TexasCHLforum.com

K.Mooneyham

FCH wrote:
Richbirdhunter wrote:When I qualified for my CHL the instructor told us not to save our targets or to take pictures of them. He said that it could be used against us in court if we were involved in a shooting
My CHL instructor said the same thing. He implied, right or wrong, the target could be collected and waved in front of a jury with all kinds of implications. In the civil trial world, the lawyer could imply just about anything from us being good enough that we did not have to shoot the way we did to us being poor enough a shot that we shouldn't be given any leeway.

Not one bit of personal offense intended toward you, but I would love to ask that instructor, where is the proof of this happening? What case law backs this up? I'm certain the mass media machine would have ran with it if this sort of thing had been used against someone. I've certainly never heard anything like this before, so again, color me skeptical.

K.Mooneyham

ELB wrote:
K.Mooneyham wrote:So, there I was reading the ol' FB postings,...

One thing they don't understand is that if you are considered an expert shooter, they will hang you in court if you kill in self defense for not just shooting in the leg or hand to stop the threat. Law enforcement is taught "center mass" and it is pass/fail. I was top gun in my academy for most points, not expert shooting.
...
Utter rubbish. I smell troll, and it stinks.

Please, keep in mind that I was asking for the individual who posted that to provide some sort of proof to back up what he claimed. Looking at the guy's profile, it didn't seem like he was a troll, just someone who was very, very misinformed, and didn't want to admit he might be wrong, or at least overdoing it.

K.Mooneyham

Two more posts from that person, as I pressed for some sort of proof of what he said:

Let me put it this way. If you are an expert shooter and carry, then are faced with the situation of having to kill in self defense, you better keep your mouth shut about your shooting proficiency or you'll be ripped apart by the grand jury and more likely to be indicted.

And:

Any shooting goes before a grand jury whether it is officer involved or citizen involved. It all depends on the circumstances of the shooting whether it results in an indictment or no bill. You're missing my point completely. If you're an expert shooter and kill someone, by all means tell them you're an expert if you want to. Let them decide your fate based on that. Or, you can keep your mouth shut and if they claim you're an expert, make them prove it! As far as case law, look it up. This is what I was taught by Harris County SO instructors at my academy. I didn't ask them for case law to prove it because that was the explanation of why we would never be ranked. To qualify for a CCL or for law enforcement, it is pass/fail only and that is why.

To me, this is part of the problem we face as people who carry firearms for self-defense, namely a lot of misinformation and people attempting to sow fear among those who do care for self-defense. Either something is a fact in this regard, or it is not a fact.

K.Mooneyham

AndyC wrote:
K.Mooneyham wrote:Do any of you know of a case where the defendant shot a "bad guy", killing said bad guy, but was convicted because the defendant was "too good" at shooting?
Total nonsense.

Prosecutors have tried before to imply that a defender should have shot someone in an extremity, and have been savaged by the defense in return.

I figured the person who posted that comment was full of hot air, AndyC. However, I also figured IF any such event had ever happened, someone on here might know of it.

K.Mooneyham

FastCarry wrote:Self defense shooting calls for shooting to stop a threat. Doesn't matter where it is, just don't hit an innocent. What matters more is, how many rounds and how long. Pump two in someone, he goes motionless.. Threat over, Job done. Stop, think, Pump a few more to make sure..that's murder.

As in the case of the pharmacist, he pumped a few into one perp, he fell. Pharmacist went after other perp, then came back and pumped more into guy that was down. Murder.

Not exactly what I'm talking about. I speaking about someone who may be considered an "expert shooter" defending themselves against a violent aggressor, and killing them in the process being convicted because they were "too good and should have shot the aggressor in the hand, leg, etc.".

K.Mooneyham

So, there I was reading the ol' FB postings, and on an article about some UT anti-2A student trying to make CHL training look bad, I see the following reply:

One thing they don't understand is that if you are considered an expert shooter, they will hang you in court if you kill in self defense for not just shooting in the leg or hand to stop the threat. Law enforcement is taught "center mass" and it is pass/fail. I was top gun in my academy for most points, not expert shooting.

I asked the individual who posted that (NOT ME!) about any relevant cases he may know of, and we'll see what he has to say, if anything. But, this bunch is about as savvy a group as I know when it comes to this kind of thing, so I'll put the question to all of you. Do any of you know of a case where the defendant shot a "bad guy", killing said bad guy, but was convicted because the defendant was "too good" at shooting? The whole idea seems rather preposterous but then again, I learn something new every day, so I figured I'd run it by y'all.

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 6 matches

Re: Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?

Re: Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?

Re: Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?

Re: Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?

Re: Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?

Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?