concealed carrier intervenes at lunchtime

[Tanis143]

lol You beat me to it druryj.

 

[TerryMiller]

21 O.S. 1289.25 (J)

J. A person pointing a weapon at a perpetrator in self-defense or in order to thwart, stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony shall not be deemed guilty of committing a criminal act.​

Also:
21 O.S. 1289.25:

D. A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

...

F. A person who uses defensive force, as permitted pursuant to the provisions of subsections A, B, D and E of this section, is justified in using such defensive force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such defensive force. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes charging or prosecuting the defendant.

...

K. As used in this section:

1. "Defensive force" includes, but shall not be limited to, pointing a weapon at a perpetrator in self-defense or in order to thwart, stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony;​

(J), as well as the combined (D), (F), and (K)(1) make it pretty clear that you can draw to stop the felony without shooting and not break any laws. Section (J) went into effect 1 Nov 2017, and there were some clarifications that went into effect 1 Nov 2018 (about two weeks ago, for those playing at home).

http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=69782

Meanwhile, shooting when the threat has ceased to be a threat is called "murder," as Jerome Ersland can attest. Granted, that one was particularly egregious, but no, you do not have to shoot just because you drew, nor should you if the threat has been mitigated.

With regards to this part:

"stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony shall not be deemed guilty of committing a criminal act."

When confronted with such a situation as this lady was, how does the "good Samaritan" determine whether they were detering aa forcible felony or an attempted one? In other words, if the guy was just waving the firearm around and not pointing it at anyone, was he actually committing a felony? The law as Dave quoted doesn't say one can deter a forcible misdemeanor.

 

[flashover008]

They say don't pull it if your not going to use

 

[Dave70968]

With regards to this part:

"stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony shall not be deemed guilty of committing a criminal act."

When confronted with such a situation as this lady was, how does the "good Samaritan" determine whether they were detering aa forcible felony or an attempted one? In other words, if the guy was just waving the firearm around and not pointing it at anyone, was he actually committing a felony? The law as Dave quoted doesn't say one can deter a forcible misdemeanor.

If it went to trial, it would be up to the jury to decide, based upon what the "reasonable man" would have felt. Personally, I would have felt a felony, found in the combination of 21 O.S. 641 and 645.

641:

An assault is any willful and unlawful attempt or offer with force or violence to do a corporal hurt to another.​

645:

Every person who, with intent to do bodily harm and without justifiable or excusable cause, commits any assault, battery, or assault and battery upon the person of another with any sharp or dangerous weapon, or who, without such cause, shoots at another, with any kind of firearm, air gun, conductive energy weapon or other means whatever, with intent to injure any person, although without the intent to kill such person or to commit any felony, upon conviction is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the State Penitentiary not exceeding ten (10) years, or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one (1) year.​

Agitated and waving a weapon says "threat" to me, meeting the definition of assault (sometimes put as "reasonably in fear of imminent bodily harm"); the gun automatically takes it up into the felony category.

They say don't pull it if your not going to use

I've heard it as "...if you're not prepared (or willing) to use it," which I find to be a much better phrasing--it doesn't foreclose options.

 

[chuter]

A gun lawyer who used to speak at CC classes at H&H would say "the rule is: if you touch your gun, somebody dies", using the same logic mentioned earlier in this thread.
He said you don't pull your gun unless you're in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death, so if you pull it and don't shoot, you shouldn't have pulled it anyway.

That was before the change to the law.

 

[JD8]

A gun lawyer who used to speak at CC classes at H&H would say "the rule is: if you touch your gun, somebody dies", using the same logic mentioned earlier in this thread.
He said you don't pull your gun unless you're in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death, so if you pull it and don't shoot, you shouldn't have pulled it anyway.

That was before the change to the law.

For him to speak of absolutes in those situations is dangerous and stupid IMO. People just need to be aware of the situation and surroundings. Don't casually use your weapon as a talisman to ward away evil (as an old OSA member would say) and don't automatically kill someone just because you've drawn your weapon.

 

[Dave70968]

A gun lawyer who used to speak at CC classes at H&H would say "the rule is: if you touch your gun, somebody dies", using the same logic mentioned earlier in this thread.
He said you don't pull your gun unless you're in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death, so if you pull it and don't shoot, you shouldn't have pulled it anyway.

That was before the change to the law.

Yes, I remember Doug well. He said that to emphasize the seriousness of drawing, not as an absolute mandate that somebody has to die. Also, as you note, it was before the change in the statutes that clarified the matter.

For him to speak of absolutes in those situations is dangerous and stupid IMO. People just need to be aware of the situation and surrounding. Don't casually use your weapon as a talisman to ward away evil (as an old OSA member would say) and don't automatically kill someone just because you've drawn your weapon.

What he said, word for word.

 

[chuter]

Yes, I remember Doug well. He said that to emphasize the seriousness of drawing, not as an absolute mandate that somebody has to die. Also, as you note, it was before the change in the statutes that clarified the matter.

In one class a woman asked if it would be ok to shoot at someone who was trying to run you over with their car; Doug said "what are you carrying, a shoulder fired missile? This isn't the movies, if a car is coming at you get out of the way!"

Good stuff in those classes; there's some people I worry about carrying guns.

 

[CHenry]

LOL
Lot of armchair quarterbacking going on here.
I say she did absolutely right based on the outcome. No one died and the idiot is in jail.

 

[druryj]

They say don't pull it if your not going to use

Pull what?

For him to speak of absolutes in those situations is dangerous and stupid IMO. People just need to be aware of the situation and surroundings. Don't casually use your weapon a talisman to ward away evil (as an old OSA member would say) and don't automatically kill someone just because you've drawn your weapon.

Absolutely agree 100% Spot on. I could not have said this any better.