Draw your weapon to fire or to scare away?

I can also imagine circumstances where I might draw secretly, such as under the table or held behind my back, to wait for the opportunity to shoot, but I'm STILL not drawing to threaten. And realistically, if I have time to wait and see, I also have time to ESCAPE. I have to REALLY stretch my imagination to think of a scenario when I would draw and wait, but I wouldn't have the opportunity to escape. Remember, the idea is not to shoot someone, the idea is to NOT GET SHOT. If you have time to wait and see, your life is not in immediate danger. There is something you can do BESIDES use deadly force, so you don't use it.

It all comes down to not being a crime statistic. If I am ever in a situation I will have to trust my instincts and training to make the right decision right then.

Having recently posted a situation I found myself in, and realizing how differently it was perceived among the responders (everyone draws their own picture in their own mind), I will not judge the OP for his actions. He knows how he felt at the moment and all the nuances that don't come across in the story. Had I been in that situation (as I picture it in *my* mind), I would have probably crossed the street when I recognized the potential for ambush. Had I crossed the street, it would have broken or diminished the possible fork attack by placing all potential assailants on one side of me (triangle vs. straight line). I would have also been able to more accurately determine their intentions if they followed me across the street.

Again, not saying this is the correct answer, just what I believe I would do based on the picture I have in my mind of what happened.

Sitting behind my desk, in my comfy chair playing armchair quarterback, I would imagine I would have displayed immediately if they changed their direction to follow me across the street and continued to close the gap. I can see no reason for this behavior other than to initiate a conflict, and I believe if I told this to a jury, they would agree with me that there was now definite reason for concern. If they continued to approach, while they were still a safe distance away (and I would consider that distance much greater for 4 people than 1), I would have drawn and commanded them to stop approaching. After that, they get lead.

As a side note: a friend of mine who is an LEO told me that his experience with laser sights is that they are very intimidating and tend to diffuse situations very quickly when the BG has a red dot painted on his chest. It makes it more real I guess.

If, AS I AM BRINGING THE GUN UP TO FIRE, something that happens changes my mind, I will not fire. From there, it's "STOP!! DROP THE WEAPON!!" If they comply, I do not fire. "FACE DOWN ON THE GROUND, HANDS BEHIND YOUR HEAD!!"

Click to expand...

Just exactly how long does it take for you to bring the weapon up to fire?

mljdeckard said:

I don't pull until deadly force is justified. After I pull, the situation may de-escalate, but I will never, EVER, pull my gun to intimidate, coerce, convince, threaten, negotiate, or persuade. The only thing I use my gun for is deadly force.

Click to expand...

so in the 4 guys scenario as described, at what point do *you* shoot?
I don't mean this to be insulting to your posted response. I would like your (and others') opinion(s) because this is something I don't have clearly worked out in my mind.

Do you wait until one of them hits you?
If you let them get to the point where it is immediate draw/shoot, isn't it too late, because they are already beating on you and may have disabled you or taken your gun?

As far as the decision process goes (in my mind)...
BG has a weapon - easy - shoot
Disparate number of attackers already in the process of beating you - easy - shoot
Cracked out dude much bigger than me starts beating me - easy - shoot

but what about a single unarmed a**h*** posturing to fight?
Do you have to wait for him to throw the first punch?
Is his throwing and connecting with one punch enough reason to shoot (at this point, drawing wouldn't be an option imho)?
How much of a beating would I have to sustain before I am justified to shoot?
If I hit him back in self defense, does it become a consensual fight and then I lose my option of using my weapon if he starts getting the best of me?

I'm not a small guy, but my scenarios assume the assailant is bigger/tougher than me, and besides that, I lost any desire to fist fight 30 years ago.

I would only draw mine if I, or another innocent, was in immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury. If the perp ran off as I was drawing, great it is his lucky (and my) lucky day. But I certainly wouldn't count on it to scare the perp off, nor would I draw it with that intention.

As a side note: a friend of mine who is an LEO told me that his experience with laser sights is that they are very intimidating and tend to diffuse situations very quickly when the BG has a red dot painted on his chest. It makes it more real I guess.

Click to expand...

Probably so, as long as it's not bouncing all over the place from nervousness.

cdinusa-

All the OP said was that there were people in front of him, people behind him, and he didn't like the way they were closing. This is a long way from; "I was in reasonable fear of my life and the only thing I could do to save my life was use deadly force". If they crossed the street, you can too. See if they follow you, walk a different way. Yell at them. Pull out your PHONE to see if they react to it. Change direction to see what they do. The distances described do not indicate that he was in imminent danger. At this distance, how were they going to hurt him? He did not see weapons present. They COULD charge him. They COULD show weapons. They COULD move to close him in. But none of these things are indicated in the situation. A million things COULD happen. I am commenting on what he described, not ASSUMING more.

If they charged, I would certainly draw with the intent to do whatever I had to to stop their actions. I don't want them to GET close enough to hurt me. When you are being charged from the front by two assailants, it is reasonable to draw in enough time to stop them. IF THEIR INTENTIONS WERE NOT VIOLENT, (or they had a sudden jolt of wisdom,) they will immediately stop their actions. But it's still "Face down on the ground, hands behind your head." If the gun comes out, the police are getting called. The first one to call the police is the victim, I'm going to make sure it's me and not someone else. Otherwise, the police will be responding to a "Man with a gun" call, and I will be forced to prove that I drew in self defense, not as the aggressor. The bad guys will have 3-8 minutes to think of a story that isn't the same as mine.

In this case, there were two in the front AND two in the rear. I will put my back to the wall where I can see all of them. If their intentions are to harm me, I will be forced to take on four assailants. This is always bad. This is why I WILL DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO AVOID FIGHTING THEM AT ALL. Again, if they see the gun and get a sudden shot of wisdom and run, I will call the police immediately. If the gun EVER comes out, it means there is a crime to report. It is impossible to control four bad guys with their hands behind their head in two different directions from me, so I wouldn't try.

But: AGAIN: This didn't happen in the OP's description. All it was, was two guys in front, two in the back that he THOUGHT MIGHT be boxing him in. If you draw in that situation, the two guys in front could just as easily run around the corner and call the police because some guy up the sidewalk just pulled a gun on them for no apparent reason. He was a LONG way from justifying deadly force.

I don't have to wait for someone to throw a punch. On the other hand, if he DOES throw a punch, or even hits me, but I AM NOT IN REASONABLE FEAR OF SERIOUS BODILY INJURY OR DEATH, I'm still not justified in shooting him. It is all situation dependent. This is the discipline you must have if you carry. You can't shoot someone just because they hit you. Just because they hit you doesn't mean they were going to injure you further.

If a drunk guy who is my size or smaller starts calling me names, thinks I hit on his old lady, charges me, I step out of the way and he falls down, no, I'm not going to draw on him. I really don't think he's going to hurt me. But if he's drunk, gives me a hard look, reaches into his pocket and charges me, I will be drawing with the intent to stop his actions. I may have a chance to shove him backwards while his hand is still in his pocket, but if not, I'm going to shoot.

If a guy charges me, and I know from previous experience with him that he is violent and will try to harm me, I will give him less leeway than a total stranger. If I have a neighbor with a history of domestic violence and alcoholism, and there is noise in the night and a frantic knock on the door, and his old lady needs to come in to escape, I see him in his doorway yelling and threatening, I will have my gun ready, but I will not SHOW the gun until he charges. (That one actually happened to me. He stayed in the doorway and I bolted the door and watched him until the police arrived. To this day, he doesn't even know that I was armed.)

This is a long way from; "I was in reasonable fear of my life and the only thing I could do to save my life was use deadly force".

Click to expand...

Again: drawing is not "using deadly force."

I have no idea who taught you that it's a good idea to pull a gun if you don't plan to use it. That's not common sens OR within the law.

It's common sense to be ready. If that involves drawing early, so be it.

so in the 4 guys scenario as described, at what point do *you* shoot?

Click to expand...

At the point that it is reasonable to fear for my life or the life of my companion.

That point wasn't reached in the scenario being discussed in my opinion.

I don't think anyone here is saying you have to wait until you're actually being attacked to begin to defend yourself. You just have to wait until it is clear that you're going to be attacked with sufficient force to justify self defense with deadly force.

If it were clear that the 4 teens intended to kill you, then you would be justified in drawing your weapon. I don't think their intentions were clear. I think the character in the story made an assumption that they were up to no good and drew his weapon either unnecessarily or prematurely.

I think a jury of 12 reasonable people would agree.

I think every jurisdiction is different and everyones perception of these scenarios is different. Hell I didn't even know there was a wall to back up against.

If it were clear that the 4 teens intended to kill you, then you would be justified in drawing your weapon.

Click to expand...

If it were clear that the 4 teens intended to kill you, then you would be justified in shooting them. Do you see no difference between drawing and firing?

If it were clear that the 4 teens intended to kill you, then you would be justified in shooting them. Do you see no difference between drawing and firing?

Click to expand...

Why would you draw if you weren't justified in shooting?

How would you shoot if you didn't draw first?

I'm confused....

I don't think a CCWer should draw unless justified in shooting.

Click to expand...

And that's the root of the issue. Why not?

I'll say it again, because if you draw a gun and threaten someone with it when your life was not clearly in danger, you have committed aggravated assault.

If you don't understand why you can't just draw your gun, you REALLY need to get some more training. Tactical AND legal. You have convinced yourself something that just isn't true.

I haven't read the entire thread, so maybe this has been covered, but...

Suppose your back is literally against a wall (Or you otherwise have way to retreat). What if someone, say, 20 yards in front of you and closing, demonstrates a clear desire to hurt or kill you you, and they're holding up a bat/machete with obvious intent to use it?

Are people here saying you can't draw a gun and give him a second to stand down?

because if you draw a gun and threaten someone with it when your life was not clearly in danger, you have committed aggravated assault.

Click to expand...

So the only problem you have with it is that it's illegal?

No, but it's the biggest one. On THR, we follow the law, PERIOD.

Where did you get this notion that if you pull a gun, it's ok to not use it?

Spare me the sanctimoniousness. The THR prohibition on advocacy of illegal acts does not extend to arguing whether something is tactically and legally sound.

Where did you get the idea that if you pull a gun it's not OK not to use it?

The law.

Just exactly how long does it take for you to bring the weapon up to fire?

Click to expand...

1-2 seconds for me to draw and fire, depending upon the range. If, during that time, Mongo sees my gun and decides that he has a pressing engagement elsewhere and turns to leave, I just might let him do that very thing.

The law.

Click to expand...

Again, thank you for your legal opinion, which no doubt will apply in all situations in all states.