Pulling weapon to diffuse a road rage scenario?

[A-R]

I would agree that there is no "shared basic for effective communication" but not for the same reasons that you think...

as far as CHAP 9, I'm starting to like this bit, it sounds as if it would apply:

PC §9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

So by my interpretation let's say you have a worst case scenario on the highway and the other driver has made it clear he attempts to cause a collision, you've made every prudent attempt to evade and he still persists. It seems the law would agree that pulling a gun in an attempt to dissuade the attacker is justified and legal. I'm pretty sure that reasonalbe people would agree that pulling a gun for .500 of a second and defusing the whole situation is a safer alternative than swerving thru traffic and playing cat and mouse while trying to dial a phone. What if there was an accident as a result of evading?

Apart from the fact it involves cars, I don't see how this is any different than some random instigator on two feet trying to beat your head in and you draw your weapon and scream 'stop or I'll shoot'. Why are the protocols for defending yourself different because you're in a car?

Glad you started reading the statutes. Now go read all the other statutes in the CHL handbook PLUS quite a few more not mentioned in the book and you'll likely start to understand the many pitfalls of showing a gun to "diffuse" a road rage situation (still don't know where you get this idea that showing a gun is a good way to defuse a situation).

But I'll start you on the right path. To be justified in USING force or deadly force, you must:

reasonably believe the conduct is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm

in other words, there must be "no other way" to avoid harm to yourself.

1. Your action must be REASONABLE
2. Your action must be IMMEDIATELY NECESSARY
3. You must be in danger of IMMINENT HARM

Even if #3 applies, it seems most here disagree with you that 1 and 2 necessarily apply

Also be sure to read offense under:

(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;

(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm; [“brandishing”]

(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;

This is just the tip of the iceberg of what you could be charged with if your actions don't meet ALL requirements under the justifications afforded in PC Chapter 9. You can also be charged with aggravated assault and all sorts of other felonies.

And lastly, though I personally disagree with this discrepancy in the law, currently under PC 46.035 Unlawful Carrying of Handgun by License Holder: (h) if you have a CHL you are ONLY justified in showing your gun if you are justified in using DEADLY FORCE .... a Texas CHL holder was prosecuted and convicted under this statute for waving a gun around in a road rage incident when he thought wrongly that he was justified

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=27187&p=328261&hili ... tt#p310584" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jimlongley]

1st off, I'm not a troll.

But you kind of act like one.

That said, consider this: You do not seem to have a CHL, or at least I have not seen any indication that you do. If this is the case, the mere act of placing your firearm in plain view, in order to intimdate or defuse, was a violation of the law far above your admitted predeliction for breaking traffic laws.

Here's something to consider: What if the Avalanche driver only backed off because HE was dialling 911? I can hear his side now "Officer, this nut in a sports car just came up along side me, and instead of just merging with traffic, and there was plenty of room behind me, tried to push in where I was, and then he waved a gun at me. His license plate is XXX-XXX."

Are you sure there isn't a report out there with your name on it right now?

I do not readily accept the old "everbody speeds" or "we all roll stop signs now and then" stuff, because not everybody does, I certainly don't and I AM a subset of everybody.

[A-R]

1st off, I'm not a troll.

But you kind of act like one.

[dicion]

- Most of the good people on this forum truly are trying to help you. And remember, we're all "on your side". We're like-minded people who believe in RKBA and self-defense. If WE (collectively speaking for the majority of the forum who've replied to this thread) have concerns about how you're responding to these hypothetical situations, how do you think a JURY will react if you actually pull a gun or God-forbid shoot it while driving a car on a crowded freeway? You're not going to have all of us sitting in judgment on you. If you're lucky, at best, your jury will be made of people who are on the fence or indifferent to RKBA/self-defense issues - worst case, you get a bunch of gun-hating nanny-staters who think anyone who would use a gun for any reason oughta be locked up.

And This, right here, is reason enough.
If WE don't back your decision, there is no way in Hades that a random selection of 12 people, who aren't all pro-RKBA and pro- Self Defense will.

Remember, as I said before, Self defense is a Defense to prosecution. You Start Off Guilty of Murder/Manslaughter/Aggravated Assault (since you've already confessed to shooting them), and you must prove it was immediately necessary to prevent imminent harm to be let off. If that reasoning was cut and dry obvious, you might not even be charged or tried, but that doesn't change the facts.

[JayCee]

This is the part that hangs me up.
pulling a gun for .500 of a second and defusing the whole situation
What are the odds of defusing versus escallating the situation. If the OP has done nothing Wrong and the aggresive drivers are intent on harm or the "Gangbanger has just been Challenged!
RETREAT is the safest option.

Statments like this make me think many of you haven't even been in so much as a schoolyard brawl much less an actual self defense scenario. I have, on both counts, several times. Gang members are like cockroaches, they scatter when threatened and are not in greater numbers. Besides that isn't there the chance for escalation in any 'threat of force' scenario?

Also FWIW the word should be defuse, not diffuse. You're removing the fuse fro ma bomb, not misting a plant.

[Excaliber]

Lastly, if you don't believe us, read what happened to a hot-tempered young man on a freeway in Austin recently when he pulled his gun to "defend himself" from a road rage incident ....

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/man" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 44356.html
viewtopic.php?f=26&t=36789&hilit=austin+road+rage

Thanks, Austinrealtor. That case is a perfect example what actually happens when the OP's legal theory and problem solving methodology are used in real life.

[JayCee]

1st off, I'm not a troll.

But you kind of act like one.

That said, consider this: You do not seem to have a CHL, or at least I have not seen any indication that you do. If this is the case, the mere act of placing your firearm in plain view, in order to intimdate or defuse, was a violation of the law far above your admitted predeliction for breaking traffic laws.

Here's something to consider: What if the Avalanche driver only backed off because HE was dialling 911? I can hear his side now "Officer, this nut in a sports car just came up along side me, and instead of just merging with traffic, and there was plenty of room behind me, tried to push in where I was, and then he waved a gun at me. His license plate is XXX-XXX."

Are you sure there isn't a report out there with your name on it right now?

I do not readily accept the old "everbody speeds" or "we all roll stop signs now and then" stuff, because not everybody does, I certainly don't and I AM a subset of everybody.

OK 'Subset' I guess you're another one on his high moral horse here. I've mentioned several timss that I don't have a CHL. That's why I'm getting the dumb questions out of the way here, before they get me black flagged from class ;)

Look, bottom line, legal or not if I feel threatened and fear for my life and feel that I have no other recourse (despite that some of you seem to have flying cars or can teleport out of harms way) then I'm going to threaten force. I can only assume by the responses here that most of you have NEVER experienced anything like the incidents I described so it's arrogant to armchair quaterback me when you weren't there.

And for extra irony, here's some comments from the mopac shooting story Excal posted:

Do you know what the usual cop response is when a fleeing suspect repeatedly swerves at a cop's car? The cop almost always opens up on the fleeing subject's car's windows, most of the time the back window because the car has already gone by and is no longer an immanet threat. The reason, the the car was considered a deadly weapon and 'the officer was in fear for his life.'



I'm not down on the police by any means but I also don't believe in double standards. If some lunatic going sixty mph. intentionally and repeatedly swerves at someone in a four ton machine the victim should be allowed the same percieved fears as LE.
If it means I spend the afternoon in jail then so be it. I'd rather not be a hit n run fatality.

For the record, I don't advocate shooting at people in traffic, the debate here is whether or not you're allowed to threaten force to dissuade an attacker in the highway.

[A-R]

Also FWIW the word should be defuse, not diffuse. You're removing the fuse fro ma bomb, not misting a plant.

You're absolutely correct here. I went back and realized I used the wrong word in one of my previous posts and changed it.

Of course,you started this thread with the incorrect word "diffuse" in your title .... just sayin'

[JayCee]

Also FWIW the word should be defuse, not diffuse. You're removing the fuse fro ma bomb, not misting a plant.

You're absolutely correct here. I went back and realized I used the wrong word in one of my previous posts and changed it.

Of course,you started this thread with the incorrect word "diffuse" in your title .... just sayin'

Hey I'm a terrible speller and I'm winging it without my trusty firefox spellchecl so I take my small victories when I can.
;)

[A-R]

OK 'Subset' I guess you're another one on his high moral horse here. I've mentioned several timss that I don't have a CHL. That's why I'm getting the dumb questions out of the way here, before they get me black flagged from class ;)

why do you think you'll be "black flagged from class" for asking questions? Such questions are encouraged by most CHL instructors.

Look, bottom line, legal or not if I feel threatened and fear for my life and feel that I have no other recourse (despite that some of you seem to have flying cars or can teleport out of harms way) then I'm going to threaten force. I can only assume by the responses here that most of you have NEVER experienced anything like the incidents I described so it's arrogant to armchair quaterback me when you weren't there.

Man, you just keep digging your hole deeper don't you? Some of the people who have already responded to you in this thread are law enforcement officers (or retired LEOs). Some of the people who have responded to you are retired from the US military and have seen "use of force" up close and personal in a manner that would leave me huddled on the floor in a pile of my own urine. Others of us have been carrying legally in this state for 10 years or longer.

SHOW SOME RESPECT!

I read your post about the event that caused you to buy a gun, and I commend you for taking your self-defense responsibility seriously. But you REALLY need to listen to what some others are telling you or you are just asking to be arrested.

And for extra irony, here's some comments from the mopac shooting story Excal posted:

Do you know what the usual cop response is when a fleeing suspect repeatedly swerves at a cop's car? The cop almost always opens up on the fleeing subject's car's windows, most of the time the back window because the car has already gone by and is no longer an immanet threat. The reason, the the car was considered a deadly weapon and 'the officer was in fear for his life.'


I'm not down on the police by any means but I also don't believe in double standards. If some lunatic going sixty mph. intentionally and repeatedly swerves at someone in a four ton machine the victim should be allowed the same percieved fears as LE.
If it means I spend the afternoon in jail then so be it. I'd rather not be a hit n run fatality.

For the record, I don't advocate shooting at people in traffic, the debate here is whether or not you're allowed to threaten force to dissuade an attacker in the highway.

Regardless of those quotes (and I noticed you didn't site the sources - some of them may know less about Use of Force law in Texas than you do), Mr. Smith was still arrested and is under indictment (far as I know) for his ill-advised actions.

As for the difference between showing it and shooting it, as I already explained to you in another thread, it's not nearly as obvious at it at first seems to be and just showing it alone is enough for you to be charged with aggravated assault, disorderly conduct, etc.

[couzin]

... I'm pretty sure that reasonalbe people would agree that pulling a gun for .500 of a second and defusing the whole situation is a safer alternative than swerving thru traffic and playing cat and mouse while trying to dial a phone. What if there was an accident as a result of evading?

I believe myself a reasonable person - but I'm not going to pull a weapon just because some other hole is driving like a jerk. Good lord man - don't you get what folks are suggesting to you? If someone is driving aggressively and you somehow end up near them - lift your right foot and slow down, park it if you have to, dial 911, count to 100. That is the way to de-escalate that one (at least for you - other drivers are on their own). If you get stupid and start trying to cut off the culprit, blocking their lane changes, trying to outrun them to the exit ramp, or whatever - the you have escalated the rage incident, not the other driver. You can't go up and swat the bear and expect it to just walk away - danged bear gonna eat you!! Remember the section of the code that says you can't throw a punch, get the crap knocked outta ya, and then shoot the guy... you are the aggressor!! You may be 30 years old but you gots lot of growin up to do. Don't go gettin all huffy and stuff - just take folks advice here and stick around - lots of experience here and good advice from really "reasonable" people (well - most of em anyways ). They have had to slap me down a few times...!!

[couzin]

Do you know what the usual cop response is when a fleeing suspect repeatedly swerves at a cop's car? The cop almost always opens up on the fleeing subject's car's windows, most of the time the back window because the car has already gone by and is no longer an immanet threat. The reason, the the car was considered a deadly weapon and 'the officer was in fear for his life.'

There is a difference in hot pursuit and your commuter ride in traffic. Repeat "I am not a cop", "I am not a cop", "I am not a cop", ...!

[pbwalker]

You can't go up and swat the bear and expect it to just walk away - danged bear gonna eat you!!

I love it!

[skub]

For the record, I don't advocate shooting at people in traffic, the debate here is whether or not you're allowed to threaten force to dissuade an attacker in the highway.

And this seems to be the crux of the issue. JayCee, as I have been listening to you, I get the sense that you want to debate this, and get those on this board to come around to your way of thinking, as if this debate will decide how situations like this are handled. But even if you could convince everyone on this board that you are right, it wouldn't change anything, because our collective will has no real bearing on how things are going to work if you are involved in an incident.

The responses you have been getting are are an attempt to explain how things are going to work in such a situation - based on their understanding of the penal code, case law, experience, and what has happened to others in similar situations. The posters don't always like or agree with all of those realities, but they recognize that we must still live within them, or face the consequences. They are not debating with you about what is "better", they are trying to explain what is real.

[VMI77]

This is the part that hangs me up.
pulling a gun for .500 of a second and defusing the whole situation
What are the odds of defusing versus escallating the situation. If the OP has done nothing Wrong and the aggresive drivers are intent on harm or the "Gangbanger has just been Challenged!
RETREAT is the safest option.

Statments like this make me think many of you haven't even been in so much as a schoolyard brawl much less an actual self defense scenario. I have, on both counts, several times. Gang members are like cockroaches, they scatter when th24reatened and are not in greater numbers. Besides that isn't there the chance for escalation in any 'threat of force' scenario?

Also FWIW the word should be defuse, not diffuse. You're removing the fuse fro ma bomb, not misting a plant.

1. Your interpretation of the law is irrelevant. The law is established through precedent as determined by the courts. You've got law enforcement officers here telling you how the law works: you ignore their advice at your own, and your family's, peril.

2. You asked about the law in a public forum and created a public record where you describe your intention to ignore what knowledgeable and sympathetic CHLers, some of whom are law enforcement officers, are telling you about the law. If you do get charged with any of the many things you can be charged with for doing what you clearly intend to do contrary to all warnings, and especially if your actions result in death or serious injury to someone, a competent prosecutor will hang you with your own words.

3. Flashing a gun may escalate the situation, and the person you flash may have a gun himself. Assuming he doesn't call the police and get you arrested, he may simply get behind you like you described in the one incident, follow you, and empty his gun into your car when you pull into your driveway, or wherever you stop first --that's hardly going to help your family. If you flash a gun at someone you "know" is a gangbanger, he may call in a few of his buddies to help out.

4. Some guy cutting you off in traffic or following too close behind you with his brights on isn't a "threat of force scenario."