i drew my weapon tonight

[TexasVet]

I honestly don't even remember what I said. I do remember saying "I am armed", and that was based on something a CHL instructor once told me to do.

other than that, I have no clue. I couldn't even really remember the color of the car

Just another clear example that we revert back to our training. So even at the range, if I am talking to/yelling at the cardboard target, this is the reason.

[n5wd]

Here's a side question that is only a little tangental to the OP's post.

Say, instead of stopping, the OP had managed to turn, and drive away, and the aggressive driver then started a chase...

Q: Would you prefer to have the bad guy stopped, and in front of you (like the OP did) or would you prefer him be mobile, chasing you?

I'm kinda torn on this - both options are bad, but I can see the chase winding up worse for all parties concerned, if I speed up (which would be natural, under the circumstances) to avoid the BG from getting in front of me and starting the whole confrontation again. (Yes, I would definitely had someone on the phone with 9-1-1 while this was going on and hopefully some officers would arrive in time to prevent real bad things from happening.

The engine and front end would make pretty good cover for the other occupants in the car IF the BG was armed (and so far, we don't know that he is)... but a high speed collision with another vehicle or worse, a fixed object, would definitely be potentially worse for everyone in the vehicle.

What would YOU prefer?

[Excaliber]

Here's a side question that is only a little tangental to the OP's post.

Say, instead of stopping, the OP had managed to turn, and drive away, and the aggressive driver then started a chase...

Q: Would you prefer to have the bad guy stopped, and in front of you (like the OP did) or would you prefer him be mobile, chasing you?

I'm kinda torn on this - both options are bad, but I can see the chase winding up worse for all parties concerned, if I speed up (which would be natural, under the circumstances) to avoid the BG from getting in front of me and starting the whole confrontation again. (Yes, I would definitely had someone on the phone with 9-1-1 while this was going on and hopefully some officers would arrive in time to prevent real bad things from happening.

The engine and front end would make pretty good cover for the other occupants in the car IF the BG was armed (and so far, we don't know that he is)... but a high speed collision with another vehicle or worse, a fixed object, would definitely be potentially worse for everyone in the vehicle.

What would YOU prefer?

Great question, and that's exactly the kind of analysis and decision one has to make in a hurry when faced with these types of situations.

The answer is: it depends on the totality of the circumstances.

[Excaliber]

It's definitely good that everything turned out well, kudos for not being confrontational yourself and just trying to stop the problem advancing.

My concern with saying I'm armed in a situation like this is it almost seems like you potentially help the BG. What if he too has a gun but doesn't have it out yet? This might make him get it or take it out. Almost like a warning shot that causes further escalation. Don't know, hope to never encounter it myself.

One might consider saying "I'm prepared to defend my family and myself if attacked."

It conveys the necessary information without the hot button of mentioning a firearm.

It's a clear, very reasonable warning that sounds good on a 911 tape, and the controlled ambiguity is disconcerting to those who are not too chemically impaired to recognize it.

100% behind you on this, but I will say this: I honestly don't even remember what I said. I do remember saying "I am armed", and that was based on something a CHL instructor once told me to do.

other than that, I have no clue. I couldn't even really remember the color of the car

If you told the average person you couldn't remember the color of the car even though you were looking right at it, they'd accuse you of not telling the truth - but you are telling the truth.

The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." You were intensely focused on the other driver who was the perceived threat. Other nonthreatening objects like the other driver's car were not important for determining whether you were about to be attacked or not. Your brain focused all your processing power on the threat, and discarded the other available visual information, even though it would have been readily recorded by a camera that was pointed at the same scene. In other words, you only remember seeing what you were looking at, even though other things were present and visible at the time.

People aren't cameras, and this is a very common perceptual phenomenon, even in non stressful situations. It is one of the things that makes the accounts of witnesses to the same event so often different, even though they were present at the same scene when it happened.

[ELB]

... I have no clue. I couldn't even really remember the color of the car

If you told the average person you couldn't remember the color of the car even though you were looking right at it, they'd accuse you of not telling the truth - but you are telling the truth.

...

I had this exact issue once when I witnessed an auto accident in Germany. I nearly pulled out in front of a speeder who came around a blind curve (scared me too); she zoomed by and struck a truck crossing the road further around the curve. The next day I went to the police station to give a statement. I knew the make and model of the car, what she was wearing, the path she followed, what happened after the accident (she screamed at the delivery truck driver, poor guy), etc etc. But then the policeman asked me the color of her car. I could not remember it to save my life. All I could remember was it seemed dirty. After the cop asked me about three times, I finally asked him. He grinned and said it was silver, and then I could see it -- it was that dull grey silver color that BMW uses. He didn't seem to think it was a big deal that I could not remember it.

[kingpinGT]

It's definitely good that everything turned out well, kudos for not being confrontational yourself and just trying to stop the problem advancing.

My concern with saying I'm armed in a situation like this is it almost seems like you potentially help the BG. What if he too has a gun but doesn't have it out yet? This might make him get it or take it out. Almost like a warning shot that causes further escalation. Don't know, hope to never encounter it myself.

One might consider saying "I'm prepared to defend my family and myself if attacked."

It conveys the necessary information without the hot button of mentioning a firearm.

It's a clear, very reasonable warning that sounds good on a 911 tape, and the controlled ambiguity is disconcerting to those who are not too chemically impaired to recognize it.

100% behind you on this, but I will say this: I honestly don't even remember what I said. I do remember saying "I am armed", and that was based on something a CHL instructor once told me to do.

other than that, I have no clue. I couldn't even really remember the color of the car

If you told the average person you couldn't remember the color of the car even though you were looking right at it, they'd accuse you of not telling the truth - but you are telling the truth.

The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." You were intensely focused on the other driver who was the perceived threat. Other nonthreatening objects like the other driver's car were not important for determining whether you were about to be attacked or not. Your brain focused all your processing power on the threat, and discarded the other available visual information, even though it would have been readily recorded by a camera that was pointed at the same scene. In other words, you only remember seeing what you were looking at, even though other things were present and visible at the time.

People aren't cameras, and this is a very common perceptual phenomenon, even in non stressful situations. It is one of the things that makes the accounts of witnesses to the same event so often different, even though they were present at the same scene when it happened.

Fascinating. Kind of like a hyper tunnel vision? Seems like it could be dangerous in a multiple threat environment, no?

[Excaliber]

It's definitely good that everything turned out well, kudos for not being confrontational yourself and just trying to stop the problem advancing.

My concern with saying I'm armed in a situation like this is it almost seems like you potentially help the BG. What if he too has a gun but doesn't have it out yet? This might make him get it or take it out. Almost like a warning shot that causes further escalation. Don't know, hope to never encounter it myself.

One might consider saying "I'm prepared to defend my family and myself if attacked."

It conveys the necessary information without the hot button of mentioning a firearm.

It's a clear, very reasonable warning that sounds good on a 911 tape, and the controlled ambiguity is disconcerting to those who are not too chemically impaired to recognize it.

100% behind you on this, but I will say this: I honestly don't even remember what I said. I do remember saying "I am armed", and that was based on something a CHL instructor once told me to do.

other than that, I have no clue. I couldn't even really remember the color of the car

If you told the average person you couldn't remember the color of the car even though you were looking right at it, they'd accuse you of not telling the truth - but you are telling the truth.

The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." You were intensely focused on the other driver who was the perceived threat. Other nonthreatening objects like the other driver's car were not important for determining whether you were about to be attacked or not. Your brain focused all your processing power on the threat, and discarded the other available visual information, even though it would have been readily recorded by a camera that was pointed at the same scene. In other words, you only remember seeing what you were looking at, even though other things were present and visible at the time.

People aren't cameras, and this is a very common perceptual phenomenon, even in non stressful situations. It is one of the things that makes the accounts of witnesses to the same event so often different, even though they were present at the same scene when it happened.

Fascinating. Kind of like a hyper tunnel vision? Seems like it could be dangerous in a multiple threat environment, no?

Yes, and that's another reason (besides tunnel vision) that officers are taught to move their heads to scan the environment during an encounter. Deliberately looking at the rest of the scene increases the chances of recognizing additional danger.

[dac1842]

I did not read all 5 pages of responses to the OP. The OP did a great job here. I have said many many times on this board you don't know how you will respond until you are put in a situation where you have to respond.
It was night time, that in itself raises more concerns, the other vehicle was driving aggressively, the other vehicle then blocks the path of the OP's vehicle. At this point I think it is safe to say a reasonable person would feel threatened, which under the deadly force continuum is the trigger factor.

Good job for someone that does not mention if he has any training other than his CHL class. That is not meant in a derogatory manner, it is a compliment.
For those that second guess his actions, you have no clue how you would respond. Second guessing is the easy part.

I would offer one suggestion to the OP. Instead of announcing you are armed, Practice stating something similar to "STOP! Step/Move any closer and you will be treated as a threat!
While what you did worked for you this time and worked well, by announcing you are armed you have played your ace, but more concerning is that had the other person been armed as well, once you announced you were armed it COULD be argued that you escalated it to an armed confrontation. Just a thought, not second guessing you, what you did worked. That sir, is the most important part of this.

Sounds like the S/O deputy handled everything properly as well.
Be Safe.

[johncanfield]

..The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." ..

I'll have to remember that phrase when my wife accuses me of not paying attention.

[Keith B]

..The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." ..

I'll have to remember that phrase when my wife accuses me of not paying attention.

I think the term you are looking for is 'Selective tune-out'. I suffer from the same disease. It is VERY common among married men.

But the tunnel vision is VERY real. I was invloved in an officer shooting years ago and my vision tunnel moved along with the suspect. Everything in that tunnel was as clear as a bell at the time, even in the low light situation we were in. When the suspect was shot I never even saw the officer pulling the trigger or the muzzle flash from his .357, even though he was well within my normal peripehral field of vision. I knew he was there and that he was not in my line of fire, but I couldn't have told you how he was dressed and what he was doing even if he had been wearing a pink tutu with a large tiara and dancing a ballet at that time.

[mojo84]

and it gets progressively worse with age and the longer one is married.

[Excaliber]

..The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." ..

I'll have to remember that phrase when my wife accuses me of not paying attention.

It won't help because it confirms her accusation that you were focused on something you considered more important than her.

She's not likely to take that well.

[ssnstump]

Excaliber...Your insight is invaluable. Thank you.
These scenarios help us all. AND i absolutely concur with KiethB's post about selective...tunnel hearing, etc.

[Excaliber]

Excaliber...Your insight is invaluable. Thank you.
These scenarios help us all. AND i absolutely concur with KiethB's post about selective...tunnel hearing, etc.

It's always gratifying to learn that my posts are helpful to someone.

Thanks for letting me know.

[texanjoker]

It's definitely good that everything turned out well, kudos for not being confrontational yourself and just trying to stop the problem advancing.

My concern with saying I'm armed in a situation like this is it almost seems like you potentially help the BG. What if he too has a gun but doesn't have it out yet? This might make him get it or take it out. Almost like a warning shot that causes further escalation. Don't know, hope to never encounter it myself.

One might consider saying "I'm prepared to defend my family and myself if attacked."

It conveys the necessary information without the hot button of mentioning a firearm.

It's a clear, very reasonable warning that sounds good on a 911 tape, and the controlled ambiguity is disconcerting to those who are not too chemically impaired to recognize it.

100% behind you on this, but I will say this: I honestly don't even remember what I said. I do remember saying "I am armed", and that was based on something a CHL instructor once told me to do.

other than that, I have no clue. I couldn't even really remember the color of the car

If you told the average person you couldn't remember the color of the car even though you were looking right at it, they'd accuse you of not telling the truth - but you are telling the truth.

The phenomenon that causes this lack of memory of something that was clearly within your view is called "inattentional blindness." You were intensely focused on the other driver who was the perceived threat. Other nonthreatening objects like the other driver's car were not important for determining whether you were about to be attacked or not. Your brain focused all your processing power on the threat, and discarded the other available visual information, even though it would have been readily recorded by a camera that was pointed at the same scene. In other words, you only remember seeing what you were looking at, even though other things were present and visible at the time.

People aren't cameras, and this is a very common perceptual phenomenon, even in non stressful situations. It is one of the things that makes the accounts of witnesses to the same event so often different, even though they were present at the same scene when it happened.

Fascinating. Kind of like a hyper tunnel vision? Seems like it could be dangerous in a multiple threat environment, no?

Yes, and that's another reason (besides tunnel vision) that officers are taught to move their heads to scan the environment during an encounter. Deliberately looking at the rest of the scene increases the chances of recognizing additional danger.

That goes back to the training we did in CA, but I have yet to see here in TX. After firing the course of fire, you scan for an additional threat before holstering.