Carrying OC or other "less lethal" weapons while CCWing - bad idea?

[Green Lantern]

In the 'what's your daily load' thread, a point was raised that carrying OC while CCWing could lead to trouble in court if you had to shoot someone in self-defense. Since any bloodthirsty prosecutor/lawyer could make a case that "you SHOULD have used the spray instead!"

What do you think? Does the legal risk outweigh the advantage of having something besides my bare hands for instances where deadly force is not called for?

I was thinking "GOTTA" get Kuboton training and carry my 'innocnet' MiniMag everywhere with me...but heck, for that matter it wouldn't be too hard for a lawyer to find out about being my trained to fight with one, I imagine... :banghead:

 

[MountainBear]

If your are legal to carry a concealed firearm (CCW), then carry it, train with it, and get used to the idea that if you ever do have to use it, some waste of air lawyer, D.A. is going to atttempt to prosecute you and your first born. Do not give them any ammuntition, including the carrying of other means of self-defense, to use against you.
It may sound cynical to think that you will get prosecuted no matter what, but I'd rather be prepared for that and not have it happen than to think notings going to happen and then get prosecuted...
This is my humble opinion, hope it helps...

 

[torpid]

Conversely, it gives you the ability to counter a threat "appropriately" in a non-lethal manner if the situation calls for it.

They operate under a separate set of requirements, but the police carry both and use spray far more often then their guns.

.

 

[ArmedBear]

The guy in Arizona headed for jail shot two dogs and their unarmed owner (okay he had a screwdriver in his back pocket) on a trail.

Did they really pose a threat that justified lethal force? Only one living man will know for sure, and he's the defendant. This is not a good place to find yourself.

Could he have neutralized most threats from two dogs and a man with spray? Yup. If he had any.

Assuming he was innocent, would that have saved him a lot of trouble? Hell yeah.

 

[TallPine]

I'm carrying enough stuff already ... can't handle anymore

 

[hso]

Only an idiot limits his options to lethal force.:banghead:

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

First off, are you Hal Jordon, Guy Gardner, Jon Stewart, Kyle Rayner, or maybe even G'nort?

Second, that is a good question. I am not the best to answer it but i agree with alot of the things said here. I will have to think on it more myself before forming a hard opinion but I am leaning towrds it being okay and having options.

 

[Handgun Midas]

I am definitely going to be carrying Fox OC, right in front of my .45.
CCW is still forthcoming and I'm shopping around a bit for OC.

I want to be able to respond to a violent confrontation, that I determine at that moment not to be deadly, with less-lethal force if the odds are against me.
This would be charging dogs; this would be someone hassling me and getting too close. I can just spray and get out of there.

However, if for a second I fear that I will be seriously harmed or killed, the .45 comes out.

 

[Rem700SD]

Most gunfights happen at around seven feet(or so I've been told)

Given the time it takes to cover seven feet, I really don't have time to consider less-than-lethal options. My guess is that if you can use LTL force, you should probably just walk away.

Just my $.02

edited for syntax

 

[carpettbaggerr]

What legal risks? If they're going to go that far to prosecute you, they'll do if even if you don't have OC on you.

It wouldn't be that hard for them to find out you decided not to learn less-lethal defense methods.

Mr. Jordan was so eager to shoot someone, anyone, that he refused to learn any other methods of self-defense. Here is a printout of his postings, under the Nom de plume "Green Lantern" where he states his reluctance to carry anything but a gun for self-defense, even in situations where deadly force is not necessary!

HSO is right. Don't be an idiot.

 

[torpid]

Most gunfights happen at around seven feet(or so I've been told)

Given the time it takes to cover seven feet, I really don't have time to consider less-than-lethal options. My guess is that if you can use LTL force, you should probably just walk away.

Walking away is wise advice.

But there may be a situational gray area between "peaceful walk away" and "lethal force gunfight", and it would be nice to have the option not to go straight to "gunfight" if "walk away" was denied as an option.

Spray might give you the option to run away when conflict avoidance is initially denied to you.

.

 

[thexrayboy]

OC spray is a viable mid level alternative to respond with in limited circumstances. If you are confronted with single assailant who is obviously
unarmed, is not of such a disparate size as to pose an obvious lethal risk and simply will not let you leave the area without first engaging in a physical confrontation it is a definite option. The obvious example is the drunk in a sports bar type eating establishment intent on proving his masculinity and wants you to be the punching bag. You can't really shoot him unless he is so vastly larger and stronger that you are in imminent danger. You can't walk away as he insists on blocking your exit. In this case OC is a useful alternative. Other such scenarios can be postulated. Most would involve
an assailant who is unarmed. If your assailant produces a weapon of any type of course your response options change. However if you are in such a scenario without OC or other less lethal options you are limited to three choices. Run, if you can, fight or firearms. Options are always nice to have.
Your guideline should generally be this. Avoid problems if possible. If not respond with the minimum force needed to guarantee your survival. If this is OC fine. If deadly force so be it. Your goal is to be alive to face the potential legal fallout. Who cares if you avoided legal action but were killed or seriously injured.

 

[strambo]

Only an idiot limits his options to lethal force.

To that I would add; only an idiot lets the "tools" he carries define his options. I always have lethal and non-lethal options available to me wherever I am, whatever I carry in any part of the world. Tools can make exercising those options more or less efficient, that is all.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

changing my mind...

Okay, I am convinced. I will have to agree with the stances taken by Strambo, Torpid, HSO and others and say that it is probably a good idea to have other non-lethal SD options. Especially with Strambo's point about letting the tools you carry define your options.

 

[Eyesac]

Essentially every non life threatening situation is a good reason to carry OC. I can think of a million situations where firing to end someones life would be "over kill" and could get me in serious trouble. There is a reason LE carries and uses it, because there is a great big "gray area" that many physical confrontations fall into. I'm for it. Fox labs is the best.

 

[MountainBear]

I have carried OC on the job before. It works, but most scenarios where I could see deploying it, I could have walked away from as a civilian (probably not on the job). If I feel threatened enough to defend myself, and not just back away, I damn well better be able to justify whatever means I use. And in today's litigious society, you are liable to get you but sued off for dousing someone with OC or using some other less than lethal means. Is this right? No, but it is reality in this day and age. After all, how many of us have had propper training on the deployment of OC or similar sprays? How many understand the propper distance to deploy it? How about the duration of the spray? What about the effects of cross-contamination?
Those of us that carry concealed are at least required to have a rudimentary knowledge of firearms, lethal force laws, etc. This might or might not save us when we are inevitably sued, but at least we can say we are are more knowledgable about our CCW pistol than we are with OC.

It also occurs to me that the carrying of a less than lethal option such as OC can escalate a situation rather than difuse it. And having a LTL option might make some a little "trigger happy." Rather than look for a good opportunity to distance themselves from their assailant, they may choose to douse them with OC instead.
I am a firm believer in standing my ground, but I am more a believer in going home alive every night.

I guess I rambled a little bit, but I guess my ramblings can be summarized by this: Whatever you carry, TRAIN with it. Go to a self defense class and learn about OC (its nasty to get sprayed with, by the way), and how, and more importantly WHEN to deploy it. And remember, the law will look a lot kinder on you if you distance yourself from an aggresor whenever possible...

 

[strambo]

The key is training. Your (and the enemies') primary weapon is your mind, not some gadget.

As an example: I'm confronted by 3 individuals. 2 are a lot bigger, one about the same size. They make their intent known to cause me serious bodily harm, no weapons evident (doesn't mean they don't have any). I draw and prepare to use deadly force to counter this disparity of force and threat.

The 2 big guys run away when the gun comes out. The 3rd, about my size is too hyped up on drugs for his own good. Makes another threat and charges. Now, we've seen from the AZ hiker thread what can happen if you shoot an unarmed, crazed individual. That guy was 57 yo and had a backpack on. I'm 32, fit with extensive military and HtoH training.

So, I step in, turn the gun sideways with my left palm on the slide and strike his sternum with the slide (finger was never on trigger) and knock him down, knock the wind out of him. Worse case scenario, his sternum could be fractured making breathing very difficult...but as Arnold said in Terminator 2 "He'll live". Retreat to safe area, call 911 and get police/medical enroute to him.

That's how you can retain a non-lethal option even with a "lethal" weapon in your hand. No time to re-holster. I could have just held the gun and struck with my 3 other appendages too.

 

[MountainBear]

At risk of pissing Justin the Moderator off (sorry Justin)

+1 Strambo!

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

First, I must have missed something...why would that PO Justin?

Second, Strambo left out the other option of just emptying your bladder and bowels into your pants and hoping that was enough of a deterent to make them go away.

 

[strambo]

Heh, speaking of bladders, a slide or muzzle strike to his would probably rupture it. That kinda takes the starch out of a person.

These skills are useful even in a lethal situation. The 3 in the above hypothetical all rush me, I shoot 2, then get a malfunction. So, I step in with all my body weight and strike the sternum of the last one with the muzzle (fracturing it and the ribs, likely damaging his heart.) This is lethal force after my "lethal" weapon jammed. Continue to engage the other 2 who still may be a threat after only 1 bullet per, clear malfunction and retreat as soon as practicable.

How many people when shooting at say 5 yards with some snap caps in the mag, immediately close and strike the target when the malfunction happens instead of standing in front of it fumbling with your weapon? You can strike faster than the fastest tap-rack-bang, nevermind a double feed. At minumum, move offline rapidly while clearing.

Bennie Cooley has a great video series called "The Fighting Mindset" 1 and 2. "Fighting Mindset 2" covers the whys and hows of striking with a handgun. Also applies to rifles. "Muzzle-punch" is your close quarters friend!

 

[Green Lantern]

First of all - it depends. Guy Gardner's one of my favorites, but he's usually a bit too cocky for his own good. Kyle Rayner was my "first" GL when I started reading. Like your "first" James Bond, you have to hold him up as the standard. And Jack T. Chance has about the best Green Lantern Oath ever:

"You who are wicked, evil, and mean - I'm the nastiest b****** you've EVER seen! Come one, come all, and put up a fight - I'll POUND yer *** with Green Lantern's light! Yowza..."

Back to business:

Ahhh, knew there was a reason I decided to carry OC anyhow besides my too-frequent need to disarm....

I think the new brand is settled now, "Fox" comes up very often on boards like these. And I may need to invest in this brand SOONER than later:

Let me ask a question about my Mace "peppergard" spray I currently use. I found an old unit I "retired" years ago assuming that you should change them yearly or so. It still had some spray in it so I took it out and test-fired it against a tree. I then CAREFULLY went up to where I had hit to get an idea of how potent it was.

Er...well...nothing! I thought I should wait a few moments for the propellant ot evaporate. I did, and took a small sniff...then a BIG one.

My nose might have tickled just a bit. I think I sneezed once or twice within the next 10 minutes.

Worried, I took another "test shot" of my current unit on a tree, with similar results. Is this a bad sign? I would imagine I should have got SOME kind of effect from breathing the stuff in at close range!

 

[1911 guy]

Ditch the mace.

While in the service, I taught a class for deployed sailors wives. Personal security, make sure you lock your doors type stuff. We also taught use of sprays. We had three instructors and once a week at least one of us would get maced. It blurrs your vision and takes your breath away the first few times. After that...nothing.

Now that I'm out of the Navy and working in a nasty environment (air quality) and still smoke a pack a day, my lungs and eyes are so used to irritation that mace still has no effect.

I agree with carrying less than lethal options. You can palm a can of OC spray whenever your spider senses tingle. Can't do that with a handgun. Spraying someone for grabbing ahold of you is perfectly legal. Shooting them, not always.

 

[StuckInMA]

The first time this was brought up to me was during the training course I had to take to get my CCW. The general rule was OC plus CCW is bad news in front of a jury. The basis for this argument was that it added another obstacle because a defense attorney will paint you as a trigger happy gun nut because you chose to use your firearm instead of your OC. Unless the attacker was also carrying a firearm, using anything more than OC would be viewed as overkill and negligent. The fact that PO's use tasers and OC before drawing a weapon more often than not nowadays reinforces that thought process in a jury's mind. A good example would be using your firearm against someone high on meth coming at you with a knife/hatchet/pipe while you had OC on your person. The question that would be raised is why you thought it was necessary to shoot someone in a situation where a PO would respond with LTL force. This is from a legal standpoint only. Again, it's about removing one more obstacle while in front of the jury.

On the other hand I read an article by Massad where he states that OC is a must have. I honestly don't remember his reasoning, but I can try and find the article if no one else here has the info.

I choose not to carry OC because when fight or flight kicks I don't think "fight" would result in me grabbing for OC first. The only time I could see myself using OC would be if the person was unarmed in which case "flight" would kick in.

I don't ever want to have to draw my weapon, but if I do I want to remove as many obstacles as I can when it comes time to face the jury. That's strictly personal preference though.

 

[hso]

Batons, saps, kubatons, sprays, etc. no more escalate a confrontation than a gun kills on it’s own. The individual controls the tool, not the other way around.

The gun is not a magic talisman. It does not protect us. It is nothing more than a tool that we use to enhance our ability to protect ourselves. Our mind protects us. We decide to avoid dangerous places. We decide to carry a gun. We decide to get training in how to use it in a street defensive crisis. We decide to cross the street, leave the bar, lock the car doors, call the cops. There are plenty of people that understand this on THR and they train in how to use the full range of ways to protect themselves. Voice, empty hand MA, MA weapons, sprays, guns. I've walked away from conflicts, I've talked my way out by de-escalation or domination, I've used my hands and feet. I've yet to use a weapon and pray I never do, but at least I've got options to choose from.

 

[Manedwolf]

I've always thought it's a good idea to have something else.

If someone wants to punch you, you use the Fox OC. If someone wants to kill you, you use the gun.