CCW Nightmare: What Would I Do?

[federali]

"Silver Tongue"

Perhaps a confusing combination of words on my part but absolutely no double-entendre was intended. I should have used "silver tongue" rather than "slick tongue" Instead, I was referring to all those scenes where the LEO, male or female, succeeds in talking the baddest looking guy since Attila-The-Hun into surrendering his weapons without firing a shot.

From Wikipedia: Silver tongue is an expression used to describe a person who has a clever way with words.

 

[chief38]

I'll bet that here in The PR of NY that an armed citizen that did foil a potential murder, killing spree, rape etc. it would be him or her that would be prosecuted and not the perp. While years ago I do believe that a legally armed citizen or off duty or retired LEO would and should have gotten involved to do their civic duty to prevent a tragedy, now there are lots who would simply look the other way just to avoid legal prosecution and public persecution. It pains me to say this, but I'll bet there are some off duty and retired local LEO's who will also turn their heads after what has happened across this Nation lately - they simply don't want THEIR lives ruined!

I blame the Press, the Politicians, and the brain dead Citizens who live here. I want to see how they react when tragedy strikes their families and friends - all of a sudden I'll bet they'll "call for action"!

Didn't mean to hi-jack your thread, but this is what came to mind after reading your post.

 

[GWK4667]

I'll bet that here in The PR of NY that an armed citizen that did foil a potential murder, killing spree, rape etc. it would be him or her that would be prosecuted and not the perp. While years ago I do believe that a legally armed citizen or off duty or retired LEO would and should have gotten involved to do their civic duty to prevent a tragedy, now there are lots who would simply look the other way just to avoid legal prosecution and public persecution. It pains me to say this, but I'll bet there are some off duty and retired local LEO's who will also turn their heads after what has happened across this Nation lately - they simply don't want THEIR lives ruined!

I blame the Press, the Politicians, and the brain dead Citizens who live here. I want to see how they react when tragedy strikes their families and friends - all of a sudden I'll bet they'll "call for action"!

Didn't mean to hi-jack your thread, but this is what came to mind after reading your post.

I would not live in a state like yours - - - sorry just the way I feel.

Here we are told that our primary obligation is in the county where I live and work but if I come across a problem elsewhere I must make a decision - - - If I make an arrest in another jurisdiction I will have to follow thru with court in the other jurisdiction with no pay and I will have to pay my own cost going to and from the court. I could lose a few days pay while I'm tied up with it as well.

If there is an misdemeanor I will normally look the other way or issue an oral or written warning. If it is a felony then I will take appropriate action and ( hopefully ) if a local officer responds quickly I will allow them to make the arrest.

But when we are sworn in we understand it is not a 9 to 5 job - - - we are to protect and serve at all times.

I cannot believe that off duty officers are not allowed to carry in NYC - - - what happens if you are off duty and run into someone that you have sent to jail and they know you are not armed - - - seems kind of one sided to me.

 

[Johnmuratore]

I live in MA, and as I understand the law, if a BG breaks into my house, my first duty is to leave. If that is not an option, I can only use equivalent force; meaning if the BG has a club, I can't use a knife, if he has a knife, I can't use a gun. You get the idea.
A man was recently indicted for aggravated assault because he punched a guy he caught trying to steal his truck from his driveway. I don't know if it will stick, but he's sure having to pay a lawyer to defend him.

I can only imagine the result if someone with an LTC got involved with a robbery under any circumstances.

With all this running through our minds, how can we possibly act in time, and legally correct?

This is as direct an assault on our 2nd Amendment rights as taking our guns away, isn't it?

 

[John R]

Anyone else see a common denominator here, they all happened in NY where no one can carry except the crooks.

 

[The Big D]

Where, pray tell, did you 'learn' that CLEARLY ERRONEOUS bit of information?

...I cannot believe that off duty officers are not allowed to carry in NYC - - - what happens if you are off duty and run into someone that you have sent to jail and they know you are not armed - - - seems kind of one sided to me.

 

[cmort666]

That said, most professional LEO's are obligated to take appropriate action(s)...particularly within their jurisdiction and particularly when a felony is being committed.

The points are that:

1. The odds are OVERWHELMING that there WON'T be a cop in your immediate vicinity if you're the victim of an unlawful deadly force attack.
2. If a cop IS there and he is either unable or unwilling to "protect" you as an individual, you have ZERO recourse. That's settled law and there's no debating it.
3. Unless you are either the beneficiary of a police protective detail, or INSANELY lucky, any IMMEDIATE deadly force attack from which the police "protect" you as an individual was either not serious or not immediate.
4. Depending upon where you live, the police might very well apprehend your assailant, but if you bled out hours previously, as my godsister did, that's simply no benefit to you.

In virtually every instance, protect yourself or don't get protected at all.

 

[The Big D]

Yet, again, it is you who does not understand the law, PROFESSIONAL LEO policies, and/or the SCOTUS decision. You obviously are anti-police/government so I will no longer reply to your rants. Done.

The points are that:

1. ....
2. If a cop IS there and he is either unable or unwilling to "protect" you as an individual, you have ZERO recourse. That's settled law and there's no debating it....

 

[BCDWYO]

Yet, again, it is you who does not understand the law, PROFESSIONAL LEO policies, and/or the SCOTUS decision. You obviously are anti-police/government so I will no longer reply to your rants. Done.

Huh?? I didn't see anything in cmort's post that was even very debatable or controversial. I certainly don't see anything anti-cop! Is there a history here? I see no rant!

 

[John R]

Huh?? I didn't see anything in cmort's post that was even very debatable or controversial. I certainly don't see anything anti-cop! Is there a history here? I see no rant!

Don't feel bad, I missed it too

 

[rwsmith]

Don't fool yoursef...

Like the OP says, having a gun isn't a guarantee of success. In most cases you are surprised, confused and scared ****less to boot and you may find your name in the obits rather than blazened across the headlines as a 'hero'.

Add to this the chance that you will shoot the wrong person and it suddenly doesn't sound very 'romantic'.

 

[cmort666]

Huh?? I didn't see anything in cmort's post that was even very debatable or controversial. I certainly don't see anything anti-cop! Is there a history here? I see no rant!

Apparently settled law and the laws of physics constitute a "rant".

Leaving aside the instances where police have simply declined to protect people as individuals, there are the laws of nature:

1. • Ask yourself how long it takes to strangle, beat, stab or shoot somebody to death (A).
   • Determine the average police response time for your area (B).
   • Subtract B from A. If the answer is a negative number, that's how long you've been dead before the police get there... assuming that your assailant is indulgent enough to LET you call the police. I've been told that some robbers, rapists and murderers can be quite "unhelpful" in this regard.
2. Police cars are not the TARDIS and cops are not Doctor Who. They don't get to keep doing it over until they get there in time and you DON'T end up dead.
3. If there are three available cops in your area, and FOUR deadly force incidents happening (or being perceived as happening) at the same time, even with a police response time of ***0***, somebody's going to have a VERY bad day.

Now if some people perceive that as a rant, they probably also perceive "Don't do drugs, stay in school, and obey the law" as a "rant" too.

 

[cmort666]

Like the OP says, having a gun isn't a guarantee of success. In most cases you are surprised, confused and scared ****less to boot and you may find your name in the obits rather than blazened across the headlines as a 'hero'.

On the other hand, NOT having a gun, is pretty much a guarantee of failure, depending upon your circumstances. The odds of an unarmed 110lb. woman prevailing against even an unarmed 210lb. man, especially a school trained predator from our prison systems are infinitesimal.

A fire extinguisher doesn't always put out the fire. A nonexistant one NEVER does.

Add to this the chance that you will shoot the wrong person and it suddenly doesn't sound very 'romantic'.

Neither is being murdered execution style like those women in that Tinley Park, Illinois Lane Bryant store.

Coming out alive is "romantic" enough for me. If I can do that by not being involved in situations which make a gunfight likely, that's great. If I have to do that by shooting somebody until they're no longer an immediate and credible threat to life and limb, that's ok too.

 

[Donn]

I live in MA, and as I understand the law, if a BG breaks into my house, my first duty is to leave. If that is not an option, I can only use equivalent force; meaning if the BG has a club, I can't use a knife, if he has a knife, I can't use a gun. You get the idea.
A man was recently indicted for aggravated assault because he punched a guy he caught trying to steal his truck from his driveway. I don't know if it will stick, but he's sure having to pay a lawyer to defend him.

I can only imagine the result if someone with an LTC got involved with a robbery under any circumstances.

With all this running through our minds, how can we possibly act in time, and legally correct?

This is as direct an assault on our 2nd Amendment rights as taking our guns away, isn't it?

Yes, it is. This is what becomes of electing progressives for decades.

 

[cmort666]

I live in MA, and as I understand the law, if a BG breaks into my house, my first duty is to leave.

That's amusing. Where I live, that would involve a 15-20 foot jump from a window. Yeah, I want to break a leg, back or neck to protect somebody trying to unlawfully do me harm.

Regardless of what the law says, I don't have a duty to die, and will never recognize such under ANY circumstances.

That having been said, I'd never live in any place where such a loathsome and illegitimate "duty" were attempted to be imposed upon me.

 

[rwsmith]

That is a realistic view.....

On the other hand, NOT having a gun, is pretty much a guarantee of failure, depending upon your circumstances. The odds of an unarmed 110lb. woman prevailing against even an unarmed 210lb. man, especially a school trained predator from our prison systems are infinitesimal.

A fire extinguisher doesn't always put out the fire. A nonexistant one NEVER does.


Neither is being murdered execution style like those women in that Tinley Park, Illinois Lane Bryant store.

Coming out alive is "romantic" enough for me. If I can do that by not being involved in situations which make a gunfight likely, that's great. If I have to do that by shooting somebody until they're no longer an immediate and credible threat to life and limb, that's ok too.

As long as someone doesn't think it would be a kick to get into a gunfight.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Very nice list of action plans. I'd like to add one.

15. Have a gun.

Often folks don't bother holstering up for a quick ride to the convenience store or.... wherever. While I can't predict what will happen or exactly how I might respond, I can predict with a high degree of certainty I will be armed.

Here's an small poll done on this Forum. http://smith-wessonforum.com/concealed-carry-self-defense/336696-how-often-do-you-carry.html

 

[cmort666]

As long as someone doesn't think it would be a kick to get into a gunfight.

It might BE a "kick"... after the fact.

But so might a plane crash.

I don't go seeking out either.

 

[unclebob]

Anyone else see a common denominator here, they all happened in NY where no one can carry except the crooks.

Kinda like Chicago where they have the strictest laws around, but the bad guys forgot to abide by the law..

 

[federali]

MA Gone Nuts?

I'll defer to the gentlemen who live in MA and are familiar with the laws up there. I find it beyond comprehension that you may not use a firearm to defend yourself against a knife wielder. I cannot possibly know the intricacies of our use-of-force laws throughout the 50 states, which, is why I said you must know the laws where you live and where you may have to use force.