I would try to walk away (back away), but if the person persisted and tried to make it physical, I would have to pull my firearm and keep it low until he crossed into the space of no retreat. I have disabilities, and would not fair well in a H2H situation.
apparently he made me look like an idiot.. i dont know anything about it so i believed him when he told me. my bad.. 
An old saying comes to mind "young guys will fight for the fun of it....an old man or sick man will just kill you".
I'm a 65 y.o. that's had 3 heart attacks, a quad bypass and several other major operations and I'm unable for robust fisticuffs or any other type of prolonged fighting. IMHO I'm too old for a a$$ whipping and too young to die.
I have given this issue much thought and have decided that I will try to defuse the situation, apologise (wether I'm right or wrong) or whatever. If the antagonist keeps up a threatening stance or posture and continues pushing the situation, I would get my hand on my gun, while leaving the gun in the holster and be prepared.
If the guy has any type of weapon then it's a whole different ball game.
Most times, these types of idiots are just showing off and playing a role and will drop the matter and walk .....but you never know when you are going to run into a dopehead or a total dumba$$ who doesn't or can't comprehend he/she is in over their head.
As long as it remains verbal and if I have time I would explain exactly what will happen if he takes another step and what the Oklahoma law is.
I do know just the appearence of a handgun can and will change a lot of people's attitude very quickly, most times in the blink of an eye.
Dave
I'm a 65 y.o. that's had 3 heart attacks, a quad bypass and several other major operations and I'm unable for robust fisticuffs or any other type of prolonged fighting. IMHO I'm too old for a a$$ whipping and too young to die.
I have given this issue much thought and have decided that I will try to defuse the situation, apologise (wether I'm right or wrong) or whatever. If the antagonist keeps up a threatening stance or posture and continues pushing the situation, I would get my hand on my gun, while leaving the gun in the holster and be prepared.
If the guy has any type of weapon then it's a whole different ball game.
Most times, these types of idiots are just showing off and playing a role and will drop the matter and walk .....but you never know when you are going to run into a dopehead or a total dumba$$ who doesn't or can't comprehend he/she is in over their head.
As long as it remains verbal and if I have time I would explain exactly what will happen if he takes another step and what the Oklahoma law is.
I do know just the appearence of a handgun can and will change a lot of people's attitude very quickly, most times in the blink of an eye.
Dave
Clint doing the gunfiring with just his hand at the 3 hoodrats in 'Gran Torino' worked out great for him. Lolllll. But he had his pistole on him just in case...
apparently he made me look like an idiot.. i dont know anything about it so i believed him when he told me. my bad..
I wouldn't put it quite that harshly. Your friend, it seems, was putting it on you, but like someone else in this thread has already said, a boxer or martial artist registering their body parts with the police is an urban myth.
Not necessarily the age difference itself, but if the attacker is very much stronger than the defender, that can be taken into consideration if this was known to the defender at the time.
The concept is called disparity of force. What this does, is to allow for great differences between physical conditions or ability. For example, if an average person were to be attacked by a marital artist or a professional boxer, that could be life threatening, even though no deadly weapon such as a gun, knife or bludgeon is used by the attacker. Deadly force might be permitted in this case. If an average person were to go after someone with a significant disability, the disabled person's life could be put in danger, justifying the use of deadly force in response, even though no outside weapon is used.
The doctrine of disparity of force, even though it has been around for a while is still kind of a murky concept, and is best used only by those that have a significant disability or where other great physical disparity between you and your foe exists. I have a mild case of cerebral palsy, but I would still hesitate to use this as a defense, unless my foe was known to me at the time of the ocurrance to be a martial artist, weight-lifter, boxer or something similar.
IANAL, but my understanding is that the circumstances that lead you to think that disparity exists must be known to you at the time that you employ deadly force, because you can't use it if you find out later.
By the time I realize that my attacker is a professional boxer or martial arts expert I am probably laying on the ground in a puddle of blood. We still have a ways to go as far as having the law on our side.
It should not be the responsibility of the victim to know how adept his attacker is. The fact a person is being attacked is all one should have to show. We should not force the victim into playing by rules his attacker can ignore.
Michael
It should not be the responsibility of the victim to know how adept his attacker is. The fact a person is being attacked is all one should have to show. We should not force the victim into playing by rules his attacker can ignore.
Michael
Similar threads
