- Thread starter
- #21
I wanted to give you a thumbs up on this advice Marty, which all who carry a gun should follow. I don't know how many thousands of the young officer I have told, "the body will never go where the mind has never been."
Rules of Engagement For The Concealed Weapons Permit Holder
- Thread starter OkieStubble
- Start date
- Status
I wanted to give you a thumbs up on this advice Marty, which all who carry a gun should follow. I don't know how many thousands of the young officer I have told, "the body will never go where the mind has never been."
- Thread starter
- #22
It will be 20 for me this August. 8 on patrol, 10 in the academy and FTO. In that time, I have been shot at 4 different times without returning fire, had to put down a man with a knife, a rabid dog and only two actual gunfights. But I have had my gun out of it's holster, pointed at someone else, too many times to count. The odds were always in my favor, every single time by simply always being in control of the contact.
And yet I still feel very fortunate.
You get to see the best and worst of us at that counter.
This is why I am hoping for some feedback and opinions about what people think on updating CCW laws to clarify the laws in aiding others and to inspire more confidence instead of self doubt and hesitation if that aid to a stranger becomes necessary.
Last edited:
When my wife got her CCW, the instructor really impressed on her that the minute you brandish a weapon in public, your life will change. Only pull out a weapon if you plan to fire, and only fire if you plan to kill. Even if you are in the right, you will get caught up in all sorts of lawsuits--and if the situation is at all controversial, the media coverage alone can be enough to ruin your life.
Slash McCoy
I freehand dog rockets
Perhaps some sort of "Good Samaritan" clarification to laws governing the use of deadly force? I know this idea would send many antigunners into a shrieking frenzy, though.
The crazy hodgepodge of gun and deadly force laws can be confusing even within the confines of ones home state. It really sucks to think that a well intentioned and even well trained person could be ruined for doing what any reasonble person would consider a noble, moral, and even courageous act. Then again, such doubt has possibly saved more innocent lives than the lives it has cost. This really is one of the biggest moral conumdrums in our time, I think.
The crazy hodgepodge of gun and deadly force laws can be confusing even within the confines of ones home state. It really sucks to think that a well intentioned and even well trained person could be ruined for doing what any reasonble person would consider a noble, moral, and even courageous act. Then again, such doubt has possibly saved more innocent lives than the lives it has cost. This really is one of the biggest moral conumdrums in our time, I think.
Slash McCoy
I freehand dog rockets
Good points yeah, but I do take issue with the "plan to kill" part. I know it seems a fine and unnecessary distinction, but I believe a more correct mindset would be "only fire if stopping the person is so necessary that his or her possible death is acceptable". The intent should be to stop the unacceptable action, with death being an unfortunate likely effect from taking one or more bullets in center mass. The "plan to kill" part is too close to vigilantism. We are not judges, juries, or executioners. We are just normal folks with guns who presumably hope to never need to use them, but who hope even more fervently not to need them and not have them. Sorry if that is splitting hairs. But as for the lawsuits, admitting that your objective was to kill the bad guy will certainly cost you dearly. The goal should not be death, but saving a life. Aiming for center of mass is the accepted manner of applying deadly force because it is the most dependable way of stopping a person with a bullet. The fact that it has a high probability of killing the bad guy is incidental and not related to intent.
Bit off topic but in the UK (where you can't carry a gun) the law states that you can use reasonable force to defend yourself. Similar rules apply for defending others.
I hope I never have to use my firearm for anything other than a target. I was fortunate to never have to fire at someone, even while deployed. However, if I should be put in a situation where I needed to use my firearm, it will be to eliminate the threat, which means center mass.
Sent via mobile
This is part of my biggest hesitation in any situation outside of my home. My state doesn't have a mandatory training to get your ccw. I did take it upon myself to attend one when PA introduced their castle doctrine law to better understand it.
I did take one of the first classes offered when I was in NC however, as I was there when they first started to issue ccw permits. The main synopsis for both is pretty much what you described.
As a ccw holder, it is impressed upon us that we WILL go to jail. Regardless of whether it was justified or not. Once you are there, you have a trained prosecutor looking for any minute detail to keep you there. God forbid if you repeat the line "Only pull out a weapon if you plan to fire, and only fire if you plan to kill."
Now by a twist of wording, you went from an investigation of a justifiable shoot, to an investigation of premeditated murder. Doesn't matter to them that that is what you were told in your process to do everything you could to stay within the law to begin with.
When I lived in NC, my live-in girlfriend was a manager at the apartment building we lived at. There was an incident in the parking lot where one of the tenants was being beaten with a baseball bat by two unknown people. I stepped in and disarmed the one with the bat and fended off the other. No firearm involved, and I didn't even strike either of them.
When the police arrived, they were trying to take me to jail just because I stopped an assault on the property where I lived.
It didn't involve me, so why did I get into the middle of it?
No matter what my training is, or my moral stance, I would be hesitant because of the inevitable fact I'm going to be sitting in a cell where I can no longer protect or provide for my family. It's sad because I don't fear the act of getting involved, but I fear the repercussions of doing it "legally".
Last edited:
+1
Remove the word kill from your vocabulary. You feared for your life, you shot until the threat stopped. No more, no less. As some have mentioned, even if the DA rules it a good shoot, you will still spend several months in civil court as every ambulance chaser in the area is going to have the family suing you for violating the perps civil rights. Never ever say you killed them.
The comment on only shoot if you intend to kill was to make the class realize that shooting to maim is a Hollywood fantasy--people aren't that accurate. But I agree with what you are all saying--no matter how justified, any prosecutor that can twist your words will.
Wayne Ivey Sheriff of Brevard County Florida. Not some jerkwater community, Brevard Co. is home to Kennedy Space Center, Patrick AFB, and high tech operations such as Harris Corp., Northrup Grumman, Rockwell..to name just a few.
Here is what Sheriff Ivey recommends to his constituents.
Just curious how you know it to be true that threat of crime/terrorism is increasing now? Do you have evidence to back this or is this your opinion?
A great and important question, Rob.
I remember seeing that story in the news. It's one thing to see a uniformed officer on the ground being beaten; that makes the call a whole lot easier.
But there are a whole lot of situations where you simply don't have enough information. You see two guys fighting, what if one of them is a plain clothes or off-duty cop? Yeesh.
So unless the situation is as clear as the example you cited, it's "not my circus, not my monkeys."
As for active shooters, that's a whole 'nother ball of worms. What if he's a terrorist with a suicide vest on? Will we be attempting a head shot from outside the blast zone?
I remember seeing that story in the news. It's one thing to see a uniformed officer on the ground being beaten; that makes the call a whole lot easier.
But there are a whole lot of situations where you simply don't have enough information. You see two guys fighting, what if one of them is a plain clothes or off-duty cop? Yeesh.
So unless the situation is as clear as the example you cited, it's "not my circus, not my monkeys."
As for active shooters, that's a whole 'nother ball of worms. What if he's a terrorist with a suicide vest on? Will we be attempting a head shot from outside the blast zone?
I live in the sticks and see a major increase in my area from when I was growing up here. Maybe not so much terrorism in my area, but definitely crime. I graduated 27 years ago, so I'd say that's enough time to make a fair judgement on an area.
As far as Rob goes, well he's been in law enforcement probably close to as long as I've been out of school. As a police captain, I'd say he would have enough knowledge to not just go spouting something like that off without having some merit to it.
Not to be an ***, but honestly all you have to do is look around with open eyes to see that things aren't what they used to be. One example: I NEVER saw armed police in the building as their day to day job when I was in school. How many schools across the country do that now?
"School Resource Officer"
.....mic drop
.....mic drop
Yes. Despite having two friends that have done it while working part time in a department, I forgot the proper title.
Yeah title aside your point is spot on. Armed police working a school as a patrol zone and then some. I'd say that is a good indicator of "the times, they are a changin'."
simon1
Self Ignored by Vista
Excellent thread Rob!!!
The responses are food for thought.
Although I'm just a CHL holder now I think that you know what my action would be if my life or the life of another was in danger, Rob.
I have a cute little story about stopping a theft from my property, by multiple people...hey, instinct just kicked in...where I just had a handgun in my hand. While the Deputies were inventorying their truck and found a loaded firearm, some meth. and mary jane paraphernalia and a bit of jewelry, an S.O. Investigator that I used to work with came out to see if the jewelry may have been from some recent burglaries in the area. He just grinned and asked me:
"Did you throw down on 'em?"
"Naw, wasn't any need. Just had it in my hand."
"Hell, I woulda throwed down on them."
Hey...this is Texas.
I just got back from your Territory Rob. Well...the N.E. corner of the Territory. I have some observations about the Courthouse there compared to the one here...but I don't want to make too long of a post.
I do agree that the CCW training could stand some improvement. But there are many things to think about when changing training.
The responses are food for thought.
Although I'm just a CHL holder now I think that you know what my action would be if my life or the life of another was in danger, Rob.
I have a cute little story about stopping a theft from my property, by multiple people...hey, instinct just kicked in...where I just had a handgun in my hand. While the Deputies were inventorying their truck and found a loaded firearm, some meth. and mary jane paraphernalia and a bit of jewelry, an S.O. Investigator that I used to work with came out to see if the jewelry may have been from some recent burglaries in the area. He just grinned and asked me:
"Did you throw down on 'em?"
"Naw, wasn't any need. Just had it in my hand."
"Hell, I woulda throwed down on them."
Hey...this is Texas.
I just got back from your Territory Rob. Well...the N.E. corner of the Territory. I have some observations about the Courthouse there compared to the one here...but I don't want to make too long of a post.
I do agree that the CCW training could stand some improvement. But there are many things to think about when changing training.
Last edited:
simon1
Self Ignored by Vista
It's SRO here also...School Resource Officer. Different titles for different places.
- Thread starter
- #40
Let's see. Generally speaking, I could just answer your question with the question, "don't you watch the news?"
I am also privy to certain LE intelligence resources USDOJ, Fusion, NCIRC and others I can't share here, but I'm sure I can break down some informational statistics using my google fu.
Would you like terrorism stats in general? Or shall I break it down to International Terrorism? Domestic? Industrial? Cyber?
Here is a global chart on terrorism:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/11/daily-chart-12
Here is a really cool global database:
Global Terrorism Database
Here is a great link, to view locations of terrorism that has happened in the U.S. from 2005- to present.
These Maps Show the Terrifying Increase in Domestic Terrorism in America Since 9-11
Just check out the last two maps of the nation in 2015 and 2016 and compare them in contrast to 2005-2010. Hell, compare them against the map from 2011 and we all know what happened in 2011.
1. I haven't even tried to scratch the surface in domestic terrorism yet. Let's just mention a few of the latest or recent past acts of DT. The 2013 Boston Marathon? While they were brothers of another nationality, they were citizens and considered Americans. 4 dead.
2. 2014 my state Oklahoma. 1 female beheaded by a mentally deranged man even though he thought he did it because of Jihad, the facts showed while he did a lot of reading on it, he wasn't involved with the religion or associated with any international faction. He was American. 1 dead.
3. 2014 Washington and New Jersey killing spree. 4 dead.
4. 2014 Las Vegas Police Ambush. 3 dead.
5. 2014 Tallahassee Police Ambush. 1 dead.
6. 2015 Charleston Church Shooting. 9 dead.
2016. Dallas? Mississippi? No reason to go on.
Lets list some known groups, who are recognized for either terrorist acts, and/or investigated for such, just within our borders since 2010.
1. Anti-Abortion Violence
2. Eco-Terrorism
3. Animal Liberation Front
4. Alpha 66 and Omega 7
5. Army of God
6. Aryan Nation
7. New Black Liberation Army
8. The Covenant
9. Earth Liberation Front
10. Jewish Defense League
11. Ku Klux Klan
12. May 19th Communist Organization
13. The Order
14. Phineas Priesthood
15.Symbionese Liberation Army
16. United Freedom Front
18. Weathermen
Please take notice, I haven't mentioned any of the organized political factions as of late who may not go by any unofficial names, or haven't been investigated for any crimes of terrorism. Mostly just acts of rioting, looting and general, basic anarchy. Because I don't want to break my own OP of non political discussion.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
