To use your gun or not to use it.

[Frank Ettin]

...I am not an attorney and my opinions regarding the law are my own.....

Yes, we know you're not an attorney. And while your opinions are your own and you are entitled to your opinions, you are obviously not qualified to opine reliably on matters of law. All opinions are not equal.

And whether you intend to give legal advice or not, the sad fact is that it's predictable that some people will pay attention to your opinions.

...I think that burglary as defined below satisfies the forcible felony requirement....

You posted the statutory definition in Illinois of "forcible felony", and burglary is listed as a forcible felony. But there are forms of theft which are not burglary, and burglary doesn't necessarily involve theft.

So you were still wrong when you claimed that:

...Lethal force can be used to stop felony theft of personal property....

 

[Brit]

There are so many situations,that could happen in the two cited incidents, Car jack/Restaurant Robbery? It is mindboggling, me personally? As I am most likely with my Wife, whose life is more important than mine!

So my assessment of risk to my Lady would drive my actions. Is this understood?

So faced with a young person, armed with a pistol, and a bag for cell phones and wallets, "Could you please just take the cash, and leave my ID?" And in reaching for my "Wallet" I would shoot him in the face!

That is as far as you can predict the outcome, as I can shoot with either hand or both, from sitting, kneeling or prone. Not to worried about being able to hit a target basically 6" round from 5 or 6 feet.

Now as the saying goes, the SXXX would hit the fan.

 

[45_auto]

As I am most likely with my Wife, whose life is more important than mine!

And in reaching for my "Wallet" I would shoot him in the face!

Your wife's life (which the robber would take by shooting her while you're bringing up your gun) is worth less to you than your wallet?

 

[Don P]

I’ve always felt I would never fire unless someone pointed a gun at me first, but this often happens in a robbery or carjacking. Yes, I realize most of the time they don’t shoot their victims, but sometimes they do. I suspect in the armed robbery scenario I would probably go along, but not sure I wouldn’t fight back in a carjacking.

I highlighted and bold texted my question/thought on that portion of the statement.
Do you think you could draw from concealment before being shot (gun is pointed at you) your words. Just curious?????

 

[Lohman446]

I highlighted and bold texted my question/thought on that portion of the statement.
Do you think you could draw from concealment before being shot (gun is pointed at you) your words. Just curious?????

I think most of us are hoping our adversary is uncommitted in that he or she is unwilling to continue the aggressive act once it is met by force or incompetent. Many of us are really hoping, should it come down to it, that both are true.

Am I able to draw from a concealed position (let alone seated), fire, and incapacitate a competent and determined individual who already has a weapon draw and is paying attention to me before that individual can fire? I highly doubt it.

And this is at least partly a flaw in my position even though I maintain that position. Your best chance to successfully (success involving you personally escaping unharmed) use force in the restaurant scenario is likely when your adversary is not entirely focused on you and is dealing with other patrons. Of course the moment you use force should that adversary have a partner that you have failed to identify the tables turn on you.

Edit: Before I am being accused of seeing only the negatives. If the situation arises where I do draw my gun I am reasonably competent with it. I also have two goals: to allow my family to escape the situation unharmed and, if possible, to escape unharmed. No one knows exactly how the body will react but from what I understand from martial arts training is the winner of a fight is often not the person who can hit the best but the person who can react the best to a hit. I believe most criminals are not committed to the action they are taking once their life is at high risk. In a fight with a citizen I believe most of them would rather retreat then continue the fight. If I have engaged in the fight I have determined retreat is not a safe option. At risk of sounding like a certain candidate and not going into details "I am going to WIN". Most of those of us that carried concealed are only going to use our weapons once we are committed fully to winning and have no other option. I hope that my adversary, should the situation ever arise, is not committed and seeks an option to end violence quickly - either retreat or surrender. Once I have deployed violence I am committed to using violence until one of those options are taken or one (or both) of us are no longer capable of inflicting violence.

 

[44 AMP]

Who would want to lead a life similar to George Zimmerman's living Hell?

That case is unique in several aspects, the main one being a strong effort by various groups (including the media) to turn a self defense shooting into racially motivated murder. It failed, Zimmerman was not convicted of murder, but many people still believe it was. Personally, I think he was a fool, and his behavior since the incident doesn't change my mind on that.

Other side of the coin, sort of, a few months ago, a man wielding a hatchet entered a Seattle area coffeehouse, and sliced the clerk's belly. As he was winding up for another swing, a legally armed civilian (CCW permit holder), fired one round, killing the attacker. The attacker was a minority with a long criminal history.

The CCW holder, talked to the police, and refused to talk to the press. His name is still, to date, unknown (not reported). The police said it was a good shoot, he was a hero. The clerk said he was a hero, and showed off the gash in his stomach (which through the grace of providence was only a quarter inch deep).

That fellow did what needed to be done, to save a life and likely lives. The incident disappeared from the news within a few days, and we have not heard anything about it, since.

The details of each individual situation matter, and no blanket question can have an accurate, truthful answer.

 

[Brit]

45 Auto.

Originally Posted by brit
As I am most likely with my Wife, whose life is more important than mine!

Quote:
Originally Posted by brit
And in reaching for my "Wallet" I would shoot him in the face!

Your wife's life (which the robber would take by shooting her while you're bringing up your gun) is worth less to you than your wallet?

Well Sir, as my Wife knows what is going to happen, as soon as my arm comes up, she will lie down on the bench.

The criminal was told stuff, he has to think about "can I keep my ID?"

I always face the entrance, my Wife always faces me.

The criminal will be facing me, yes? I will take my chances on his expertise with his possibly never fired handgun. I know my skill.
If he shoots me, I hope he does not shoot something I can not do without!

Faced with threat, I will fight, I have done all my life. And I am still here.

Who would feel threatened by a white bearded old Chap?

 

[K_Mac]

Who would feel threatened by a white bearded old Chap?

Brit, I learned a long time ago that you have to be very careful around old silverbacks. Now I are one!

 

[4V50 Gary]

Threat of serious bodily injury or death, yes I'd resort to force up to and including deadly force.

 

[Lohman446]

Threat of serious bodily injury or death, yes I'd resort to force up to and including deadly force.

That begs the question. Outside of restraining a child or such presented with a threat of bodily injury or death is there any level of force below deadly force one would resort to?

I don't shoot with the intent to kill anyone - I shoot with the intent to stop the aggressors violent actions. However shooting center of mass has a distinct possibility of leading to death and I accept that. I'm not "pistol whipping" someone, putting them in a restraint hold, or shooting for an extremity or weapon. If I use force I have one level of force available and that is the use of a firearm to center of mass.

You know what, if you don't mind I'm going to ask that as a question in another thread

 

[Brit]

Quote:
Threat of serious bodily injury or death, yes I'd resort to force up to and including deadly force.

That begs the question. Outside of restraining a child or such presented with a threat of bodily injury or death is there any level of force below deadly force one would resort to?

I don't shoot with the intent to kill anyone - I shoot with the intent to stop the aggressors violent actions. However shooting center of mass has a distinct possibility of leading to death and I accept that. I'm not "pistol whipping" someone, putting them in a restraint hold, or shooting for an extremity or weapon. If I use force I have one level of force available and that is the use of a firearm to center of mass.

From sitting, a shot into the nose of a man standing, has much more of a chance to cause cease and desist, quickly, than two rounds into center of mass, plus his nose is further away from my lovely Wife, than between his nipples!