Would it have been justified to draw a firearm.

[MikeDVB]

Avoidance is always best - even if you were charged and acquitted or the shoot was ruled as justified - you'll still find yourself in civil court.

If you can survive and avoid serious bodily injury without shooting, you shouldn't shoot.

 

[T2D4]

lol at these wannabe cowboy threads.

"i clearly had time to react and avoid the situation, but it would have been more fun to draw my weapon, so can i do that next time?"

 

[indytechnerd]

I think we have to add an addendum to the "draw your weapon in the face of danger" and that's "...and will drawing (and possibly firing) my weapon eliminate that danger".

In this instance I think that 2nd criteria would not be met. Ok, we see it plenty in Jason Statham movies, but I don't see anyone in the general populace reacting to a vehicle driven toward them by drawing their weapon, disabling the driver/vehicle with well placed gunfire, and diving out of harms way, avoiding being squashed by the now out of control car.

Sure you can draw your weapon because the guy poses a serious threat to your future as a professional break dancer, but this isn't "Tango and Cash" and you're not going to cause that van to come to a screeching halt inches in front of you.

Get clear of the nutball and save the SD rounds for threats that will be affected by them.

 

[bw8755]

Even if you could have drawn and shot, in 20' you still would have been hit by the vehicle as it would not have brought an immediate stop to the vehicle. HEck, getting shot may have caused the driver to further depress the gas pedal.

 

[88GT]

I think INGO needs to learn to read. He didn't ask if it was prudent or the best course of action. He asked if it would be justified, by which I assume he means legally justified.*

The answer is an unequivocal "yes." Read the code. Unholstering is not discharging. The law doesn't regulate when you can and can't unholster. It's a little grader if he wants to discharge said firearm, but reasonable man standard applies.

I do not understand the insistence that someone wait until the last possible moment to draw, regardless.




*morally, the answer is always.

 

[MikeDVB]

@88GT quit injecting sense into this conversation!

 

[fw501]

No. As a LEO I would not have been justified either. Use of Force Continuum says no.

 

[rjc2rjc]

I have learned all ready from just my few posts on here that no one will see everything the way everyone else see's it. Some go about explaining there differences or aggrements with others in a tactfull way and respectfull way.
But some are just plane a$$ hats about things.

If some would just take the time to read things compleatly before puking out a bunch of nonsence that was never said, or assuming the posting person means they want to be the guy who just wants to draw there gun and shoot at something. we would all be happy happy happy.

i never stated that i wanted to shoot at a moving car. i did state that i felt for a moment my life was in danger. but i WAS able to move myself out of the way with a couple giant steps. I also stated that I felt like getting out of the way was my first response. I didnt have a gun on me so i couldnt have drew one if i wanted to.

My question which I did say in the original post was on the lines of thinking of others, such as the hadicaped, elderly or people with small children. The people who arn't as able to move as fast as they once could.

I can tell you if i would'nt have been able to get the last step in I would have been hit by the van. But that is a mute point because I was able to and for me at that time doing such was the correct response. Really my only avalible response.

I sat and thought on it for a couple days and then posted the question. but like stated earlyer some dont bother to read the intire post before they assume.

 

[IndyGunworks]

I can tell you if i would'nt have been able to get the last step in I would have been hit by the van. But that is a mute point because I was able to and for me at that time doing such was the correct response. Really my only avalible response.
.

In that set of circumstances a firearm would have made NO difference, handicapped or not, the person would have been hit by the van. If you were one step away from getting hit, the time it took you to draw would have cancelled that one step and you wouldn't be posting this question at all.

 

[rjc2rjc]

Once again the question is not about me. Think about the person we have all seen walking slower than your self. we have all been behind them or seen them they can only take 2 to 3 steps to your one let alone take 2 giant steps. Those are the people i am wondering about. I know it is hypothetical and things can play out in alot of different ways. But im not asking about if i would be dead , or if i was able to take the giant steps . Im saying people who are not ABLE to.


SCREW IT I GIVE UP!
Forgive me for thinking.

 

[IndyGunworks]

THATS WHAT I AM SAYING... you are the one not listening. If they were to slow to get out of the way, drawing a firearm would not have helped. The van had forward motion and even a 50bmg fired into it... hell 50 50bmg's fired into will not stop the forward momentum and they would have been hit. No matter how slow or fast the person is, its loose loose to try and draw a firearm. Getting out of the way as quick as possible would be the BEST choice to make w/ a moving vehicle coming at you.

 

[rjc2rjc]

In that set of circumstances a firearm would have made NO difference, handicapped or not, the person would have been hit by the van. If you were one step away from getting hit, the time it took you to draw would have cancelled that one step and you wouldn't be posting this question at all.

I stand some what corrected. You started out with "the person" and ended with me.
I was still peaved about a couple other posts and did not heed my own words and make the switch over in my head.

I do underestand what you are saying and i agree if you are capable of getting out of the way. That is the better choice. If it was a handicapped person in what ever way. And they know they cant get out of the way. Should they just do nothing and get ran over? Or draw and fire and at least give there self some sort of a chance. How ever slim it may be anythings better than just letting them self get ran over.

Its a hypotheticly slippery slope kind of situation. I would say if it was me not being able to move out of the way and I was sure I couldn't. I would atleast try to give my self that chance. Maybe I still get hit? Then maybe the guy see's the gun and pulls the steering will. I dont know.
I guess the way I see it is. It would be justified in that situation. What ever the out come would be. Atleast one way or the other I did something to try and save my life. And if the driver gets hit by the bullets and i still get ran over. Then atleast he is going to jail or the grave.

 

[IndyGunworks]

I guess I understand it clearly. So lets break it down. A vehicle coming at you w/ no other course of action MIGHT justify drawing, but you have to prove that to a jury and that will be difficult. Under your set of circumstances it wouldn't be hard for a lawyer to get what YOU heard dismissed as hearsay because you cannot prove that they actually said what you heard.

So, you are in the grey area.

Regardless of the grey area ANY amount of mobility in an attempt to get out of the way is the wise choice because no bullet is going to keep that vehicle from hitting you so why take the extra time to draw instead of using that as a last ditch effort to get yourself out of the way, or at least low and between the wheel base?

 

[dbiernesser]

I would say it would have not been justified. It sounded like you had ample time to get out of the way.

Now if you had to dive out of the way or if there was a store employee yelling after him or was brandishing a weapon or something like that I'd say that's a different circumstance.

Also think that in an active shooting situation, your first priority is to get safe (to cover) not to shooting at moving vans while diving and drawing too. We have our licenses to carry to protect our families and ourselves. But that's just my two cents.

If, on the other hand, the van swerved through the parking lot to try and hit you then you may have had a valid case for self defense.

I absolutely agree with this.

 

[beararms1776]

The other day I was walking into the Lowes hardware store. As I was walking across the the drive between the parking spots and the front of the store there was a van sitting there running. As I got into the middle of the drive a man came running out of the store and dove into the passenger side back of van yelling at the driver to GO GO GO MOTHER BLEEPER GO.

I knew what was going on right away. But I hadn't relized where I was standing. The driver started yelling at the guy that jumped in saying," he wasnt going to go to jail" but then punched the gas with me standing about 20 ft infront of the van. i was able to get out of the way but only because I took a couple giant steps to get out of the way.

Now with that story told. the way I am thinking is. i was able to take the giant steps to get out of the way but barely. So one could say sence I was able to get out of the way that drawing the firearm would have been a no no.

An argument could also been made that they were comitting a crime and running me over with a van in that crime makes the van a deadly weapon and drawing would have been an adequate responce.

And so you know i am still waiting on my permit and was not in possesion of a firearm. This has just been in my head every since it happened.
Did I feel my life was in danger yes until I got that last step out of the way. What if I wasnt able to take those steps. Say I was an elderly man with a permit to have a firearm and couldnt have taken those steps.



After talking to the lady at the counter I found out I was almost ran over so the guy could steal 2 cordless drills.

No. It would have to be an extreme dire situation. To me, this doesn't quite fit the case.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

There's the laws of the state of Indiana, and there's the laws of physics.

One, you're probably GTG on. The other, not so much.

 

[printcraft]

Just dump a mag into the van, it will aspolde and flip over.

Don't forget the victory dance.

 

[Bushido Devil Dog]

My is that is you have the artistic skills...

...feel free to draw as many firearms as you like!

 

[firefighterjohn]

I guess I understand it clearly. So lets break it down. A vehicle coming at you w/ no other course of action MIGHT justify drawing, but you have to prove that to a jury and that will be difficult. Under your set of circumstances it wouldn't be hard for a lawyer to get what YOU heard dismissed as hearsay because you cannot prove that they actually said what you heard.

So, you are in the grey area.

Regardless of the grey area ANY amount of mobility in an attempt to get out of the way is the wise choice because no bullet is going to keep that vehicle from hitting you so why take the extra time to draw instead of using that as a last ditch effort to get yourself out of the way, or at least low and between the wheel base?

And most attorneys are masters of finding that one little piece of testimony to use against you...

 

[Tnichols00]

IMO the question that you should be asking yourself is not would it have stopped the robbery but...

Was your life or the life of another in danger?

No is the answer, you were easily able to get out of the way and he did not run over anyone else. The life of a human has much more value than two cordless drills, even if he is a shmuck.