Bicyclist tries to open my van door..

[Kleanbore]

Posted by silicosys4: I'm pretty sure its not legal to shoot someone in self defense for the act of opening your front door in any state.

We have a sticky on that. Look for Castle Doctrine.

In many states, a defender's having had a basis for a reasonable belief that someone had entered, or in some states, was attempting to enter, one's domicile unlawfully creates a presumption that deadly force was justified. In other states the entry or attempt must be made "with force"; in some places that would entail turning the knob; in others the entry must be "tumultuous". In some places the law encompasses the automobile. In all cases, the structure or the auto must be occupied.

However, shooting someone is not something that one ever, ever wants to do unless it is absolutely unavoidable. By the way, that applies to any use of deadly force, whether administered with a gun, blade, bat, crowbar, nine iron, or Cross pen.

One other thing: all such presumptions can be rebutted. If the state were to have sufficient evidence to prove that the defender had some basis for a reasonable belief that the person shot had not represented a threat, things could get ugly.

Uglier, that is. If you shoot someone, you can expect to end up in all kinds of unpleasantness, from neighbors, co-workers, children's friends and teachers, prospective employers, and the demons in your own mind, every night, perhaps forever. And that's even if you had to do it.

A good read on that is In the Gravest Extreme, by Massad Ayoob.

 

[silicosys4]

We have a sticky on that. Look for Castle Doctrine.

In many states, a defender's having had a basis for a reasonable belief that someone had entered, or in some states, was attempting to enter, one's domicile unlawfully creates a presumption that deadly force was justified. In other states the entry or attempt must be made "with force"; in some places that would entail turning the knob; in others the entry must be "tumultuous". In some places the law encompasses the automobile. In all cases, the structure or the auto must be occupied.

However, shooting someone is not something that one ever, ever wants to do unless it is absolutely unavoidable. By the way, that applies to any use of deadly force, whether administered with a gun, blade, bat, crowbar, nine iron, or Cross pen.

One other thing: all such presumptions can be rebutted. If the state were to have sufficient evidence to prove that the defender had some basis for a reasonable belief that the person shot had not represented a threat, things could get ugly.

Uglier, that is. If you shoot someone, you can expect to end up in all kinds of unpleasantness, from neighbors, co-workers, children's friends and teachers, prospective employers, and the demons in your own mind, every night, perhaps forever. And that's even if you had to do it.

A good read on that is In the Gravest Extreme, by Massad Ayoob.

True, and if I were on a jury trial concerning person A who shot person B for person B opening person A's front door after person A slammed in their face, in order to continue an argument between them, while person A had all reason to believe person B was opening the door to continue an argument, not to cause them harm....I'd find that despicable and vile, and a gross misinterpretation of the law, but I'd have to take it as the law says and either convict or acquit as appropriate

 

[Centurian22]

WOW, I am truly amazed at the opposing thoughts here on this. I'll cast mine: you did absolutely right, especially given the potential risk to your unaware daughter (definitely a PRIME teaching opportunity!). No one died, got harmed, or even threatened with deadly force, so it ended well.

 

[silicosys4]

WOW, I am truly amazed at the opposing thoughts here on this.

I KNOW, so crazy that people would actually say that the use of deadly force should actually be a last resort, suggesting there are other means to an end, and that one should be prepared to use extreme amounts of judgement in using their firearm appropriately in such a situation!

 

[DrBozack]

I just keep picturing John Goodman in "The Big Lebowski."

 

[easy]

After reading this thread, I believe the OP practiced restraint and discipline and acted accordingly. I certainly hope that some of the posters never have to face this exact situation, because they would be at a deadly disadvantage by time they figured out what bicycle boy was doing. Not being able to see if BB was carrying any kind of weapon is a reason to be 'on alert'. His persistence was enough to go to the next level.

Some others on here live in a peace and happiness fantasy world. More power to them.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=755579

 

[silicosys4]

Some others on here live in a peace and happiness fantasy world. More power to them.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=755579

Don't know if you are referring to me, but I'm fine living in my "fantasy" world where not every excuse to pull the trigger means the trigger gets pulled, and the use of deadly force is reserved for circumstances that necessitate it and not just enable it.
Worked out for me so far through a break-in and some other assorted hairy situations.

I think the fantasy world here consists of clean cut self defense cases, sympathetic juries, no lawyer fees, and in-out court appearances.

 

[PiratePenguin]

True, and if I were on a jury trial concerning person A who shot person B for person B opening person A's front door after person A slammed in their face, in order to continue an argument between them, while person A had all reason to believe person B was opening the door to continue an argument, not to cause them harm...

Why are you so ready to believe that one side would be willing to escalate the argument to violence out of fear, but not that the other side might be willing to escalate the argument violence out of anger?

 

[silicosys4]

Why are you so ready to believe that one side would be willing to escalate the argument to violence out of fear, but not that the other side might be willing to escalate the argument violence out of anger?

Good question, and I think this gets down to the core of my argument.

Because in most instances, I believe we live in a society in which the former is more likely than the latter. I believe that for whatever reason many people have been conditioned to fear our fellow men too much, to be too quick to draw negative conclusions, and act out of fear or instinct instead of rationality.

The OP's situation is a good example, IMO. The OP was more willing to escalate the situation to violence out of fear than the dude on a bicycle was to escalate the situation to violence out of anger, as is evidence of their actions and the outcome.

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^ With all due respect, You don't have a clue and obviously don't have formal training in the matter at hand. In contrast, I worked in Central America in the early 80's where there was a price on my head and have received some of the best training available. I don't screw around with people trying to engage me three times in nonsense conversation uninvited, nor trying to get into my car. The first is bad manners. The second is an invasion.

Contemplate:

Attempt 1: My response: "OK, I'll pull up a bit" (even though this is a nonsense request). Any normal interaction would have ended there. I'm still in Yellow.

Attempt 2: (after he follows me further) "You think it's illegal? OK, Here, let me call 911 if you like and you can tell them all about it, otherwise *back off*" Even the most dense individual would take this social cue. Yellow... still.

Attempt 3 (as he puts his hand on the door handle to open it): "Back the F... off and I mean RIGHT NOW!" (as my daughter blindly comes within 20 feet of the situation. Try to open my door when you're obviously drunk or stoned, after the first two "No thanks, we gave at the office" answers? You can bet that I have absolutely gone from Yellow to Orange.

He never put me in a position to switch to Red. But in Orange, You are ready to apply force if needed. I was.


Next level escalation (he entering but not showing a weapon) would have seen me bailing out of the drivers side door, while bringing the M9 with me, then passing around the back of the van to put myself between him and my daughter. You need to have it in your hand if you're going to bring it with you so I did. I don't wear it when I'm driving.

I am not in a hurry to shoot anyone. Restraint and always having "one more out" at all times is the key. De-escalate, then verbal judo, then disengage, never be afraid to run, but always keep that one last option at hand.

It's interesting to read opinions from those who have never seen the elephant in person and who were not there this time. I've done so before, and was there this time.


If my daughter had not been part of the scenario, I would have just driven away. She complicated everything.


Willie

.

 

[silicosys4]

Ok, cool story Willie, very dramatic in the telling. Glad you came out of everything without issue and glad the rasta wasn't the threat you perceived him to be and that he could have been. Nobody likes to be harangued.

Maybe next time be more aware of being an obstruction to bicyclists?

Edit: BTW, if you have a problem with people who weren't there analyzing and critiquing the situation, perhaps you shouldn't post your experience in the Strategies, Tactics, and Training section of a large online forum.

 

[Dave P]

"The outcome would have been the same."

We only know the outcome because it has passed in time.

At the time it happened, the OP did not know what the future would bring, so he was PREPARED to have it go his way.

 

[travisd]

Hmm? I must have missed where he said he emptied his gun through the window at the guy for talking to him. If silicosys4 lets random druggies in his car with no thoughts to how things could go south then fine, but if someone tries getting in with me and I cant leave I will definitely pull a gun if needed. That is not something that is acceptable to do. No, I'm not going to shoot him for touching my car, but I guess I care for my own safety more than some random drunk/ druggies if it comes down to that.

You did everything right willie in my opinion and apparently most peoples here..

 

[joeschmoe]

Let's look at the bikers actions:

He choose to stop when he clearly could have continued on. Nothing wrong with polite conversation.
After initial conversation the van moves away, the biker followed to initiate a second conversation which leads to arguing.
As arguing continues he ignores repeated demands to "back off".
Then he attempts to open a door of the vehicle.

He went from reasonable to pushy to confrontational to harassing to a threat.

Attempted car jacking, assault or perhaps he just wanted to threaten, startle or scare the driver with his actions. All of which should be resisted.

Either way its now up to the driver to do something to prevent being a victim.

Any person who makes a habit of doing what this biker did is going to wind up in jail, the hospital or worse.

 

[Centurian22]

Silicosys4

I KNOW, so crazy that people would actually say that the use of deadly force should actually be a last resort, suggesting there are other means to an end, and that one should be prepared to use extreme amounts of judgement in using their firearm appropriately in such a situation!

1) Deadly force was not used.
2) Willie used multiple other means to reach an end that involved everyone going home alive. (Driving away/moving the first time even though he had no need/reason to, offering to call law enforcement, and verbally warning the person to back off, then more sternly warning the person to back off while preparing in case things escalated).
3) What would you have done / wanted done? Invite the persistant, impaired, escalating, argumentative individual who attempted to gain uninvited access to the small confined personal space in for a Cup Of Tea while your unaware and unprepared daughter enters the situation from a direction that you can do nothing about if things do go badly?

I pity your fantacy world and hope for your sake and the sake of those you care about that you never have to experience a rude awakening to the real world.

 

[SnowBlaZeR2]

This thread looks like it's about done. I do want to emphasize that it would be wise to take a hard look at how some of us do things. If you live in an area where you are comfortable with someone trying to illegally gain access to your vehicle or home, that's great, but I still don't think it's wise to take those actions so lightly. We are all certainly free to make our own choices. I just hope those choices don't end up with someone losing their life because they wanted to give a criminal the benefit of the doubt, as opposed to reacting to their behavior.

 

[Field Tester]

WOW, I am truly amazed at the opposing thoughts here on this. I'll cast mine: you did absolutely right, especially given the potential risk to your unaware daughter (definitely a PRIME teaching opportunity!). No one died, got harmed, or even threatened with deadly force, so it ended well.

Take a look at your last line there. That accounts for both sides. Willie states what he thinks the mind set was of the bicyclist in the OP. He even felt that the purpose of grabbing the handle was to continue the conversation, not violence.

That however does not rule out the possibility of violence. Willie didn't brandish, just reached. I'm conflicted on this one. Does Willie's state of mind possibly make this a horrible outcome if Mr. Bicycle Man decides to press the issue?
Did Willie's body language and movement possibly save him and his daughter from harm?

I honestly don't know how to feel or what to think about this situation. This is one of the harder ones I've had to think about. Willie's own admission to Mr. BM's state of mind, lack of violent speech and tone, demeanor and continuation of the confrontation to just complain, tells me this may not have been all that serious.

Then again, the man reached for his door handle. From previous conversations, I know Willie isn't quite a youngin and it can be assumed Mr. BM is probably in shape since he's riding a bike (a stretch, I know). Add to that his 25 year old daughter (who I'm picturing in my mind as a hot model, just makes this more fun) is not paying attention to what is going down. Tell me who among us isn't in a heightened state of self defense when it comes to our children.

Willie has not escalated the issue, has attempted to comply with the original problem, twice puts his hands up in a non threatening defensive manner to show he's no threat and wants the confrontation to end.
I just don't know.

I'll say this, I don't like it, but I think Willie may have been in the right on this one. He stopped at the perfect moment by not brandishing, and I think that's what makes this a understandable and decent play.

Either way, I still love your posts Willie!

 

[Field Tester]

I just keep picturing John Goodman in "The Big Lebowski."

Because this isn't Nam and there are rules?

 

[HexHead]

"hey man, the law says I have the right to be able to bike past you without needing to go around you"

At this point I would have told the guy to go F himself.

 

[lemaymiami]

A thought to add to my previous post, approving of Willy's actions....

If you're ever in a real world shooting incident... you can pretty much be certain that at least one of the folks who will review the incident afterwards (either in the decision to prosecute or not - or actually on the jury if it comes to that...) will have the same mindset as the fellow on this thread that can't seem to find anything kosher in this scenario....

That sort of stuff is why for every armed citizen, shooting should be your absolutely last solution, period. Spend a few months in and out of court while your shooting is being comtemplated (justified or not justified...) and it's something you'll never forget. For me, that was around 35 years ago and I was a young uniformed cop at the time. To this day the memory is one that stays with me.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by lemaymiami: If you're ever in a real world shooting incident... you can pretty much be certain that at least one of the folks who will review the incident afterwards (either in the decision to prosecute or not - or actually on the jury if it comes to that...) will have the same mindset as the fellow on this thread that can't seem to find anything kosher in this scenario....

That sort of stuff is why for every armed citizen, shooting should be your absolutely last solution, period. Spend a few months in and out of court while your shooting is being comtemplated (justified or not justified...) and it's something you'll never forget. For me, that was around 35 years ago and I was a young uniformed cop at the time. To this day the memory is one that stays with me.

Good input.

The other part, even if the legal aftermath does not drag on for a long time and seriously deplete the defender's resources, is the myriad of problems that would relate to dealing with other people afterward, even in a clear cut case.

Fortunately it did not come to that.

The only things I think we really know, other than things might well have turned very bad very quickly, are the following:

• The presence of his daugher prevented Willie from taking what would otherwise have been the best choice--driving away.
• The daughter could use some industrial strength coaching on the subject of sutuational awareness. Along with that, the development of some contingency plans should be considered.
• Where and how to keep a firearm or two or a firearm and other weapons in an automobile or on one's person so that it or they can be readily accessed and used by the driver and kept away from unwelcome guests is something that we all should put some thought into.

 

[skoro]

He went from reasonable to pushy to confrontational to harassing to a threat.

For no discernible valid reason.

Opening the vehicle door after repeated warnings invites escalation to match the threat.

 

[Willie Sutton]

^^

The reason I posted this scenario is to show that there are almost always going to be very uncertain ambiguities in many cases when people interact. Accepting the general case that when you hear hoofbeats behind you, you generally think horses and not zebras, when a situation like this occurs you generally think "drunk/stoned kid" and not "possible carjacker". This is what I was when first confronted and is why I just moved along a bit. "Cooperate and Graduate" is a good place to start things off. But... then....things.... changed.... In the end it is still was "likely" the case that he was just a stoned kid not able to drop the subject and wanting to "educate" me.... but....


But you can never be sure.... and therein lays the ambiguity. Do you wait until it's too late (error), do you jump the gun (error) or do you rationally look at things, use your tools, and always have one more tool in the works than the one you are using at the moment?


These scenarios are rarely as simple as a guy shoving a gun into your face and saying "give me your wallet". They evolve slowly at times, and we often need to be able to reliably make decisions under conditions of uncertainty. Walking one line while preparing to jump to another is an art form. Being able to go from Yellow to Orange, and then NOT and I mean NOT NOT NOT jumping to Red without really needing to requires discipline. I've seen way too many cases of "Color Code Inertia" happening, where someone jumps straight from White or Yellow to Red without pausing at Orange, without any reason to be in Red. Witness every cop emptying his magazine at some poor guy for pulling out his wallet. Adrenelin and switching to the "Monkey Brain" where winning a "Dominance Display" becomes more important to the narrowing perception of that primitive thought process than simply leaving unharmed is something to be aware of. Don't fall into the trap. The posters who thought that the next step that I might have contemplated if he had entered would be to shoot rather than to bail out of the other side of the van are showing their own Monkey-Brain thought process response, not mine. It's interesting to observe. It's they who need more training, not me.

The ROE does change according to the environment as well. In Central America I would have been absolutely ignoring him (he's likely a posed distraction) and would have been looking at the horizon for the three other guys approaching on dirt-bikes. Distract with one person and kill with the mobile team. Willie has seen the elephant before and has won. This is why I leave the windows down as one tactic: More armor thickness between them and me (metal plus glass = pretty good armor) and easier to return the complements. With a 1911 in .38 Super in those days.

Take that advice to the bank... (That's a Willie Sutton Pun, guys)




"What's done is done, but how about a good long talk with your daughter about situational awareness and the realities of a world that includes dangerous people? "

Sadly my Condition White daughter is likely to stay that way. But we did have a little talk to simply stay away when the old man is having a frank discussion with strangers. She's grown up with my war stories, but this was the first time she witnessed one. maybe it'll sink in.



Willie

.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by skoro: Opening the vehicle door after repeated warnings invites escalation to match the threat.

Had he opened the door, that would really have been scary.

However, for reasons pointed out by lemaymiami and for many other reasons, attempts toward deescalation are always preferred.

Posted by Willie Sutton: The posters who thought that the next step that I might have contemplated if he had entered would be to shoot rather than to bail out of the other side of the van are showing their own Monkey-Brain thought process response possibility, not mine. It's interesting to observe.

Heh!

I came close a couple of times to suggesting getting out of the van (with the gun, of course), but you were there and none of the rest of us can visualize the real situation with any degree of clarity.

Sadly my Condition White daughter is likely to stay that way. But we did have a little talk to simply stay away when the old man is having a frank discussion with strangers.

Well, that's some good news.

 

[Willie Sutton]

"I came close a couple of times to suggesting getting out of the van (with the gun, of course),"

The immediate tactical problem with that would have been that old Willie would be standing in the middle of the street in a small tourist town where nothing much ever happens, in a bathing suit, shirt, and sandals, holding a M9, for no apparent reason.

Try explaining that to the local cop who would most likely show up just then....


"The OP was more willing to escalate the situation to violence out of fear"

Fear? Here's the key: Go look in the mirror, because you're discussing yourself *and the way you would think*, not me *or the way I think*. Interestingly enough this reminds me of the way antios view firearms: They fear them because they *themselves* cannot handle them and as an extension they think *I* cannot handle one. So: I'm not afraid of anything. My pulse rate never raised. In my work I deal with life threatening things every day, and if I was one prone to fear I'd have been dead long ago. When the elephant comes I just see things slow down, I see paths towards the future possibilities opening in a variety of ways, know I am on one path, see clearly that I can jump to others, and am in a constant loop of act/assess/act again/assess... in a constant loop... until things are over.


Training and experience. They have worked so far.


Willie

.