Thoughts on this sutuation

[SMS]

...and who is attacked...

I'll just highlight that portion. Neither of the fictional scenarios involved an "attack" at the point the alleged victim introduced a firearm to the equation.

Someone walking in your direction or someone saying not-nice things in your direction is not an attack.

 

[ripnbst]

Since I have nothing better to do at the moment, I will whip it out and take part in this pissing match.

My take on this is "timing is everything". If a guy approaches me and asks for money and I say no go away and then he asks again and I say no go away and then he gets within 5 feet of me and I feel threatened so I lift my shirt to show my previously CC'ed weapon, I have just brandished my weapon. Don't even attempt to feed me the line of bull "I decided to transition to OC." Likewise in the original scenario where the vehicle doesn't stop as soon as the pedestrian might like. Revealing in the middle of a confrontation is brandishing if it is done on purpose.

If instead of taking a step back toward the pump to replace the nozzle you reach from where you are standing which reveals the gun, IE, something that could be construed as a natural motion, I think you are in a much better place legally. Purposely lifting your arm randomly so it pulls the shirt up or actually reaching down and grabbing the shirt and moving it to show the firearm is brandishing. Using your head will keep you out of trouble and effectively accomplish the same thing.

You mean to tell me you just conveniently decided to "transition" form CC to OC? Yeaaaaaaahhhhh, riiiiiiight. And Obummer supports gun rights.

Reaching for the pump which happens to pull your shirt up is something much more defensible.

Transitioning from CC to OC is something that should be done discreetly. Not something you should do while someone is staring right at you that you are having a confrontation with.

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.

Per your post, "force with force" and you are interpreting his action as force. I suppose if he moved toward you menacingly and asked you for money, you would be legally covered to move toward him menacingly and ask him for money. Might confuse him enough to diffuse the situation entirely.

 

[Sam Shoun]

I have a hard time believing that a rapist/mugger/carjacker is going to do anything but retreat once he sees that she is willing and able to shoot him if he persists.

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/95999354.html
http://www.annarbor.com/news/crime/unarmed-man-attempts-to-rob-emu-student-carrying-holstered-gun/
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police/reports/reports2006/073106robNewtonPatton.htm
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...p-dont-chase-the-guy-who-just-stole-your-gun/
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

If criminals will not attack an armed person, then cops never get in fights...right?

As far as tactics... it's not like I'm advising the use of ninja smoke here. I won't try to sell anyone on the relevance of the Tueller drill or the entire science of managing unknown contacts to these scenarios. Suit yourself. I'm just glad we're all interested in decent people being safer.

I doubt that transitioning between open and concealed carry at any time both are legal is technically illegal. I would, however, have serious concerns about how an aggressive prosecutor would use this act with a jury.

 

[bigfug]

Define non deadly force. The difference lies and a disparity of force in the conflict. Every worthwhile CCL instruct the class that man on woman, two men on one, adult on child is always an automatic disparity of force. Personally if I am Person A, and Person B was driving wildly, then responded in a road rage manner, and he was still in his truck with it running, I am clearing any obstacle that I might have in the event I need to protect myself.

But in the OP there is no disparity of force. Person B is outside of the truck, no weapon, only verbally aggressive. In the situations you mentioned there would be. I thought we were responding to the OP's situation.

 

[bigfug]

Help me out here. I don't see this language anywhere in the SDA. Please cite.

It would be in the deadly force handout, it might be CLEET's definition, I'll have to look. But those are verbatim from the material. All my posts have been in response to the original post, not any of the spinoff what if's. Every scenario is different and there is not any one right answer.

 

[gillman7]

But in the OP there is no disparity of force. Person B is outside of the truck, no weapon, only verbally aggressive. In the situations you mentioned there would be. I thought we were responding to the OP's situation.

If the truck is running, it is way too easy to get back in and run over me. They have already shown a proclivity to dangerous driving. If they open a door and aggresively move toward me after almost running me down, they are showing a desire to hurt or seriously injure me. The other examples in the thread such as a women being approached lends to the rest of my post. The whole transitioning to OC from CC is a crock. If I move my cover garment, my next move is to the grip, and readying myself for a good sight picture. No flashing to intimidate, if I feel threatened enough to show a gun, I will show them the barrel of it. Granted it will take a lot to make me pull it, but if it comes to that, I am in fear of great bodily harm, or death. Doesn't mean if I pull it I have to shoot, it does mean that if I pull it, I should be ready to shoot.

 

[Michael Brown]

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/95999354.html
http://www.annarbor.com/news/crime/unarmed-man-attempts-to-rob-emu-student-carrying-holstered-gun/
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police/reports/reports2006/073106robNewtonPatton.htm
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...p-dont-chase-the-guy-who-just-stole-your-gun/
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=086_1260862712

If criminals will not attack an armed person, then cops never get in fights...right?

As far as tactics... it's not like I'm advising the use of ninja smoke here. I won't try to sell anyone on the relevance of the Tueller drill or the entire science of managing unknown contacts to these scenarios. Suit yourself. I'm just glad we're all interested in decent people being safer.

I doubt that transitioning between open and concealed carry at any time both are legal is technically illegal. I would, however, have serious concerns about how an aggressive prosecutor would use this act with a jury.

This must be false.....

Open carry has been "proven" to be a non-issue.

Michael Brown

 

[Jam Master Jay]

The notion that exposing a previously concealed weapon constitutes deadly force is silly. So you're saying that if I'm in Walmart and my gun is concealed under my coat but I decide to take off my coat to be more comfortable, I'm all of a sudden threatening everyone with deadly force because I'm transitioning to open carry?

Here's a better scenario: What if you are already open carrying and the guy in the truck simply hadn't noticed that you were and decides to turn around when he sees your gun? There's not much difference. Either you think "transitioning to open carry" is legal and reasonable or you think it's a threatening gesture, in which case I'm guilty of threatening my family every time I come home and expose my previously concealed weapon.

Exposing a gun is legal now. Now if you put your hand on your gun like you're attempting to draw it? That's a different story.

Besides, the guy in the first scenario lost his self defense excuse when he got out of his truck to make a confrontation.

 

[Norman]

The notion that exposing a previously concealed weapon constitutes deadly force is silly. So you're saying that if I'm in Walmart and my gun is concealed under my coat but I decide to take off my coat to be more comfortable, I'm all of a sudden threatening everyone with deadly force because I'm transitioning to open carry?

Here's a better scenario: What if you are already open carrying and the guy in the truck simply hadn't noticed that you were and decides to turn around when he sees your gun? There's not much difference. Either you think "transitioning to open carry" is legal and reasonable or you think it's a threatening gesture, in which case I'm guilty of threatening my family every time I come home and expose my previously concealed weapon.

Exposing a gun is legal now. Now if you put your hand on your gun like you're attempting to draw it? That's a different story.

Besides, the guy in the first scenario lost his self defense excuse when he got out of his truck to make a confrontation.

Strawman, strawman, opinion without any legal experience.
Everything is bases on the totality of the circumstances. Shooting soup cans is fine. Shooting soup cans off a 3 year old's head is illegal. Your walmart scenario was a strawman you constructed to beat up the arguement. Were you in a verbal altercation with everyone in Wal-Mart when you took off your cover garment? No. Now stop the the strawmen. Halloween is over.

If you were in a heated verbal altercation with an LEO, and you "transitioned to open carry" you should expect to catch a few rounds. There is a distinction here, and if you are unable to see it then you don't need to be carrying a handgun.

Both men lost their claim to self defense when they started the senseless altercation.

 

[Jam Master Jay]

I'm really not trying to be a troll. I don't see any strawman. Either transitioning to open carry is a threat or it isn't. The road rage incident that the OP offered up was probably a poor illustration but there are real life scenarios where exposing a gun can prevent an attack.

If a cop shoots a guy for exposing a gun, that cop will face some serious consequences. As I said in my post, there is a difference between revealing a gun and actively grabbing for it like you're going to shoot someone. And as in my post, what if the gun wasn't concealed before but the other person simply hadn't noticed it? or what if it was accidentally revealed by a gust of wind or ordinary movement?

I'm simply trying to illustrate that someone revealing their firearm is not using deadly force like some here were saying. The only reason I'm making an issue out of this is because I can see a time where exposing a gun could prevent a crime against the carrier from ever occurring.

What about this scenario: You're in QT. A sketchy tweeker walks in the door in a suspicious manner. He's looking all around erratically and appears to be carrying a heavy object in his jacket. You open your jacket to reveal your gun and legally open carry. Are you threatening him with deadly force? It's not unrealistic to think that a criminal may come into a convenience store to rob the place and may shoot any other patrons there who witness the crime. Seeing your gun may cause the guy to reconsider. If you'd been open carrying all along there'd clearly be no issue, so why is there an issue if you were first concealed but later chose to be open?