TexasCHLforum.com

G26ster wrote:

hi-power wrote:
I just wanted to make sure you saw the other part of srothstein's quote:

srothstein wrote:I have to admit that I would try the recommended shouting first, but if they did not stop, the one on the left goes first.

That was the reason for my original question. It's not the posturing, or even the drawing of the weapon I was questioning. It was the "one on the left goes first," that implies shooting someone who did not heed your command to stay away. That is why I asked when did a crime listed in the statute become imminent? I just don't think failure to obey someone's command to stop is just cause for being shot, sans other evidence of a crime in progress IMHO. I'm not a lawyer or a LEO.

Superman wrote:It sounds like there is a lot of inferring on what "might" happen. The inference could be very wrong and displaying a weapon could have the opposite effect (scaring them and making them call the cops on you). The easiest way to be sure is to *communicate*...simply ask them to stay back until you're done with your transaction and then they can have the ATM. If they don't comply after that and keep coming towards you (or even reply in a bad way), then your inference of them wanting to do you harm is much more easily justified. Talking to clarify your inferences is free...assuming you're correct can cost a lot. Putting myself in that situation, that's what I would have done (communicate to stay back and then show/draw if they didn't respect the request). By communicating before the draw, you take away their potential "excuse" of them just trying to use the ATM too and then trying to say you overreacted. Just my 2 cents...

srothstein wrote:I have to admit that I would try the recommended shouting first, but if they did not stop, the one on the left goes first.