Pulling The Trigger Theory Vs Application

It happens to cops all the time. A person can attack them and even after that the cop shooting an unarmed criminal ends up in court. I KNOW what it costs to defend yourself in court if you shoot an unarmed person especially if they are the wrong race. If they have not touched you it is hard for you to prove that you were in imminent danger. He might be all mouth and was just going to run over to you and cuss you out. My life has value but spending it in prison or even going broke in courts just isn't much better than accepting a little pain.

By the way, I have special insurance just for this sort of occurrence and have discussed the best way to limit my culpability in case it ever happens. Once again, think ahead and prepare for the worst...

 

Well Tex if we go back to my original post which was about why people don’t pull the trigger, you are honestly illustrating one of the problems now. You don’t fully understand the law as it pertains to self-defense. If you don’t know the rules it’s hard to play the game at a high level.

You do NOT have to prove that you were in imminent danger. Only that a reasonable person would believe that they were. Rather it’s on the prosecutor to prove that you didn’t reasonably feel that way.

This is a MAJOR difference. And legal self-defense is NOT against the law, rather spelled out as something you CAN do.

I would say misinformation, and a lack of understanding of legal self-defense is a MAJOR, MAJOR cause of hesitation and lack of action.

 

Evidently, you can't understand what I've said over and over. I am massively aware of the exact wording of the laws concerning self-defense. What I have repeatedly said in less direct ways is that I don't want to end up in court spending a quarter million dollars defending myself.

The LAW stated that you are allowed to use lethal force if you have a REASONABLE belief that you are in danger of serious bodily injury or death. What you don't understand is that all too often because of obvious political pressures District attorneys decide to let a jury decide if you were justified. We all read all the time about people, especially cops, that defended themselves but because the attacker was black they ended up in court.

These are REALITIES. If you fail to deal with realities you end up in trouble even if you truly were justified in your actions. Texas probably has some of the most open laws about self-defense in the US but even here we have to deal with the fact that our legal system is run by and affected by politicians and political pressures. I really dislike that our District Attorneys are elected. Too many of their decisions are based on how that decision will affect their next election regardless of the legalities or moral issues.

I guess some people just can't understand that the legal system is not really black and white and that even if you are obviously innocent being dragged through a procecution, posting bond, and later living with the crud that the media will throw out about you if you dared to shoot one of their beloved criminals is a punishment worse in some ways than letting the criminal beat you nearly to death. In many cases even after people are found innocent they lose their jobs and have to relocate. I have personally known a person that went through this. They were found innocent of ALL charges. their life was ruined and they had to leave. Look into the life of the cop in Ferguson Missouri a few years ago. He was more than justified in his use of force and his life was trashed.

I think that the dead horse has been beaten enough. I offer you the last word and I am done with this topic. It has been a pleasure...

 

Tex reality is all I’m interested in. You should consider not taking offense at me drawing out details on terms. What you are aware of I have no idea without discussing it.

You don’t have the corner on understanding reality. I don’t get my information from gun insurance companies selling fear and misinformation. And I don’t draw my conclusions from high profile political cases. Rather from hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of real world cases where people used every level of force everyday and it often doesn’t make the news.

Your fear of the legal system is clearly a factor in you taking advantage of what the law allows. Exactly one major reason people hesitate. The question is, is that hesitation on your part warranted, or would you be fine if you operated within the law. You seem to feel the law will throw the book at you for doing the right thing. My experience is much different, therefore I am less likely to hesitate to exercise my right to self-defensive.

 

I never said you should shoot an unarmed person for no reason.

You can be "in fear for your life, or of serious bodily injury" without ever being touched or without the other person being armed.

It all comes down to the specific details of each incident.
No two are ever identical.

 

We all understand what you keep saying.
Most simply don't agree.

 

We do seem to have a lot of Jail House lawyers here, don't we? My training has come from current police, and former police with an occasional ADA thrown in for good measure. IMHO we all sincerely hope it never escalates to that level, but if it does I will shoot until the threat is stopped. I will give my name, rank, and serial number and include the fact that I am the one who will file a complaint. Point out any evidence that may be available. From there the Police get the express statement " You will have my complete cooperation within 24 hours, after I have spoken to an attorney. " Period!! Don't say another word.

We can all speculate on what we think the law says, but we are not attorneys, at least I am not, and we don't KNOW, the law. Don't for one second think you do. Do what you have to do to stop the threat, and hire an attorney.

 

They will turn that against you, saying "you weren't calm so you must have lost control."

It's best to say nothing aside from "I want to see my lawyer".

 

Morgan 101 you have a pretty solid plan, that is more thought out than your average ccw holder. Pointing out certain witnesses, and evidence is a key factor. As well as demonstrating that you will eventually give a statement. Although most attorneys are going to advise you to say nothing.

Typically attorneys only know how to properly represent the guilty. Self-defense is a unique aspect of the law where unlike everything else in this case you actually DID comit the act, HOWEVER it wasn’t a crime and was JUSTIFIED under the law.

 

This is coming from the ADA's with whom I have trained. Not from me. The last part of your post is questionable " it wasn't a crime and was justified." Yes, it was a crime. You shot somebody. The burden of proof is now on you to PROVE that is was justified. It will probably cost you thousands of dollars defending yourself. I don't know the statistics, but I think it would be very interesting to see how many people just walk away without some type of court proceedings. How much did it cost them?

Here is an example of a case that was used in one of the training classes. Average Joe lives on a quiet cul-de-sac in Everytown U.S.A. There is a car at the end of the cul-de-sac with a young couple who don't belong there. They get out of the car, and the guy starts doing his best Mike Tyson imitation on the girl who is laying over the hood. The guy is wailing on her. Average Joe yells at the guy telling him to stop. He then goes back into the house and gets a hunting rifle, and calls the Police. When he goes back outside Mike Tyson starts walking toward him. When he gets on the driveway Average Joe fires a round into the ground. The ricochet and flying concrete hit Mike Tyson in the legs. He is laying in the driveway when the Police drive up. Girlfriend immediately runs up to the Police and says " he just shot my boyfriend."

Now Average Joe standing there holding a smoking gun, is up to his eyeballs in a He Said She Said argument. About $10 Grand later he is found not guilty. He did not get off scot free. When the bullet leaves the barrel you own it until it comes to rest.

I love Clint Smith, and thought this might be the right place for this link.

 

JUSTIFIABLE Homicide is just that, Jusitified. It’s NOT a crime. I see people all of the time not criminally charged because the elements to the crime do not exist. From a prosecutors point of view it HURTS them politically to charge someone and NOT get a conviction. So in many cases even when the person should have been charged at times they don’t because criminal homicide is hard to prove if a justification for self-defensive can be made.

What helps prosecutors is solved homicides. A justifiable homicide is a solved homicide and is not a crime. It might go to a grand jury for transparency but rarely do charges follow.

Civil suits are their own thing to discuss. But no a justifiable homicide is not a crime, rather spelled out in the law as something you CAN do.

 

I think we are busy splitting hairs here. I don't disagree that Justifiable Homicide is not a crime. I am saying that somebody in the District Attorney's office and I am guessing a judge will have to decide or rule that the Homicide is justifiable. It is not automatic. What the individual may think is justifiable might not be the opinion of the authorities.

 

Yes someone decides but the self-defense laws can make it extremely difficult to prove a criminal homicide even if they are politically motivated to do so. In some rare cases the prosecutors will politically push a case through, they know they can not win and/or don’t have a crime. To catch the headlines they want to get re-elected. However recently we have seen some of them sued for malicious prosecution. So it’s backfiring and they are no longer getting a free pass. However the majority of the time, throwing fathers, family men, and working common men in jail for shooting muggers, rapists, druggies and such is political suicide, especially if it truly is self-defense.

 

Excellent discussion. I hope we can have more of them. Thanks for your input.

 

Just to clarify, self defence is legal in the UK but any violence used in self defence must be proportionate and without premeditation. Any weapon used in self defence must be something that you could reasonably and legally have to hand. You may not keep or carry a weapon solely for the purpose of self defence. You may use proportionate violence in defence of yourself or any other person, if attacked in your home there is no duty to retreat and the requirement for proportionate violence is relaxed as long as the violence employed for self defence is not grossly disproportionate.
The advice given by other forum members about taking legal advice before making a statement to law enforcement is sound advice.

 

I travel a bit and was in London a few months ago on a layover. One of the challenges is not knowing the self-defense laws were I go. But I go by a basic rule. You don’t get to hurt me!

 

It doesn't matter what your true mental state happens to be.
They can't use it against you if you don't tell them.

 

If the facts say it's "justifiable" that's what matters.

They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't, not decide whether it was or not.

That's all the more reason to know what the law allows, and to keep your mouth shut until your lawyer is present.

 

I think looking at high profile cases is how most people assume they will be treated. Most people don’t even understand the totality of those cases. While being charged without evidence is possible, it is unlikely. And to hear some people talk, they believe it is inevitable that they will be jailed. This is completely false. Misinformation spread commonly by insurance salesmen, selling fear.

The best way to avoid being jailed is not gunfighter insurance. Rather training and dedication to really understanding your rights, how and when to apply them in a justifiable way. But because of the self-defense laws on the books, the odds are stacked in your favor regardless as it pertains to criminal prosecution.

 

I simply don't understand this thread. My friends and kin will shoot aggressors. Uhhhhhh ...... what else is to be said?! Locals hunt, locals have served in the military, attack them or their friends/family and they will open fire on you. 100% Step in front of a Greyhound bus traveling 85 mph and see what that buys you. End of discussion.

 

And the women will shoot you.

Kid at my Church (he was what, 13; I was younger) dumped his .22 auto into his wife-beater dad. His dad went ambient temperature. So what.?! Kid was immediately welcomed back. He did right. Everyone loved him. God loved him. Screw his dad eternally. Some humans don't count and should be put down. So it goes.

 

That's why it pays to be certain of the laws and certain the circumstances allow you to use deadly force.

It's also a good reason why people may draw a gun but not pull the trigger, since many times the sight of the gun ends the threat, and not shooting someone is always a better choice.

Around here it's quite rare for any arrests to be made when it's a clear case of self defense.

 

This is a topic I rarely think about as while there is law and order I have an almost zero chance of ever needing to defend myself but if law and order has broken down to the point that I will need to defend myself I will have no fear of being arrested so will just do what needs to be done and move on.
All this doubletalk and hair splitting is just a waste of resources!

 

This is yet another giant blind spot for people, thinking there are no consequences in a post shtf shooting. It’s such an important topic I started another thread on it instead of discussing it here.

 

Your first mistake is thinking there is "law and order" now.
People for the most part behave well without it.
Those who don't act the same either way.

Having to defend yourself nowadays is often a matter of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It doesn't have to be a "bad part of town" or any specific time of day or night.

You have to be prepared all the time, regardless of your ideas about the current state of "society".

You're only "at risk" when there are other humans nearby.