bad guys and verbals?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Guy with gun= immediate deadly threat.

Guy with knife= immediate deadly threat if within 30 feet.

Guy with big screw driver= possible deadly threat within 30 feet or some mook that just used it to break in.
Anyone within sight inside my house is well within 30 feet. None of the rooms are that big.

Of course every situation is different ... and in that awful event one will have about 3/10 of a second to assess the situation and make up your mind (you need at least that much time because you don't want to make the decision when you are 2/10 :D ).

The more I think about, I don't think trying to hold somebody for the cops is a wise idea. It's pretty much either run them off or shoot. I don't get paid to catch bad guys, and why should I deprive some deputy of the all the fun ;)
 
buzz knox said:
As with everything, what happens later will depend on your ability to articulate why you did what you did at the moment the shooting occurred. Even if it's just "I was scared out of my gourd and didn't have time to say 'stop' before I acted to save my own life." That's enough to explain away your verbal silence if the facts support it as a good shooting.

I agree. There isn't always time to CYA with verbal commands. The important thing is to CYA with a stream of lead.
 
If an someone forces there way into my house, with dogs barking and the two dead bolts locked, I would pretty much consider that a warning. If they are armed with ANY potentially deadly wepon (maby even a big mag-light) I intend on defending myself at all cost. I will give him a very strong "GET DOWN OR YOUR DEAD, IM ARMED!!!" and thats about it. Thats if there brave/stupid enough to make it to my "kill zone". In each of my houses (parents and college apartment) unless you break into a bedroom "safe room" you only have asscess to one room before wondering into my "kill zone", so odds are if there armed, they going to set shot unless then drop.

Why worry about getting sued if you can't make it to court?
 
"stop, get out, I've got a gun"

If someone is in my house....

1. I hope to be alerted to it before I'm dead
(after going through the "baby days" multiple times, I seem to wake up very easilly, where I used to be able to sleep through anything.)

2. I hope to arm myself, while I still have time for it to do me any good.
(gun vault is very close and I occasionally practice rolling out of bed and opening it in total darkness)

3. I hope to get into my "spot" (or at least my alternate spot) before the BG gets upstairs.
(house is small, so I should be able to do this...and from this spot I'm physically between the threat and the those I'm sworn to protect).

So far things have gone according to plan....now I'm concentrating on slowing down my breathing and listening like a hawk.

Now here's the part I don't get....

Why would I ever want to "give away" the small advantage I've prepared for myself, and have been fortunate enough to achieve.

If I open my mouth....I've lost the element of surprise and BG now knows where I am (and might shoot at the source of the noise).

IF I say "I've got a gun", now BG knows to make himself ready and be very careful.

If I say anything....I think it's going to be a very loud, commanding and probably profane direction (threat) that will be intended to communicate "shock and awe" and "scare the cr@* out the bum to send him running away"

Fortunately, I live in a state where I am not obliged to retreat in my own home.

My concern is for the life of my family and myself. Getting sued or going to jail would really suck....but not nearly as much as failing to do what I can for fear of some scum bag lawyer or liberal DA.
 
SSN
My concern is for the life of my family and myself. Getting sued or going to jail would really suck....but not nearly as much as failing to do what I can for fear of some scum bag lawyer or liberal DA.

Verry well put. Mind if I use that some time?
 
Where in New York do you live? I was under the impression that New York State Law included the retreat clause. Do you have a cite for No Retreat?

You must retreat at all times unless you are in your house. Then you can stand your ground. It's stated in the use of deadly force packet which is provided with your handgun permit paperwork.
 
Without reading tons and tons of legal "code". what are the laws in texas about retreating?

Just wondering.
 
Without reading tons and tons of legal "code". what are the laws in texas about retreating?

Just wondering.

I believe the law says something like "you will be mocked and your manhood will be questioned" if you retreat in Texas.:)
 
Ditto what answerguy said......

The only remorse I will feel will be when I have to face the old lady and explain to her how all that blood got on her new carpet.......That is, unless she shot him first...........I don't feel remorse after shooting a nice buck, wondering how bambi is going to get along without his dad, or wonder how Huey, Luey, and Dewey are going to survive after shooting Donald Duck, or wonder how heartbroken Minnie is going to be after I shoot Mickey Mouse........Call me caluse, maybe so, but I most likely, along with my family, will be alive.......that is what counts........chris3
 
Texas Retreat

Dacoda, going from memory, I believe Texas uses the "Reasonable Man" test, stating that if a "Reasonable Man" would not have retreated, Texas Penal Code 9.32,a2 then there is no retreat necessary. If during an "unlawful entry" into the habitation of the actor, there is no duty to retreat. Texas Penal Code 9.32, b.
 
After doing some role-playing force-on-force, I have concluded that attempting to communicate with a B.G. is a bad idea. Because of human nature, we do not want to hurt others and we generally want agreement. The transition from his non-compliance to your using force is a difficult one to make.

Talking to the B.G. is communicating to him that you and he are about to fight, whereas a principle of self-defense is to act explosively and to end the fight before the B.G. knows he's really in one. Furthermore, with regard to OODA, communicating keeps that in your mind, not acting.

In the FoF, I noted that just about every person who attempted to communicate with or confront the BG verbally got shot, whereas those who acted generally got shot less.

That said, communicating is not the same as verbalizing, and yelling "STOP STOP STOP STOP ..." as you move, draw, and fire is not a bad idea...
 
By the time lethal force is necessary a verbal warning is moot. At least according to the attorney that taugh the Oklahoma CCW class I attended.

According to him if you pull your piece someone better die. If you pull your piece don't waste time yelling stop or anything else. Just shoot.

The class was amazed and argued the point but the attorney was adamant. If lethal force is necessary it is too late for a warning. If you pull your piece lethal force better be necessary. If you pull your piece someone better die. A verbal warning won't make any difference when you go to court. Either lethal force was justified or it wasn't. If it was then it was - no warning necessary. If it wasn't a warning isn't going to make any difference - you're gonna get to spend some time in the joint.

Being one of the top defense attornies in OKC I believed him. Still do.
 
I agree completely with the attorney in Werewolf's story. If you pull your gun then deadly force better be necessary at that point. Nevertheless, even if you find yourself in a position where you are justified in dispatching a bad guy, not killing him could serve your interests better. This could mean getting him to withdraw or getting him to stand down.

As Zak said, this could be too much of a risk. I was taught in my CCW class that action is always faster than reaction. Once you alert the bad guy to your position and weapon you are put on the defensive, waiting to see if he will attack or withdraw. That puts you at a disadvantage because you are now in the position of reacting (slower) rather than acting (faster).

I think that my position would be that if deadly force is truly necessary, then just use it.
 
My experience in force-on-force scenario training was that verbalization played a critical role in pre-engagement interaction. [This may be outside the scope of the original scenario presented in this thread, but it seems at least a little relevant and it doesn't appear to have been mentioned so far.]

Many scenarios began with the student encountering role players who did not present an immediate threat -- in the same way that an interaction on the street may begin innocuously enough. Students who were able to control and assess the situation through verbalization techniques (think Farnam's "tape loop" concept) often had "better" results than those who did not.

As I said, this is probably outside the scope of this thread, as Mr.D inquired about situations where the subject "is very clearly a threat". I certainly wouldn't respond to someone standing in my livingroom holding a weapon in the same way I would respond to a fellow who was getting just a little too close at the ATM :). My point is just that, generally speaking, there seems to be a place for verbalization skills in the tool box.
 
The way I learned it was..

STOP
DON'T MOVE
DROP THE WEAPON
GET OUT, NOW

Repeat as appropriate. No ifs, no ors, no discussion, no negotiation. If they don't comply, there is not much else you can say that will make a difference. How you say it is at least as important as what you say. Practice is essential.

I was thinking about this just the other day, wondering how often such commands are effective. Somehow I doubt that there is much research, but it would be a useful thing to know.

John
 
John Rogers The way I learned it was..

STOP
DON'T MOVE
DROP THE WEAPON
GET OUT, NOW

Thats' kinda similar to what Eddie Eagle tells kids
(maybe it's what Eddie says when confronted with a bad guy)

If you see a gun:
STOP!
Don't Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.

On a more serious note, I'm not sure that I want to tell a bad guy to "Get out now!". I'd much rather see him sprawled on the floor waiting for the cops to come haul his dumb ass away. If you let him leave he might come back to your house or a neighbors again.
 
Hello group. Here is my opinion on the question.

Outside the home do everything possible to retreat from the situation and if others are around make it visually and verbally known to witnesses and the bad guy your reluctance to participate in any type of altercation, you don’t want to be hurt and you want to leave (put your hand on your gun, discretely). If the bad guy has a weapon (knife or club) and is within 21 feet, you can shoot. Twenty-one feet is a magic number. Studies have been done that have proven that a non-athletic person can close a 21 foot gap and deliver the thrust of a knife in 1.5 seconds ( http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Tueller/How.Close.htm). Having spent some time with local Sheriffs deputies, they confirm this and say that 21 feet is the edge of the safety-zone. Three factors must be in-play before using deadly force. Ability (weapon), Opportunity (within 21 feet) and Jeopardy (you actually believe this person is going to kill you or cause grave bodily harm and this threat is immediate and unavoidable). On the street, never point your gun unless you actually plan on firing; un-holster if you must but keep the gun low to the ground. Others can file assault charges against you if they wet their pants while you are waving your gun. Never fire a warning shot. That is TV stuff and it’s appalling that some cops do it. Firing a weapon in the direction of a human, anywhere, is the use of deadly force. Using Google, there are countless cases where warning shots by cops and civilians had no impact on the situation.

In the home, in my opinion, things are a lot different. Most home invasions happen during the day. The bad guy assumes most people will be at work. If there is a confrontation at night and in the home, the bad guy is telling you two things. First, “I don’t care if anyone is home” and second, “I am prepared to deal with the homeowners if confronted”. Now, at 2:30AM, awoken from a sound sleep to the sounds of a window breaking or door-jam splintering or just that uneasy feeling that someone is watching you sleep, are you prepared to make rational decisions regarding proper defense of your family? To issue commands, secure the area, retreat to safety (where is “safe” if not the home?), make a citizens arrest, search the bad guy for weapons or even be able to find your phone (lines cut?) to call for help. You don’t know how many bad guys there are, if they have a knife or a gun or what their real intent is. Do they want the new flat screen TV and your coin collection or do they want to tie you up and violate your wife and 9 year old daughter with various household objects while you watch helplessly? In my opinion, unless the bad guy has one foot out my front or back door, there is about a 97% chance he isn’t leaving my house alive (no warnings either). Confronted in the home, especially at night, one must conclude that the invader is prepared to use deadly force or inflict great bodily harm to accomplish whatever it was they came to do. When the cops show up after a shooting, only tell them what is apparently obvious (no details). Tell them you wish to file a complaint against the person(s) (even if dead) that attempted to kill you and that the evidence (point to the bad guy and general area) will support the statement your attorney will be making on your behalf in the morning.

Short answer: On the street run. In the home stand your ground. Only shoot to stop the threat of deadly force or great bodily harm to you or immediate family.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top