CHL Instructor Shoots Aggressor at Gas Station

[Mike S]

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that his "use of force" could be justified as a deterrent when the BG was still, in essence, just a menacing threat. It did not work in this case and the BG pursued a course of action that escalated the defendant to a position that make him believe that a use of deadly force was authorized. I certainly think that a more than "reasonable" case could be make by the victim that he felt in imminent danger when the attacker pursued H2H combat against his drawn weapon.

I know the shooting was in LA, but using the TX/PC as a guide:

Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

I think the video suggests (B) was not happening. That leaves only (A). In my world there is no scenario where a person pushes you a few times can be considered "the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force", thus I cannot envision a scenarios where one "reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary"

So based on that tape alone, it was not justified, IMO. Yet he was not charged, leading me to conclude there were other aggravating factors we are unaware of, for example, he was shouting "I am going to take that gun from you and kill you", etc.

Texas defines "deadly force" as capable of causing 'death' OR 'serious bodily injury'. It also defines 'serious bodily injury' as 'causing or capable of causing death, permanent disfigurement, or serious impairment of any organ or bodily function' (I'm paraphrasing off of memory, so please look it up for the exact legal definition. I'll edit this later when I'm not rushing to get ready for church).

Let's keep in mind that the attacker DID have a size disparity over the defender (from every video angle the attacker appears a good 8"-1 foot taller) and appeared to be intoxicated based on his mannerisms/ actions. If he had been shot merely for the simple assault (throwing the busted bag of chips into the clerk's face), it may have resulted in charges filed. However, if we're going to analyze this under Texas law, I see no issues with the justification under TPC 9.32. (I'm no lawyer, though).

[imkopaka]

Mike S., it could also be reasonably assumed that the attacker intended to disarm the LTC instructor and potentially use his weapon against him since he was openly carrying and the attacker knew he had the gun before it was drawn. The fact the the attacker kept coming after the weapon was drawn supports this idea. If someone continues to advance after I pull a gun on them, the only way they could reasonably believe they are going to survive the encounter if if they injure me so badly I can't shoot them. I'd call that serious bodily injury.

[Keith B]

with Mike S. The individual had every right to use force, including deadly force, do defend himself. He used great restraint against the guy that kept backing him into a corner. Had it continued I would bet the aggressor would have caused serious bodily injury to the armed man, so he had justification.

Louisiana has a Castle Doctrine similar to Texas. In 2006 they extended it to public places, just as Texas has. Here is a good article comparing the Zimmerman/Martin case to the LA Stand Your Ground laws http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... nd_zi.html You can apply them to this situation.

End run, had I been in the shooter's shoes, I would have more than likely done the same thing. I am too old to try and fight someone who is bigger and stronger than me. One punch to the head can kill, and i will not risk taking one.

[Mavs00]

I obviously agree with Mike and Keith and have posted such above. Once the BG turns his attention to the shooter, his actions begin to justify not only a legal "display" (or brandishing) of his weapon, which then escalates to a legal use "use of DF" once the attacker continues to pursue. I think that we can all be in agreement that there were things that the shooter could have done to deescalate or not to interject himself into a argument that wasn't his in the first place.

All that aside, I think that both those guys bring up another very important element..... Disparity of force is a very real legal concept here at play here. The attacker does appear physically larger and stronger than the shooter which makes it a very real possibility that he (shooter) would have been overcome and had his weapon used against him. That totally makes a difference in justification. Disparity of force is obviously not just size thing either, as age, physical conditioning, sex, # of attackers...etc is at play too. So any "what would you do" scenario has to be looked at through your personal lens. For example.... I'm at least the size of the attacker, and I have H2H training, so my use of deadly force threshold is likely to be higher than a smaller person for instance? It also changes with age, I'm pushing 50, which is not old, but I ain't as tough as I used to be...... 20 years ago, in a scenario like this.... I would have delivered serious beat-down and had no question about using DF. However... being older, I've lost a step and am not nearly as physically strong as I used to be. That's the whole reason I have chosen to CC most everyplace nowadays and it become more important with each passing day.

[JALLEN]

I obviously agree with Mike and Keith and have posted such above. Once the BG turns his attention to the shooter, his actions begin to justify not only a legal "display" (or brandishing) of his weapon, which then escalates to a legal use "use of DF" once the attacker continues to pursue. I think that we can all be in agreement that there were things that the shooter could have done to deescalate or not to interject himself into a argument that wasn't his in the first place.

All that aside, I think that both those guys bring up another very important element..... Disparity of force is a very real legal concept here at play here. The attacker does appear physically larger and stronger than the shooter which makes it a very real possibility that he (shooter) would have been overcome and had his weapon used against him. That totally makes a difference in justification. Disparity of force is obviously not just size thing either, as age, physical conditioning, sex, # of attackers...etc is at play too. So any "what would you do" scenario has to be looked at through your personal lens. For example.... I'm at least the size of the attacker, and I have H2H training, so my use of deadly force threshold is likely to be higher than a smaller person for instance? It also changes with age, I'm pushing 50, which is not old, but I ain't as tough as I used to be...... 20 years ago, in a scenario like this.... I would have delivered serious beat-down and had no question about using DF. However... being older, I've lost a step and am not nearly as physically strong as I used to be. That's the whole reason I have chosen to CC most everyplace nowadays and it become more important with each passing day.

Maybe, but it doesn't always go as you intend or hope. While you are "delivering a serious beat down" the guy picks up a large can of pork and beans from the shelf you knocked him into and clocks you with it right between the eyes. It turns out he is a pretty tough hombre himself.

I always avoided snatching purses from little old ladies after I read that a guy who did so had the unanticipated misfortune of doing so from the mother of a Mafia chief. I always wanted to hear the follow up, but he's never been seen or heard from since.

I remember a fellow breaking into my b-i-l's home one evening. There was a noise, my b-i-l went to investigate, the guy fled out the backyard and down the alley. B-i-l was a O-3 SEAL at the time, and one of the founders of triathlon who could run sub 6 minute miles all the way to Tijuana and back. He followed the perp, who was running as fast as he could until he couldn't, whereupon he was kicked and stomped and beaten, and left in a heap in the middle of the street.

If the guy is that serious a threat, why risk an undignified outcome. Just shoot him and be done with it.

[Solaris]

I find it interesting we can all watch the same video and see different things.

As I said, I find it inconceivable one could justify killing an unarmed man who pushed you a couple of times. I have been pushed a few times in my life, even had punches thrown at me, never once did I consider killing the aggressor over it. I can think of 87 ways to de-escalate that situation without going to my gun, the simplest being just walk out of the store and go home instead of drawing.

Interesting though that some of you do think was justified. I disagree, but do not disrespect your opinion.

[rotor]

I find it interesting we can all watch the same video and see different things.

As I said, I find it inconceivable one could justify killing an unarmed man who pushed you a couple of times. I have been pushed a few times in my life, even had punches thrown at me, never once did I consider killing the aggressor over it. I can think of 87 ways to de-escalate that situation without going to my gun, the simplest being just walk out of the store and go home instead of drawing.

Interesting though that some of you do think was justified. I disagree, but do not disrespect your opinion.

It is an interesting phenomena that so many people came away with different feelings. I reviewed the video and thought the shooting was justified. I pictured myself being pushed into a corner which there was no backing out of by this big guy, obviously on something as he had no fear of a man with an openly carried gun, and having him beat the dickens out of me for no apparent reason. Would I consider my life in danger? Yes! A guy who brings his fist to a gun fight has something seriously wrong with him. The big guy also followed the small guy back into the store, cornered him and was probably going to seriously bash him, at least it so appeared. Perhaps earlier the shooter could have gotten away but at the point he fired? Doesn't look like he could and I wouldn't want to take a beating from the big guy.

[Solaris]

It is an interesting phenomena that so many people came away with different feelings. I reviewed the video and thought the shooting was justified. I pictured myself (see 1) being pushed into a corner which there was no backing out of by this big guy (see 2), obviously on something as he had no fear of a man with an openly carried gun, and having him beat the dickens out of me for no apparent reason. Would I consider my life in danger? Yes! A guy who brings his fist to a gun fight has something seriously wrong with him. The big guy also followed the small guy back into the store, cornered him and was probably going to seriously bash him, at least it so appeared. Perhaps earlier the shooter could have gotten away but at the point he fired? Doesn't look like he could and I wouldn't want to take a beating (see 3) from the big guy.

my 2 cents

1 - If you see yourself, do you also see yourself doing ALL the other things the instructor did prior to the shooting? The totality of the circumstances must be evaluated, you cannot cherry pick the final 5 seconds. You cannot run into Harlem yelling slurs, then when someone comes at you with a knife, shoot them and claim self-defense.

2 - The instructor was not small. He was a pretty stout looking dude, not as tall, but he looked more muscular. Reminded me of Michael Chiklis, aka Vic Mackey from The Shield.

3 - If you do not want to take a beating do not insert yourself into a non-violent verbal exchange between two other people. Just MYOB buy your stuff and leave.

The instructor inserted himself into the altercation. It was just words exchanged until the instructor got involved, and escalated it. Convenience clerks see this on a daily basis and most know how to handle it. this clerk seem to be doing fine on his own.

I guess the most important takeaway is, just because you think your actions are justified, a jury of your peers may not. the instructor, even if not charged, has now had his life changed for the worse. He may face financial ruin, even if not successfully sued.

Good discussion.

[locke_n_load]

To everyone who says that they would have simply had a fistfight with the guy, just remember, all it takes is one lucky punch to daze you and your shirt comes up, the dude has easy access to your firearm.
I highly recommend not engaging in fist fights, even self defense ones, when you are carrying, openly or concealed. There is always a deadly weapon involved in that instance, and hopefully the bad guy never gets access to it.

[LTCTLB]

To everyone who says that they would have simply had a fistfight with the guy, just remember, all it takes is one lucky punch to daze you and your shirt comes up, the dude has easy access to your firearm.
I highly recommend not engaging in fist fights, even self defense ones, when you are carrying, openly or concealed. There is always a deadly weapon involved in that instance, and hopefully the bad guy never gets access to it.

it can never end well. During my LTC class the instructor said once we decide to carry we have made the decision to be the most patient, calm, and level headed people around.

[Solaris]

To everyone who says that they would have simply had a fistfight with the guy, just remember, all it takes is one lucky punch to daze you and your shirt comes up, the dude has easy access to your firearm.

Hence why you may want to walk away from a non-violent verbal exchange between two people, especially if you are open carrying.

[JALLEN]

I can see myself going out to get a license number and car description. That's the point he seemed to have attracted the ire of the big guy.

Until I was ~40 years old, the other lawyers in San Diego teased me because my pin striped suits had only 5 stripes. At ~130 lbs, there isn't much good getting in fights. The last time I hit somebody in anger was probably when I was 13, or 15 yo.

In any event, we are taught to stop the threat. When does a disagreement become an argument, and when does that become an altercation, and then become a threat?

We don't know what was being said, of course, but shoving would be my limit, I think. Adults have no business acting like that, and when they do, the risk is high that not everybody is going to live happily ever after.

[drjoker]

Have you ever REALLY PUNCHED someone in a life or death situation? A really hard punch to the head will break the bones in your hand. After your hand breaks, how are you supposed to punch or shoot? Also, it is very difficult even for boxing pros to knock someone out, especially if the person being PUNCHED is hard headed, which the agressor obviously is.

I wouldn't want to ever be involved in an encounter like that. But, the deceased physically attacked the shooter even to the point where you can see his shirt being ripped in one of the frames. The shooter repeatedly pushed him away and tried to withdraw only to be pursued by the deceased who kept getting more and more violent.

Was there a way to end that without loss of life? Maybe. Was the shooter threatened? Yes. Did the shooter try to deescalate? Hard to say what happened in the parking lot. What would I have done? I hope I never find out.

I couldn't agree with you more. I hope we never have to find out.

Could things have been handled better? Absolutely. But in the heat of the moment with emotions and adrenaline pumping through your veins it's hard to say what I would do. I will say the shooter showed restraint for a very long time. After watching the video, I can't say I wouldn't have drew my firearm. My first thought was just knock him out, everyone gets to go home to their families. I don't feel like that is fair to the shooter because I was never in his shoes.

[drjoker]

[quote/]
Then he went out into parking lot, inserting himself into a dispute which was not his, thus escalating it, and in my opinion, making him a part of the problem.[/quote]

Evil is not perpetrated by evil people alone. Evil happens when good people do nothing. That's how 6 million Jews died because good people did nothing. There were only 80,000 NAZIS at the start of WWII.

You want a better world? DO SOMETHING.

Are you from New York?

[Solaris]

In any event, we are taught to stop the threat.

I wasn't.

I was taught, and it was emphasized in my LTC class to de-escalate.

An argument between a customer and clerk is a non-event IMO, nothing to see here, MYOB. Why the instructor felt the need to insert himself, well, he gets to live with the consequences of that.