Concealed Carry: Prime Examples where CCW Shooting is Justified

[johnny_yuma]

This thread is for Law Enforcement and persons with expert knowledge to demonstrate model examples where a Concealed Carry Citizen is justified in using their weapon to kill another human being. Dead serious. We all enjoy our weapons and feel safe carrying them, yet, reality is under improper circumstances any one of us may lose our life and liberty in the process. In Pennsylvania where I live, "taking another life in self defense" is a question of if the state can disprove that "the individual had reasonable belief that his or her life was in immediate jeopardy or that another was about to suffer same or immediate serious bodily injury" Recently in the news, a man in Texas was vindicated for beating another man to death who was in the process of raping a 5 year old girl. The court found that he was justified because the homicide occurred in order to stop the bodily harm to another. Another simple implication might be applied as such: "A Man with a knife raised a knife and lunged at an intended victim within very close proximity to the intended victim's body when shot"... or "was clearly in the process of abducting my child with their hands on the child"... Already I am at a loss here to make lock tight examples, because any of those situations can be complicated and construed one way of the other or misconstrued in court. Still... my question stands: What are some PRIME examples of where discharge of a firearm that results in loss of life of another human being is generally accepted as self defense. Im looking for case study type examples, even if they are theoretical. In my opinion the decision will occur instantly. -When that circuit of self survival goes off in our brain the very instant that our life -or our families lives- are in immediate jeopardy. -A moment where nothing but the survival instinct dictates, and all legal hyperbole goes out the window. But lets try and get some concrete examples so we can think ahead for what to look out for and BE PREPARED ahead of time. Lets talk about real world most possible scenarios where deadly force is warranted, and when it is not.

 

[Muss Muggins]

No such thing as a absolute in self defense . . .

 

[Arik]

The Pennsylvania self-defense statute provides that use of force is "justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion." 18 Pa.C.S. § 505

Here are some that were not considered self defense. Some are obvious some not so much

Pennsylvania | VPC: Concealed Carry Killers

Otherwise......

You can look up Gerald Ung Philadelphia.
Virginia man acquitted in Philly self-defense shooting in 2010 sued by victim; case may test Pa. Castle Doctrine law | Pennsylvania Record

Another in Reading PA maybe 5 years ago.

If you just Google Philadelphia civilian self defense shootings you'll find a lot. You can do that with most large cities.

Bucks DA: Pizza Shop Customer Justified In Shooting Of Robbery Suspects << CBS Philly

https://www.google.com/amp/6abc.com...omat-owner-who-shot-robber-bystander/1819538/

Armed Citizen Shoots Alleged Carjacker in Philadelphia | Self-Defense Corner



Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[johnny_yuma]

Honestly, Im just looking for what situations to be aware of, as a concealed carry person where use of deadly force is a real option. To my common sense it is where my life or the lives of my loved ones are in imminent jeopardy. -Im looking for examples of "what to expect" as likely events that meet that criteria. Thanks.

 

[johnny_yuma]

The Pennsylvania self-defense statute provides that use of force is "justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion." 18 Pa.C.S. § 505

Here are some that were not considered self defense. Some are obvious some not so much

Pennsylvania | VPC: Concealed Carry Killers

Otherwise......

You can look up Gerald Ung Philadelphia.
Virginia man acquitted in Philly self-defense shooting in 2010 sued by victim; case may test Pa. Castle Doctrine law | Pennsylvania Record

Another in Reading PA maybe 5 years ago.

If you just Google Philadelphia civilian self defense shootings you'll find a lot. You can do that with most large cities.

Bucks DA: Pizza Shop Customer Justified In Shooting Of Robbery Suspects << CBS Philly

https://www.google.com/amp/6abc.com...omat-owner-who-shot-robber-bystander/1819538/

Armed Citizen Shoots Alleged Carjacker in Philadelphia | Self-Defense Corner



Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

I have just started reading through that material, and while only briefly I have scanned the content. -They are all Morons. People killing each other over road rage, fist fights...

----Persons who do not concern my quest for primary examples of clear and justified CCW use of deadly force. Honestly, I appreciate that no response here is a 'get out of jail card'. Im looking for hard cut and powerful examples of where CCW deadly force is *relatively* solid.

 

[johnny_yuma]

North Carolina Law: The defendant must have believed in the need to kill to avoid death or great bodily injury. Focusing on the first part of this requirement, decisions have held that the defendant must literally "believe in the need to kill,"

what are the most common situations that fit this criteria, and how to be wary of them is my point exactly.

 

[BAM-BAM]

This is not the forum to give you the "simple" answer(s) you seem to be looking for.

You say you are in Pa. but later quote N. Carolina law.....................

Read your State's statutes (or the State you are in)..... read case law....... take a seminar with a lawyer who practices in your State and specializes in firearms and use of deadly force.

First off what you are asking about is..... the justifiable use of deadly force..... not "justified to kill".... to stop a threat of death or serious bodily injury.

Death may result from the use of deadly force......but I've never seen a statute written that justifies....... the outright "killing" of another human being.

 

[johnny_yuma]

Nonsense. Quality 'advice' on this issue exists.

 

[BAM-BAM]

Nonsense. Quality 'advice' on this issue exists.

Yes it does ..... and I've tried to point you in the right direction to get it!

 

[Pisgah]

You seem to be seeking a clear, unarguable rule about when it is justified to use deadly force. Unfortunately, such does not exist. In general, most states -- and I emphasize MOST -- and, in fact, most countries whose legal system is based on the English model, adhere to the "Reasonable Man" doctrine.

Stated simply, that means that if a reasonable man in the same circumstances would believe that deadly force was the only means available at the time to avoid death or serious injury to himself or another innocent person, the use of deadly force is justified.

Of course, certain extenuating circumstances may apply here. For instance, let's say you get in to an argument that escalates in to a physical fight. Suddenly, you realize that your opponent is far superior to you in strength and/or fighting skills, and that you may well be killed, so you manage to draw your gun and shoot him. The prosecution is going to argue that your actions were not a result of your being in immediate fear of your life, but of your voluntary engagement in mutual combat. This nullifies the affirmative defense of self defense. In a case like that, you'd better hope for a danged good lawyer and a sympathetic jury, and also hope for the opportunity to plead to a lesser offense.

But if you really want the best advice for whatever your location may be, the proper guidance has already been given here -- go talk to a lawyer in your jurisdiction and pay attention to what he says.

 

[keith44spl]

I would contact my personal lawyer on such matters.

.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Im looking for hard cut and powerful examples of where CCW deadly force is *relatively* solid.

That's not out there . . .

 

[SAFireman]

I would contact my personal lawyer on such matters.

.

^^^^ THIS IS EXPERT ADVICE ^^^^ Take it!

 

[robertrwalsh]

The definition of what is reasonable will be decided by a local prosecutor and maybe eventually a jury of 12 people who were not there at the time, probably don't carry themselves and (depending on what state you are in) think gun owners are at best "odd." As noted many times above there simply is no hard and fast rule and some laws seem to overlap. Also case law and statute law are often different and sometimes at odds with each other.

 

[Walkingwolf]

If you have to think IF deadly force is allowed, then maybe you should not use it. People have rarely been charged, or convicted of crime where they had absolutely no choice. Even the subway vigilante in NYC they could not get a conviction. They had to settle for gun possession charge.

Simply if you can survive without shooting, then don't shoot, your life will be much easier.

 

[BAM-BAM]

I would contact my personal lawyer on such matters.

.

Did a six hour Continuing Legal Ed. course here in Pa last year on "Gun Laws" with a Attorney who's entire practice is centered on firearms and the law. Did another 3 hour session that just dealt with firearms and estates....and what Lawyers could and couldn't do without violating some some State or Federal Law.

It was amazing how much Attorneys who aren't "gun folks" don't know about gun laws.....same applies to Attorneys who don't do criminal law.

 

[kthom]

As Muss has stated, "There are no absolutes in self defense". Every situation is a case unto itself, and those who determine if a case involves true self defense are different in every case, even within the same jurisdictional boundaries. The only thing that comes close to allowing a claim of self defense to be validated is that the one claiming self defense must not have had any part in escalating the events leading up to the action. A plea of self defense in any situation stands on the fact, if it can be proven, that the person claiming self defense has admitted that they did in fact commit the physical acts necessary to protect their own or someone else's life that was in jeopardy of ending as the result of someone else's actions, while not accelerating the event in any way.

In other words, a claim of self defense places the burden of proof upon the person who claims it, as opposed to being innocent until proven guilty! And that decision gets to be made by someone or someones not involved in the event! The outcome depends on subjective ideas about what constitutes self defense even when the parameters described in black and white "law" have been established.

 

[Arik]

I Im looking for hard cut and powerful examples of where CCW deadly force is *relatively* solid.

Like BAM BAM said.

There are NO hard cut facts. Most of the time it's something that happens in a split second. There is no movie "villain". A scruffy dirty looking guy wearing a hoodie down low and walking towards you with his head down may be sizing you up or maybe a tired construction worker just walking home.

Nonsense. Quality 'advice' on this issue exists.

Advise is be to know your laws and your surroundings. If you can avoid "it" then do so. You mentioned that fist fight was stupid, and it was, but the guy was also protecting himself. If I go to punch you would you not protect yourself? But in that case the circumstances were such that it wasn't considered self defense.

BTW the examples I linked were "examples of where CCW deadly force is *relatively* solid"

However if you want something more solid....

If your walking down the frozen food isle of your supermarket and some guy pulls a sword and starts swinging at you.....if you shoot him it would be a relatively solid self defense claim
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[ExcitableBoy]

HERE WE GO AGAIN...

The laws are too complicated and vary ridiculously from state-to-state. A way should be found to standardize statutes nationwide.

In any case, if you have doubts concerning your own judgement in the use of a firearm for self-defense, you should not be carrying.

Period.

 

[richardw]

Justification is going to vary according to state law. I am in PA, and In Post 3 by Aria there are some good examples of justified shootings.

This is a subject that has concerned me as a licensed carrier. In researching the topic I came across a brief opion by a PA croiminal defense attorney. If you are in PA, it is important to read it.

Http://fairlielaw.net/duty-to-retreat-or-stand-your-ground-a-primer-to-self-defense-in-pennsylvania/