm. He has the means to do so. I can not retreat (because of the children). When I determine him to be two steps from striking distance, his life is forfeit. I will interpret his disposing of the bat as preparation to access a more lethal weapon, if he continues to advance.
I will NOT speak to police on scene. I do not even know if I will BE on scene when they arrive. If that situation came down and I was alone, and I did not think a witness could identify me, I think I would drive away. If I can avoid having to prove self defense in court, it may mean the difference in bankruptcy, and a comfortable retirement.
I think our criminal justice system is criminal, but i do not think it is justice.
Everyone has to determine for themselves when it is appropriate to shoot, and then they have to defend that choice in court.
I have my line drawn. I will not be hit. I will stay away from areas where trouble could be expected. I will walk away or run away, or hide, if possible, The kids in this scenario gives my choice no flexibility. When the man threatens with the bat I will be in condition four(red?) (danger imminent, threat identified, pistol drawn, decision made to fire, awaiting proper target). His abandoning the bat only means he has identified me as a sheeple (mistakenly), and is anticipating an easy victory.
If memory is accurate, it was Jeff Cooper that created the situational awareness levels.
one (white) blissfully unaware of surroundings
Two (yellow) alert and aware of surroundings, including people in the area
Three (orange) Aware that you are in trouble, and evaluating threat and your required response.
Four (red) Immediate response is required, threat is identified, gun is drawn, and target is acquired.
In my opinion, when he presents the bat, and a verbal threat, he has pushed me from orange into red. He has declared intent to do grave bodily harm. He has the means to do so. I can not retreat (because of the children). When I determine him to be two steps from striking distance, his life is forfeit. I will interpret his disposing of the bat as preparation to access a more lethal weapon, if he continues to advance.
I will NOT speak to police on scene. I do not even know if I will BE on scene when they arrive. If that situation came down and I was alone, and I did not think a witness could identify me, I think I would drive away. If I can avoid having to prove self defense in court, it may mean the difference in bankruptcy, and a comfortable retirement.
I think our criminal justice system is criminal, but i do not think it is justice.
mrming,
Yes, it is. Equally sized men and women are generally not equal in strength, particularly in upper-body strength which is the most pertinent issue here. This means that disparity of force would be present if he and I were the same size.
Answer is different if he is significantly smaller than I. In which case, the three elements would still be present but two of them (A & J) aren't as solid as I'd like and would be up for grabs in court. I'd still shoot (mostly for the sake of defending the kids), but I'd be a lot less easy in my mind about it.
ksnecktieman,
Agreed with your post right up to the second-to-last paragraph.
There's always a witness.
pax
A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer. -- Robert Frost
Edward429451
member
Disparity of force is debatable. He threw the bat, made some kind of martial arts gesture (Black Belt?), and made a furtive movement to his waistline. I had to shoot. Couldn't take the chance with the kids there.
Are baseball bats considered lethal force or not? I would think so.
Are baseball bats considered lethal force or not? I would think so.
- Status
