How Should This Confrontation Be Handled?

[K.Mooneyham]

I'll pile on with the rest of them, can't hurt to reinforce the point. Do not get out of the car. If the other person comes up to you in a violent, confrontational manner, they are in the wrong. Call the police if violence ensues, stay ready, and avoid as much trouble as possible.

[Solsand]

To all - as the original poster, this thread sort of got away from me. Before I had a chance to reply.This is only my second post and my previous was with regards to open carry on a MC. I tell you I love this forum and every answer to my post was informative or helpful in some way. And a lot of the answers are just plain common sense - "why get out of the car", "why not pull away", etc. The one thing I was taught in my class that I always try to remember was the duty of the CHL holder to de-escalate any confrontation. That one mantra will probably save most folks a lot of pain, trouble and heartache.

That said, because I am an almost daily MC rider, I made one glaring omission when setting up this (as I'm sure most of you have guessed by now) not so hypothetical situation... What if I'm on my bike with no way to remove myself (e.g. blocked in)? This actually occurred to a fellow rider brother of mine. He went out of his way to NOT shoot the guy, but we all wondered if he was within his rights and the law to hold the guy - at gunpoint if necessary - until LEO could arrive. Since he did not, the offender fled and has never been caught (more than a year). Police report after the fact proved he was not the aggressor regardless of whatever road rage incident may have taken place. He was on a bike, the other party approached at the light and before he could side stand his bike to at least defend himself... BAM!

So I apologize to all who have answered my post, but definitely not a waste. These answers still apply to a situation that could occur to anyone. If some of you could now, re-assess this scenario with the changes I have just described. Could he legally hold the offender at gunpoint until LEO arrives, using his phone communication with 911 as a sort of record of the events and to avoid any possible confrontation with LEO arriving on scene?

You guys are awesome and I really appreciate the interest. I'm sure I'm biased but as a MC rider we are constantly - sometimes daily - faced with folks who would rather just run " those scum bikers" off the road. Heaven forbid we flip someone off after the fact or use a get back whip...

[The Annoyed Man]

Ok here we go, I'd really like to know what is going to be inside/ outside LTC law-

Hypothetically, a road rage incident of some kind takes place. We both have to stop at the next light. Driver approaches me on foot WITHOUT a weapon, words are exchanged. He decides to turn this into a physical confrontation, takes a swing and I am knocked to the ground. I'm carrying - he could be - so I immediately draw my weapon and tell him he can either be shot or he can back off and freeze. I call 911 and explain the situation and ask for LEO to come out. My question- can I legally hold him at gun point until LEO arrives? Will I likely be arrested for drawing my weapon? Not looking for the "you should have just shot him/ fear for life" answer. I am tying to see if this altercation can be handled in the manner I have just described without having to shoot this guy. I know most of you have probably seen the video of the two ragers in Austin last month, where one guy approached the other with a bat. He could have been shot and the shooter would not likely have been charged. This scenario is not what I am describing...

Thoughts? Advice? Thanks.

Consider only the part in red for a moment......

1. You were both in your cars.
2. You both stopped at the next light.
3. He approaches you on foot.
4. You are knocked to the ground.
5. WHY the heck did you get out of your car?

If he's approaching on foot, stay in your darn car and drive away.

[Jusme]

To all - as the original poster, this thread sort of got away from me. Before I had a chance to reply.This is only my second post and my previous was with regards to open carry on a MC. I tell you I love this forum and every answer to my post was informative or helpful in some way. And a lot of the answers are just plain common sense - "why get out of the car", "why not pull away", etc. The one thing I was taught in my class that I always try to remember was the duty of the CHL holder to de-escalate any confrontation. That one mantra will probably save most folks a lot of pain, trouble and heartache.

That said, because I am an almost daily MC rider, I made one glaring omission when setting up this (as I'm sure most of you have guessed by now) not so hypothetical situation... What if I'm on my bike with no way to remove myself (e.g. blocked in)? This actually occurred to a fellow rider brother of mine. He went out of his way to NOT shoot the guy, but we all wondered if he was within his rights and the law to hold the guy - at gunpoint if necessary - until LEO could arrive. Since he did not, the offender fled and has never been caught (more than a year). Police report after the fact proved he was not the aggressor regardless of whatever road rage incident may have taken place. He was on a bike, the other party approached at the light and before he could side stand his bike to at least defend himself... BAM!

So I apologize to all who have answered my post, but definitely not a waste. These answers still apply to a situation that could occur to anyone. If some of you could now, re-assess this scenario with the changes I have just described. Could he legally hold the offender at gunpoint until LEO arrives, using his phone communication with 911 as a sort of record of the events and to avoid any possible confrontation with LEO arriving on scene?

You guys are awesome and I really appreciate the interest. I'm sure I'm biased but as a MC rider we are constantly - sometimes daily - faced with folks who would rather just run " those scum bikers" off the road. Heaven forbid we flip someone off after the fact or use a get back whip...

While being on a bike definitely changes the inside/outside issue and as a rider myself I know how vulnerable someone on a bike can be not only while moving but while stopped for lights/traffic etc. I still stand by my original reply in that once the gun has been produced and the attack has stopped, then to possibly re-escalate the situation by trying to force the aggressor to stay puts you into a precarious situation in that, if he tries to leave, you would not be justified in using deadly force to stop him from doing so. I would at that point call 911 and speak to any other witnesses and see if they will remain to speak with police.

[Pawpaw]

Being on a bike certainly changes things and makes the "stay in your vehicle" advice a non-starter.

I'm having a hard time picturing a situation where a bike would be completely trapped. Unless you're riding a full dresser, you should be able to take off between the line of cars. You do leave a bike length or two between you and the vehicle ahead, right? Still, it COULD happen.

If someone is able to sneak up on you so quickly you don't have time to get off, you need to work on your situational awareness. When you see the threat, don't worry about the kickstand unless there's time to put it down. Step off the bike on the opposite side to the threat and let the bike fall toward the threat (scratches can be fixed) and take a step or two backwards, thus putting an obstacle between you. At this point, I would start yelling, "Get back!", "Get away from me!". If nothing else, it will get other people's attention. If he moves to step around the bike to get to you, I would think you'd be on solid ground to draw your weapon - you can be pretty certain you're under attack.

Every situation is different, so your mileage may vary. I just tried to work within the terms you set.

Edit: If, instead of pressing the attack, he goes back to his vehicle, let him. If you can safely get the license number, that's good. If not, then let it go. If you pulled your weapon, stop as close as safely possible and call 911 to report it. You don't know what he might call 911 and say. He had a lot more opportunity to get your license number.

[Solsand]

To all - as the original poster, this thread sort of got away from me. Before I had a chance to reply.This is only my second post and my previous was with regards to open carry on a MC. I tell you I love this forum and every answer to my post was informative or helpful in some way. And a lot of the answers are just plain common sense - "why get out of the car", "why not pull away", etc. The one thing I was taught in my class that I always try to remember was the duty of the CHL holder to de-escalate any confrontation. That one mantra will probably save most folks a lot of pain, trouble and heartache.

That said, because I am an almost daily MC rider, I made one glaring omission when setting up this (as I'm sure most of you have guessed by now) not so hypothetical situation... What if I'm on my bike with no way to remove myself (e.g. blocked in)? This actually occurred to a fellow rider brother of mine. He went out of his way to NOT shoot the guy, but we all wondered if he was within his rights and the law to hold the guy - at gunpoint if necessary - until LEO could arrive. Since he did not, the offender fled and has never been caught (more than a year). Police report after the fact proved he was not the aggressor regardless of whatever road rage incident may have taken place. He was on a bike, the other party approached at the light and before he could side stand his bike to at least defend himself... BAM!

So I apologize to all who have answered my post, but definitely not a waste. These answers still apply to a situation that could occur to anyone. If some of you could now, re-assess this scenario with the changes I have just described. Could he legally hold the offender at gunpoint until LEO arrives, using his phone communication with 911 as a sort of record of the events and to avoid any possible confrontation with LEO arriving on scene?

You guys are awesome and I really appreciate the interest. I'm sure I'm biased but as a MC rider we are constantly - sometimes daily - faced with folks who would rather just run " those scum bikers" off the road. Heaven forbid we flip someone off after the fact or use a get back whip...

While being on a bike definitely changes the inside/outside issue and as a rider myself I know how vulnerable someone on a bike can be not only while moving but while stopped for lights/traffic etc. I still stand by my original reply in that once the gun has been produced and the attack has stopped, then to possibly re-escalate the situation by trying to force the aggressor to stay puts you into a precarious situation in that, if he tries to leave, you would not be justified in using deadly force to stop him from doing so. I would at that point call 911 and speak to any other witnesses and see if they will remain to speak with police.

I think this actually answers my question... if he attempts to flee then I am no longer justified in using force of any kind, to hold him until police arrived. Now, if I attempt to get away from the attacker and he continues to pursue - and I can pull my weapon with no doubt of it not being taken from me - at that point I WOULD be justified correct?

[Jusme]

To all - as the original poster, this thread sort of got away from me. Before I had a chance to reply.This is only my second post and my previous was with regards to open carry on a MC. I tell you I love this forum and every answer to my post was informative or helpful in some way. And a lot of the answers are just plain common sense - "why get out of the car", "why not pull away", etc. The one thing I was taught in my class that I always try to remember was the duty of the CHL holder to de-escalate any confrontation. That one mantra will probably save most folks a lot of pain, trouble and heartache.

That said, because I am an almost daily MC rider, I made one glaring omission when setting up this (as I'm sure most of you have guessed by now) not so hypothetical situation... What if I'm on my bike with no way to remove myself (e.g. blocked in)? This actually occurred to a fellow rider brother of mine. He went out of his way to NOT shoot the guy, but we all wondered if he was within his rights and the law to hold the guy - at gunpoint if necessary - until LEO could arrive. Since he did not, the offender fled and has never been caught (more than a year). Police report after the fact proved he was not the aggressor regardless of whatever road rage incident may have taken place. He was on a bike, the other party approached at the light and before he could side stand his bike to at least defend himself... BAM!

So I apologize to all who have answered my post, but definitely not a waste. These answers still apply to a situation that could occur to anyone. If some of you could now, re-assess this scenario with the changes I have just described. Could he legally hold the offender at gunpoint until LEO arrives, using his phone communication with 911 as a sort of record of the events and to avoid any possible confrontation with LEO arriving on scene?

You guys are awesome and I really appreciate the interest. I'm sure I'm biased but as a MC rider we are constantly - sometimes daily - faced with folks who would rather just run " those scum bikers" off the road. Heaven forbid we flip someone off after the fact or use a get back whip...

While being on a bike definitely changes the inside/outside issue and as a rider myself I know how vulnerable someone on a bike can be not only while moving but while stopped for lights/traffic etc. I still stand by my original reply in that once the gun has been produced and the attack has stopped, then to possibly re-escalate the situation by trying to force the aggressor to stay puts you into a precarious situation in that, if he tries to leave, you would not be justified in using deadly force to stop him from doing so. I would at that point call 911 and speak to any other witnesses and see if they will remain to speak with police.

I think this actually answers my question... if he attempts to flee then I am no longer justified in using force of any kind, to hold him until police arrived. Now, if I attempt to get away from the attacker and he continues to pursue - and I can pull my weapon with no doubt of it not being taken from me - at that point I WOULD be justified


If the person continues after you have drawn your weapon and you believe your life is in danger then yes you are justified in using deadly force, but being justified does not always mean it is the best decision. Everyone who is put into a situation will have to make that decision for themself, I say a prayer every time I put on my gun that it will stay in its holster and I'll never have to make the choice to use it on another human being.

Stay safe and aware.

[Mavs00]

I think this actually answers my question... if he attempts to flee then I am no longer justified in using force of any kind, to hold him until police arrived. Now, if I attempt to get away from the attacker and he continues to pursue - and I can pull my weapon with no doubt of it not being taken from me - at that point I WOULD be justified


If the person continues after you have drawn your weapon and you believe your life is in danger then yes you are justified in using deadly force, but being justified does not always mean it is the best decision. Everyone who is put into a situation will have to make that decision for themself, I say a prayer every time I put on my gun that it will stay in its holster and I'll never have to make the choice to use it on another human being.

Stay safe and aware.

I think this is correct.

As I understand it, If he just assaults you by punching you in the face first (unprovoked) you would be justified to DISPLAY your firearm to get him to stop, as a DISPLAY is a use of force to meet an unprovoked use of force. I would hazard to guess that you would certainly not be authorized to DISCHARGE (deadly force) in that situation, as him just using his fists on you hardly justifies feeling that your life is in "danger". Unless he displays a weapon like a knife, or a baseball bat or something, you might have a hard time defending that use of deadly force against him to a jury of your peers. If he is pursuing you while you are attempting to get away or after you've shown your weapon.... much more likely to be justified, but still. Juries are funny things.....

As for the holding him until police get there. I'd be interested to know what the correct answer is on that one too. On one hand, he's assaulted you and you are in essence effecting a "citizens arrest" so it might be okay. However, once the imminent threat is removed (such as him fleeing, or attempting to flee), you no longer have the justification to use the weapon in a force on force incident, so detaining him is in essence holding him against his will.

[txblackout]

you should always leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front for you to escape. There is a youtube video from south america where the bad guys are in the car in front. The front car stops suddenly and the guys get out and carjack the car behind which cannot escape because the rear car stopped too close.

If you change the question to motorcycle I would say the motorcyclist should leave as soon as the person comes out in a threatening manner.

[thetexan]

Ok here we go, I'd really like to know what is going to be inside/ outside LTC law-

Hypothetically, a road rage incident of some kind takes place. We both have to stop at the next light. Driver approaches me on foot WITHOUT a weapon, words are exchanged. He decides to turn this into a physical confrontation, takes a swing and I am knocked to the ground. I'm carrying - he could be - so I immediately draw my weapon and tell him he can either be shot or he can back off and freeze. I call 911 and explain the situation and ask for LEO to come out. My question- can I legally hold him at gun point until LEO arrives? Will I likely be arrested for drawing my weapon? Not looking for the "you should have just shot him/ fear for life" answer. I am tying to see if this altercation can be handled in the manner I have just described without having to shoot this guy. I know most of you have probably seen the video of the two ragers in Austin last month, where one guy approached the other with a bat. He could have been shot and the shooter would not likely have been charged. This scenario is not what I am describing...

Thoughts? Advice? Thanks.

As to drawing your weapon...

You can use common or deadly force if you meet the statutory requirements in 9.22, 9.31, and 9.32. If you meet those requirements of the use of deadly force then the display of your gun with the threat of deadly force is permissible. No statute requires you to actualize the use of deadly force. But your use of or threat of the use of deadly force is only available as long as the requirements of 9.22, 9.31, and 9.32 are in place; in other words, as long as you have a reasonable fear of a threat of serious bodily injury or death against you requiring the immediate use of deadly force. Once that disappears your authority given in those statutes goes away.

As to holding a person at gunpoint...

Texas Criminal Procedure states...Art. 14.01. OFFENSE WITHIN VIEW. (a) A peace officer or any other person, may, without a warrant, arrest an offender when the offense is committed in his presence or within his view, if the offense is one classed as a felony or as an offense against the public peace.
(b) A peace officer may arrest an offender without a warrant for any offense committed in his presence or within his view.

see also Officeof the Attorney General, Texas, White Opinion, Opinion No. MW-537, Dec. 22, 1987 (citing Alexander v. United States, 390 F.2d 101 (5th Cir. 1968); Romo v. State, 577 S.W.2d 251 (Tex. Crim.App. 1979); Woods v. State, 213 S.W.2d 685 (Tex. Crim. App. 1948)) (“Any individual may make a ‘citizen’s arrest’ under that provision, provided that all applicable legal requirements are met.”).

The best definition of arrest I have found is, "A seizure or forcible restraint; an exercise of the power to deprive a person of his or her liberty; the taking or keeping of a person in custody by legal authority, especially, in response to a criminal charge.

In Texas you are authorized under the above circumstances to forcibly deprive a person of his liberty. However, I find nothing beyond 9.22, 9.31, or 9.32 that authorizes that force can be escalated to use of or threat of use of deadly force. If the threat of serious bodily injury or death no longer requires the immediately necessary use of or threat of use of deadly force to counter it, then your authority to use or threaten to use deadly force is gone.

So...can you make a citizen's arrest using force? Yes, pursuant to Texas CP 14.01. Can you use common force to effect the arrest? I believe the rule allows that, when and to the extent necessary to effect the arrest. Can you use the threat of deadly force to effect the arrest? Not unless you have authority to use deadly force under the present circumstances.

Example. The guy goes for his gun and you instinctively deck him. He is now groaning on the ground and you have disarmed him. Can you use the threat of deadly force (showing your gun) to keep him on the ground. I don't believe so, since the threat requiring immediate necessity is gone, and, by law, you can only threaten the use of deadly force if you are authorized to use deadly force. In a situation where a deadly threat has been neutralized, you can use whatever common force is necessary, I believe, when and to the extent necessary to effect the arrest until the cops arrive, but nothing more.

If your attacker is still a threat requiring the immediately necessary use of or threat of the use of deadly force then you've still got major problems requiring defending yourself, much less effecting an arrest.

I am sure there is plenty of case law to be found on this subject in the state law library. Also, for more on the subject study warrantless arrests.

tex

[FCH]

...as him just using his fists on you hardly justifies feeling that your life is in "danger"...

I strongly disagree. When a full grown man is coming at you with his fists, you can definitely be killed.

[thetexan]

...as him just using his fists on you hardly justifies feeling that your life is in "danger"...

I strongly disagree. When a full grown man is coming at you with his fists, you can definitely be killed.

The law requires a reasonable fear requiring an immediately necessary use of deadly force, only when and only to the extent necessary to avoid the injury or death. AS LONG AS THAT FEAR REQUIRING THE IMMEDIATE NECESSITY TO AVOID SERIOUS BODILY INJURY OR DEATH IS REASONABLE it doesn't matter if he's coming at you with a fist, a pillow, a nerf bat, or a feather boa! And would certainly include any instrument of deadly force.

AS LONG AS YOUR FEAR IS REASONABLE.

[Solsand]

Yes we were taught exactly that in our CHL class. "Especially..." he added, "if there is a significant size difference between aggressor and potential victim." Fists can definitely be considered weapons.

[WildBill]

...as him just using his fists on you hardly justifies feeling that your life is in "danger"...

I strongly disagree. When a full grown man is coming at you with his fists, you can definitely be killed.

The law requires a reasonable fear requiring an immediately necessary use of deadly force, only when and only to the extent necessary to avoid the injury or death. AS LONG AS THAT FEAR REQUIRING THE IMMEDIATE NECESSITY TO AVOID SERIOUS BODILY INJURY OR DEATH IS REASONABLE it doesn't matter if he's coming at you with a fist, a pillow, a nerf bat, or a feather boa! And would certainly include any instrument of deadly force.

AS LONG AS YOUR FEAR IS REASONABLE.

The law says nothing about FEAR.

[thetexan]

You are correct. The word is belief. My mistake. Fear is a belief however, but belief is the word.