Lucky my brother carries.

[Matt E]

Exactly!

Its the rare person who takes pure joy just in hurting and killing people and nothing else. They are called serial killers. Your odds of encountering one that picks you out as food are miniscule compared to your average street robber. They don't want a fight, they don't want attention, they are likely willing to hurt you but would rather it go off as quickly and quietly as possible. Am I saying that you should just hand it over and you will be completely safe like the antis imply? NO! Plenty of people have gotten hurt/killed after handing it over.

Post #109 is some of the soundest "street advice" you will ever read. Even if you are not carrying, if you are suspicious of anybody, make them think you have a weapon. I know most probably read post 109 but I can't emphasize this part enough. You are unlikely to be targeted if you are carrying yourself in a confident and observant manner anyways but if you are targeted and give any indication that the playing field is level or tipped in your favor, the perp is going to go elsewhere. This is important since some have restricted LTC's and don't want to break the rules, some work in GFZ's, travel to states where they cant CC or, what is probably the majority of us, can legally carry 24/7 but (admit it) often don't. I strongly advise having a gun but if for some reason you dont and shit goes south, indicate that you have one. Putting one hand in your pocket as you approach a "threat" pretty much screams "gun" to the perp. I'm sure I will piss of some of the overly tactical firearms instructors who say "thats a good way to start a gun fight where you don't have a gun" but the world does not work like that. If the robber has a gun, he is going to be indicating that to you long before you have to start any other tactic.

They might be dumb but they know street body language. Transferring a large item (ie grocery bag) to a different hand screams "I see you and I'm getting ready to fight". Even just talking to the person at a distance can back them off because they are immediately thrust from their perceived position of controlling the encounter. Don't ever take your eyes off somebody approaching you that you deem suspicious, pass them with as wide a berth as possible and turn your entire body to watch them if you have to.

I had a recent situation in Pacific Beach, CA just a few weeks ago. There is a boardwalk along the beach and its generally residential houses backing up to it. Its extremely dark for such a populated place and there are many dark alleys leading to the houses/between the houses, etc. It was about 1130P when I stepped out of my hotel to take a walk down the boardwalk. I was wearing workout clothes and the gun accompanying me on that trip was a Glock 23 so of course it stayed at the hotel. All I had was one of those benchmade rescue knives with the blade, hook and center punch. About halfway down the board walk, I see a guy who seems to have strategically placed himself in one of the very dark shadows, I barely caught his presence from about 50' out. I unclipped the knife from my pocket and held it in my hand such that the little center punch end was sticking out. It could do more damage quick than my bare hands if it came to that. Don't know if he saw me do that.

I'm the only soul on the boardwalk for a good long distance and he is on the "inland" side against a dark row of bushes behind a house. There is a trash barrel right on the seawall directly opposite (10' or so) his position. With NOBODY else anywhere in sight, he waits until I get within about 10' of him to step out in front of me and pretend to throw something in the trash barrel. He times it so he is walking from barrel toward alley just as I would be passing his position. I'm highly suspicious and I even get a little shot of adrenaline, who would step right into somebodies path intentionally when its clear there is nobody for 1/4 mile in either direction? I slowed down as he crossed back in front of me and said "how are you Sir" in a forceful voice, as I got even with him, I started to turn my entire body such that I was square with him. It was awkward for me but I could tell he was even more surprised. He mumbled a bit and kept walking straight down the alleyway. At that point, I'm sure he saw that there was something in my right hand and both of my hands were already in "casual" positions someplace above my waist.

Moral of the story, not everything that is said about avoidance is wrong or anti bullshit. I have no doubt if I had carried myself in a different way, Id have had something bad happen to me that night. I much prefer and highly recommend a good firearm, dont get me wrong but it goes to show that probably 80% of this can be "stopped" without one. No way the guy saw my knife from that far away and I dont even know if he knew what it was when we were within 5' of eachother but he did see me REACT to HIS presence way back, he did see that I acknowledged him before he could me (with a polite greeting no less), as he tried to move past me he saw that I nearly stopped and faced him directly as if waiting for a response to my greeting and he definitely saw at that point that the "something" I reached for back there was now in my right hand. One action probably won't save you from the most determined. I'm convinced this guy was pretty determined to get something over on me that night.

1) I don't look "tough" but I'm in shape
2) I walk confidently and w/head on swivel
3) I reached for and made immediately available to me a weapon

1-3 did not do it for this guy, I'm convinced he had intentions of pulling something until I verbally spoke to him first then turned and started directly into his face as if waiting for a response as he tried to get back behind me. Coming out to "throw something away" was his final way of sizing me up and seeing how I was going to react to him being nearby. Had I dawdled along texting, not paying attention, not looked at him, not said anything, he would have got his way fast. It was not until the TOTALITY of the situation from my early indications that I might have had a weapon to my body language and final posture that he decided I was not a good target. This guy is probably in the "more persistent" category of street robber because most can be deterred a bit easier.

The other key that none of us have mentioned yet is to always shield your draw side and keep the potential aggressor(s) to your other side. But all this advice is correct.

 

[jefftk]

Everyone should call their local FBI office and get a copy of Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted. When it first came out it was ground breaking because it demonstrated to academics and other elites what street police knew all along. What did it show in interviews with cop killers? Nice guys finish dead. That's right. Most of those offenders commented that the Officer they killed set himself up to be killed because of reluctance to use force early in the encounter.
..................
If a guy is coming at you with a gun in his hand shoot him. Shoot him right then. If you don't shoot first you may not shoot at all. I have known more than one person who was shot and received life changing injuries and also shot their attacker. Their only regret was not shooting sooner. Like Bill Jordan said "Nothing disturbs your enemy's aim like a slug delivered to the belt buckle area".

This is exactly what I was thinking of, with regards to the following perspective:

I really dont understand this whole idea that its possible that if you dont brandish a firearm you could be killed. If you're worried about being killed then pull the gun. If you're not worried about getting killed, why make the argument that you're going to be killed? I dont get it.

The way I see it, its not necessarily about whether or not do "brandish", or display, a gun. Its about properly (quickly) responding to, and acting on, your fear and intuition in the situation. Its not that "not brandishing" could get you killed/injured - inaction could get you killed/injured. Many people's intuition tells them that a display of force will put an end to such an encounter - and many reports and research on the subject uphold that belief. Suppressing what you think is best to do will likely result in delayed action. Its suppressing your intuition, thinking about what the jury will think of your story, and delaying action that could get you hurt - not necessarily the specifics of what that action is. Thats just my marginally informed and unexperienced opinion on the subject....


Also, here is another perspective about that arfcom post
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...61-summit-2012-instructors-2.html#post2346296

--Southnarc gave his Managing Unknown Contacts module, as he has at previous Summits. I have done this class four times now, including during the ECQC course, and always find it useful. If George Zimmerman had taken this class there’s a pretty good chance we would never have heard of him.

I was curious to speak with Craig about that post at the ar15.com site, “Street Robberies and You,” that we discussed on the api list. (http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/128...cs.html&page=1)
The writer recommended giving a physical indication that you are carrying a weapon when you go to Orange. Craig strongly disagrees. He feels that you don’t want anyone to know that you are carrying, or where you are carrying, until you’re in Red. He notes that when he teaches his MUC course, a lot of students reflexively blade their body and lower their shooting hand as if to reach for or guard their weapon. He feels it’s one thing for a police officer to do this—his adversary knows he has a weapon and where it is—but another thing for you to do so when carrying concealed, and particularly a problem if you’re doing it unconsciously. By lowering one hand, you’re dropping half of your “fence” and improving your adversary’s chances of dropping you with a blow to the head. If your adversary has a partner somewhere behind you, as is often the case, you’re also providing him with information that may influence how the confrontation proceeds. I wish I’d gotten a chance to discuss this further with Craig as I’m still of two minds about it; maybe it just depends on the situation.

The ar15.com article suggested saying, “I don’t have a gun” while reaching for it, because that’s supposed to psych out your UC. Craig thinks that’s a little too cute, as it’s a mistake to try to come off as “street” when you’re not street. Your UC will pick up on that and take it as a sign of weakness. The same with using profanity; Craig says that properly employed it can be useful when addressing VCAs, but if you’re not accustomed to using it don’t try it out at that time. It won’t come off well. The same with employing police jargon; if it isn’t really you, don’t bother.

 

[BrianK]

I am not sure if you are a lawyer, and may have the best of intentions, but I think you missed the part about brandishing not being a law here in Mass....

No but assault is.

Having said which, I think the OP's brother acted entirely appropriately.

 

[jason6]

BINGO!!!

jason6, I got tired of reading your collegial legal ramblings by pg 7 or so and, while you seem well intentioned and intelligent, you are soaking wet here.

I can't stand the "if you are gonna bring the gun into the mix, you'd better shoot to kill" mindset. It is flawed at best and does not take into account the continuum of circumstances anybody could face in public. Do the police who's existence is sanctioned by courts and all levels of gov't train as if its a binary "shoot to kill" or "don't touch/mention gun"? OF COURSE NOT!!! To do so would be crazy and I think the vast majority of the public would say the same thing given the context that the person with a gun is a LEO. Why turn a potential robbery into a "killing" when showing the gun is enough?

Good grief..... I never said once you have to shoot to kill if you pull your gun, not ever (I think that would be terrible advice). That was not the point at all!! My point was that before you BRANDISH your gun, it would be intelligent to make sure it's lawful to use said gun. That's the key here, as i see it. Brandishing is not using the gun to protect your life, i keep saying that over and over and over, its using the gun to threaten the other party. Its a common theme i think that some people that disagree with me are even saying. If you bring your gun to the mix you should be ready to use it. Thats it! Thats what i'm saying. If you wouldn't be in the right to use the gun, don't threaten to use it on the other person.

And this whole duty to retreat thing is pretty straight forward. If you can get away without exposing yourself to more harm you should do it. Honestly it seems like common sense to me. But whatever, i think some people are making it out to be more than it is.... And yea i would be worried about them proving it. Cameras are everywhere these days. If I were to stand my ground in MA and kill someone, and someone's camera in front of their business caught the whole thing, i'd be extremely worried of my child growing up without a father. Not only that but there's a fair chance the BG's family would probably be living in the house i paid for and my family would be living in an apt. I don't agree with the laws in MA at all. Just seems that if i could try to get away first - while not exposing myself to further harm- i'd just try to do it the best i could, while probably erring on the side of caution.

I've never even thought about displaying a gun to ANYBODY in civilian life but I'd do it to avoid something I thought was becoming a true threat and have no regrets whatsoever. How often do you hear about somebody getting arrested for these kinds of things? I cant find any stories online right now. I will note Ive been involved in casual conversations with many city cops in MA who talk about incidents they deal with and routinely say "the guy [would be victim] pulled a gun and he [bad guy] took off". Me being interested in this stuff, I always ask "and what became of it". The answer I always got: nothing, we never brought it up or we told our LT and he did not give a F and rarely, DA's office did not give an F and broomed it. I would not expect that result but IT HAPPENS.

My point was never to say if you brandish your gun the police will swoop in with helicopters and a swat team to arrest you..... I'm sure just brandishing the gun will never go reported by the BG and noone will the the wiser. But what i AM saying is if you end up shooting that BG dead and he's laying in a pool of his own blood, dead, how you acted might become a larger issue.....

Even turning around and asking somebody "whats up?" or "can I help you?" in a stern voice is not considered offensive nor is it, as jason6 says, likely to be construed as "starting something".

What????? I've been saying to address them verbally since the very first thread i posted!!!! When did i say that speaking to them would be construed as "starting something"???????

Perhaps indicate verbally to them that i feel threatened, "hey guys i dont want any trouble, please don't follow us" or whatever, before beating feat.

Verbally communicating with them would still give you a good idea of their intentions without beating feet.

We have something in common because ive been tired of posting since page 7. If you've noticed i've pretty much been saying the same thing over and over again. Trying to make my point clear because lots of replies are taking what i'm trying to say out of context. I dont enjoy bickering with people on the internet. I'd be happy to agree to disagree, maybe its my fault too for not making my argument more clear, but i want my point to be correctly understood/stated. I think this is real important shit to know whether you agree with me or not, think i'm an idiot, or whatever.

 

[rommel]

UI think part of the responsiblity of carrying a gun is knowing the consequences of your actions with it. That being said I have come to the understanding that I would much rather regret something I did vs something I did not do. If I had to spend time in jail along with every penny that I am worth, then I would be happy each one of those days knowing I potentially saved my wifes life. I would not have one good day of life if I did nothing and something bad happened to someone I love. Hell ****ung yes I am brandishing and I will never regret it.

 

[jefftk]

Brandishing is not using the gun to protect your life, i keep saying that over and over and over, its using the gun to threaten the other party. Its a common theme i think that some people that disagree with me are even saying.

I think the disagreement is that those two points are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Yes, showing a gun is a threat - or perhaps a "counter-threat" - which often causes criminals to abort their plans. Evidence shows that this method has clearly resulted in many situations from developing further. I guess whether or not the persons life was actually saved is dependent on what the criminals plan was in the first place. Its speculation. I think arguing that a display of force such as "brandishing" won't save someones life is as relevant as arguing that having a gun wouldn't have helped someone in a situation where they got mugged/assaulted etc.

 

[Billsail]

I think the disagreement is that those two points are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Yes, showing a gun is a threat - or perhaps a "counter-threat" - which often causes criminals to abort their plans. Evidence shows that this method has clearly resulted in many situations from developing further. I guess whether or not the persons life was actually saved is dependent on what the criminals plan was in the first place. Its speculation. I think arguing that a display of force such as "brandishing" won't save someones life is as relevant as arguing that having a gun wouldn't have helped someone in a situation where they got mugged/assaulted etc.

Exactly! Brandishing can diffuse a situation, before "drawing down" on an attacker becomes a necessity.

 

[jason6]

I think the disagreement is that those two points are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Yes, showing a gun is a threat - or perhaps a "counter-threat" - which often causes criminals to abort their plans. Evidence shows that this method has clearly resulted in many situations from developing further. I guess whether or not the persons life was actually saved is dependent on what the criminals plan was in the first place. Its speculation. I think arguing that a display of force such as "brandishing" won't save someones life is as relevant as arguing that having a gun wouldn't have helped someone in a situation where they got mugged/assaulted etc.

They're not mutually exclusive.

If someone came at me with a knife and i brandished my gun, and he ran away, then it could very well of saved my life. In my opinion however, i dont think brandishing the firearm was the right choice, i think i would have pulled the firearm and been ready to use it. However it cannot be overlooked that in this scenario there was an obvious threat that warranted getting pulled on, so brandishing would be appropriate if thats your choice. Thats my thinking. In scenerios that threaten my life i'd pull the gun. In scenerio's that dont threaten my life i wouldn't brandish my gun and claim it saved my life.

Thast what i'm trying to say. The evidence is the persons own actions. IMO by brandishing the gun instead of pulling it i'm assuming the person wasn't afraid for their life. The way i phrased it was with the assumption that people here are more likely to brandish the gun before their life is threatened rather than brandish it in a situation that warranted pulled the gun on the BG, if that makes sense. It certainly doesnt sound like people are advocating delaying pulling the weapon and brandishing it instead, so i was going with the common theme.

EDIT: Even if youre dead set on brandishing even a little bit of compliance with the laws we have would go a long way. Like crossing the street and seeing if they follow before you brandish.... Jogging down the street and seeing if they run after you before you brandish..... Speaking to the potential BG and letting him now youre not happy with what he's doing before you brandish.... it just seems in this case the OP went straight to brandishing and bypassed everything else.

 

[Duece]

I love watching people twist in the breeze

 

[Matt E]

Good grief..... I never said once you have to shoot to kill if you pull your gun, not ever (I think that would be terrible advice). That was not the point at all!! My point was that before you BRANDISH your gun, it would be intelligent to make sure it's lawful to use said gun. That's the key here, as i see it. Brandishing is not using the gun to protect your life, i keep saying that over and over and over, its using the gun to threaten the other party. Its a common theme i think that some people that disagree with me are even saying. If you bring your gun to the mix you should be ready to use it. Thats it! Thats what i'm saying. If you wouldn't be in the right to use the gun, don't threaten to use it on the other person.

And this whole duty to retreat thing is pretty straight forward. If you can get away without exposing yourself to more harm you should do it. Honestly it seems like common sense to me. But whatever, i think some people are making it out to be more than it is.... And yea i would be worried about them proving it. Cameras are everywhere these days. If I were to stand my ground in MA and kill someone, and someone's camera in front of their business caught the whole thing, i'd be extremely worried of my child growing up without a father. Not only that but there's a fair chance the BG's family would probably be living in the house i paid for and my family would be living in an apt. I don't agree with the laws in MA at all. Just seems that if i could try to get away first - while not exposing myself to further harm- i'd just try to do it the best i could, while probably erring on the side of caution.



My point was never to say if you brandish your gun the police will swoop in with helicopters and a swat team to arrest you..... I'm sure just brandishing the gun will never go reported by the BG and noone will the the wiser. But what i AM saying is if you end up shooting that BG dead and he's laying in a pool of his own blood, dead, how you acted might become a larger issue.....




What????? I've been saying to address them verbally since the very first thread i posted!!!! When did i say that speaking to them would be construed as "starting something"???????







We have something in common because ive been tired of posting since page 7. If you've noticed i've pretty much been saying the same thing over and over again. Trying to make my point clear because lots of replies are taking what i'm trying to say out of context. I dont enjoy bickering with people on the internet. I'd be happy to agree to disagree, maybe its my fault too for not making my argument more clear, but i want my point to be correctly understood/stated. I think this is real important shit to know whether you agree with me or not, think i'm an idiot, or whatever.

They're not mutually exclusive.

If someone came at me with a knife and i brandished my gun, and he ran away, then it could very well of saved my life. In my opinion however, i dont think brandishing the firearm was the right choice, i think i would have pulled the firearm and been ready to use it. However it cannot be overlooked that in this scenario there was an obvious threat that warranted getting pulled on, so brandishing would be appropriate if thats your choice. Thats my thinking. In scenerios that threaten my life i'd pull the gun. In scenerio's that dont threaten my life i wouldn't brandish my gun and claim it saved my life.

Thast what i'm trying to say. The evidence is the persons own actions. IMO by brandishing the gun instead of pulling it i'm assuming the person wasn't afraid for their life. The way i phrased it was with the assumption that people here are more likely to brandish the gun before their life is threatened rather than brandish it in a situation that warranted pulled the gun on the BG, if that makes sense. It certainly doesnt sound like people are advocating delaying pulling the weapon and brandishing it instead, so i was going with the common theme.

EDIT: Even if youre dead set on brandishing even a little bit of compliance with the laws we have would go a long way. Like crossing the street and seeing if they follow before you brandish.... Jogging down the street and seeing if they run after you before you brandish..... Speaking to the potential BG and letting him now youre not happy with what he's doing before you brandish.... it just seems in this case the OP went straight to brandishing and bypassed everything else.

Seriously WTF is wrong with you? You're worried about the law more than your well being? Someones coming at you with a knife and it's not appropriate to utilize your tools? Are you retarded? I hear Patrick, Coakley, and obama don't want you having guns, why don't you go turn them in. Then again why do you even have them? If someone is coming at you with a weapon you don't feel it's justified to use a counter measure? Why don't you get a whistle or piss yourself so you won't be escalating the situation. If you carry it you must be prepared to deal with the consequences of it. Ultimately you may need an Atty to defend you in court (potentially) or you could at best end up in the hospital, have your gun used against you, or worst end up dead. There's a reason I keep my criminal defense lawyers number in my phone and his card in my wallet. If anything happens you seek MEDICAL ATTENTION BEFORE YOU SPEAK WITH ANYONE!!! Then you ask for a lawyer if there is questionable circumstances. As I said before I have had my hand on the backstrap or drawn 3x and guess what I have been fine all 3x. Now if I didn't with the guy following me for 3 streets at 3a, or the guys carrying bats and pipes I'm sure I would not have gone home fine with nothing more then some adrenaline. Go suck some more liberal *******.

 

[Randy Lahey]

Running away and the BG chasing you makes it really obvious to anyone there was a direct and obvious threat. And keep in mind the law says you have to flee. You can't say, "sorry officer i cant flee because my wife is wearing high heels" or "i'm too fat" or whatever. The law says you have to try, the law doesnt say you have to run faster and get away, but you do have to try. So why brandish a gun before fleeing? If you have to flee anyways, why do it? To save yourself from getting winded? To save the wifes high heels? If they chase after you, gain on you, to where you feel you have no other choice, turn and pull.
QUOTE]

Don't forget to yell "Do whatever you want to the girl just don't hurt me!"

 

[jason6]

Someones coming at you with a knife and it's not appropriate to utilize your tools? Are you retarded?

If someone came at me with a knife and i brandished my gun, and he ran away, then it could very well of saved my life. In my opinion however, i dont think brandishing the firearm was the right choice, i think i would have pulled the firearm and been ready to use it. However it cannot be overlooked that in this scenario there was an obvious threat that warranted getting pulled on, so brandishing would be appropriate if thats your choice.

I'm going to go slam my head in the door.....

 

[Matt E]

.

 

[Duece]

If the door is threatening, you might try running away

I'm going to go slam my head in the door.....

Seriously though Jason, you've been twisting your panties in a knot trying to defend what is essentially an indefensible position.

 

[Matt E]

I'm going to go slam my head in the door.....

Maybe it will help. You are the one who are referring to a ready to draw position as brandishing. This is preparing to draw in the even it is needed. By not drawing when it is not needed you did not escalate to drawing down on someone. Make sense?

So you would rather draw down on everyone is a better option here? Sounds like you are advocating the exact law violations you are looking to avoid. Just by saying conflicting things will not make it right.

 

[DemonChronicles]

Note to self: Don't ever let this guy date my sister...

I think this is a pretty bad idea.

On the surface, nowhere in this country is it legal to brandish a firearm to someone for saying "lets do it". Saying "lets do it" is not a crime. Then factor in we're in MA where you have a duty to retreat. Its just a bad idea.

People see brandishing for what it is- a macho challenge. "see what i got? you really want to mess with me?". Thats what it is. If you have to shoot someone and get to court you're going to look like an aggressive *******, that contributed to the problem. Forget possible criminal charges, you'll go broke just defending yourself from wrongful death- win or lose.

Me, i'd beat feet. Perhaps indicate verbally to them that i feel threatened, "hey guys i dont want any trouble, please don't follow us" or whatever, before beating feat. I know it's not macho and cool, but that's the right thing to do. If said BG's ignore you or threaten you, and beat feet after you then i'd feel pretty comfortable (legally a morally) pulling on them if i had to. Later in a civil court (and perhaps criminal) i could explain that i did everything i could possibly do to diffuse and avoid the situation.

Look at it from a different perspective even- what if its a misunderstanding? What if they were talking about something else and had a legitimate (lawful) reason to turn around and walk the same direction as said person? All they said was "lets do it". If the person you misunderstood is a fellow CCW'r he'd be within his legal rights to draw on you, then you draw, and its a shootout that you unlawfully started. Youre looking at mucho jail time and probably going broke too.

I mean seriously, if all they say is "lets do it", even if those guys are planning on raping and killing both of you, if you avoid criminal charges, BG's family is still going to sue you for wrongful death and say he was a good kid that forgot his contact lens solution, or something, that they were turning around to go back to the store and get it when some stranger pulled a gun on them for no reason...

I just think brandishing is always a bad idea, especially in Mass.... If you're carrying the trump card, dont play it in the middle of the hand. If you show someone you're carrying, let them be looking down the barrel- hold 'em or fold 'em, game over.

 

[jason6]

If the door is threatening, you might try running away



Seriously though Jason, you've been twisting your panties in a knot trying to defend what is essentially an indefensible position.

It's not really my position. The great state of Massachusetts, in its infinite wisdom, made these laws, not me. I think some of the reasoning why not to follow them is a little silly but whatever..... It is what it is. These are the issues you and I will have to answer to if are number gets called. It doesnt matter what i think, it'll matter what a jury/judge thinks and they'll be judging you on the same criteria. And its not quite as simple as saying, i'd rather by tried by 8 than be carried by 6, so i'll do what i want....

BUt yea i do think jumping straight to brandishing and not doing anything else at all, is ripe for misunderstanding and causing problems for everyone in the long run.

(Youre joke my me lol too. +1 for Deuce.)

CJA- Youre not missing much by not reading all my posts because they say mainly the same thing. But what you did miss is me saying that if you avoid shooting someone then whatever, the swat team is going to come flying in one a helicopter. But what if it doesnt avoid the shooting and you DO shoot? Then maybe breaking a rule here or there is really going to hurt you. Thats what im saying. Position yourself for the ever unlikely scenario of actually having no choice but to shoot someone. I dont think a gun is a tool to scare people away. A gun is a tool to kill people when carried. If you use the gun as a tool to scare people, IMO you compromise its real purpose of taking someone elses life to save your own....

 

[jason6]

Maybe it will help. You are the one who are referring to a ready to draw position as brandishing. This is preparing to draw in the even it is needed. By not drawing when it is not needed you did not escalate to drawing down on someone. Make sense?

So you would rather draw down on everyone is a better option here? Sounds like you are advocating the exact law violations you are looking to avoid. Just by saying conflicting things will not make it right.

What? youre playing semantics now. The OP was not "getting ready to draw"... and like i said, brandishing a gun then i dont think would be a good idea.... "getting ready to draw" if people are coming at you with a knife is a very good idea, i assume you have to get ready to draw before you do draw so..... and yes drawing is also a very good idea. The threat is obvious, i'm not going to wait until they start running at me with the knife. A course i took at S&W taught that you always draw on a BG brandishing a knife. They talked about studies of how quickly a BG with a knife can cover ground and you shouldnt wait to draw... and it wouldnt be unlawful to pull a gun on someone brandishing a knife at you.

 

[.40swToFreedom]

If the defendant (used deadly force, which is force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm) (or) (used a dangerous weapon in a manner intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm), the Commonwealth must prove one of the following three things beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that the defendant did not reasonably and actually believe that he (she) was in immediate danger of great bodily harm or death; or
Second, that the defendant did not do everything reasonable in the circumstances to avoid physical combat before resorting to force; or
Third, that the defendant used more force to defend himself (herself) than was reasonably necessary in the circumstances.

A person cannot lawfully act in self-defense unless he or she has exhausted all other reasonable
alternatives before resorting to force. A person may use physical force in self-defense only if he (she) could not get out of the situation in some other way that was available and reasonable at the time. The Commonwealth may prove the defendant did not act in self-defense by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant resorted to force without using avenues of escape that were reasonably available and which would not have exposed the defendant to further danger.

http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsan...s/criminal/pdf/9260-defenses-self-defense.pdf

I'm not saying i love the laws in MA at all. But they are what they are. I would not consider brandishing a weapon as your first move as, doing "everything reasonable in the circumstances to avoid physical combat before resorting to force".

And i would think that if you dont bother running for xyz reason the law in MA will pork you. Like i said before, i think the case could be made that brandishing the weapon instead of pulling it is proof in of itself that you weren't in such a threatening situation that you could not retreat.

I just think brandishing in general is a bad idea. Especially in MA.

In reference to this post and a few others- the OP's brother did not 1) use deadly force in self defense or 2) "use a dangerous weapon in a manner intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm", so defending himself in court is moot. He did not brandish in my opinion. He lifted his shirt and tucked it behind his gun. He did not put his hand on it or draw (as the story was told to us). What law did he break in MA? Sounds like he went from concealed to open carry as he continued to walk away and reassess any perceived threat.

On another note is this even real? No one goes into Boston for a date night in Chinatown.

 

[Matt E]

What? youre playing semantics now. The OP was not "getting ready to draw"... and like i said, brandishing a gun then i dont think would be a good idea.... "getting ready to draw" if people are coming at you with a knife is a very good idea, i assume you have to get ready to draw before you do draw so..... and yes drawing is also a very good idea. The threat is obvious, i'm not going to wait until they start running at me with the knife. A course i took at S&W taught that you always draw on a BG brandishing a knife. They talked about studies of how quickly a BG with a knife can cover ground and you shouldnt wait to draw... and it wouldnt be unlawful to pull a gun on someone brandishing a knife at you.

It took a class to tell you to draw on someone with a knife? As I have said before you keep them to your non draw side and prepare. If they are within 30-40' you damn well better be drawing or getting ready to draw. It's not semantics, as his brother didn't hold it up waiving it around and chasing them with it. Regardless of how he conducted himself, he conducted himself in a manner that let them know that (even with 4 of them) that he was in control and had the ability and means to stay in control. He did not draw or do anything else to escalate the situation. So with that being said I don't consider "beating feet" as a responsible way to fulfill your duty to retreat. Especially in a dark alley you need to retreat cautiously, since you do not know who else may be around. You can effectively take a step back here or there and and staying fully aware of your surroundings. That to me would be fulfilling your duty to retreat.

Hell I caught a guy in my backyard in the middle of the night. I gave chase but ended up losing him. It turns out there was a stolen car dumped next in my next door neighbors driveway. When I was talking to the cops they asked why I didn't call them. My exact response was because I do not need them to protect my family or myself and at no point was I in fear. The state has conditioned you to question yourself and your actions. Yes I was carrying and would do it again. The one time I had a gun pulled on me by a tenant the PD would not respond. From that point forward I was determined to not have to rely on anyone else for my safety and well being, and questioning if I should brandish (as you call it), backstrap it, or draw out of fear of law is the last thing on my mind.

 

[atilla]

words

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Matt E again.

thought you should know i'm thinkin' 'bout 'ya.

 

[jason6]

This is preparing to draw in the even it is needed. By not drawing when it is not needed you did not escalate to drawing down on someone. Make sense?

So you would rather draw down on everyone is a better option here? Sounds like you are advocating the exact law violations you are looking to avoid. Just by saying conflicting things will not make it right.

I thought you were advocating not drawing until you were ready to fire. I was responding to what i thought was your assertion about "not drawing" on people with knives when a gun is "not needed" and "not escalating" things..... Maybe i didnt read it right... the triple negative is sort of confusing....

and like i've said, i'm not advocating putting yourself into more danger by "beating feet". The law doesnt require that either.....

"The Commonwealth may prove the defendant did not act in self-defense by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant resorted to force without using avenues of escape that were reasonably available and which would not have exposed the defendant to further danger."

 

[Snowboarder2012]

Of course it could become a legal issue, see Zimmerman right now, when you boil it down we actually have a not too dis similar hypothetical case on our hands here in this thread. Who starts what? Who provoked what, etc. I don't deny your legal reasoning that it could go south and you could end up needing to defend yourself. Its a calculated risk, a game of odds if you will. You are walking down the street and you feel an individual or group is about to attack you based on sound observations and reasoning, not paranoia. If you are watching for the right things, NOBODY can get the drop on you without telegraphing their intentions multiple times. What do you do? Personally, the first thing I do is indicate I have a weapon without showing it. Thats very sound advice from that detective quoted in post 109 and Ive been trained by multiple people to react that way. I can be simultaneously crossing the street, turning down another road, stepping into a safe place, etc. You are still retreating. Lifting your shirt as you retreat to display a gun is probably going to be seen by any witness or camera as "retreating". A camera is a quick snapshot as you walk by, the thug has been eyeing for longer than the range of the camera. They will tell you their intentions subtly, you get the hell away and let them know you intend to fight if approached as you do.

Gun as a tool to scare is not always bad, its one of the best ways to use it. I always refer people to this article from our own backyard, great read:

? View topic - Near miss: the Andrew Patti incident

We live in a very remote part of our town surrounded by woods with 2 neighbors within 200 yards of us. Last year one of those neighbors, an elderly woman was robbed while she was out only to have the junkie scumbags getaway car parked in our driveway. I have a S&W 9c strapped to my side always! Be it outside or in, all the time. I refuse to be a victim and I will protect my wife, kids and myself by all means necessary, period!

+1 Great point and great read. Thanks for sharing this link.

 

[Matt E]

I thought you were advocating not drawing until you were ready to fire. I was responding to what i thought was your assertion about "not drawing" on people with knives when a gun is "not needed" and "not escalating" things..... Maybe i didnt read it right... the triple negative is sort of confusing....

and like i've said, i'm not advocating putting yourself into more danger by "beating feet". The law doesnt require that either.....

"The Commonwealth may prove the defendant did not act in self-defense by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant resorted to force without using avenues of escape that were reasonably available and which would not have exposed the defendant to further danger."

I've said that if you're drawing (or anything for that matter, even ccw) then you damn well be ready to use it.

If someone has a knife you damn well better be drawing and have them targeted in before they are within 15' or so to ensure that in the event you have to fire they still are not getting the chance to get within reach.

As for your quote.... "The commonwealth MUST prove the defendant." Have you heard about the reasonable man theory that all lawyers are taught in law school? Same thing applies for a jury, (would a reasonable man...). If a defense attorney can show that you had reason to suspect that there may be other perps to the rear (where the others came from) or turning your back to the perps you have used reasonable retreat, and limited further danger. The part that really kills me here is you are splitting apart the law. If you're really in a position with your significant other and you have four seedy perps making their intentions clear then as far as I am concerned you do what you feel is necessary to remove yourself from the situation safely. If that means "brandishing", backstraping, drawing, and hell throwing a dot on a perp then so be it. Who the **** are those on capitol hill to tell you if you can make it home safe that night. Do what is necessary and if you get bound up seek medical attention to remove yourself from the situation and to keep the cops from questioning you and immediately after your medical care, and you have had a chance to clear your head a bit you seek out council. Clear enough?

 

[Duece]

"a reasonable man acting prudently"

 

[jason6]

Have you heard about the reasonable man theory that all lawyers are taught in law school? Same thing applies for a jury, (would a reasonable man...).

"The Commonwealth may prove the defendant did not act in self-defense by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant resorted to force without using avenues of escape that were reasonably available and which would not have exposed the defendant to further danger."

Thats pretty much what youre saying... avenues of escape that are reasonably available.

In the context of the OP's post though it doesnt sound like he tried or considered doing anything but brandishing his firearm at them.

wisper loudly to another something like "F'it lets do it" and they all turned around and started to follow my brother and his wife but almost instantly my brother lifted up the back of his shirt to clearly show his Glock 22

 

[Matt E]

"The Commonwealth may prove the defendant did not act in self-defense by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant resorted to force without using avenues of escape that were reasonably available and which would not have exposed the defendant to further danger."

Thats pretty much what youre saying... avenues of escape that are reasonably available.

In the context of the OP's post though it doesnt sound like he tried or considered doing anything but brandishing his firearm at them.

He was tied down with a female at his side. Do you want a book on this to determine if he followed the letter of the law exactly? Who gives a flying fvck? They made it home. The intended assault was thwarted end of story. It's good to know you look for Beacon hill approval before deciding how a third party should defend himself. Are you politician?

 

[Deleted member 12999]

Would it have been ok for him to look left and right after they took off?





wat wus thread count on bad guys shirts?

I am actually really combat hard after watching that video

 

[MisterHappy]

If you have an LTC-A without restrictions, you're an adult.

Make your own decision.

Should you think about possible "scenarios" prior to strapping on your gat? Yes.

But you do what you think is best.

It starts with whether to carry, or not.....

 

[bigtig50]

Note to self: Don't ever let this guy date my sister...