CCW - The first thing you need

[James K]

When you get a CCW license and plan to carry, the first thing you need is not a new gun, or ammo, or a holster. It is a lawyer. If you do have to use that gun you practice with so much, you will need an attorney very badly.

No matter what you think or have been told, if you blow someone away, no matter how justified you think you are, you will be arrested. Any you might be stuck with a public defender who has 200 cases and is a contributor to Handgun Control.

Find a criminal attorney in your area who is sympathetic to gun owners and CCW. There may even be one in your pistol club. The nice lawyer who helped with your house title won't do, and will tell you so, but he may be able to refer you.

When you find a good attorney, put him or her on retainer (costs less than your weekend range ammo) and make sure that the lawyer or a firm member will be available around the clock. Bad things don't usually happen during business hours.

OK, now I'll hear from all the gunshop lawyers about how the cops will congratulate you, give you the ticker tape parade, etc. Let's hear also from cops and from anyone who has been there, done that.

 

[Byron Quick]

It usually works in the manner you describe.
However, I do know of individuals who have killed others who were never arrested or charged. I am talking of direct personal knowledge here of the shooter and the police involved, not hearsay at the gun club.

 

[Keith Rogan]

Jim,

I suspect that its going to depend on where you live and the political makeup of your local government.
Here in my locale, the local police chief teaches a large part of the CCW course and is a big supporter. He's not the DA, but his peoples report will be what the DA acts on and frankly, if the shooting is a good one nobody is going to be charged with anything.
His bottom line promise was that if its a good shoot, you have no criminal law problems.
Civil law is out of his hands and thats where a lawyer comes in handy. I'd rather face a suit than die, so...

------------------
Keith
The Bears and Bear Maulings Page: members.xoom.com/keithrogan

 

[Rob Pincus]

I agre with Jim's Philosophy, Be prepared. BUT, if you lok, you should be able to find a lawyer to go on retainer for the cost of a Box of ammo. I know a few pro-gun types who get $1.00 from their shooting pals every year to be put "on retainer."

Don't let some blood sucking legal type take advantage of your desire to be safe.

For what it is worth, I have BTDT when people where arrested, let go without much more than a pat on the back and I've seen LEO's who wouldn't even speak about on-duty shootings without talking to a lawyer first.

Personally, I think LEOs have as much or more to worry about legally as a CCW holder. I know more LEOs who have a lawyer standing by (beyond the FOP lawyer), than I do CCW holders.

------------------
-Essayons

 

[James K]

A CCW license entitles you to carry a concealed weapon legally. Period. It gives you NO other rights or privileges you don't have without it. It doesn't make you a cop or justify police action on your part.

In some cases, especially in a small town, where the Police Chief is your brother, the DA is your uncle, the chief judge is your grandfather, and the shooting is obviously justified, you will probably get off OK. Note I am not talking about in your home or place of business, that is a whole different ballgame, but you don't need a CCW there.

But if you kill anyone on the street or in a public place in a city, the street cops only know they have a body and a shooter. What to you think they are going to do? Take your word that you are a good guy? Maybe, but I wouldn't count on it. Don't believe me, ask the cops you know.

If I am arrested, I want an attorney right then to represent me in talking to the cops and the prosecutor, not try to get one after the prosecutor goes for an indictment on M1 and starts making a case for premeditation because I got a CCW. (Yes, folks, the CCW can be and has been used as evidence of premeditation. They don't have to show you planned to kill the baddie you blew away, only that you planned to kill someone.)

If you think you are so holy and your cause is so good, that you are immune from the law, fine. Let me know what the visting hours are in your prison and I'll come and let you cry on my shoulder.

I like the $1 retainer. I'd ask if there is anyone like that in Maryland except that I don't stand a chance of getting CCW here.

 

[Rob Pincus]

Jim, I think everyone agrees that it is good to be prudent, but honeslty, you sound like a lwayer trying to scare people into putting him on retainer .

 

[Jim V]

My 2 cents: Put an attorney on retainer. My advise if you are a CCW holder, are involved in a shooting, Call 911 (or have someone call 911) asking for both the police and an ambulance, maintain the scene until LEO's arrive, make a brief statement, "He attacked me and I was in fear for my life. His weapon is there and those people saw everything and are witnesses. Before I say anything else,I WANT MY ATTORNEY." and then shut up until you talk to him. All this from being at the scenes of more than one shooting as a LEO. 99.9% of the LEO's that arrive at the scene will not know you from Jack the Ripper and will treat you as if you were. Believe me on that.

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum




[This message has been edited by Jim V (edited April 01, 1999).]

 

[James K]

Thanks, Jim V.

No, I am not an attorney. I was a deputy sheriff for 10 years or so.

My main reason for starting this thread was that I get sick reading about "I am going to get a CCW license and my real neat .99 Cal Glockenspiel and I'll be ready for any SOB..." You know the bit.

These guys are gun nuts, not killers; their guns are fun toys, not serious weapons. I doubt any of them has ever given any thought to avoiding trouble, in fact some seem to want to court trouble. They don't seem to even think about what will happen AFTER they find out what those great handloads do to a human body.

I am trying a dash of cold water, though I doubt it will do any good. It ain't the Old West any more, folks, and the sheriff won't just say it was a fair fight. (Maybe in some parts of Alaska, but even in Anchorage it might be different.)

[This message has been edited by Jim Keenan (edited March 31, 1999).]

 

[jimmy]

Jim K., I believe your points are well taken. In my area, for instance, anyone defending himself with a firearm, however justified, will likely be arrested, lynched in the media as a "vigilante," and prejudicially crucified by the DA.

A case in point: last year a local concealed handgun licensee killed a criminal in what was (as near as I can tell) obvious self-defense. He received the full "treatment" from the gun haters and their allies in the media and the DA's office, was indicted for murder, and is now awaiting trial. His lawyer is one of the best in the city, and hopefully he'll be found innocent. But in the meantime he and his family have had to endure a long nightmare.

BTW, I've noticed that the anti-gun, anti-self-defense crowd in my area only understands "victim" as someone who dies. If I die because a criminal kills me, I'm the victim, and that's perfectly okay with the gun haters. But if the criminal who tried to kill me dies because I shot him to save my own life, he becomes the victim and I, of course, become the criminal in his place. It's an outrage, and it defies logic or justice, but it's real.



[This message has been edited by jimmy (edited March 31, 1999).]

 

[DC]

I agree with our contingent of Jims..
In California, if you shoot a buglar in your home at 3 am...you are the criminal. The act of shooting is great political mileage for a DA, the liberal media, etc. The fact that this is your home, you were asleep and that this clown broke in tends to be forgotten. You will be taken into custody, your home searched, all your guns confiscated and the next day your name will be in the paper and news and it will be noted that you have other guns. If you have dirty magazines you will be said to have pornography. Thus, your reputation is besmirched and your position is pre-biased before your hearing.
And, remember...you were asleep and YOUR home was broken into. Bottomline...you will need an attorney and fast.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"

 

[Karanas]

Jim Keenan's wish to splash a little cold water should be taken seriously by everyone.
While the prevailing philosophy among many of those who embrace the right of self defense can be simply summarized as "better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6", I suspect that most have never been active participants in our legal system.
It is certainly better to be alive, but I'm sure that there have been some who thought otherwise after a little trip through our courts.
Having an attorney on retainer is not a bad idea. Regardless of where you live or the attitude of local law enforcement to this issue, the one thing that you have to realize is that if you are involved in a shooting, you become an instant candidate for a lawsuit. You may not face criminal prosecution if the shooting was justified, but considering the litigious nature of our society, it's probably only a matter of time before some ambulance-chaser convinces the family of the crackhead who was attacking you that they're entitled to some compensation for their loss.
As ridiculous as that sounds, it does happen. They don't need a good case to file a lawsuit, just a plaintiff. Defending yourself in a court of law will be expensive, and that's with a clear cut case. If there are any ambiguous factors, you could be looking at financial devastation.
Anything you say, before or after the shooting, can be used against you. Having your lawyer there can be more important than you think.

 

[Grayfox]

I was fortunate enough to have the legal portion of my CCW class taught by a pro-gun law professor with lots of courtroom experience. He explained that most honest people forced to defend themselves will almost always go to the investigating officers and start running their mouths about the incident. Due to the fact that they have just gone through a very tramatic experience, they will also almost always say something stupid and end up in trouble.
His advice was to only say "I would like to speak to an attorney." and then SHUT YOUR MOUTH. Let the evidence speak for itself. DO NOT make any statements to the police until you have consulted a lawyer and had time to get the events straight in your own mind.
He had a saying: "There are no deaf mutes in prison."

 

[Byron Quick]

Well, just 'cuz I'm a gun nut doesn't mean I'm stupid, y'all I've been in about seven situations where it would have been legal to use lethal force in the state of Georgia. Broke the thumbstrap of my holster three times. I've only drawn my pistol once and did not aim it at anyone. Two of these occasions probably exposed me to increased probability of injury or death as I escaped as required by law in this state. I'm not looking for trouble. I actively avoid it and will continue to do so. I have the best criminal attorney in this part of the state on retainer. Ask your local attorneys who they would retain if they faced criminal charges.

My father asked me if I was looking to kill someone many years ago after observing my preparations and practice. I really couldn't honestly tell him no. I did not know. Now I can as I have thrice had the opportunity to shoot another human being presenting a clear and present danger to my life with witnesses present. The answer is no. I carry for protection in the final extreme. No more. No less.

 

[45King]

Grayfox>His advice was to only say "I would like to speak to an attorney." and then SHUT YOUR MOUTH.

VERY sound advice. Say nothing more, unless it's something to the effect of "I don't feel too well, I think I may be having a heart attack."

------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard

 

[Keith Rogan]

Jim,

Alaska isn't the Wild West. I doubt its any different than the rural west or south. If you defend yourself here, you are going to be investigated. If the investigation reveals you were indeed in danger of losing your life or "great bodily harm" you will not be charged.
You will still likely be involved in a civil suit if theres any wiggle room for a lawyer at all. Even if you win you may lose everything you own to legal fee's.
Thanks for the reminder to keep our mouths shut and engage an attorney.
Its funny isn't it that those of us who live in places where personal danger from criminals is lowest, have the easiest time getting a CCW permit and dealing with the law if we have to use it.
I suggest we no longer use the term "citizen" in describing inhabitants of non-CCW states. We just refer to them as "victims".

Ricardo - "I think I'm having a heart attack" - LOL!


------------------
Keith
The Bears and Bear Maulings Page: members.xoom.com/keithrogan

 

[James K]

I thank those who agree with me; most, I note have "been there" in one way or another. On talking to the police, I agree in a way about saying nothing, but it could be seen as obstrution of an investigation. The cops have a legit need to know if anyone else is involved, or if there are witnesses, or where the gun is. Like I said, consult an attorney first, and take his or her advice.

Note for gun nuts. Don't talk about your gun or your ammo to the cops or prosecutor, especially after you have been warned. Some friendly "gun guy" cop may want to chat about your gun or your reloads. In court, you will hear how the defendant "bragged to the police about the vicious bullets he concocted in the secrecy of his basement; bullets made only to rip and tear innocent human flesh."

 

[DC]

This is a tangent concerning facing a civil suit...

I'm usually pretty good at researching stuff out, but...I can't find when and the precedents that removed financial obligation from the loser. I.E. it used to be if I sued you and lost, then I had to pay ALL attorney fees (both sides) and court costs....thus, you would be out little financially (not counting lost work time, etc). Any of you have any info on when this changed and specifics?

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"

 

[DC]

I'd add this to Jim's last post..
Its a very good idea to be discrete period. It is common in all court cases to interview friends, co-workers, etc....and anything you said or done in the past can be misconstrued or intentionally twisted against you.
Over exuberance at the range, telling folks at work about the new "bad-ass" gun you just bought, etc.

You shoot someone and there will be people out to get you even if it was justified.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"

 

[Karanas]

DC,
I'm not sure about recovering your legal fees in a civil suit if you win, that might have something to do with the laws in your area.
Having been sued once (not firearms related), the problem you face is what I call legalized extortion.
Even if you have a good case, you will incur legal fees. In my situation, my attorney acknowledged that the plaintiff didn't have much of a case, "BUT", you never know what can happen in a courtroom. If you fight and win, you may be able to recoup your expenses. If the plaintiff doesn't have any money, then what? Ever try to sue anyone who's bankrupt? If you fight and lose...? Appeal? Welcome to the lawyer gravy train.
This is usually the point at which the lawyers suggest negotiating a settlement. The plaintiff will usually settle for less than their original demand, especially if they have a weak case. So now you have to decide which is more important, your righteousness or your savings account.
It hurt, but I swallowed my pride and paid the b*******! The alternative was an ongoing legal battle that I had no guarantee of winning. Unfortunately, my experience is not uncommon. As my lawyer put it, "it's the cost of doing business".

 

[DC]

Karanas..

I agree...I was speaking about the past. Unfortunately my brother hasn't gotten that far in law school yet. My understanding is that at sometime within the last 20 yrs financial responsibility for civil litigation was changed from loser is responsible to equal responsibility...hence that enabled (coupled with more useage of contingency basis by lawyers) the proliferation of civil litigation we see today.
I'm speculating here, but I vaguely recall it had to do with enabling more equitable representation for the less financially blessed. Thus, as in everything, it was abused such that one needn't have a "good case" all you have to do is sue and that in itself damages your opponent.

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"