Don't let anyone know you have a gun unless you're shooting at them with it

This is key to the story: "She rolled her car into his leg (slowly - no injury) and he put his hand on his hip."

How slowly? If it were hard enough to push him back or knock him off his feet, he should be justified in putting his hand on his piece (in a perfect world, IANAL). Unless he presented it unholstered, that shouldn't be considered assault if he was in fact hit and feared for his life. Again, IANAL though.

I know you were holding your tongue with the magistrate because that's the unfortunate truth about court dealings where your client's fate is in this person's hand, but the answer to "There's no reason to carry a gun when you go to the store" is: THIS EXACT SCENARIO IS WHY SOMEONE SHOULD CARRY AT ALL TIMES! Who knows if the driver would have escalated things if not for your client carrying?
 
I'm always torn by this kind of advice. Many years ago the wife and I were leaving the Worcester Galleria at night and walking back to our car in the parking garage. As we were walking I noticed two guys of color following us. They were gaining on us and they split up so they were walking next to the cars on both sides of the lane. My wife was very nervous and I finally said "F" it and went for my gun that was IWB. They saw it right away and both of them bolted in different directions. I never had to pull out of the holster. I'm more then positive that if I wasn't carrying we'd have been assaulted/mugged that night. Sometimes just showing is enough to deter a crime, so I take this advice with a grain of salt.

I agree, I think this scenario is quite a bit different than yapping about it to some broad in a parking lot altercation where there was no imminent threat.
 
This is key to the story: "She rolled her car into his leg (slowly - no injury) and he put his hand on his hip."

How slowly? If it were hard enough to push him back or knock him off his feet, he should be justified in putting his hand on his piece (in a perfect world, IANAL).
Come to think of it,
any Eurasian grifter could have fixed the complainant's little wagon.
Shoe: meet other foot.
fake-pedestrian-car-crashes-are-sprouting-around-the-world_2.gif


Is he gonna get his LTC back?
Does the complainant have a history of road raging or making frivolous complaints?
 
JFC. I feel like I’m on an ‘Occupy Democrats’ forum, not a firearms forum. Being charged on allegations that you pointed a gun at someone twice, when you did not, isn’t having false charges levied against you? WTF is wrong with you?

I think you just like to argue.

I'm pretty sure it's consensus around here you don't show a weapon without good cause and the likelihood you'll have to use it immediately.

Threaten someone with a firearm and you should not be surprised if they embellish their story a bit.

I have a question for Mr. Swatgig. Is there any difference in Massachusetts law between threatening someone by showing a firearm versus by drawing and pointing it?
 
I'm pretty sure it's consensus around here you don't show a weapon without good cause and the likelihood you'll have to use it immediately.

Threaten someone with a firearm and you should not be surprised if they embellish their story a bit.

So you are okay with criminal charges based on people lying. Says a lot, no?

Which part of his story indicates he showed and threatened her with a firearm?

This part?

Gun in holster under his shirt. He never removed it from the holster nor did he life his shirt. She never saw the gun until the cops arrived


. He was then a willing participant in a verbal altercation and refused to move out of her path when she engaged in more stupidity - if that's actually what happened. He topped it off with an assault with a dangerous weapon under the law.

Why are you attacking me right now! I’m telling the police you pointed a gun at me. It won’t be false charges, because I know you own a gun and are a willing participant in a [written] altercation; and engaging in stupidity.

When someone does something stupid on the road, as this woman did, wait a few moments and then drive on. How hard is that?

When someone is debating you online, why not just ignore them and move on? How hard is that?
 
When someone is debating you online, why not just ignore them and move on? How hard is that?

I'll have to remember that. Permission to argue - DENIED. lol.

I don't believe Mr. Swatgig's client's story 100% and I doubt he does either. In any case, whatever happened, he's the one in the dock.
 
That was satirical. Thought it was obvious. I even used the exact same wording as you.

And we can only base our opinions off the story we are told. So based on the OP’s story, you’re okay with criminal charges? Embellishing (aka, lying) about what happened is fine, as you’ve mentioned already? All because someone honked their horn longer than you’d like and placed their hand on their hip?
 
I remember when I was taking my concealed carry training at MFS and of the the things that was brought up is who do the cops believe? The answer is the first person who calls since they are the one in jeopardy. I suppose when pulling a gun make sure that the 911 call gets in before the crazed moonbat does. Maybe this guy is lucky and there is video evidence.
 
@swatgig is teaching us something.
Don't reveal your firearm unless you need to shoot. Ignore it at your own peril - but that would be stupid.

Even after getting his LTC back he can't get the money and his time back for the hassle.
 
Stay in your car, call 911 and let popo sort out the enraged female losing her mind while you enjoy the AC in your truck.

Dont forget to start filming but dont let the whack job see it.....just prop it on the dash and enjoy the show

Dont forget to smile

This.

Why he got out of his vehicle is beyond me.
 
I'm always torn by this kind of advice. Many years ago the wife and I were leaving the Worcester Galleria at night and walking back to our car in the parking garage. As we were walking I noticed two guys of color following us. They were gaining on us and they split up so they were walking next to the cars on both sides of the lane. My wife was very nervous and I finally said "F" it and went for my gun that was IWB. They saw it right away and both of them bolted in different directions. I never had to pull out of the holster. I'm more then positive that if I wasn't carrying we'd have been assaulted/mugged that night. Sometimes just showing is enough to deter a crime, so I take this advice with a grain of salt.

That's great, and I likely would have done exactly the same thing- but that's a wholly different ballgame than a typical mutual combat road rage retard festival. I don't
think it's wise to conflate how one would respond in (what happened to you on the street) vs what happened to swatgig's client.

The problem with road rage is, legally, at least at some level the courts attitude is "both parties are wrong by default otherwise we wouldn't be here" and if both parties are wrong and one of them has a gun, and that's somehow part of the narrative, the "cuz guns" doctrine is going to kick into overdrive.


-Mike
 
I have a question for Mr. Swatgig. Is there any difference in Massachusetts law between threatening someone by showing a firearm versus by drawing and pointing it?
No. Either qualifies as Assault with a Dangerous Weapon.

"conviction of assault by means of a dangerous weapon requires proof of an overt act undertaken with the intention of putting another person in fear of bodily harm and reasonably calculated to do so, whether or not the defendant actually intended to harm the victim" Merely moving a jacket aside to show someone a gun has been held to constitute ADW. It's arguable that placing your hand on your hip, where one would carry a concealed weapon, is enough of an overt act to put someone in fear. Pointing a toy gun at someone is ADW, so why not reaching for an unseen gun?
 
She followed him into a parking lot and they started arguing.
Meaning that he was an active participant, instead of disengaging and walking away.

She rolled her car into his leg (slowly - no injury)
If he'd had a badge, he could have done a mag dump on her and it would be ruled justified.

*edit*: I should have read 180's post first. ;)
 
It doesn't matter, you don't let someone know you're carrying until you're pointing the gun at them, particularly someone who's batshit crazy.



Because no one saw her using her car as a weapon and it's his word against hers.

You never ever let someone know you're carrying. Ever. Once you have told them you have a gun on you all they need to do is call the police and say you threatened them w/ your gun. The police will find your gun on you so the other person is going to get the benefit of the doubt, good luck with that he said/she said in court. God forbid you actually show it to them, then she says "he's got a black handgun gun" or a "silver revolver" and if the cop verifies that then she's going to get the benefit of the doubt each and every time.

To your first point, yes, yes, and yes. He should have kept his mouth shut, rather than saying anything her.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I am understanding the story wrong. Wouldn't there be cameras around to show he kept it concealed, and that she was lying?
 
Hey!

We have an attorney, who is one of us, giving us the benefit of his professional experience and advice.
Stop monday morning quarterbacking and listen.
Get the benefit of legal advice BEFORE you need it WITHOUT having to pay for it in dollars, time lost or risk to your LTC.

Take it as a learning moment and quit debating it.
I swear we'd argue if someone said the sky was blue this morning...

And thanks @swatgig for posting.
 
Over a confrontation in a parking lot?

You seriously overestimate the capability of retail establishment parking lot camera coverage.

Have you not watched a SINGLE crime drama?

H could collect enough video from various angles (from ATMs, stores, banks, passing car dash cams etc) to create a holographic image of the crime scene AND zoom in so far that you could see the perpetrator's reflection from the shiny spoon on the mantel.

And Calleigh would simply glance at the bullet fragment and determine not only the caliber but the twist ratio, make and model of the rifle and whether it was shot right handed or left.
 
I'm always torn by this kind of advice. Many years ago the wife and I were leaving the Worcester Galleria at night and walking back to our car in the parking garage. As we were walking I noticed two guys of color following us. They were gaining on us and they split up so they were walking next to the cars on both sides of the lane. My wife was very nervous and I finally said "F" it and went for my gun that was IWB. They saw it right away and both of them bolted in different directions. I never had to pull out of the holster. I'm more then positive that if I wasn't carrying we'd have been assaulted/mugged that night. Sometimes just showing is enough to deter a crime, so I take this advice with a grain of salt.
If you had kept the gun hidden until the last minute you might have actually had to use the gun.

Sometimes there is no winning answer.

I would have answered "No, my phone. If you come near me I will need the video when I press charges.".

I had someone threaten to "slap me around a bit" because my door touched his car when opening (no damage, and I did offer my insurance info). As he was getting irate I backed away and went to the rear of his car (yes, I was armed). WHAT ARE YOUR DOING??? was his reaction. I said "If you touch me I am pressing charges so I am getting your license plate number". He got back in his car, telling me how lucky I was he was not going to beat me up, and left. Funny thing - he was about my size and there is no way either of us could be certain who would prevail in CQB.

You seriously overestimate the capability of retail establishment parking lot camera coverage.
Retail cameras are to protect the store from theft and holdup. There is little benefit to the store having a parking lot camera.

One year, numerous cars had guns stolen from the parking lot at one of the big Vegas hotels during the post-match awards ceremony. You guessed it - no working cameras on the lot, but you bet any that were aimed at the casino's money cows that failed would be replaced immediately.
 
Last edited:
I've come to believe that police are absolutely powerless to help people unless the crime was committed right in front of them. Otherwise the old tried and true "well, what do you want me to do?" comes out. Maybe because its MA and "cuzgunz"?
 
I've come to believe that police are absolutely powerless to help people unless the crime was committed right in front of them. Otherwise the old tried and true "well, what do you want me to do?" comes out. Maybe because its MA and "cuzgunz"?
Marge: I thought you said the law was powerless.

Chief Wiggims: Powerless go help you, not punish you.
 
Over a confrontation in a parking lot?

You seriously overestimate the capability of retail establishment parking lot camera coverage.
Have you not watched a SINGLE crime drama?
^This.

Not until this exchange had I considered how a shark defense attorney
could deliberately leverage the CSI Effect.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury,
if my client had really threatened that woman,
wouldn't there be footage of it on parking lot cams?
(Or spy satellites, heh).​
I.e., "(animated) GIFs, or it didn't happen".

So far that's like something straight out of Idiocracy.

But as Global Warmening causes juror intelligence to plummet,
someday it could become a standard tool of the defense.
 
^This.

Not until this exchange had I considered how a shark defense attorney
could deliberately leverage the CSI Effect.
Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury,
if my client had really threatened that woman,
wouldn't there be footage of it on parking lot cams?
(Or spy satellites, heh).​
I.e., "(animated) GIFs, or it didn't happen".

So far that's like something straight out of Idiocracy.

But as Global Warmening causes juror intelligence to plummet,
someday it could become a standard tool of the defense.
This is actually a thing with juries. They watch so much tv, they want to see video, dna, fingerprints, etc. it’s not a proper argument, but some juries have acquitted for it.
 
Back
Top Bottom