When to use deadly force

[Guest Drewsett]

If I was alone in the car, I would have simply tried to drive away...preferably by driving over the BG/Crackhead/dumb ass. If my wife was in the car with me, I would have been out of the car with my hand on my gun after the first hit. I would instruct him in a stern voice to leave me and my family alone. If he moved towards me after I exited the vehicle I would unholster my weapon. If he continued to move towards me with weapon in hand I would have pulled the trigger til the gun went "click".

I have four lawyers in my family and I'm pretty sure they would be successful in my criminal defense...assuming charges were pressed.

[Guest crotalus01]

I agree with an earlier poster that the video was likely staged. There are edits in the video that would not normally be in a "real" video, usually a clear giveaway of a staged event.

[daddyo]

Ok 3 out of 5 post. Chief.

I did not say I was the only one who knew what to do. Neither did I say "everyone" was talking tough. Fact is, there are SOME here who ARE just talking tough and simply don't have a clue about how shooting someone will affect them. When someone says they will empty three mags of 10mm into the guy because he banged on his window, that's simply empty talk. And if someone is that trigger happy, they have NO business carrying a deadly weapon. You know it and I know it.

SOME is not the same as EVERYONE.

Please don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

What's wrong with you people? I thought the purpose of the thread was to speculate

on a course of action one would take in a situation, not to trash someone for their

position. I don't want to be caught in that situation, but it could easily occur. There are crazies everywhere and it is important to know when and where one might have to use deadly force. That video was just an exercise and from the responses on here it was a good exercise. I don't really think about using deadly force every time I

walk out of the house. It made me think, ok?

[Guest jackdm3]

What's wrong with you people? I thought the purpose of the thread was to speculate

on a course of action one would take in a situation, not to trash someone for their

position. I don't want to be caught in that situation, but it could easily occur. There are crazies everywhere and it is important to know when and where one might have to use deadly force. That video was just an exercise and from the responses on here it was a good exercise. I don't really think about using deadly force every time I

walk out of the house. It made me think, ok?

Could have fooled us on that "Apartment" thread. Not you specifically. (Do you get the feeling we'll have to over-communicate our words from now on?)

[Harold]

IMHO him beating up my car is what I pay insurance for. As far as location etc working on scenario of this in Tennessee which is where I live. First swing that breaks glass near me or any passengers doors in my car (especially wife and kids in car) I am assuming he broke it to enter or hurt me or them. I will be using deadly force to attempt to stop him. But here comes real world question ever try to shoot across your passenger in your passenger seat and shoot a guy through the window and not hurt passenger in car or miss and shoot past them and hit another bystander? Typically my son is in the back seat either diagonal or directly behind me how to shoot attacker and not risk injury to him? Do you exit the car if there is time? Obviosly these aren't scenarios you can typically try shooting around or through during drills on a gun range?? Not saying I wouldn't try to stop him anyway I could. But at same time got think how you would actually pull off that shot? My worst fear is me hurting a friend or family member trying to protect them.

[Guest mosinon]

I didn't know there were degrees of fearing for your life.

+1 on that notion.

I also thought the Castle Doctrine defined your property

to include your car. I could be wrong there. Anyway,

if I felt my life or anyone in my car was threatened,

yes I would use deadly force.

Just so you know, I wouldn't want to kill anyone. I doubt

anyone else on here would want to either, but faced

with the prospect of life and death, I think I would do

what had to be done. Is that better?

How can you tell what is life and death? You can't. You've got to make that judgement. Trying to think like a lawyer in that situation is too much to ask. I'm with 6.8 on this one.

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

Yes, it does. Statute was revised in 2007 to include forcible entry into vehicles. Once a window is broken, would think that would indicate forcible entry.

Statute also strengthened the "no retreat necessary" in any situation where you have a legal right to be.

Well, there is still the statute that says you won't be charged with a possession crime if you must use your firearm in justifiable self defense, whether you have permit or not. But I agree they should extend the no permit carry right to vehicles.

- OS

Well, therein lies my confusion in the whole Castle Doctrine and Vehicle thing. To me it dont make much sense to say we can defend our vehicles from forcible entry but not extend the ability to carry to the vehicle.

And I do understand a weapon can be carried in the vehicle w/o permit so long as it is separated from the ammo. I actually did that for awhile as it was better than nothing.

In the case of this video carrying in such a way may well have saved someones life if the crackhead had started hitting the occupants. Because as soon as he started hitting the car I would have been getting the gun and ammo together.

Of course I had a good bit of confusion on just "how" to legally separate the two....Go figure? I had heard no rounds in the mags and either the gun or rounds in a locking container IE glove box, or console.

But when I asked several LEO's and explained that I kept the gun in the console and the mags in the back of the van, meaning I would have to exit the van to get them. (I am expecting them to tell me to unload the mags) Both a local LEO and a Sheriffs Deputy told me to just put one in the glove box and one in the console without any mention of mags not being loaded.

Our laws can be very confusing but it is still our duty to know them and know them very well before we send anything down range. That is why these discussions are so beneficial. I learn something everyday:)

At any rate thanks for explaining that the Doctrine does extend to our vehicles.......sort of anyway

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Could have fooled us on that "Apartment" thread. Not you specifically. (Do you get the feeling we'll have to over-communicate our words from now on?)

Nah:D touche, jack. inserting foot in mouth

Edited February 11, 2010 by 6.8 AR

[Guest jackdm3]

This has been a particularly heated-debate week. What's on for tomorrow? Can't hardly wait.

[Guest rockbottom12]

Yes, it does. Statute was revised in 2007 to include forcible entry into vehicles. Once a window is broken, would think that would indicate forcible entry.

Statute also strengthened the "no retreat necessary" in any situation where you have a legal right to be.

Well, there is still the statute that says you won't be charged with a possession crime if you must use your firearm in justifiable self defense, whether you have permit or not. But I agree they should extend the no permit carry right to vehicles.

- OS

link please. I want to know about this. I just took my HCP class last month and they were talking that the car is not included.

[Oh Shoot]

link please. I want to know about this. I just took my HCP class last month and they were talking that the car is not included.

Need to make a book of all the bad info taught at these various classes.

Michie.com

You want 39-11-611. Self-defense

Here's page broken out of their damn frames format:

Michie's Legal Resources

the pertinent phrases here are:

(2) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, if:

© Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury within a residence, business, dwelling or vehicle is presumed to have held a reasonable belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury to self, family, a member of the household or a person visiting as an invited guest, when that force is used against another person, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence, business, dwelling or vehicle, and the person using defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

- OS

Edited February 11, 2010 by OhShoot

[dwcz]

Good scenario to consider. Things happen so fast in real life, its better to have some mental "lines in the sand" already drawn before you find yourself having to decide how to respond in a few seconds.

I think I would definitely respond differently if my wife or 8 month old daughter were in the vehicle. I've had one situation occur where I felt someone was a threat to my daughter and close enough to hurt her. Luckily, they stopped just short of me reacting physically. I was surprised at how quickly I went from wanting to avoid a physical confrontation, to ready to to do what ever was necessary when my daughter was involved and that person reached the line I had drawn in my mind.

Thanks for sharing this link.

[Punisher84]

I think DaddyO should grace us with his vast knowledge of self-defense shootings and legal experience. Or maybe just back up his statements with more than his own theories about the members on this board.

If you bothered to keep up with the law you'd know that just last year the legislature passed a bill that extended a little bit of the "castle doctrine" over to your vehicle as it relates to what is justified when it comes to a case like this.

I love how people like you want to assume everyone is talking tough or macho when they say they'd shoot in this case. Yea people get a bit more wordy on the net about things, but I'll tell you right now, if someone is trying to bust out my window with a hammer,tire iron,crowbar,etc. I'm gonna assume they want to hurt me and I'm not going to get hurt, so I'm going to shoot them and do what I've been trained to do.

So why don't you shut up and quit telling people what they will and won't do.

[Punisher84]

IMHO him beating up my car is what I pay insurance for. As far as location etc working on scenario of this in Tennessee which is where I live. First swing that breaks glass near me or any passengers doors in my car (especially wife and kids in car) I am assuming he broke it to enter or hurt me or them. I will be using deadly force to attempt to stop him. But here comes real world question ever try to shoot across your passenger in your passenger seat and shoot a guy through the window and not hurt passenger in car or miss and shoot past them and hit another bystander? Typically my son is in the back seat either diagonal or directly behind me how to shoot attacker and not risk injury to him? Do you exit the car if there is time? Obviosly these aren't scenarios you can typically try shooting around or through during drills on a gun range?? Not saying I wouldn't try to stop him anyway I could. But at same time got think how you would actually pull off that shot? My worst fear is me hurting a friend or family member trying to protect them.

That is why you get advanced training. You learn the answers to those questions.

[daddyo]

I think DaddyO should grace us with his vast knowledge of self-defense shootings and legal experience. Or maybe just back up his statements with more than his own theories about the members on this board.

If you bothered to keep up with the law you'd know that just last year the legislature passed a bill that extended a little bit of the "castle doctrine" over to your vehicle as it relates to what is justified when it comes to a case like this.

I love how people like you want to assume everyone is talking tough or macho when they say they'd shoot in this case. Yea people get a bit more wordy on the net about things, but I'll tell you right now, if someone is trying to bust out my window with a hammer,tire iron,crowbar,etc. I'm gonna assume they want to hurt me and I'm not going to get hurt, so I'm going to shoot them and do what I've been trained to do.

So why don't you shut up and quit telling people what they will and won't do.

And once again, I did not say EVERYONE. Get it right or give it up. Neither did I tell anyone what they would or wouldn't do. But I know bovine scatology when I hear it.

It's just funny to me that when you hit someone with a good dose of reality how they try to shut you up because they don't like what you said, no matter how much truth it contains.

And as far as the "castle doctrine" is concerned, are you ready to put your faith in the legal system? Many innocent men have gone to prison. I don't intend to be one of them. My family needs me and I need them. It's all about making it home at the end of the day, whether it's avoiding a situation that could go very wrong, or actually having to use your weapon in justified self-defense.

I don't have any special knowledge or experience. I have, however, given these matters a great deal of thought (probably more than I should) and I have read everything I can get my hands on pertaining to self-defense and the legalities involved. I am a believer in shooting as the very last resort and only when everything else has failed. Killing someone is final and can't be taken back. Every account that I have read of a self-defense shooting mentions the way that it changes your life forever. I don't want to experience that and I don't think anyone here who hasn't already wants to either. It distresses me when I hear someone say that they would shoot in a situation where they could possibly escape instead. Avoiding trouble is always the better option. I have no use for someone who walks around with a weapon and a chip on his shoulder. Anyone who talks big about how they would shoot no matter what is a fool.

It wasn't my intention to offend anyone, but the truth often offends people. Also looks to me like some (notice I said SOME, not EVERYONE) here need to put their big boy pants on and stop getting offended. Self-defense and personal protection are not something to be taken lightly. People who are willing to shoot someone with no thought to how it will affect them and/or anyone else are trigger happy in my opinion and need to spend some time thinking about what happens after they use their weapon. If they don't, they shouldn't be surprised if they end up with Bubba as a cellmate.

Edited February 11, 2010 by DaddyO

[Punisher84]

And once again, I did not say EVERYONE. Get it right or give it up. Neither did I tell anyone what they would or wouldn't do. But I know bovine scatology when I hear it.

It's just funny to me that when you hit someone with a good dose of reality how they try to shut you up because they don't like what you said, no matter how much truth it contains.

And as far as the "castle doctrine" is concerned, are you ready to put your faith in the legal system? Many innocent men have gone to prison. I don't intend to be one of them. My family needs me and I need them. It's all about making it home at the end of the day, whether it's avoiding a situation that could go very wrong, or actually having to use your weapon in justified self-defense.

I don't have any special knowledge or experience. I have, however, given these matters a great deal of thought (probably more than I should) and I have read everything I can get my hands on pertaining to self-defense and the legalities involved. I am a believer in shooting as the very last resort and only when everything else has failed. Killing someone is final and can't be taken back. Every account that I have read of a self-defense shooting mentions the way that it changes your life forever. I don't want to experience that and I don't think anyone here who hasn't already wants to either. It distresses me when I hear someone say that they would shoot in a situation where they could possibly escape instead. Avoiding trouble is always the better option. I have no use for someone who walks around with a weapon and a chip on his shoulder. Anyone who talks big about how they would shoot no matter what is a fool.

It wasn't my intention to offend anyone, but the truth often offends people. Also looks to me like some (notice I said SOME, not EVERYONE) here need to put their big boy pants on and stop getting offended. Self-defense and personal protection are not something to be taken lightly. People who are willing to shoot someone with no thought to how it will affect them and/or anyone else are trigger happy in my opinion and need to spend some time thinking about what happens after they use their weapon. If they don't, they shouldn't be surprised if they end up with Bubba as a cellmate.

I think you need to quit reading Massad Ayoob articles and gun magazine advice. I agree with you as far as the "always shoot" part, but you can't carry a gun and hesitate either.

I have been in the Army, I have worked in gun sales and firearms training, I work in security and now and am waiting for my slot in the police academy to open up in the summer, so I have worked with and around people who deal with these types of cases everyday for quite a few years now. If you are so afraid of going to jail, you don't need to carry a firearm for self-defense. Period. The reason is your fear of those 12 people, the judge, lawyers, and police will make you hesitate and that will get you killed everytime.

I think where you want to blame many people here for being to overzealous, my assertion would be that you do not have the mindset to carry a firearm for the opposite reason.

[daddyo]

I think you need to quit reading Massad Ayoob articles and gun magazine advice. I agree with you as far as the "always shoot" part, but you can't carry a gun and hesitate either.

I have been in the Army, I have worked in gun sales and firearms training, I work in security and now and am waiting for my slot in the police academy to open up in the summer, so I have worked with and around people who deal with these types of cases everyday for quite a few years now. If you are so afraid of going to jail, you don't need to carry a firearm for self-defense. Period. The reason is your fear of those 12 people, the judge, lawyers, and police will make you hesitate and that will get you killed everytime.

I think where you want to blame many people here for being to overzealous, my assertion would be that you do not have the mindset to carry a firearm for the opposite reason.

Yeah, maybe I should just leave my gun at home so I would have zero chance of defending myself if I needed to just because I have given some thought to what happens after the shooting occurs. What a great solution.

If your definition of "being afraid of going to jail" is not WANTING to go to jail, then, yes, I guess I am afraid of it nor do I want it. I don't see how that disqualifies me from carrying the means to defend myself. I don't walk around talking about how I won't hesitate to use it. Anyone who doesn't recoil (no pun intended) to some extent just from the thought of shooting someone and/or taking a life no matter what the reason needs to think about it a little more and really ask themselves some hard questions about why they carry a firearm. What I've seen here so far from some (not all) is a desire to enact justice, which has nothing to do with self-defense.

Don't misinterpret what I've said to mean that I could not defend myself if it were the only option, but ONLY if it were the only one available. But you believe whatever you like.

Carrying a mousegun can also get one killed, but I sure see a lot of folks here who think they're the best thing since sliced bread.

Thank you for your military service.

Oh, and BTW, I don't read gun magazines nor did I ever say that I've read anything by Massad Ayoob.

Edited February 11, 2010 by DaddyO

[tt0511]

Frankly, there are some here who talk like BA rednecks and I don't get the impression that they have the foggiest notion of the responsibility that comes with the carry permit and the weapon.

When you have nothing between you and him, no door, no glass, and there's no room to escape, and you GENUINELY FEAR FOR YOUR LIFE, then it's justified. Not just because he messed up your car. Last time I checked, you can't drop someone just because they are destroying your property.

If you kill him and the police or the jury determines that you were not in imminent danger of losing your life, then get ready to say hello to Bubba in your new jail cell.

^^^ Yep. What he said. Taking from Mr. Ayoob, ...with a permit and a weapon for it, you have the ability to do something that even the judicial system or police do not (I think this is how he put it), ....you have the ability to immediately order and execute the death penalty upon a criminal. Therefore, ...you d@mn sure better be right and KNOW that a jury will conclude that you were only acting in the same manner than any reasonable person could be expected to act under those circumstances.

For the sake of the video, not until the thug rares back the tire iron to hit YOU or a passenger in the car are you justified in terminating his sorry tail. I do think there would be more leniency in the case that infants or children were in the back seat. If nothing else, it's an emotional tag that a jury can relate to and will have a hard time getting out of their minds when deciding a verdict.

Also, in the video scenario, if you get out of your car I think you better be doing it with the intent and attempt to run away. If you get out of your car and stand your ground in front of the guy I believe you may find yourself in some serious . Because you carry a permit (therefore having been informed more than the average citizen without one), and a deadly weapon, you are going to be scrutinized more carefully and closely than a citizen with no deadly weapon or permit.

Just my 2cents. Keep yourself safe, and behave yourself wisely.

[Punisher84]

^^^ Yep. What he said. Taking from Mr. Ayoob, ...with a permit and a weapon for it, you have the ability to do something that even the judicial system or police do not (I think this is how he put it), ....you have the ability to immediately order and execute the death penalty upon a criminal. Therefore, ...you d@mn sure better be right and KNOW that a jury will conclude that you were only acting in the same manner than any reasonable person could be expected to act under those circumstances.

For the sake of the video, not until the thug rares back the tire iron to hit YOU or a passenger in the car are you justified in terminating his sorry tail. I do think there would be more leniency in the case that infants or children were in the back seat. If nothing else, it's an emotional tag that a jury can relate to and will have a hard time getting out of their minds when deciding a verdict.

Also, in the video scenario, if you get out of your car I think you better be doing it with the intent and attempt to run away. If you get out of your car and stand your ground in front of the guy I believe you may find yourself in some serious . Because you carry a permit (therefore having been informed more than the average citizen without one), and a deadly weapon, you are going to be scrutinized more carefully and closely than a citizen with no deadly weapon or permit.

Just my 2cents. Keep yourself safe, and behave yourself wisely.

Again stop reading Ayoob. He has some good points, but he is WAY over cautious, and the reason for that is to avoid litigation. In TN you do not have to retreat if you are in a place you have a legal right to be. So if you got out of the car to tell the guy to stop and he came at you with the tire iron it's justifiable self-defense.

[tt0511]

Again stop reading Ayoob. He has some good points, but he is WAY over cautious, and the reason for that is to avoid litigation. In TN you do not have to retreat if you are in a place you have a legal right to be. So if you got out of the car to tell the guy to stop and he came at you with the tire iron it's justifiable self-defense.

I'm new to the CCW lifestyle, so it's possible you are correct and I just don't know it yet. Perhaps Mr. Ayoob is too cautious. I don't feel that way when reading the books I have that he has authored. I do realize that since some of his books were written, laws have relaxed and even turned to positively reinforce the right of the citizen to defend themselves. I think Mr. Ayoob is weighing in heavily on the potential, and normal psychological effects that occur in the aftermath of having to kill a human being. I can believe that the event would be near impossible to quench from memory and I am sure it would haunt ME for a long, long time even if I was justified. I wouldn't necessarily "regret" defending my life or my family or friend's lives, but I would have a knot in my stomach that I was put into the situation and forced to react in that way.

What I was saying about getting out of the car and running, ...to me this is just common sense. He can beat the crap outta my car all he wants while I'm in the store calling the Poe-Poe. It slipped my mind about Castle Doctrine extending to the car when I typed that. Nevertheless, I'd rather retreat if he's not attempting to harm my person or anyone else. Him beating the snot outta my car is not a life or death situation, ...and I don't want to MAKE it one. As a Christian, ...in a situation like in the video I'll take any alternative available route that presents itself before taking the life of a person. That's just where I'm at right now. Sure, law may ALLOW you to stay there and risk having to shoot the guy. But, ...is that really what you "should" do? It depends on the situation. Although the scenario of the video is shocking, whether staged or not, I'd have my doubts about the person who "kills" someone over that. The first rule of self defense is to flee if you can. Though I have a lot to learn and contemplate, in the video scenario I feel the moral high ground is most certainly to exit the vehicle when the criminal is on the opposite side of the vehicle and get outta dodge. I'm a beginner at all of this however, so my position may change. Forums are for discussing such things and learning up us wimper snappers.

[E4 No More]

I'm new to the CCW lifestyle, so it's possible you are correct and I just don't know it yet. Perhaps Mr. Ayoob is too cautious. I don't feel that way when reading the books I have that he has authored. I do realize that since some of his books were written, laws have relaxed and even turned to positively reinforce the right of the citizen to defend themselves. I think Mr. Ayoob is weighing in heavily on the potential, and normal psychological effects that occur in the aftermath of having to kill a human being. I can believe that the event would be near impossible to quench from memory and I am sure it would haunt ME for a long, long time even if I was justified. I wouldn't necessarily "regret" defending my life or my family or friend's lives, but I would have a knot in my stomach that I was put into the situation and forced to react in that way.

What I was saying about getting out of the car and running, ...to me this is just common sense. He can beat the crap outta my car all he wants while I'm in the store calling the Poe-Poe. It slipped my mind about Castle Doctrine extending to the car when I typed that. Nevertheless, I'd rather retreat if he's not attempting to harm my person or anyone else. Him beating the snot outta my car is not a life or death situation, ...and I don't want to MAKE it one. As a Christian, ...in a situation like in the video I'll take any alternative available route that presents itself before taking the life of a person. That's just where I'm at right now. Sure, law may ALLOW you to stay there and risk having to shoot the guy. But, ...is that really what you "should" do? It depends on the situation. Although the scenario of the video is shocking, whether staged or not, I'd have my doubts about the person who "kills" someone over that. The first rule of self defense is to flee if you can. Though I have a lot to learn and contemplate, in the video scenario I feel the moral high ground is most certainly to exit the vehicle when the criminal is on the opposite side of the vehicle and get outta dodge. I'm a beginner at all of this however, so my position may change. Forums are for discussing such things and learning up us wimper snappers.

That guy was demonstrating his power in a primal fashion, and if you were to get out of the vehicle he would have seen that as a challenge: therefore, he'd run you down if he could.

[Punisher84]

I'm new to the CCW lifestyle, so it's possible you are correct and I just don't know it yet. Perhaps Mr. Ayoob is too cautious. I don't feel that way when reading the books I have that he has authored. I do realize that since some of his books were written, laws have relaxed and even turned to positively reinforce the right of the citizen to defend themselves. I think Mr. Ayoob is weighing in heavily on the potential, and normal psychological effects that occur in the aftermath of having to kill a human being. I can believe that the event would be near impossible to quench from memory and I am sure it would haunt ME for a long, long time even if I was justified. I wouldn't necessarily "regret" defending my life or my family or friend's lives, but I would have a knot in my stomach that I was put into the situation and forced to react in that way.

What I was saying about getting out of the car and running, ...to me this is just common sense. He can beat the crap outta my car all he wants while I'm in the store calling the Poe-Poe. It slipped my mind about Castle Doctrine extending to the car when I typed that. Nevertheless, I'd rather retreat if he's not attempting to harm my person or anyone else. Him beating the snot outta my car is not a life or death situation, ...and I don't want to MAKE it one. As a Christian, ...in a situation like in the video I'll take any alternative available route that presents itself before taking the life of a person. That's just where I'm at right now. Sure, law may ALLOW you to stay there and risk having to shoot the guy. But, ...is that really what you "should" do? It depends on the situation. Although the scenario of the video is shocking, whether staged or not, I'd have my doubts about the person who "kills" someone over that. The first rule of self defense is to flee if you can. Though I have a lot to learn and contemplate, in the video scenario I feel the moral high ground is most certainly to exit the vehicle when the criminal is on the opposite side of the vehicle and get outta dodge. I'm a beginner at all of this however, so my position may change. Forums are for discussing such things and learning up us wimper snappers.

I agree with that. I'm a Christian as well, but that's really not what gives me pause about taking a life. An often quoted verse around here is the one about a man having no sword should sell his cloak to buy one. I see it like this. I do NOT want to take a life unless I am given no other choice. I don't relish in the thought of having to ever shoot anyone, but I also realize that some day, whether in my line of work or because of where I live, it may become a real possibility so I prepare myself as best you can for it.

I have actually met Mas Ayoob and had a conversation with him about his articles and books and what I gathered from that 10-15 minute conversation is pretty much what you asserted above. He wants you to be cautious and think. For that I commend him, it's just at times he can be a bit too much scare factor if you don't read into it or understand his point fully.

[tt0511]

That guy was demonstrating his power in a primal fashion, and if you were to get out of the vehicle he would have seen that as a challenge: therefore, he'd run you down if he could.

No way to know that. I'd first try to run and keep my eyes looking back at him to see. If he pursued me and I felt I was in danger of being caught, I would likely reach to draw while running, stop, then turn to face the inevitable.

[tt0511]

I agree with that. I'm a Christian as well, but that's really not what gives me pause about taking a life. An often quoted verse around here is the one about a man having no sword should sell his cloak to buy one. I see it like this. I do NOT want to take a life unless I am given no other choice. I don't relish in the thought of having to ever shoot anyone, but I also realize that some day, whether in my line of work or because of where I live, it may become a real possibility so I prepare myself as best you can for it.

I have actually met Mas Ayoob and had a conversation with him about his articles and books and what I gathered from that 10-15 minute conversation is pretty much what you asserted above. He wants you to be cautious and think. For that I commend him, it's just at times he can be a bit too much scare factor if you don't read into it or understand his point fully.

I agree with everything you said. But, I've never met Mas. The verse you mentioned is just one of a whole host I studied and made sure I was convinced in myself that lethal force in self defense was Biblical (not trying to turn this thread into a pulpit) as that was my primary concern. I do want to be cautious. I'm a lot further along and a lot more "well thought out" in regards to self defense than I was when I had my permit the first time. One of the reasons I didn't carry my gun when I had my permit the first time was that I wasn't sure I could actually shoot someone. The story is different this time. I've aged, matured, thought, etc. and have come to the conclusion that yes, I can, and will if put in that situation.

I think threads like this, ...videos, literary reports, etc. are good exercises if you actually put yourself into the situation mentally and think about all of the emotions, facts, ....and what you would do. It's good to do this on a regular basis.

Edited February 11, 2010 by tt0511