The minimum threat level to present your gun?

[ShooterMcGavin]

Follow my thought process here.

I. Gun "use" is only an option in a life threatening situation.
II. The bearer should not present their gun unless prepared to fire the weapon.
Note that quotes were put around "use" in the first statement because "use" did not mean "fire". Please let me know if you disagree with those 2 points of my personal gun policy thus far.

Following the logic of the previous statements.... If an attacker is not realistically threatening your life, your gun should remain concealed, and it should not be "used" (i.e. shown) even as a deterent.

How would you respond to the following situations? Would your gun be an option?
1. A much larger guy grabs you by the shirt, raises a fist, and makes some demand ("give me your wallet, watch, ... <whatever>").
-A-Is your life really in danger? Beating someone to death would take time and this guy wants money. Realistically, your life is not in danger if you send him away with your valuables.
-B-If this guy gets the impression that you are reaching for a weapon, he might be able to wrestle it away from you.

2. You are leaving an event, heading back to your car. Six drunk guys are walking some distance in front of you. They notice your nice car and stop at it before you get there. You hear comments about vandalizing it, and they start doing some "unauthorized body work".
-A-At this point, your life is not clearly in danger. Yelling at them will either send them running, or put your life in MORE danger than it is currently.
-B-Calling the police is an option, but vanalism is not a high priority for the cops.
-C-How do you confront them, or at least prevent more damage to your car?

3. Two guys just beat your friend up in a parking lot and he's lying in a bloody heap (still conscious). They are all the same size as you and no weapons are visible. Fighting them means that you are next to be a bloody heap; calling the police means that they take off (maybe after they beat you up).
-A-At this point, your life is not clearly in danger.
-B-Of course you are not going to just ignore what happened to your friend.

I just want to hear some thoughts, and I am serious about asking this. Please assume that you have little or no martial arts training. You have your CCW, cell phone, no pepper spray, .... and pants. Ladies, you can also have a bra for this example. What is the minimum threat level where you would present your gun?

 

[rickomatic]

In immediate threat of grave bodily injury or death, with no escape route.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

In immediate threat of grave bodily injury or death, with no escape route.

Yes, I agree.

Does this mean that you present your wallet when it is forcefully requested, instead of considering your gun?

If a VERY BIG guy comes after you with the clear intent to hurt you (no weapons in sight), do you take the hits in order to spare his life?


PS: I edited and changed the last situation.

 

[TheDisturbed1]

Does this mean that you present your wallet when it is forcefully requested, instead of considering your gun?

Giving someone what they want isnt how you would try to make sure they dont do it to someone who CANT defend themselfs

If a VERY BIG guy comes after you with the clear intent to hurt you (no weapons in sight), do you take the hits in order to spare his life?

even the big guys dont feel invincibility when it comes to lead that flies at about 900 fps

hopefull the big guy doesnt have any real reason to harm you... (like if you pissed off his "boss" or something).

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

If a VERY BIG guy comes after you with the clear intent to hurt you (no weapons in sight), do you take the hits in order to spare his life?

Did you just really ask, "Does one allow oneself to be subjected to grave bodily harm or possible death to spare an assailant's life?"

It doesn't take many hits to kill or cripple a person. The answer should be obvious.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Nobody is going to be allowed to hit me before I draw my handgun. If "some big guy" grabs my shirt I waited too long. Indecision can cost you your life, or worse.

For the 6 drunks and the car thing, I would push the panic button on my remote and set off the alarm, all that noise and the lights flashing should get them running.

If your friend ( or even a stranger) is being beaten, especially as badly as in your scenario, you have the legal right to protect his/her life as if it were your own. To do less would be wrong. I'm too lazy right now to look up the exact wording of the law but you have the right to protect other when their life is in danger.

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

Giving someone what they want isnt how you would try to make sure they dont do it to someone who CANT defend themselfs

Ok, so how do you handle that situation?

even the big guys dont feel invincibility when it comes to lead that flies at about 900 fps

So you would present your gun in that situation?

Did you just really ask, "Does one allow oneself to be subjected to grave bodily harm or possible death to spare an assailant's life?"

It doesn't take many hits to kill or cripple a person. The answer should be obvious.

I think my words were changed a little in your version That's not exactly what I said... However, you are free to make whatever assumption is reasonable in what the outcome would be if you did not use your gun.

I must say, I have taken a lot of hits in my time, and none were fatal or even close. Since I did not state that the guy wants money (or what reason), so I guess you could guess that he might beat you badly. Fair enough.

Yes, I am being vague and trying to find the straw that breaks the camel's back. In other words, what is the most basic and minimum thing that would make you resort to your gun?

 

[Mandirigma]

If you are a CCW'er this question should already be answered in your head.

It shouldn't be one you are still pondering. Now I understand you are asking what other peoples opinions are, but I'll tell you now they will be varied.

For me. I look at it this way. If someone decides to assail me or mine, they deserve everything thats coming to them. I will sleep soundly. They made the choice for me.

 

[Cybrludite]

I'm not a lawyer, your mileage may vary, offer not valid in all 50 states, void where prohibited, etc...

You'd be amazed at just how lethal a beating can be, especially with multiple opponents. If someone's tag-teaming a friend of mine, especially if he's down, I would likely draw my piece if they didn't back off after being verbally challenged. If they tried to either rush or encircle me, they'd be getting shot. Now, if my buddy's lost a fight and the two are no longer hitting on him, that's another story. I'd just be taking him to the ER, no need for gunplay.

With the car being trashed, it's a case of property damage, not a threat to life & limb. No way, no how would you be justified in throwing down on them. If you were to walk around the corner, find yourself right next to them, and blurt out, "My *&^&%ing car!", followed by agressive moves towards you on their part, then you'd be justified. Spotting the vandalism from a distance, and then running up and getting involved? That makes you party to a fight, my friend, and going for your Big Iron in that case will be assault with a deadly weapon at the very least. After all, you saw there were six of them before you went rushing in...

In case one, where the guy grabs me & demands money, I'm a big, scary looking guy myself. If someone lays a hold of me like that, their either high or have an ace-in-the-hole I don't know about yet. If I'm suprised, I'm more likely to deck him than to go for my gun. Given a heads up, say by really agressive panhandling prior to his assaulting me, I'd be likely to go for the gun. Wether or not I'd shoot would depend on what he was doing with the hand that wasn't grabbing me.

 

[Jeff White]

The Reasonable Man Rule

The law differs from state to state. Some states require you to retreat in the face of a threat before you can use deadly force. Some states don't. Some states even establish a legal assumption that you were threatened in certain circumstances.

But a good thing to remember that will keep out of legal hot water almost anywhere in the US is the Reasonable Man Rule. Just about every jurisdiction I can think of permits you to use deadly force to defend yourself or another if you can articulate the imminent fear of death or great bodily harm. The reasonable man rule comes into play in that if a reasonable man were to weigh your actions and decide that yes, he would have felt in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm if put in your situation, your use of force will most likely be found to be justified.

It's ultimately going to come down to how you tell your story and if your story matches up with the physical evidence and the testimony of any witnesses.

Let's look at your examples one at a time and see how this would play out:

1. A much larger guy grabs you by the shirt, raises a fist, and makes some demand ("give me your wallet, watch, ... <whatever>").
-A-Is your life really in danger? Beating someone to death would take time and this guy wants money. Realistically, your life is not in danger if you send him away with your valuables.
-B-If this guy gets the impression that you are reaching for a weapon, he might be able to wrestle it away from you.

Could the much larger guy kill you? At the time he grabs you, are you in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm?

Aren't you making a pretty big assumption that if you give him your wallet he'll leave? Granted, that is what happens in a great majority of strong arm robberies. But what if this guy is the excepetion? The fact that in your example, your attacker has a big size advantage will make it easier to convince that reasonable man that you were in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. It's called disparity of force.

Might he be able to wrestle your weapon away from you? Yes, that's why you walk around in condition yellow and hopefully don't let him get that close. There is a lot more to defending yourself then carrying a firearm. A fight is one activity you can do everything right and still lose.

2. You are leaving an event, heading back to your car. Six drunk guys are walking some distance in front of you. They notice your nice car and stop at it before you get there. You hear comments about vandalizing it, and they start doing some "unauthorized body work".
-A-At this point, your life is not clearly in danger. Yelling at them will either send them running, or put your life in MORE danger than it is currently.
-B-Calling the police is an option, but vanalism is not a high priority for the cops.
-C-How do you confront them, or at least prevent more damage to your car?

Six drunks?? Let me ask you this. Are your skills such that you could shoot all six before they could get to you? Do you have insurance on your vehicle? Discretion is sometimes the better part of valor. While it might be very satisfying to pull your weapon and order them to stop, is damage to your car worth the hassle of provoking a fight. You may put yourself in the situation of having to shoot one or more of them. And something else to think about, is that while them changing their focus from the car to you, may give you the right to shoot them, they will almost certainly tell the story so that it looks like you were the aggressor. How is the reasonable man going to look at one or two of your attackers down and the rest saying; "Man we, was just looking over the dude's car and he come up waving his pistol and yelling at us to get away from his car, when we told him to put his pistol up, we didn't mean no harm, he shot Bob and Lou. The dude is crazy."

In reality, they probably rushed you daring you to shoot.....But remember in court, they are going to be cleaned up and Bob and Lou's families are going to be telling the world how you just stopped two promising you men's careers in microbiology and the world will have to wait another few generations for the cure for cancer and AIDs becuase of your actions. It's now your word against theirs for the reasonable man to believe.

3. Two guys just beat your friend up in a parking lot and he's lying in a bloody heap (still conscious). They are all the same size as you and no weapons are visible. Fighting them means that you are next to be a bloody heap; calling the police means that they take off (maybe after they beat you up).
-A-At this point, your life is not clearly in danger.
-B-Of course you are not going to just ignore what happened to your friend.

Your friend's life is in danger. Get out your cell phone and call the police, use your gun to defend your friend and yourself as necessary. If they take off, let them. You're not a peace officer, it's not your job to apprehend them. Wait with your friend and protect him and yourself until the police and EMS arrive. I think the reasonable man would buy off on your use of force if necessary.

Jeff

 

[ShooterMcGavin]

It shouldn't be one you are still pondering. Now I understand you are asking what other peoples opinions are, but I'll tell you now they will be varied.

I have made up my mind; I know what my answers are. Maybe I did a poor job with my examples. This topic was conceived after reading about some people presenting their gun at times that REALLY did not seem appropriate (my opinion, and I wasn't there).

Cybrludite, thanks for the good answers.

 

[Jacka L Ope]

Our rules for Washington State:

RWC 9A.16.050
Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

Rather straightforward.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16&full=true

 

[Majic]

Number one you can use your gun. A knowing person can kill you with just one punch. The problem is you have allowed this person to grab you. You were not aware of the situation.
Number two you can't use your gun. You are not in any immediate danger. Your car can be replaced or repaired. That's why they milk us for insurance premiums.
Number three as the fight is over and your friend survived then you can't use your gun. Call for the police and emergency medical aid, but if no more violence occurs or is threatened then the situation has stabilized.

 

[1911Tuner]

Situations

The scenario:

> A much larger guy grabs you by the shirt, raises a fist, and makes some demand ("give me your wallet, watch, ... <whatever>").<
**************

Demands an instant and aggressive response. Heel of hand comes straight up into his chin. Don't be gentle. Hit HARD. He isn't expecting it, and an immediate, aggressive response will catch him by surprise, which will give you time to "Step off the X" and secure a more...presuasive...means. The trick is that the response MUST be instant...within one second...or you lose the advantage. Hard for most people to transform from a passive/peaceful to an aggressive in that time frame. Have the plan pre-formed in your mind beforehand. Practice it mentally. If you catch him by surprise, and you hit with all your strength...chances are that you won't have to shoot. Win-Win.

 

[Stretchman]

Think of a firearm as a last resort weapon. If there are other alternatives, do you want to use a firearm?

The best course of action is always deescalation. You want whoever is bothering you to stop and go away. How you do that can change from scenario to scenario. You need to train.

Some people are simply really high strung. Tweaked. They always seem to find themselves in trouble. They always end up in altercations with anyone. Other people are just the opposite. They never seem to have any trouble at all with anyone. Sometimes people who never have trouble will end up with trouble because there are people who believe that never having trouble isn't right, or fair. And peop-le who always seem to find or cause trouble can be calm and collected sometime. Mostly when they are institutionalized.

The first thing to look for is behavior that doesn't fit the scenario. All riled up over nothing? Or really calm when there's a reason not to be. Your threats will stick out. Learn to avoid them.

Sheeple have the game nailed. Most of the time, sheeple simply avoid the trouble altogether, and never get into trouble, because sheeple can do no wrong. Once you deicde to carry a weapon, you're consciously deciding to break out of that mold. You're now a wolf in sheeple's clothing. AS a wolf, you have to learn to avoid the snares.

Think about your scenarios. Which are snares? The last 2, for certain. The first one? That would be one sorry dude, man, who would get the surprise of his life. See the wolf, man. Be the wolf. Don't get suckered. IF you have to fight, the element of surprise and direct engagement are your friends.

 

[fattsgalore]

As most CCW instructors will tell you "He better go down with a hole in the head and you with a knife in the leg."
If you pull your piece even in a self defense situation your going to jail. If, IF! A cop roles by.
Personally, I'd rather pull it to show I'm not playing then drawing and dumping a mag in another humans chest. I'd rather scare them then take a life.

But add my familly to the equation, and it's over.
Dead as a door nail.
Now as for you senerios once they put there hands on you you can no longer run there a threat and will be treated as such.(my money isn't worth my life or there's but when they start putting there hands on you your in trouble)
Your second situation has happened to someone I've known he even let off a warning shot and was facing three years prison term. The drunk guys ened up calling the police on him.
Situation three, probally hand my pistol to someone then start busting heads. I've been in something similar to this one.

 

[DragonFire]

If / when you display your firearm, you provide LEGAL JUSTIFICATION for the assailant to shoot you

Not quite. As long as you were justified in drawing your weapon, it doesn't automatically give a BG the right to shoot you. There is no right to self-defense for an armed robber. However, display your gun at the wrong time, and some other GG might misinterpret your intentions and justifiably shoot you.

I'd rather pull it to show

While I hope just the sight of my gun will scare the BGs off, I wouldn't pull my gun just to "show" it. In certain circumstances that's called "branishing a weapon".

he even let off a warning shot

A shot is a shot is a shot. Plus how could he sure that warning shot wouldn't hit somebody? Where did he shoot? Up in the air, into the pavement? The bullet had to go somewhere. The bottom line is HE SHOT! Plus I was taught, that if you have time to fire a warning shot, there is no "immediate" threat, so you shouldn't be drawing your gun.


I personally have an issue with the case of somebody grabbing you. I've been told that unless I can express some "disparity of force" (multiple BGs, one real big BG, a weapon etc.) that I can't pull my gun. But I know what one punch can lead to. Plus, since I'm carrying, if the BG gets me into a fist fight, I have to worry about him grabbing my gun and using it on me.

So I have made the personal decision that no one will put there hands on me, or get me into a physical fight. I will do everything I can to calm things down or leave before it comes to that point, but if I can't, there I will draw my gun. I know the ultimate results will depend on how well I can express my actions and feelings before I drew to the authorities after the fact.

One thing I've been taught is to start yelling things like "stop", "drop the weapn", "back off" etc. Even if they don't have any affect on the BG, hopefully witnesses will remember me yelling and sounding defensive not offensive.

 

[TexasRifleman]

While I hope just the sight of my gun will scare the BGs off, I wouldn't pull my gun just to "show" it. In certain circumstances that's called "branishing a weapon".

In Texas that act is specifically covered by statute and in fact is not considered deadly force if you pull a gun but do not fire.

Certainly pulling it JUST to show it is not a good idea, but just becase you pull it doesn't mean you have to use it.

Recognizing that the sight of arms may stop a crime on its own, the penal code addresses this that a "threat of deadly force" is not the same as "deadly force".

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

If you pull your piece even in a self defense situation your going to jail. If, IF! A cop roles by.

The one time I pulled my concealed weapon was under this exact circumstance so I am a believer in the deterrent factor.

The conversation between Dallas PD and myself was:

TSM: I pulled a gun on 3 guys at a gas station just now.
TSM: Short explanation of what happened followed
DPD: Did they leave when you did that?
TSM: Yes they are gone and I am in my car
DPD: OK, thanks. Have a nice night, if we need you we'll call.

 

[shield20]

A big guy grabbing you and using the threat of force in demanding your wallet IS ROBBERY. It is a felony usually covered by self-defense justification. The threat of "serious physical injury" (a part of "deadly physical force") is also present, and damn sure "imminent" - you do not have to be someone's punching bag!

NYS Penal
S 35.15 Justification; use of physical force in defense of a person.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he reasonably
believes such to be necessary to defend himself or a third person from
what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful
physical force by such other person,
...

2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person
under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:

(a) He reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to
use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not
use deadly physical force if he knows that he can with complete safety
as to himself and others avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating;
except that he is under no duty to retreat if he is:
(i) in his dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police
officer or a peace officer at the latter`s direction, acting pursuant to
section 35.30; or

(b) He reasonably believes that such other person is committing or
attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible sodomy or
robbery; or


#2 & #3 is up to the BG's next move . Criminal Mischief is not justification for deadly force. There MAY BE justification in #3 - but good luck in court.

4. A private person acting on his own account may use physical force,
other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to the
extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to effect an
arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person whom he
reasonably believes to have committed an offense and who in fact has
committed such offense; and he may use deadly physical force for such
purpose when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
(a) Defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes
to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force; or
(b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder,
manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible
sodomy and who is in immediate flight therefrom.

 

[ZeSpectre]

1. A much larger guy grabs you by the shirt, raises a fist, and makes some demand ("give me your wallet, watch, ... <whatever>").
-A-Is your life really in danger? Beating someone to death would take time and this guy wants money. Realistically, your life is not in danger if you send him away with your valuables.

Injecting a bit of realism here. This is personal experience not hearsay. I have seen a strong man kill another man with ONE PUNCH. I have had the misfortune to have seen this twice in my life.

I have also seen a not-so-big guy lay a much larger guy out with ONE PUNCH and then nearly kick him to death before others could stop him.

 

[1911Tuner]

Awareness

...Is your friend. Never let a stranger lay hands on you without immediate retaliation, and have a plan ahead of time. Don't be gentle! Touching someone without permission is assault. You have the right to defend.

Never shake hands with a stranger unless you're being introduced by someone that you know. Hard to refuse this simple gesture of friendship, but if you offer your hand, he has control of that hand as soon as he takes it.

If asked for directions, step back and blade your body to his. Never take your eyes off of him. Likewise, if asked for a cigarette or a light. Keep a pack of matches handy and toss them while he's out of reach. Tell him to keep'em if he wants to give them back. If he insists...back up and tell him to keep his distance. He may mean no harm, and he may be insulted, but he'll get over it. If he does have evil intentions...you may not.

Be aware of the red flags. A group of young men without young women with them is best avoided. Anyone whose movements seem to be geared to yours is an immediate alarm. Multiply that by 10 if there are two or more who seem to be "Jackaling" your moves. Test them. Jaywalk and see if they do too.

Distance is your ally. If your radar goes off, maintain as much distance as you can for as long as you can. Distance takes time to cover, and gives you time to plan your response. The more time that you have, the better.

If you must use an ATM at night...take a minute or two to look around before you exit your vehicle.

Never hit lightly. If you have to strike...hit with all your heart, and move.

 

[GhostlyKarliion]

I. Gun "use" is only an option in a life threatening situation.
II. The bearer should not present their gun unless prepared to fire the weapon.
Note that quotes were put around "use" in the first statement because "use" did not mean "fire". Please let me know if you disagree with those 2 points of my personal gun policy thus far.

First off, I do not pretend to adhere to your thought process in my own personal belief (in fact I find the idea of restricting "use" to only life threatening situations to be foolhardy, however I would say that I agree with your second condition under reasonable circumstances). Notwithstanding though I shall endeavor to place myself into your circumstances and mindset to accurately answer your statements.

1. A much larger guy grabs you by the shirt, raises a fist, and makes some demand ("give me your wallet, watch, ... <whatever>").
-A-Is your life really in danger? Beating someone to death would take time and this guy wants money. Realistically, your life is not in danger if you send him away with your valuables.
-B-If this guy gets the impression that you are reaching for a weapon, he might be able to wrestle it away from you.

1. (starters, I'm 6'5, 330lbs, someone "much larger" than me describes goliath) before getting to this stage I would have already challenged him verbally, or if it was a random attack, I would challenge as soon as possible. Surrendering my wallet to him is already out of the question, it is no longer a matter of loosing my property, it’s a matter of invasion of freedom and security.
-A-keeping the described thought process in mind, the attacker is reduced to two options, either he attempts bodily harm, or retreats. If the man attempts bodily harm, then I would patiently wait until the soonest opportunity to draw my sidearm presented itself and proceed with deadly challenge/force if necessary (see -B-). If the attacker retreats then there would be no need for further challenge.
-B-While presenting my weapon in this situation does present risk, that risk is controlled through correct timing and body positioning, however if it becomes necessary to assume the risk, then the risk is to be assumed.

2. You are leaving an event, heading back to your car. Six drunk guys are walking some distance in front of you. They notice your nice car and stop at it before you get there. You hear comments about vandalizing it, and they start doing some "unauthorized body work".
-A-At this point, your life is not clearly in danger. Yelling at them will either send them running, or put your life in MORE danger than it is currently.
-B-Calling the police is an option, but vanalism is not a high priority for the cops.
-C-How do you confront them, or at least prevent more damage to your car?

2. Considering the numbers involved (six to one) my first reaction would be to observe the area for backup of any kind, (be it a friend, security guard, etcetera... my following course of action would be the same weather finding someone or not, with the exception of loudly calling for assistance) following that I would position myself far enough away from the group to allow reaction time and then verbally challenge them.
-A-by controlling the variables to the best of my ability I have assumed a reasonable amount of control over the situation, allowing the option of 'putting myself into more danger' to be a controlled risk instead of a chaotic one
-B-depending on the situation, with a lack of appropriate assistance I may use this option as a means to get their attention, speaking loudly enough to be overheard on my phone, however not relying on the police to affect the situation at all.
-C-Allowing the preceding circumstances, if my attempts to draw attention to the situation have not been fruitful I would continue harassing the group until I got a response (be it from them or onlookers), pressuring the situation until they retreated or became violent, using necessary force as needed.

3. Two guys just beat your friend up in a parking lot and he's lying in a bloody heap (still conscious). They are all the same size as you and no weapons are visible. Fighting them means that you are next to be a bloody heap; calling the police means that they take off (maybe after they beat you up).
-A-At this point, your life is not clearly in danger.
-B-Of course you are not going to just ignore what happened to your friend.

3. In accordance with your conditions, I would place my hand near my sidearm, but in a casual - non-threatening way, and while verbally challenging them and ordering them to surrender until the police arrive (declaring a citizens arrest), I would take note of height/weight/skin color/clothing/tats or scars. When challenging them doesn’t work, I will assume a defensive stance and inform the group that I am willing and able to use deadly force against them if they attempt anything, reducing their options to three; 1. Comply with my order and surrender until the police arrive (very highly unlikely), 2. Run from the area (which the information I gathered will be handy when the police do arrive), 3. Advance towards me. Options 1 and 2 diffuse themselves, the third provides for escalation until I do feel that my life is in danger and produce my sidearm.
-A-My actions would be designed to force either compliance, retreat, or attack as soon as possible to facilitate safe rescue. Placing my own life in danger being a controlled (but necessary) risk considering the injured person involved.
-B-Ignoring what has happened to my friend is not an option, their fate on their evening is however in their hands, if challenged I will open fire, however it is their choice weather they leave in hand cuffs, on foot, or on stretchers.

What is the minimum threat level where you would present your gun?

I do not feel that your requirements allow for this question, ‘I. Gun "use" is only an option in a life threatening situation.’ Places the level where you would present your gun to be when the situation becomes life threatening, in my perception this doesn't give room for any leeway.

As I have already stated I find a fundamental error with your first requirement, I would consider as an option presenting my gun when the threat of harm was first recognized, and judge whether or not to present it on the type and degree of harm perceived.


but, thats just my $0.02

 

[whited]

.

It could be just me, but there are some worrying trends and thought
processes occurring here. I take issue with all the hard and fast rules that
have been mentioned. Those sound great on an internet forum and allow
the authors to appear to be very sound and experienced gun-folk. However,
I feel that in reality these cliches lose much of their profundity. I am in
no way advocating breaking the absolute sacrosanct writ of law handed
down to us by wise politicians worshipping their brazen bull. I'm just
saying that for me only, personally, if a guy grabs you, it could very well
already be too late. I am not going to pause for a moment and have an
internal dialogue regarding the various and sundry (and likely inane) legal
codes in whichever jurisdiction I happen to be in before defending myself,
nor am I going to vainly attempt to judge the aggressor's ability or final
intentions before doing something about the situation. Making these
types of judgements can be very dangerous.

I'm all for calming, evasion, and avoidance. But when discussing last-resort
scenarios, one of my great fears is failure to act.

My life is more important that any law, and to attempt to 'judge'
abilities and intentions of aggressors is dubious at best, deadly at worst.

 

[Chem Geek]

-A-Is your life really in danger? Beating someone to death would take time and this guy wants money.

That's a big misconception, it takes very little time to beat someone to death. Ever taken or seen a knockout punch? I've seen more than one person go down after a single solid shot, even from scrawny guys. After that you have absolutely no control over what happens. Besides, even if you don't die, you're very likely to have brain damage of some form, let alone facial disfigurement. I enjoy being smart, so I really try to avoid being hit in the head repeatedly.

I'm a "big guy," and if someone was threatening me or my fiance, I'm quite confident that I could kill them bare handed if I got within arms reach. Being within arms reach of someone who's strong, angry, and even slightly trained (i.e. at least been in some street fights) is a VERY bad place to be.

 

[MJZZZ]

When I was younger, we didn't think twice about duking it out and only the real hardguy types carried a weapon. Now it seems young people value life less and are more willing to do serious harm over the slightest provocation. Since I've had both hips replaced, I can no longer fight or run like I used to. I am not about to let someone get close enough to strike me or worse take my gun from me and use it against me. So count me in the camp of those that when the hair on their neck comes up, the gun comes out to low ready. Mike Z