Search found 3 matches

by Dragonfighter
Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:01 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Stupid question: Justification against unarmed
Replies: 34
Views: 4324

Elotemuygrande wrote:I have smeared the stuff all over my face to test the effects, and while it's miserable I could probably come at you just fine after being sprayed. However, when the slightest bit gets in the eyes they become inflamed and your eyelids shut involuntarily. I was totally blind for 5-10 minutes from one little drop of the stuff that I tested. I suspect, although I'm not sure, that even someone who was drugged up or had a high pain tolerance would have to close their eyes if you were able to hit them there. That is a really good concern though, that it might blow back on you and you would disable yourself.
Use in a car or other confined space is ill advised in my opinion.

I have taken a hit square in the face and eyes. I did in the second incident I related. Rapid blinking and a little snot slinging later, I was able to see enough to wrap this guy up. I was for all practical purposes, out of commission for quite a while after the incident. You might consider it an emergency override.

If I could force my way through without being desensitized chemically or deranged, then I suspect one who was could also. And the fellow that we fought in the first incident was hit full force more than once.

I will grant this, if a choice between CS and OC is what I have against a nut bar, I'll take the OC everytime.
by Dragonfighter
Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:08 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Stupid question: Justification against unarmed
Replies: 34
Views: 4324

I have had a few hand-to-hand situations wherein OC was utilized. I have to date prevailed, but...

I have seen it used where the BG was drugged (PCP) and it had little effect. It was used by a small female LEO and it was my partner and myself that actually ended up in the fight. The OC did not slow the guy down and the fight was a hard one. We burned all night long after that one.

One instance was an MHMR person where both of us were hit. I trained extensively with CS several (>25) years ago so I was able to function which was good. It was in a small house and the LEO effectively took himself out of the fight and managed to agitate the BG. I was riding with a different partner who vacated when he saw the OC come out. I managed to pretzle the yo-yo and coax my partner back in with some tape. I was out of service for about three hours after that one.

There are a few more examples but in my experience OC is ineffective with someone who is chemically or emotionally altered. Depending on the environment the potential to disable yourself as well as the BG is very real.

I am fairly diplomatic. I will (and have) chose diplomacy anytime that the situation's urgency level allows. I have talked myself out of more trouble than I care to admit. If I can not de-escalate the situation, I would have to consider the possibility that OC would not serve either.
by Dragonfighter
Mon Dec 10, 2007 1:30 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Stupid question: Justification against unarmed
Replies: 34
Views: 4324

Your justification comes in the vagueries of the law. Terms like "reasonable" are key. Do you "reasonably" fear for your life or seriously bodily harm.

Disparity of force is another concept. A little old lady wanting to kick your tail is one thing, the same little old lady wielding a baseball bat is another.

I believe the first CHL shooting in Texas was the one that occured on the Mockingbird bridge in Dallas. A 370# Samoan got bent at a light and came back yelling at a 150-160# CHLr. The BG (unarmed) reached into the car and started to pound our intrepid test case who then dropped him with one shot center mass.

Typical press demonization occured, but the articles were pushed further back the more facts that were known. The BG was dead on the spot, and the Good Guy was no billed. I was sold on the .40 S&W.

Return to “Stupid question: Justification against unarmed”