The realities of the street

Kleanbore · Jan 7, 2014

Posted by quert65: in AZ, LA, VA, UT, WY, MT or any other open carry state. Is it legal to open carry in public?
In those areas where it is legal can you ccw and then open carry on the same day?
Can you legally take of your jacket thereby exposing your firearm to public view?
If you carry your wallet in your right hand side back pocket(I do) and IWB on your R side, can I reach for my wallet?
If I'm in a parking lot and I feel threatened may I take off my coat? Put my hand on my wallet to make sure it is secure?

Frank has already answered the real question. It will come down to why, how, and under what circumstances. It is really not a good idea at all to try to get cute about it.

My point is that there are ways to display your firearm legally in open carry states that may prevent you from being harmed/using your weapon which I think everyone can agree is the goal.

There is one, and that is to carry openly.

Also I would honestly, like to see a case where someone was convicted in a state with legal open carry, and they never opened their mouth or touched their sidearm

There have been plenty, but conviction is only the worst case.

The situation in gun friendly, open carry Arizona became so serious that

People became felons and served time for what many, if not most, of us would consider to have been reasonable actions;
The Arizona CCW website and training materials emphasized in great death the serious legal consequnces of exposing a concealed firearm, or putting one's hand on it through a garment, or mentioning its presence, or reaching into a purse containing a firearm, under circumstances in which the actor could not demonstrate a basis for a reaonable belief that deadly force had been immediately necessary to prevent death or iimminent bodily harm, and explained by way of numerous examples when uncovering the firearm might be appropriate and when it would not be
The legislature saw the need to amend the law to reduce the threshold for justification to a situation involving the immediate necessity for non-deadly physical force. The amendment was vetoed the first time, but it later became law.

There are a handful of states in which one may lawfully display or even produce a weapon under threatening circumstances that would not justify the use of deadly force. However, in all of them, non-deadly physical force would have to be justifiable.

Arizona now permits the defensive display of a firearm under certain circumstances, but the law has not ben tested, and Arizona attorney Michael Anthony recommends against drawing unless the circumstances would indicate the need for deadly force.

Several states do permit drawing a firearm under some circumstances in which the threat has not yet risen to a level requiring deadly force. As has been mentioned, Texas is one of them.

Searching around for examples won't help you--the only way court cases are routinely recorded in detail comes about when appellate decisions pertinent to the legal question at hand are rendered. There would have to be a conviction, an appeal on the basis the relevant legal question at hand, and an appellate decision--which is how the common law was written in the first place.

Far better to consult a competent criminal defense attorney in your jurisdiction, in private.

qwert65 · Jan 7, 2014

I see we are typing past one another, I do not appreciate your insinuation that I'm being cute. My whole point is that under certain circumstances(by no means all) in most open carry states that one may switch from concealed carry to open carry in an effort to end a situation before it begins(without threatening or even talking to the potential opponent(s).
Your rebuttal that it would depend on the specific circumstances is nonsensical, since the whole scenario is the circumstance. It's the equivilant of you stating that you can use a gun in self defense depending on circumstances and me saying no you are wrong, you can only do it depending on circumstances. Id like you to at least answer this question- in the circumstances of the scenario I gave, where the sidearm was never touched and no words were every spoken to the potential assailants, in 2014 in the state of AZ what could the ccw'er be charged with?

Kleanbore · Jan 7, 2014

Posted by quert65: ...I do not appreciate your insinuation that I'm being cute.

I'm afraid it appears to me that you are--checking a wallet--and so on. You are trying to claim that an act committed in a circumstance in which your real motive, as described by you, had been to cause someone to react to the display of your weapon, had really been done for innocent reasons.

My whole point is that under certain circumstances(by no means all) in most open carry states that one may switch from concealed carry to open carry in an effort to end a situation before it begins(without threatening or even talking to the potential opponent(s).

Is the "effort to end a situation" intended to influence someone via the display of a weapon? If so, it is patently unlawful, except in a handful of states, and in those, only in circumstances in which force would have been justified.

.Id like you to at least answer this question- in the circumstances of the scenario I gave, where the sidearm was never touched and no words were every spoken to the potential assailants, in 2014 in the state of AZ what could the ccw'er be charged with?

Well, unless you could come up with some reason to successfully assert that the scenario you described would justify the use of non-deadly physical force, the charge would be aggravated assault, in Arizona.

Potential charges in other states might well be much less severe.

Your best near term step would be to consult an attorney. Might I also suggest that you invest the time and money to attend MAG-20, a very excellent class in the lawful use of force. Discussing the article in the OP would be interesting.

qwert65 · Jan 7, 2014

I don't think you understand reality- the law does not punish thoughts- the law punishes acts- moving a garment - no matter the situation is not a crime. If I thought that looking at you would kill you and I proceeded to stare at you(in public)that's not a crime.
There is zero case law that removing a jacket is a crime anywhere. There is no case law that shows open carrying where legal at night is a prosecutable offense anywhere.
Threatening someone with deadly force is a crime)and should be) however, your supposition that switching from concealed to open in front if people is wrong- there are many on this board who do it every day . Once again taking off your jacket, reaching for a wallet, hell bending over with your sidearm so it prints/shows is not a crime anywhere open carry is legal

Sam1911 · Jan 7, 2014

moving a garment - no matter the situation is not a crime.

Unless, of course, that act brings a weapon into view in such a way as to alarm someone and affect their behavior.

You can do any number of things in perfectly legal ways or ways and at time which are not legal.

Could you remove your jacket and allow others to see your gun without breaking the law? Of course. Could you remove your jacket and allow others to see your gun in a way and/or circumstance where that could be a threatening act? Undoubtedly. The fact that you would suggest that doing so would scare off a potential attacker makes that abundantly clear.

Case A) I was standing at the gas pumps filling my car, and decided to take off my jacket. I wasn't interacting with anyone and no one was directly interacting with me. That exposed my gun, but that's legal in my state so no worries.

Case B) I was standing at the gas pumps filling my car, and several young guys started walking my way. I felt threatened and took off my coat and turned so they could see that I was armed. They started talking excitedly and then backed away quickly. ... That exposed my gun in a way that alarmed them and changed their behavior. They called the police and registered a complaint against me. The police reviewed the security tapes and can see that I faced them, made eye contact and took an apparently deliberate action. He said/she said there was/wasn't some verbal contact and now we're in a legal entanglement that very well may end up before a jury.

Hey, it might be a good thing -- if you don't have to shoot someone who was going to attack you (or die under their attack). Might end up being a bad thing -- if you are arrested, tried, and convicted for threatening someone by a display of a weapon.

I think counselor Kleanbore understands reality pretty well. And he feels that one of the acts you may indeed be prosecuted for is bringing your weapon into view at an inauspicious time and/or an inappropriate manner. You may disagree and you don't have to take his advice. He's not your lawyer. But it is probably foolish to blindly contend that he's blowing smoke.

xXxplosive · Jan 7, 2014

I love it when I read questions like...When should I draw or should I carry with one in ?
In the 20+ years I worked in Newark, NJ ...my S&W Model 36 saved my arse twice....didn't need someone to tell me when to draw and certainly didn't worry about brandishing or any of that stuff....luckly, most here will never be in a confrontational situation but if you are and you survive it you'll never ask those questions again....I guarantee it.

Kleanbore · Jan 8, 2014

Posted by quert65: the law does not punish thoughts- the law punishes acts

Well, you are half right. If an act is committed with criminal intent it is a crime. Otherwise, usually, but not always, it is not.

For those acts in which intent matters, the operative words are mens rea.

Of course, lifting your shirt and moving your jacket, do constitute overt acts.

- moving a garment - no matter the situation is not a crime.

You seem to be unwilling to try to learn. If you move the garment knowingly and willfully for the purpose of exposing a weapon, it may well be a crime. That would depend entirely upon the circumstances, and upon whether the act would be lawfully justified. Providing evidence of justification would be up to you. The threshold for justification varies among jurisdictions. So do the consequences.

I hate to put it quite this way, but it is becoming quite evident that you do not know what you are talking about.

If I were you, I would take steps to change that.

Again, consulting a local criminal defense attorney who is knowledgeable of use of force law would be a good first step.

Big_John1961 · Jan 8, 2014

hammerklavier said:
The part about how petty thieves become holdup men was poorly written. Did he say most become holdup men, or very few do?

RiverPerson said:
"This is a process that starts with stealing candy at the corner store as a child. It progresses through bigger property crimes that may also involve violence. But one day G gets tired of selling his stolen property for nothing and decides it would be better to steal cash. Cut out all that tiresome sales stuff.

Keep in mind many petty thieves, auto burglars, residential and commercial burglars, paper thieves, and hustlers will get to that point and decide not to become armed robbers. Most will. It is a special group of outliers who decide threatening to kill people for a few dollars is the way to go."

I think he says few will become holdup men. The part in bold seems redundant.

That whole thread is one of the few useful things to come out of arfcom GD.

Thanks to both of you for clarifying this. I originally read it as most of these petty criminals do turn into murderous robbers. Big difference.

SouthernBoy · Jan 8, 2014

Post by KleanBore
That's worth thinking about, but in no US jurisdiction would that justify the lawful display of a firearm.

Sure it does. My firearm is openly displayed every day... perfectly legal.

(I know, you're referring to brandishing or what might be construed as brandishing)

SouthernBoy · Jan 8, 2014

Posted by qwert65
I understand what you are saying, but for all practical and legal purposes if one brushes their coat away while making eye contact in a dark alleyway or parking lot, if this descalates the situation - how would an investigation price the difference then say reaching for a wallet? I'm not disagreeing with you and obviously doing the same in a crowded mall would be dumb.
But honestly, for the sake of argument say that a potential thug calls - even if they lie and state that you threatened to shoot him- what evidence would the police have if you never actually touched your sidearm? (If there was video it would show it, and if there wasn't its he said/she said)

My point was only that an open carry state allows you the option of removing your coat as it were

Yes it does but KleanBore speaks of doing this for the specific purpose of warning someone to stay away and/or leave you alone. While this may seem well and good, in most states, mine included, this would fall under the umbrella of brandishing since your actions would be viewed as using your sidearm to intimidate others or put them in fear of their safety and lives. In this he is correct.

It is a fine line between preparing one's self for an act you perceive is about to take place and your actions being construed as illegally brandishing a firearm. Taken to the extreme, even the act of doing this when an attack is imminent could be viewed as brandishing but we know this is not likely to happen. Then again, some police officers have arrested people for open carrying under brandishing laws. Silly but it has happened in some places.

What I wonder is this. If you are carrying concealed and you perceive a threat of attack is forming up and close and you put your hand on or in the vicinity of your handgun, could that be taken as brandishing? Remember, the gun is concealed so nothing is visible. I have to wonder how that would play out.

SouthernBoy · Jan 8, 2014

Post by qwert65
Here's some questions;
in AZ, LA, VA, UT, WY, MT or any other open carry state. Is it legal to open carry in public?
In those areas where it is legal can you ccw and then open carry on the same day?
Can you legally take of your jacket thereby exposing your firearm to public view?
If you carry your wallet in your right hand side back pocket(I do) and IWB on your R side, can I reach for my wallet?
If I'm in a parking lot and I feel threatened may I take off my coat? Put my hand on my wallet to make sure it is secure?

I can't speak for the other states but in Virginia I can offer answers to your questions.

"In those areas where it is legal can you ccw and then open carry on the same day?"

Absolutely and I have done this many times.

"Can you legally take of your jacket thereby exposing your firearm to public view?"
Yep, and again I have done this many times as well.

"If you carry your wallet in your right hand side back pocket(I do) and IWB on your R side, can I reach for my wallet?"
Of course. I carry my wallet in my left rear pocket and am right handed so this would not enter my mind. But if I did as you mentioned, I would not be concerned about it in my state.

"If I'm in a parking lot and I feel threatened may I take off my coat? Put my hand on my wallet to make sure it is secure?"
This could enter into the area of vagueness. If you were removing your coat or jacket and putting it in your trunk of the back of your car, then you could have a good argument that this was all you were doing. With a potential threat present, you might be wise to wait until the threat has passed before doing this.

SouthernBoy · Jan 8, 2014

Posted by CA Raider
We just have to remember that the man who wrote that link was a cop who was paid for arresting armed hold-up men. He already knew the situation and who his opponents were. We have the tough time of not knowing who our opponent is, and not having any special protection from the law.

This is true and easily overlooked. Police also have qualified immunity on their side so they can grasp that firearm as the enter a situation. With us, it is a little different. If you put your hand on your gun, it had better be because you are about to pull it on someone. I don't think you would get in trouble if you assumed a stance* that puts you in a better position to get that firearm out quickly. Your demeanor would be noticed by the BG(s) and they would more than likely avoid you. Then get on that phone and call it in.

* Stance = think how you train. A level of awareness and preparedness to get that gun into action quickly is what I am saying here.

SouthernBoy · Jan 8, 2014

Posted by xXxplosive
I love it when I read questions like...When should I draw or should I carry with one in ?
In the 20+ years I worked in Newark, NJ ...my S&W Model 36 saved my arse twice....didn't need someone to tell me when to draw and certainly didn't worry about brandishing or any of that stuff....luckly, most here will never be in a confrontational situation but if you are and you survive it you'll never ask those questions again....I guarantee it.

And this, people, is the reality of it all. Everyone I have ever spoken with who has had to pull their gun knew at the time they did this that it was real and their decision was the right one. I haven't spoken with anyone who has had second thoughts or questioned their decision taken at the moment they did this.

Good post.

Trunk Monkey · Jan 8, 2014

Kleanbore said:
If you move the garment knowingly and willfully for the purpose of exposing a weapon, it may well be a crime.

That's not even questionable in Colorado, it would be a crime

qwert65 · Jan 8, 2014

Sam1911- what if in your case A some other customers saw your weapon and called 911? Think you'll get convicted then?
We all are talking about fine lines and I understand what the law says, I have never, ever suggested this was something to do in every or even in most cases. Clearly brandishing is and should be a misdeamoner at the least.
This all started when I have a real incident which worked out fine, in this case I didn't even turn around and look at the hecklers. I was told this was a no-no. My only point was that this was a potential tool to use if an attack looked imminent, I don't know if those fellows were going to do anything more I honestly don't know(or care).
Also, saying someone would be prosecuted for brandishing in your example A or my own example is silly at best.(in an open carry state) saying someone would be prosecuted for your example B is possible and might even be convicted depending on how blatant it was and if there were cameras/witnesses. Like anything else you have to think. I will point out- if someone is walking towards you planning on an attack they are watching you and your hands - you don't stand there like a cowboy on Main Street, he'll if you're at a gas station get in your car and leave.

Mr.Kleanbore, I understand you are speaking from the law, and like to be precise, I am sure that you are tired of us talking in circles and I am as well. I did enjoy the debate and will have another discussion with my attorney. I also understand that attorneys try to limit their liability and can not advise someone to break the law. However, sometimes you are concerned with getting to court first. I enjoyed the discussion very much, thank you.

Kleanbore · Jan 8, 2014

Posted by quert65: Also, saying someone would be prosecuted for brandishing in your example A or my own example is silly at best.

I had never even thought about a charge of brandishing in Virginia. But it turns out that it would be a real possibility.

Here's the definition of brandishing in Virginia. A layman reading that might well doubt that simply exposing the firearm intentionally would legally constutitue brandishing, but evidently it would. See this.

So, the question would boil down to whether you did it to induce fear. You might say, "no, I did it because I wanted them to know....". At that point you might well get an unpleasant education. Read the embedded link about the conviction of the McDonald's job applicant. I'm sure he was convinced that no one would be able to convince a jury that he raised his shirt unlawfully. Frankly, the conviction surprises me a little.

And yes, the fact that lifting one's garment to expose a firearm can constitute brandishing in Virginia has been tested through the appellate process. The Virginia Supreme Court so ruled in 2005.

Did your act constitute brandishing under the law? Apparently so. Would you be prosecuted? Who knows--it's a roll of the dice.

In any event, I too learned something. I has been thinking only of simple assault, which in virginia is defined in part in the same way as the Common Law definition cited by Frank Ettin.

Both brandishing and simple assault are Class 1 Misdemeanors in Virginia. Convictions for two of them in five years will keep you from renewing your concealed carry permit.

Of course, you might beat the rap on one or both. Have you considered what that might cost you?

...(in an open carry state) saying someone would be prosecuted...

The open carry provision simply prevents you from being prosecuted for failing to keep your firearm concealed.

It also gives you the important option of carrying openly in the first place. That can have its downsides, but if you can keep the bad element from sneaking up on you from behind, it would serve you effectively in the situation you described.

Do speak to your attorney, and again, I recommend signing up for MAG-20.

One of the things you will learn there is how important it is to be the first to report an incident.

Trunk Monkey · Jan 8, 2014

Qwert65 said:
Sam1911- what if in your case A some other customers saw your weapon and called 911? Think you'll get convicted then?

Once again I'd like to reference this news story

August 4, 2008 - 11:53PM

A former El Paso County sheriff's deputy appeared in court last week on a felony charge alleging he threatened someone with a gun.

Shawn Moncalieri, 33, was fired from the Sheriff's Office last year after two internal affairs investigations in seven months: one related to a questionable officer-involved shooting and the other involving possible wrongful arrests.

Colorado Springs police officers allege Moncalieri flashed his .40-caliber Glock at business owner Larry Salas in April. Moncalieri faces a felony menacing charge, which carries a maximum three-year prison sentence.

Moncalieri, who works as a private investigator, went to Salas' Prince of Battle silk-screening business at 513 W. Colorado Ave. with disgruntled customer Ricardo Wong, according to an arrest affidavit. Wong and Salas exchanged words after Wong was ordered to leave the store. Salas called police when Moncalieri "placed his right hand on his right hip, indicating the presence of a firearm under his coat," the affidavit states. When a police sergeant arrived, he saw "suspect flop the right side of his coat backward to reveal a handgun in a holster." The sergeant took the loaded gun as evidence. Moncalieri told officers Salas threatened him with a knife.

Moncalieri declined comment Monday.

A 4th Judicial District Court judge ruled this year that the El Paso County Sheriff's Office had to hand over the two internal affairs investigations on Moncalieri to The Gazette. A Gazette reporter asked in February and March 2007 to review the files, but was refused. El Paso County Sheriff's officials have appealed the judge's ruling, saying internal affairs reports are not subject to disclosure as criminal justice records.

One report deals with an incident in which Moncalieri shot at a fleeing burglary suspect who allegedly tried to run him over. The 4th Judicial District Attorney's Office, which investigated the August 2006 incident, determined the shooting was questionable, although not criminal.

The second incident involves a possible wrongful arrest involving two Fountain men that resulted in the county secretly paying each $20,000. The Colorado Court of Appeals has not ruled on the sheriff's appeal.

Moncalieri is scheduled to stand trial on the menacing charge Oct. 27. He has pleaded not guilty and remains free on bond.

I actually got a chance to talk to this guy after all this happened he wasn’t convicted but it took over a year’s worth of court appearances and cost him in excess of 10,000$. He also lost his security license (livelihood) and his CHP.

You want to risk that to play cutesy by my guest

qwert65 · Jan 8, 2014

Mr. Kleanbore, your example of someone obviously doing the opposite of what I said to do(in public threatening by facing them after making demands) and the was charged with carrying a concealed weapon as well shows most likely that he didnt have a ccw. The fact that it was plainly stated in the article shows you are not debating this in good faith. Other then that the incident happened in VA they are completly different circumstances.
And of course, moving a garment to show a weapon is a crime, moving a garment to check a wallet, adjust your jacket is legal. the thread title is realities of the street, the reality is to get home and get on with your life- not make sure you are 100% in the clear because maybe some prosecuter will use it against you if he can prove intent with witnesses, cameras etc.(since in your world most attacks happen around helpful witnesses and video cameras). How many altercations have you been in? They happen very quickly, very fast and half the time nobody sees anything. And in my opinion(never been involved in a shooting, only a stabbing) the fall out from a shooting even if you are 100% correct pales in comparison with a he said/she said of someone removing a garment both in police interest and the DA's interest in going to court.
Google that crimminals name with the McDonald job - he did not have a ccw and thereatened someone making his entire example moot

qwert65 · Jan 8, 2014

Trunk monkey if you read what I am writing in that man was in a verbal disagreement and apparently did it either twice or waited till an officer was there and was not going about his bussiness.
In what way was that similar to Sams(not mine) example?

Even with his behavior which toe was brandishing he still (even with witnesses) was acquitted

strambo · Jan 8, 2014

How is that news story and situation anything like what the article is referring to re: thinking there is an imminent armed robbery? How is thinking you are about to be assaulted by armed robbers and preparing to act "playing cutsie?"

Getting in an argument in a store with the store owner when you can leave is way different than thinking you are about to be assaulted by a criminal in the street...and he still wasn't convicted (sounds like he should have been).

Southernboy
What I wonder is this. If you are carrying concealed and you perceive a threat of attack is forming up and close and you put your hand on or in the vicinity of your handgun, could that be taken as brandishing? Remember, the gun is concealed so nothing is visible. I have to wonder how that would play out.

That is like a big rig is turning into your lane and you are in their blind spot, so you swerve into the next lane to avoid a collision...and are worried about getting cited for failing to properly signal a lane change.

Trunk Monkey · Jan 8, 2014

Strambo said:
How is that news story and situation anything like what the article is referring to re: thinking there is an imminent armed robbery? How is thinking you are about to be assaulted by armed robbers and preparing to act "playing cutsie?"

Because in both cases you could very well be called on to justify your actions to someone else's satisfaction.

And yes Mr. Moncalieri was aquitted but he didn't get the year of his life or the 10,000+ $ he spent getting aquitted back. I don't know about you but I don't have 10 large sitting around to spare

Kleanbore · Jan 8, 2014

Posted by quert65: And of course, moving a garment to show a weapon is a crime, moving a garment to check a wallet, adjust your jacket is legal.

True--so you show your gun, and someone says that you did so and that it frightened them. At that point you are at some risk.

If investigation shows that your gun, holster, and carry method are consistent with the report of the complainant(s), you have one strike against you. It is relevant evidence.

the thread title is realities of the street, the reality is to get home and get on with your life- not make sure you are 100% in the clear because maybe some prosecuter will use it against you if he can prove intent with witnesses, cameras etc.(since in your world most attacks happen around helpful witnesses and video cameras).

You may not get home and get on with your life if you are accused of a crime.

And when it comes to carrying a firearm, you had better believe that your objective is to "make sure that you are 100% in the clear". Always.

How many altercations have you been in?

A few, but that is irrelevant.

They happen very quickly, very fast and half the time nobody sees anything.

Is that another way of saying, go ahead and do it, you are unlikely to get caught?

And by the way, I do hope that does not imply that you would not do everything possible to be the first to report the incident, and to avoid even the appearance of having taken flight, which could make your defense much more difficult.

Google that crimminals name with the McDonald job - he did not have a ccw and thereatened someone making his entire example moot

He asked for an application, which is entirely legal, he exposed his firearm, and he was charged with and convicted of brandishing. There is nothing to say that someone who is approached by two citizens and who exposes his firearm would not be charged with brandishing, simple assault, or both. And it really doesn't matter at all whether those citizens have long criminal records.

He may not be charged--but if it does happen, the days, weeks and months ahead could prove difficult.

No ccw? It may seen counterintuitive or perhaps even wrong, but in every US jurisdiction, a person without a ccw, even someone with a long criminal record, has the legal right to defend himself. He can be charged with carrying concealed without a permit, but that is entirely irrelevant to the charge of brandishing.

But that case is just an example cited on a Virginia gun website. They mentioned it for illustration, but the facts of that case do not change the law.

Here is a relevant excerpt from the article:

One can brandish by:
Pointing a gun at another person (clearly intended as a threat)
Drawing a gun, but not pointing it at the person as part of a threat
Pulling back a cover garment to intentionally show the person is armed with a holstered firearm as part of a threat
Touching a holstered gun as part of a threat
Simply wearing a holstered gun or handling a gun is NOT brandishing if it is NOT done with the intent of inducing fear in another. Handling a gun in public is generally not a good idea, however, unless at a shooting range or at a gun show.

A person can only brandish a gun legally in a situation where they would be justified in shooting the gun in self-defense. In that case the threat must be imminent and either lethal or extremely grave.

So it hinges upon whether the act was done as part of a threat. Frank Ettin has already told us that doing so to cause someone to leave or keep his distance cold well be interpreted as a threat. That's good enough for me.

The way the Virginia law and court rulings read, one would be lawfully justified in exposing the firearm knowingly and willfully for the purpose of causing another to induce fear only for the purpose of lawful self defense.

That would require a basis for a reasonable belief that death or serious bodily harm had been imminent and that there had been no other safe means of self defense. Showing evidence to support that reasonable belief is the duty of the defender. What such evidence would you have?

SouthernBoy · Jan 8, 2014

This is the measure in Virginia for whether or not the use of deadly force is justifiable (or excusable).

"If you have a reasonably held, good faith belief, based on objective fact, that you or another innocent person is faced with the imminent threat of serious bodily injury, then you are authorized to use such force as is reasonably necessary, up to and including deadly force, to stop the threat."

Kleanbore · Jan 8, 2014

^^^

Yes. And one might add that there is no duty to retreat.

CA Raider · Jan 8, 2014

SouthernBoy.

Hope that measure passes. I wish we had that kind of common sense in California, but there is not much chance of that right now. I haven't checked the wording for CA ... But i expect we are compelled to retreat. I wouldn't be surprised if we are also required to let the criminal check our gun and offer to buy them a beer.

CA R

The realities of the street

Moderator

Member

Moderator

Member

Moderator Emeritus

Member

Moderator

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

member

Member

Moderator

member

Member

Member

Member

member

Moderator

Member

Moderator

Member

Similar threads