I was asked this question. What would you do?

[beararms1776]

I was asked by a hardcore lib anti-gun co-worker when a gun subject came up what would I do in this situation:
You get in a traffic accident and you have a gun in your car and an unarmed man much bigger than you is raging mad and running towards you would you shoot? "No" I answered, He's not armed so I would run and call police.
Then I asked him what he would do and he replied he would shoot.
Am I wrong about my view of an unarmed person? What would you do?

 

[esrice]

Am I wrong about my view of an unarmed person? What would you do?

The assailant being armed has nothing to do with it.

Ask yourself "was I in fear of death or grave bodily harm?"

(very simplified)

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

It's all subjective and wholly dependent upon the totality of the individual circumstances of the incident as they happen "real time"...

:-)

 

[shibumiseeker]

Is he a hundred feet away or 20? My first instinct is to put some distance between me and the aggressor. If I am unable to do so then I will pull my weapon and prepare to shoot. If the aggressor keeps coming when a gun is pointed at him, fire.

If he's a hundred feet away and I can move to cover then I will do so.

The law does not require you to get into a fistfight with someone, even someone you are pretty sure you could take; a civil court is a whole different matter. You are legally able to defend yourself from assault and battery with a weapon should you choose. Heck, you can Taser a 10 year old who is hitting you and get away from criminal charges

 

[johnsmith]

I'm 63 years old. Almost any threat to me is serious and I may respond with deadly force. If a raging 10 year old is attacking me, I may hold him until his parents show up, but if a 6'3" SEIU thug lays his hands on me, I'll pump his chest with as many shots as I can get off.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I was asked by a hardcore lib anti-gun co-worker when a gun subject came up what would I do in this situation:
You get in a traffic accident and you have a gun in your car and an unarmed man much bigger than you is raging mad and running towards you would you shoot? "No" I answered, He's not armed so I would run and call police.
Then I asked him what he would do and he replied he would shoot.
Am I wrong about my view of an unarmed person? What would you do?

I've had angry citizens get out of their cars and yell at me for cutting them off, etc. I politely apologize and ask them to get back into their car. It's worked so far.

Having said that, unless I truly fear for my life, I wouldn't draw my weapon in a situation like that. I would ready my pepper spray and I would call the police, and probably lock myself inside my car.

I'm not surprised that your hard-core-Liberal co-worker would tend to shoot first. Firearms are probably a magic wand to him; you wave it around and other people comply.

 

[360]

I'm 63 years old. Almost any threat to me is serious and I may respond with deadly force. If a raging 10 year old is attacking me, I may hold him until his parents show up, but if a 6'3" SEIU thug lays his hands on me, I'll pump his chest with as many shots as I can get off.

 

[cosermann]

The implication of your liberal friend's question seems to be, that he'd rather be gravely injured or dead than to use lethal force against someone else to prevent grave bodily injury to himself, or even his own death. You might ask if that's really what he's trying to say.

 

[ATM]

Get out and start removing your clothes.

Most people do not want to fight a nekkid person.


They fear it might turn into wrasslin'

 

[jsgolfman]

I've had angry citizens get out of their cars and yell at me for cutting them off, etc. I politely apologize and ask them to get back into their car. It's worked so far.

Having said that, unless I truly fear for my life, I wouldn't draw my weapon in a situation like that. I would ready my pepper spray and I would call the police, and probably lock myself inside my car.

I'm not surprised that your hard-core-Liberal co-worker would tend to shoot first. Firearms are probably a magic wand to him; you wave it around and other people comply.

I think that's an interesting comment about liberals. I think it would also apply to anyone who is not familiar with weapons. People who don't handle or otherwise interact with weapons on a regular basis (or ever) probably DO have a sense of awe or mystique about their use and usefulness or lack thereof.
They typically espouse an opinion akin to revulsion when it comes to weapons...unless confronted with a scenario like the one mentioned above. Then that, if I may use your phrasing, "magic wand" comes out and fixes things.

 

[Jubbie]

Then that, if I may use your phrasing, "magic wand" comes out and fixes things.

Goes right along with ATM's idea.

 

[indyjoe]

It comes down to the same situation that Police can run into. If you have a pistol, ANY ENCOUNTER can be a lethal one. If the person were to stun you, over power you, or some how take possession of your weapon. It is a lethal encounter.

That said, the chances of a 4' nothing old lady getting my weapon is small and I would be in serious trouble if I jumped a few ladder rungs in the force continuum to shooting her.

However, someone that is fit and looks like they can kick my ass will be put down if they are close enough and aggressive enough that I believe my life or those around me are in immediate danger. If solo, I will retreat if possible. If I am protecting others, I may not be able to. If the first blow puts me into a situation where I can't recover, not pulling my weapon could mean all that are with me are about to be killed by it.

 

[youngda9]

Apply AOJ to all situations, learn it and understand it.

Cornered Cat - Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy

 

[beararms1776]

Real life scenario would of course be different but I just have the issue of an unarmed person. I didn't think about this before but a person could carry a bottle of mace in their car for a situation like that or a tazer. But if they were fataly injured with a gun or tazer and they were unarmed, that may not play out so well for the defender.

 

[beararms1776]

 

[colt45er]

You don't know the training nor the skill of the person charging you. Your life may very well be in danger depending on the situation.

If I truly felt my life were in danger in this situation, it would not matter if he had a weapon or not. I, as a reasonable individual, believed he intended to cause me grave physical harm.

 

[beararms1776]

I'm not surprised that your hard-core-Liberal co-worker would tend to shoot first. Firearms are probably a magic wand to him; you wave it around and other people comply.

Yeah, it doesn't make sense does it. I mean being all anti gun and all then shoot an unarmed man. Typical. Then again he never did make much sense.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I'm 63 years old. Almost any threat to me is serious and I may respond with deadly force. If a raging 10 year old is attacking me, I may hold him until his parents show up, but if a 6'3" SEIU thug lays his hands on me, I'll pump his chest with as many shots as I can get off.

Yep, this.

 

[Joe Williams]

I was asked by a hardcore lib anti-gun co-worker when a gun subject came up what would I do in this situation:
You get in a traffic accident and you have a gun in your car and an unarmed man much bigger than you is raging mad and running towards you would you shoot? "No" I answered, He's not armed so I would run and call police.
Then I asked him what he would do and he replied he would shoot.
Am I wrong about my view of an unarmed person? What would you do?

Depends on whether or not I was in fear of being killed or suffering serious bodily harm. If there is an alternative, I'll take it. And that includes running if safely feasible. If not... I'm a little dude. If a whack job places me in fear for my safety, I'll act to end the threat.

Like I tell my boy, guns are to used in extreme situations. They are useful for solving almost none of the problems we face in our daily lives.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Bear in mind that there will likely be witnesses to the event, and their perception of what happened may be critical to what occurs afterward.

There are anti-gun prosecutors who regard it as a personal affront when a citizen uses a gun for personal defense rather than "letting the police handle it" and who will prosecute even the most clear cases of justifiable homicide. Anyone unfortunate enough to find themselves in the scenario described here needs to act in such a manner so that witnesses will say, "Yes officer, that poor man did everything he could to try to get away from the other man but the other man simply gave him no choice."

There were times in my law enforcement career when I knew going into a situation that I was probably going to have to give some lumps to an uncooperative suspect, and there would be a use of force investigation. I always did my utmost to get the bad guy to give up, even when it was a complete waste of time. And when the dust settled and my bosses were interviewing the witnesses, they would say, "Yes sergeant, that young officer tried very hard to get that terrible man to stop what he was doing but the man simply wouldn't cooperate. The officer had no choice but to use force. I just don't know how he able to be patient with the man for as long as he was."

It's a shame that we have to think of things like this, but it's necessary. Perception is reality.