Are you going to wait till he smashes your window? Or wait till he rears back? Did you watch the related video? What happens to the passenger if that nut smashes that window? I would only have to shoot if he came at me with the tire iron. I am just saying I would want the open space and not being trapped. I would have gotten out of that car quickly and drawn.You have to be ready to prevent that outcome.
By beating on the trunk and roof of your car, he has shown that he intends to damage the car. Not to disable it, not to enter it, but to damage it.
Of course, that could change very quickly, and you have to be ready should that happen.
As described in the OP, we has come at the car with a weapon, but not yet at the driver.
No.
I'll be ready for him, if he does come to the windows on either side. Obviously, that would require an immediate response with deadly force, before the attacker could swing.
One might be able to successfully and convincingly articulate reason for believing that deadly force had been immediately necessary before that point, but should witnesses and the wounded man testify that the incident only involved damage to property, one might not succeed. It's a matter of risk mitigation. Do you want to bet everything on the assumption that your story will prevail? How quickly can you successfully shoot to stop when the man is no longer beating on the trunk but is coming around the car for you? I't's a judgment call with very high stakes.
His apparent level of trepidation does not enter into the picture at that point. What is important is his demonstrated intent.
Of course not.Posted by Russ Jackson: Are you going to wait till he smashes your window?
Yep. Different scenario. In the video, the attacker has already threatened the occupants.Did you watch the related video?
Grave danger of serious injury, obviously, but pounding on the trunk--which indicates intent to damage the trunk, for the moment--is something else again.What happens to the passenger if that nut smashes that window?
Good thinking.I would only have to shoot if he came at me with the tire iron.
Do you believe that you would be lawfully justified in drawing on someone who is damaging your unoccupied automobile?I am just saying I would want the open space and not being trapped. I would have gotten out of that car quickly and drawn.
Good thinking. The question, however, was about drawing.Posted by Russ Jackson: I would never shoot someone for attacking my car.
Necessary, but perhaps not sufficient justification. Unless all of the elements of justifiable self defense--ability, opportunity, jeopardy, and preclusion--are satisfied, and you cannot evade, escape, deescalate, or avoid the attack, keep your finger off the trigger.Only if he advanced towards me.
In most jurisdictions, you would have to be justified in the use of deadly force; in a few, justification for using force would be sufficient.If I opened my door to get out of the car while the attacker was beating on the car and he advanced towards me I would draw my gun.
Good thinking.If he stayed at a distance and only wanted to beat on the hood I would leave the scene.
I cannot imagine leaving my wife in a car that I had tried to escape from.If my wife was still in the vehicle I have to say I would most likely draw the weapon.
Given imminent danger of death or serious harm, plus immediate necessity, most of us would.The second I thought I or passenger was in danger I think I would shoot the individual.
Just leaving space in front wasn't an answer.
-I drive past a police station on my way home. But to get there, I have to get through a busy intersection. This is Houston, maybe some of you are not familiar with the degree of traffic we have, but this incident took place during rush hour. There was no way for me to leave an escape route; I knew I was getting boxed in as soon as I hit that light; cars in front, to the right side, and a tall curb to the left, and his car (with no front plate) behind me. Just leaving space in front wasn't an answer.
Instead of driving home, you should have driven straight to the police station.
I see this suggestion made often. While I know where the police station is near where I live, I don't know where police stations are in the numerous towns around me, some of which are incorporated and some of which are not (and hence have not police stations). When I was commuting to and from Dallas, I knew of one police station down town near where I worked, but otherwise had no clue for the other 40 miles of the commute until I got home.
He stated he was heading home, meaning he could have headed to his hometown police station if he didn't know where another one was.
You do realize that nearly ALL armed encounters end with no shots fired, right?