What Most People Who Carry Fail to Realize

[crc4]

7 minutes ago, Alleycat72 said:

I learned about it with handcuffs on next to a man that tried to kill me. That's the only time I was thinking able the law and how it affected me. No charges filed against me.

 

So did you shoot him? What did you learn from your involvement?

[chances R]

On 12/29/2022 at 7:50 AM, Alleycat72 said:

I learned about it with handcuffs on next to a man that tried to kill me. That's the only time I was thinking about the law and how it affected me. No charges filed against me.

 

Certainly glad for your favorable outcome…but it sucks knowing your future lies in the hands of others.  That is why studying all one can about SD helps one from being in that situation.  Learning by experience is not the preferred method.  Unfortunately, most people now charged with felony assault thought they were doing the right thing and never fired a shot.  Avoidance is the # 1 plan.  I would rather take a butt whooping than pull my gun, that will heal faster than my bank account.

[James B]

I had personal criteria to meet before carrying... Reckon I spent about a year training/learning (and making insurance changes in light of new risks) before I actually got my permit and began to carry every day.

Also a fan of Branca's book, but thankful I never needed to defend my or anyone else's life during that time.

I don't think my approach was typical, or necessarily reasonable to expect from everyone or maybe anyone. There is this background cognitive dissonance in our country when it comes to our rights perceived versus practiced, and I think THAT, more than personal flaws, helps to create a population predisposed to failing at exercising its own rights.

Fudd lore is a thing, sure, and sometimes people are negligent or arrogant or slow or whatever, but how is "lol all your rights got taken away because you're too dumb to spend 100s of hours and 1000s of dollars reading self defense law books, attending firearms, self defense, first aid, etc. etc. etc. training courses before defending your life or maybe your kids', pleb" an acceptable cultural response to that? And how is NOT carrying at all an acceptable solution? We need more people to carry, not less.

Lastly, I know we want to be lawful folk, here and anywhere else, but sometimes the law is jacked up, and in rare cases, the law is not even just -- think ww2 germany and just following orders. Sometimes we nurture or are nurtured with malicious intent (how do you have no idea what your rights actually are despite 12+ years of  state education)...

Edited January 5, 2023 by James B
cat hit enter!

[crc4]

8 hours ago, James B said:

Fudd lore is a thing, sure, and sometimes people are negligent or arrogant or slow or whatever, but how is "lol all your rights got taken away because you're too dumb to spend 100s of hours and 1000s of dollars reading self defense law books, attending firearms, self defense, first aid, etc. etc. etc. training courses before defending your life or maybe your kids', pleb" an acceptable cultural response to that? And how is NOT carrying at all an acceptable solution? We need more people to carry, not less.

Lastly, I know we want to be lawful folk, here and anywhere else, but sometimes the law is jacked up, and in rare cases, the law is not even just -

In my opinion, it takes less time to learn how to be on the right side of a self-defense act, than to spend 8-16 hours or more deciding which new gun to buy. The concepts aren't difficult, but do require simple knowledge that's easily obtainable.

The law is very often not just. It's a system. One prepares for that law system by understanding how that system works. Study of SD justification prepares you by teaching you about that system and how you can best navigate successfully through that system.

Merely obtaining some type of SD insurance though isn't enough. One must understand that to be on the right side of the investigation and possible charges, it's necessary to come to the SD situation with 'clean hands.' The clean hands concept is a major component of any SD action, but again is easily learned.

Some people (not saying you, sir) believe the TV shows and movies where an innocent man gets saved by dramatic lawyers and the real truth passionately displayed before the jury. Unfortunately, that's not how it works.

That's the great importance of having an attorney that understands not only the system, but how to properly present an affirmative defense for any SD action. That's takes an attorney who has trained, prepared for, and has handled such cases in the past. The typical criminal defense attorney is rarely what you need to stay out of jail.

I've said this over and over and will continue to say it - learning SD justifications is  not difficult, but does require the same commitment to that 'system' as to becoming proficient with firearms. The good news is that it take far less time to learn, only someone who wants to and is willing to work at it.

 

Edited January 5, 2023 by crc4

[pop pop]

I agree with crc4 whole heartily. I have read many books, am a member of Armed Citizens Legal Defense Net, and have studied Self Defense quite a bit since starting concealed carry when TN passed the concealed carry law years ago. Bracca and Mas's books are the best and can be ordered from Amazon cheap. I recommend them 100%. Also know one needs to be a member of ACLDN (360-978-5200 call them for a free book "What Every Gun owner needs to know About Self Defense Law," again FREE) or another insurance company of your choosing, for your family's protection. ACLDN is 95.00 per year now for one. You pull that gun and you stand to lose your total future, "seriously." 

Have had to almost pull my gun to avoid a beating, from 3 "IMO" drugged individuals who, after leaving my yard, drove a few miles (4) from my house, and beat a legally blind man going to his mailbox, just as I was doing. I was 73, just had total knee replacement surgery and was unable to flee from them. His son told me last month his dad never got over the beating and he spent 4 weeks in the hospital but was able to leave only to die 3 weeks later.  Sheriff said he died of old age as he was 84, because he got out of the hosp and died at home. This guy, crc4, is giving good advice here guys.  Look at what happened to Kyle Rittenhouse, and Goerge, In Florida, who shot and killed Trevon Martin. That can happen to you. Not saying it will but CAN. 

"Everyone" who pulls a gun, in S D and uses it, your life "Most Times" will never be the same from that day forward. Some are justified, but many arent because they don't know the laws of Self Defense. I agree whole heartily, Educate yourself. Bracca's book, "the Law of Self Defense, and Massad Ayoob's books "In The Gravest Extreme" and "Straight Talk On Armed Defense" all can be purchased on Amazon cheap. Well worth your read. Cost very little to educate yourself on Self Defense guys. "Excellent" Advice crc4.

Edited to add; George Zimmerman in Florida shooting. Another good book, "Concealed Carry Class, the ABCs of Self-Defense Tools and Tactics" by Tom Givens. He has had 68 students in shootouts in Memphis with interesting results. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by pop pop
add content

[lock n' load]

There are two recent cases of road rage in north Georgia that resulted in fatal shootings. Initially they both appeared justified but later indictments came back and both men are facing murder charges. One case was initially no-billed by the grand jury but the DA took another look and was able file charges again with the grand jury indicating the person the second time. He was arrested and charged with 2 counts of murder. Probably felony murder and malice murder.

[lock n' load]

On 12/26/2022 at 7:38 PM, crc4 said:

Congratulations. You now know more about the laws of self-defense that at least 85% of gun owners know. Let us know if you like Ayoob's book.

It's good info to know but at the end of the day if you don't learn to APPLY the principles of SD then you are just wasting your time and money. Kinda like reading the Bible, if you don't apply what you learned then what have you gained?

Edited January 7, 2023 by lock n' load

[Alleycat72]

https://www.fox26houston.com/news/houston-robbery-suspect-shot-to-death-by-customer-taqueria-gessner

 

[crc4]

The SD shooting appears justified. I'm sorry he didn't stick around, but it's understandable. 

Notice he didn't hesitate to shoot. That's a plus and probably saved lives including his own.

 

 

[Snaveba]

The article indicates that the perpetrator may have been carrying a fake handgun.  How would that effect (if at all) the justification as a SD shooting?

 

[crc4]

9 minutes ago, Snaveba said:

The article indicates that the perpetrator may have been carrying a fake handgun.  How would that effect (if at all) the justification as a SD shooting?

 

In my opinion, not one bit. No one has time to examine to see if the 'gun' is a real gun. The 'manifest intent' of the robber was clear. That's all that matters here.

[chances R]

2 hours ago, Snaveba said:

The article indicates that the perpetrator may have been carrying a fake handgun.  How would that effect (if at all) the justification as a SD shooting?

 

Probably not a bit.  If a reasonable person would perceive it as a 'gun' then that is really the bottom line.

[DHF]

On 1/7/2023 at 11:19 AM, Alleycat72 said:

https://www.fox26houston.com/news/houston-robbery-suspect-shot-to-death-by-customer-taqueria-gessner

 

For anyone interested.  Andrew Branca will be evaluating this incident with Attorney Steve Gosney today at 3pm CST on YouTube.

From the email promoting this event, "...Although the initial shots fired by the shooter appear to be legally justified as defense of self, defense of others, and (uniquely under Texas law) perhaps even defense of property, the last shot fired looks more difficult to justify. At the moment that ninth shot was fired the robber was apparently unconscious on the floor and had been disarmed of the only weapon he was known to possess, when the shooter fired one last shot, apparently into the robber's head."

 

[lock n' load]

I watched this and it has some in-depth analysis on the final shot that was fired. To me, this isn't a good look for the good guy. That last shot could be construed as more retributive than self defense. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out...

[crc4]

8 hours ago, lock n' load said:

I watched this and it has some in-depth analysis on the final shot that was fired. To me, this isn't a good look for the good guy. That last shot could be construed as more retributive than self defense. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out...

What many fail to realize and is always worth repeating, is you don't shoot to kill - you shoot to stop the threat. Once the threat is stopped, you stop shooting. Never say 'that you shot to kill' as that will be a prosecutor's ace to play at your trial.

That will help keep you out of a very difficult position should (and most likely) you are charged with manslaughter at the least, and second degree murder at the worst. 

The shooter was in a strong legal position until he appeared to fire the coup de grace.

 

Edited January 9, 2023 by crc4

[pop pop]

All the people involved left the scene and no one called 911. The defender actually gave the patrons their money back. The defender should have called 911 immediately. I also agree the last shot will probably be deemed overkill and illegal. Feel sorry for the defender in this, however it is Texas. We will see??? 

[chances R]

all shots after the initial 4 seem unnecessary to me.  If he called 911 at that point, we wouldn't have this conversation.

[Snaveba]

I agree. And the last shot almost seems like an afterthought or a spiteful shot.  I’m sorry, but you can’t “John Wick” someone and say it was defensive. 

[crc4]

Great article on "What Do I Say After A Shooting?"

 

[Tiggereast]

On 12/16/2022 at 2:05 PM, crc4 said:

The fact you're a law abiding citizen has nothing to do with the inevitable investigation. Even if you killed a man raping your child in their bedroom, there will be an investigation. Most likely, even if the DA doesn't want to prosecute because it was a justified shooting, he'll take it to the Grand Jury. That's in a county where the DA is friendly to gun owners. Forget about a liberal/progressive DA as then you'll be arrested, made to make a major bond, probably spend several night in jail, then see a judge to set bond. That's just the beginnings of your woes.

Even if the Grand Jury votes a 'no true' bill,  in some jurisdictions that doesn't stop the dead person's family from hiring their own prosecutor.

The legal fees are paid by you. The expert witnesses are paid by you. Paper work is paid by you. You'll pay even if you're not convicted.

That's just the criminal action. It's worse for civil suits. That's what happens to law-abiding citizens who were fully justified.

Is it fair? Fair doesn't count. Reality does. And that's the reality of what happens.

You are correct sir, it is truly a mess. No your legal rights 

[Tiggereast]

Just ordered a copy of the Baranca book ! 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Tiggereast
Spelling

[BigK]

I think his only hope is to argue that a previous shot killed the bad guy and he only abused a corpse with the last shot.