Friend pulled a gun yesterday

[McKnife]

If your friend believed he was in imminent serious bodily injury... he'll be okay. Get a lawyer and smash him down.

The guy was provoking a violent argument (I'll get a hold of you?).

I bet he had to change underwear after he saw the barrel.

 

[thertel]

First off, there is no such thing as an ex-marine. Once a marine always a marine.

Second, my understanding is that there is no longer a duty to retreat from a threat in Texas with the Castle Doctrine now in effect. Assuming all the details are accurate it sounds like the Big Guy planned on kicking some marine ass, especially considering he pushed a woman down to the ground. I hope this gets no billed. Sucks for your friend though because this is going to be expensive.

Very UnTexan of the man to push the woman around.

 

[tnieto2004]

Not gonna wade through 4 pages, sorry but it's late.

The reason he's not being charged with posession is that he had it in the truck, not on him. The TX law about guns in vehicles is currently ambiguous (the fix goes into effect in Sept.) and the fact that they chose not to try to charge him on that count is what I'd expect from reasonable LEO and a reasonable DA.

If he got to his truck he should have gotten into it and left.

Pretty plain what happened and why he's in trouble.

He's being charged because he went to his truck, got his gun and assaulted the guy with it.

LE responded as they should have. Two guys exchanged words and one went to his truck, retrieved a firearm and used it to threaten the other. Pretty straightforward.

Ironically, in this case he would have been better off if he HAD been carrying it on him in violation of the law. Then he could argue that he felt threatened and had no choice but to draw. As it is he retreated to his vehicle and then rather than leave chose instead to retrieve a gun and escalate the confrontation.

You need to edit the first post to reflect the fact that he didn't DRAW, he went to his truck to get the gun. That makes a big difference.

No. He was getting into his truck (I stated he was by his truck) when the guy started after him. You also forgot the part about the man assaulting the woman.

 

[eltorrente]

No. He was getting into his truck (I stated he was by his truck) when the guy started after him. You also forgot the part about the man assaulting the woman.

If he had time to reach inside the truck for the gun, he had time to get in the truck and lock the door. Angryguy wasn't holding his door open or physically grabbing him and preventing him from getting to safety. The girlfriend got pushed but wasn't being assaulted or grabbed, so she could have followed marineguy and got into the truck also.

 

[tnieto2004]

The girlfriend got pushed but wasn't being assaulted

haha ..what!?

 

[Hypnogator]

If he pulled it, he should have used it.

Surprised that no one else picked up on this choice bit of legal wisdom!

OK, so this former Marine (who presumably was trained in unarmed combat) pulls his gun out of his truck and shoots an unarmed man instead of retreating into his place of presumed safety (his truck) and escaping the situation or calling the police. Charge: Murder. Conviction: Vol Manslaughter. LSMFT -- Legally Sufficient, Mighty Fine Trial. He now spends the next 15 year as somebody's girlfriend, not with his girlfriend!

And frankly, IMHO, that's as it should be. The BG in this scenario obviously shouldn't have pushed his girlfriend, and can/should be charged with simple assault and battery. As someone said, a truly un-Texan thing to do; but hardly a capital offense! Stand-your-ground laws were never intended to protect those who would threaten to kill an unarmed A-- H--- for non life-threatening behavior when a safe retreat is clearly at hand.

Sorry about your friend, but from what you've described, this just isn't a situation that would, IMHO, justify using a deadly weapon in self-defense.

 

[gc70]

Wanna' bet that girlfriend actually laid hands on angryguy before there was any pushing or brandishing? Some of those Texas women can be mighty feisty.

 

[winchester62]

Wow! A few real falsehoods in this thread...

The agressor DID commit assault and battery. If the victim has been actually touched by the person committing the crime, then battery has occurred. If the victim has not actually been touched, but only threatened, then the crime is considered to be assault. Does this level of threat allow deadly force? Probably not, but he might get no-billed anyway. Size disparity might very well come into play.

For those who missed it 18 times: In TX you may legally have a loaded firearm in your vehicle. Get it? This is not a crime! (Contrary to what the LEO brass in Houston and Austin think.)

The TX "castle doctrine" goes into effect on September 1st. It doesn't really have any bearing on this case probably.

When you pay a bond to a bail bondsman, that is their fee - you don't get it back.

To the OP, I wish your friend luck. Try not to pull your hair out reading some of these responses. They are worth what you paid for them - mine included.

 

[G.A. Heath]

Ok, we don't have the entire story, but based on what we know this is my take.

The OP's friend, lets call him Dave (Randomly chosen name), was legally carrying under the authority of the Texas traveling law so little or no possibility of him being charged with UCW (Unlawful carrying of a weapon).

Dave attempted to extricate himself from the situation but the BG, lets call him Sam, followed Dave towards Dave's truck. Dave's GF, lets call her Sally, attempts to place herself in Sams path to prevent the situation from escalating. Sam then pushed, or knocked, Sally to the ground (Assault on Sams part). Dave at this point is now at his truck and has access to his weapon and/or a means of escape. Escape while preferable is not possible as Sally and Dave's brother, lets call him Frank, would be left to Sam's mercy. Now Dave has to decide to engage Sam H2H or with a weapon. Dave has been trained in H2H (How recent was that training and what kind of shape is Dave in?), and he has been trained with weapons. Sam is a complete unknown he could be a current USMC H2H trainer, fifth degree black belt in 19 forms of martial arts, an average joe, high on drugs, armed with a concealed weapon, or some combination thereof. Dave has to also keep in mind that Sam is not afraid that Frank might intervene, or that Sally might get local LE involved, so Sam thinks he has a major advantage over Dave and others that may try to assist Dave. The consequences of guessing wrong could cost Dave his life. Should Dave fail Sally and Frank might be next.

So is there a disparity of force, Does Dave think his life (and possibly others) are in danger, can Dave stop Sam H2H without risking his own life?

BTW, Castle Doctrine doesn't come into effect until September 1, 2007.

 

[theken206]

"Aren't ex-marines supposed to be at least moderately skilled in H2H combat?"

no not really, I mean there is some H2H training in the service but its really nothing special from what i have seen though the marine corps may diffrent from the army its not a given that joe blow marine is going to be any better of a fighter that joe blow street brawler.

In better shape, more determined and diciplened mentally, sure but its set in stone.

 

[hoji]

Then go after the arresting officer and the department for telling them they couldn't press charges on the assault. Go after them hard. That kind of crap is what gives good police officers a bad name.

Brad

Any LEO who knows this goes on in his/her department is just as guilty as the one who is offending.

 

[lesjones]

Disclaimer again: there's lots we don't know about this case, so I'm going to talk in the general case here, not just about this particular incident.

I'm amazed at the number of people in this thread who have the mindset "you shouldn't draw a gun just to defend yourself against an ass beating."

WTH? You can defend yourself against less than lethal force, particularly if you present the gun without going all Wild Bill Hickok the second it clears the holster.

Once the ass beating starts, there's no guarantee your attacker is going to stop once he's blacked your eye, or put you on the ground, or kicked in your ribs, or at any other point. Not drawing your gun when violence is imminent puts the other guy in control and you at his mercy.

 

[03Shadowbob]

Did the Marines stop teaching their recruits how to kick ass? I know a lot of Marines both family and friends, some big some small, and they all know how to kick ass when needed.
I do not think that someone coming aggressively at you empty handed is a reason to pull a gun unless you are elderly or a woman. If you are worried about getting your ass kicked then look at other options like OC spray but do not pull a gun unless you want to wind up in this guy's situation.
Sometimes I read here and wonder if the same guys who say pull a gun because someone is yelling at you and has his chest bowed out are the same kids in elementary school who told the teacher someone was kicking his seat. :banghead:

 

[brerrabbit]

Regardless of size disparity, No one has the right to try to beat down another person. No one has the obligation to take a beating just because it is not a threat to life.

If some one feels the need to try to whup up on me, and I have a weapon handy, I will use it to stop their use of force, up and including taking their life.

I will try my best to avoid a fight, including de-escalation and walking away, but I will shoot an aggressor if possible before I would grapple with them. I believe there is a quote mentioning Sam Colt and equality.

I have played around with too many wannabe bullies in my life, and I dont heal so quick nowadays.

The fundamental question is, what Texas law requires a man to take a beating or to engage in a fight if he does not want to? Or requires that he not use a weapon to defend himself.

 

[springmom]

Quote:
Just a WEE bit of overstatement, there.

Yeah, Yeman recently introduced a series of reforms so I probably shouldn't have compared them with the Texicans.

Honestly, if I was looking at a serious felony down there I'd probably put my own lights out while I still had the chance. They dish out a lot of very hard time in that state. To me, death would be better than years in a Texas hole, though obviously that's a personal choice you have to make yourself.

Weeeeeeeellllllll, yes and no.

IF you get to trial with the charges against you intact on an aggravated assault charge, and IF you have a record of prior legal involvement, then yes, you MAY end up with hard time. But less often than you'd think, and the two IF's in that statement are very big ones indeed.

Our own miserable experience with this comes from the standpoint of victim and his family, after my then 17 year old son was beaten, robbed, pistol-whipped and shot at while sitting peacefully in a neighborhood park with the girl he was hoping would become his girlfriend. A gang of thugs had just done the same to some poor guy four blocks over, and they drove by and saw YS and the girl. He lost his wallet, my personal CD player, his cell phone, and about two weeks when he couldn't eat anything other than soup or milkshakes.

They caught everyone involved except the one juvenile, who seems to have vanished. Two of the guys flipped on a third, SWORE he was the shooter, blah, blah. They got "time served" and out they went about 3 months later, most charges dropped. The supposed shooter got 20 months in the state jail, again, most charges dropped. In state jail in Texas there is (supposedly) no parole, no early release. The sentences tend to be relatively short (20 months!) but you serve every single day.

Yeah. Right. NOT. The jerk was out in a MONTH. Seems HE flipped on another guy, who is as we speak in the Harris County lockup. Mr. 20 Months is out free.

And if the oxygen thief who's in the Harris County jail flips on some other case they want info on? Guess who will also walk free?

Not us. We still look over our shoulders. YS still cannot talk about that night. His grades cratered that last semester of high school, and he messed up two semesters of community college in the fallout. The guys who did this have, all but one, gotten away with it.

Texas isn't the hard case you think. For the DA it's about clearing cases and wins and getting info on other bad guys. If they can clear this guy's case by bargaining it down and getting a guilty plea, they'll do it in a minute. Saves them time and money and makes them look good.

/rant, and sorry for the momentary thread hijack, but it's relevant to the issue at hand, and the presumption here is just not quite correct.

Springmom

 

[budney]

If some one feels the need to try to whup up on me, and I have a weapon handy, I will use it to stop their use of force, up and including taking their life.

Brerrabbit, I hope you never find yourself in a witness stand telling the jury, "I thought he was going to give me a fat lip, so I killed him." While it's true that you have no moral obligation to "take a whupping," that doesn't mean you're legally permitted to use deadly force to avert minor injury or inconvenience.

That's why God gave us batons, pepper spray and the right to file assault charges.

--Len.

 

[frank23185]

2 things:

Just because you can morally and legally stand your ground, does not always mean it is a good idea.

Yes, no man should suffer an arse whooping. However, the law frowns upon killing someone to avoid a fist fight. Plus, if you are afraid of getting in a fight, don't piss people off in the first place.


I said before, I doubt there are any innocent parties to this currently debated engagement.

 

[Kimber1911_06238]

get a good lawyer. Carrying without a permit is a SERIOUS violation no matter where you are.

 

[distortion9]

Wow....some of the responses in this thread, my join date and post count should explain what I think about that....anyway.

The fact is this.

Once again, a firearm was successfully used to end a confrontation before it had a chance to go sideways....WITHOUT A SHOT BEING FIRED.

We KNOW what happened as a result of the weapon being pulled (Situation over, Marine gets taken away in cuffs). We DO NOT KNOW what would have happened had he NOT retrieved the weapon (Situation NOT over, Marine gets KO'ed and cracks his head wide open on a curb while his weapon sits in the glove box).

This is also known as, "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6".

On a side note, the first thing that came to my mind was that the aggressor was shown some sort of professional courtesy. I'd like to know what he does for a living that trumps a Marine being threatened and having his girl shoved. If I had been the responding officer, I'm telling the guy he's lucky he didn't get shot for putting his hands on another guys woman and thanking the Marine for his service.

Have a nice day.

 

[araiford]

I think some are under the assumption that the former marine was just minding his own business when some guy attacked him for no reason whatsoever.

Probably a poor assumption.

 

[tmajors]

Once the ass beating starts, there's no guarantee your attacker is going to stop once he's blacked your eye, or put you on the ground, or kicked in your ribs, or at any other point.

I agree completely. Waiting to draw until after the beating starts is a good way to get yourself into a hospital or dead imo. I've seen plenty of people hospitalized or killed by someone using nothing but hands and feet. Sure you can physically fight back but then you get charged as well as the bad guy, and again the size disparity means you aren't guaranteed not coming out with injuries or worse. If the bad guy had a gun would people say you can't draw and fire until the bad guy shoots first? Hell no.

Then the part about locking himself in the truck. Smart...or is it really? Bad guy has already pushed the girlfriend and people are advocating locking himself in the truck and leaving the girlfriend outside with the bad guy. Bloody brilliant. Either the bad guy is gonna leave, start beating on the truck, no biggy, or the bad guy is gonna go back to the girl. No matter the outcome though any self respecting girl is gonna ditch the guy that locked himself in the truck and leave her to the wolves.

Personally I think your friend did right. The legal system might not agree, he might spend time in jail, but far as I see it tell your friend to hold his head high knowing he prevented himself and maybe his girlfriend from any further injury without having to fire a shot or get physical.

 

[gc70]

On a side note, the first thing that came to my mind was that the aggressor was shown some sort of professional courtesy. I'd like to know what he does for a living that trumps a Marine being threatened and having his girl shoved. If I had been the responding officer, I'm telling the guy he's lucky he didn't get shot for putting his hands on another guys woman and thanking the Marine for his service.

A lot depends on who told their story to the police first. Wanna' bet that angryguy wouldn't tell the police anything about yelling or pushing girlfriend? (i.e. "I was just going to talk to this guy about dangerous boating practices when he pulled a gun on me.")

 

[damien]

Have the woman sue his pants off and offer to retract the suit if he drops the charges or retracts his allegation (which will cause the charges to be dropped). He will drop them - he doesn't want to lose his Red Neck Clipper Ship.

 

[MudPuppy]

He should have just taken a punch or a minor beating and ignored his girlfriend getting pushed down.--its not like she got hurt or anything.

(I think I hear twilight zone music in the background...)

 

[RNB65]

Your buddy is SKREWED, unfortunately.

Maybe. Maybe not. Tell him to hire a good defense lawyer and put it in front of a jury. If you can get a rural, conservative jury and show them that brandishing a weapon in that situation was justifiable as self-defense, they'll acquit in a heartbeat. Country folk don't like hot headed thugs that rough up other people.

Then sue the guy for making threats and try to recover enough money to pay the lawyer fees.