Membership
Self defense action
A self defense shooting involves the actual discharge of a firearm by a member in order to preserve a human life or to prevent serious bodily harm to a person. The life or serious harm the member is attempting to protect can be their own, or another person’s. When a member decides to use deadly force, they must be able to explain their reason for doing so.
When police officers are being trained at the academy, one of the questions asked by the cadets is “How will I know when to shoot?” The instructors will usually answer with one sentence, “You will know when to shoot” There will be an instant when you will know that if you do not take action, something very bad will happen.
Naturally, when another person has a gun pointed at you or someone else, there is the probability of death or serious bodily harm. The standard rule in any law enforcement agency is that it a subject has a gun pointed at another person, the threat must be neutralized. There is no greater threat than a person attempting to do harm with a firearm. If one of our members was ever charged under those circumstances, they would be covered.
What about an assailant that has a weapon other than a firearm? When a person has a gun, there is an understanding that the assailant doesn’t even have to move from their location in order to cause serious harm or death. A bullet travels a long distance in a short amount of time, and the only question is how accurate the assailant’s aim is in hitting his target When the attacker has a knife or a club, the perception by the public of how dangerous that person is changes.
And thal perception is usually distorted. Police officers go through extensive training to protect themselves against an attack wielding a knife. Most people do not realize that officers are trained to shoot a person charging at them with a knife it that person is within what is called the “safety radius.” For most officers, that distance is 25 feet. What that means is that if the assailant is 25 feet away and charging, the officer will have just enough time to pull his weapon out of his holster and fire one round at the assailant before he reaches the officer. Officers have been stabbed and killed by an attacker because the officer hesitated to fire before the attacker was inside the safety radius.
There has been a great deal of controversy lately regarding the shooting of an unarmed assailant The Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri is an excellent example of when deadly force is necessary in order to preserve a life even it the assailant is unarmed. There are several factors to consider when the decision is made to shoot an unarmed person.
A small woman would probably be able to convince a jury that she was in fear of her life being attacked by an unarmed assailant. A large man would have a harder time proving that he felt his life was in danger by an unarmed attacker. There are many factors involved any time deadly force is used in a self defense-situation. The most important factor is if a judge or jury will believe that deadly force was necessary in your circumstance.
The problem with those people who have never been through specialized training in regards to unarmed assailants or those with knives and clubs, is that there is a hesitation to pull the trigger for fear of a backlash of public opinion. No one wants to be accused of killing a person when it “wasn’t necessary” because they didn’t have a gun. Unfortunately, when someone is trying to kill you with a knife or club, if you hesitate with your firearm, it could be fatal. Remember, if your unarmed assailant reaches you, they can very easily get your weapon, and then they are no longer unarmed.
In Home Invasion shooting
The rules regarding in home invasion shootings differ from state to state. Many states have adopted laws called “The Castle Doctrine,” which reduces the liability of the homeowner if they kill or injure someone who has broken into their home. In the past, the homeowner had to feel that his life was being threatened before he was able to shoot an intruder. Under the Castle Doctrine, the threat level has been reduced, and the homeowner has a much greater latitude in defending his home. An intruder that has broken into the home is assumed to have planned to do serious harm or to kill those inside. The actual act of a deadly threat does not have to exist for the homeowner to shoot tho intruder.
States that currently have the Castle Doctrine in effect include Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. There are states that uphold the Castle Doctrine idea, but still rely on case law and may enforce a “duty to retreat.” Those states include the District of Columbia, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, South Dakota, and Vermont.
In states that do not recognize any type of Castle Doctrine, the same rules apply that would restrict your use of deadly force in public. If you were to shoot an unarmed burglar in the back in one of those states, chances are you would be charged with a crime.
This doesn’t mean that you can shoot someone that is entering your home if you know there is no threat. You can’t plug your neighbor friend who has just knocked and entered your side door like they have done on many other occasions. Even if you mistake them for an intruder, you are probably looking at charges being filed against you. The home invasion laws were designed to protect homeowners against viable threats to tho occupants of the home.
In Car Invasion shooting
The rules regarding in car invasion shootings also differ from state to state. The states that have adopted Castle Doctrine laws also reduces the liability of the occupant of a motor vehicle if they kill or injure someone who is entering the car uninvited. Under the Castle Doctrine, the threat level has also been reduced if someone suddenly jumps into your car and the driver and passengers have a much greater latitude in defending themselves. An intruder that has broken into your car is assumed to have planned to do serious harm or to kill those inside. The actual act of a deadly threat does not have to exist for the occupants of the vehicle to shoot the intruder.
It is important to know what the laws in your state allows when it comes 10 the issue of deadly force. It is important to know the facts so you will feel comfortable when you take action, and you will know that such action will be defended by the Gun Owners Legal Defense Network.
Brandishing of the Firearm
There are instances where a member has used his firearm to deter an incident and was never required to pull the trigger. The term used in this situation is “brandishing” a firearm. The same rules apply here that would apply if you actually had to pull the trigger. Brandishing (displaying your weapon in an aggressive nature) requires the same standard of the chance of death or serious bodily harm.
The penalties of brandishing your firearm without, just cause can result in serious charges. A gun owner became angry at the neighborhood children who were playing near his car in the driveway. After warning them several times, he went and got his handgun. He walked out on his porch and pointed the gun at the children, ordering them to stay away from his car. The man was charged menacing, a felony. Face it, the man was certainly not in danger of his life, and the action was purely offensive and not defensive. GOLD’N would not defend this man under any circumstances.
An Accidental Inadvertent Display of the Firearm
One of the largest fears of the concealed carry permit holder is that someone will see the weapon under the clothing and call the police. This is the single most common incident occurring with permit holders that results in a visit from your local law enforcement. It is important to know what your options are under these circumstances, and to also have an attorney well versed in the law available with your phone call.
This was a huge problem when concealed carry permits were first being issued. States that did not recognize open carry were strict in their concealed carry legislation, making it a violation of the law if the gun was not “concealed.” Therefore, any circumstances that allowed another person to see your weapon was a violation of the concealed carry statute.
Fortunately, some of the people being arrested for accidentally displaying their weapon in public appealed their convictions to a higher court. It has been determined by most courts that an “inadvertent display” of the gun DOES NOT constitute a violation of the concealed carry laws. In most states where this decision has been made, it is not written into the actual statute, but is contained in case law. Not every police officer is knowledgeable in case law. They go strictly by the law itself.
Which is why it is important for the gun owner to know the law, or at least have legal representation that is familiar with not only the law, but all of the case law that goes along with it. A man in a retail store bent over to pick up an item from a shelf. Another customer observed the gun in the man’s holster and called the local police on her cell phone. When the officer showed up, he took the man down at gunpoint, took his firearm, and advised the man that he was under arrest for violating the concealed carry ordinance. Back at the station, the man called his attorney, who spoke to the arresting officer and pointed out the Appellate Court decision that said an inadvertent display of the firearm was not a violation of the concealed carry ordinance. The man was subsequently released from custody and his gun returned.
Some states, like Texas, still have laws against a person carrying a weapon in plain view, Although this is a violation of the Second Amendment of the Constitution, some states still have statutes prohibiting the practice. lo those states, it is prudent to research the law and determine if an inadvertent display of the firearm is a violation of that state’s concealed carry law.