Attempted Carjacking ...

[israel67]

On the off-chance that some of you might not read Defensive Carry, this is scary stuff ...

Last night was my girlfriend’s sisters 21st birthday. They went to the bar district in Saginaw known as Hamilton St. to celebrate. I was there ride home at two when the bars closed, as I do not drink and rarely go to bars. I was waiting outside the Pub for them to come out when a junky white Sunfire drove around the block twice with three males in it. They parked 40 yards behind me down the street. Initially the car and its occupants gave me a really weird feeling, so at that point I am watching them in my mirror while scanning for other threats. One male got out of the car and walked down the sidewalk towards me and the bar. By now I have my Springfield XD Sc in .40 with the XML tac light in my hand. The guy came up to my window which was just cracked enough to hear him and asked for a cigarette, I told him that I did not have any more. It was very dark where we were and he could not tell that I had my gun in my hand pointed at him through the door the whole time. After he asked for a smoke he turned his head side to side like he was looking around and said “how about all your money than " as he pulled up his shirt to show me his gun. As soon as he showed me his gun my XD was in his face with the light in his eyes. He was so surprised that I wasn’t the typical “sheep� and that a blinding light was suddenly in his eyes that he stumbled a few steps back said oh crap and ran back to his car. I never took my gun off of him while he was running incase he started shooting at me. I noticed that there was a couple crossing the road in front of my truck as the car with the perp pull up behind me and blocked me in. My first instinct was to get out of there as soon as he was no longer a threat, but because of the people crossing the road I was unable to move my truck. At that point I was sure that they were going to pull up next to me and start shooting. As they drove by I pointed my gun at the car, out my window, with my tac light on. The people in the car squinted as they could not look into my weapon mounted light. Judging by the passengers body language I think he had a gun in his had out of sight, but I will never know for sure. I think that the only reason they did not shoot was because of the witnesses that were standing by my truck. They pulled off as fast as they came there and I got out of there ASAP.

After I got home I realized how close I came to possibly being shot by them as they drove by. Looking back I feel like should have got out of my truck and took cover behind it as they drove by. I feel like I left myself very vulnerable to them, it all happened so fast that I had little time to think.

A few thoughts that I had had after looking back at the situation…

-I will never carry my gun at night without my light on it again. I think that this gave me a priceless advantage against them. I don’t think that the situation would have turned out as good for me if I didn’t have it.

-I am going today to have night sights installed on my gun. I now know what it is like to aim a gun under stress with a poor sight picture and do not want to do it again.

-My girlfriend always says that I am paranoid because of the way I am always watching people around me. Sometimes I think that i am also, but this habit gave me an advantage of being ready.

I am very thankful of the training that I have received from my CCW instructors; it may have saved my life last night.

[HerbM]

Prudence does not equate with paranoia.

Paranoia is an excessive or unreasonable fear.

Prudence is buckling your seat belt, having a fire extinguisher in your home, locking your doors, watching out for and avoiding predators, as well as having the means and the skill to defeat those predators or to escape other dangers.

Paranoia is a word that gun control advocates use to invoke an emotional response, especially when they have no facts nor logic to support their irrational case.

[DoubleJ]

I love how these RealWorld accounts turn into Product Testimonials

"I rounded the corner with my SupreTac DoubleTap Quadrail with the detachable Light/Laser/Tazer/OC dispensor and 50rd ammo drum...."

[BigBlueDodge]

Okay, this is a real life situation, so let's talk hypotheticals here.

1. What was the attempted crime, theft or robbery? My guess is aggravated robbery, because it was attempted theft, with use of force with a deadly weapon.
2. Was the victim in his legal right to shoot the attacker when the attacker brandished his weapon? Hmm, I'm not sure on this. I want to say yes, but since the attacker never actually grabbed the weapon, that has me thinking that there would be a discussion of was the victim's life really at hand, since attacker did not point gun in a threatening manner at victim.
3. What threat does brandishing a weapon consititute? In this case, the attacker didn't physically have gun in hand, pointed at victim. Can your life be in danger if attacker has a weapon (gun inside waistband, knife in pocket) that he shows you, but does not actually have it in his hand?

These real life situations are great, because they allow us to analyze, after the facts, what the victim was legally allowed to do so that we may be better prepared for future occurrances.

[Pinkycatcher]

Okay, this is a real life situation, so let's talk hypotheticals here.

1. What was the attempted crime, theft or robbery? My guess is aggravated robbery, because it was attempted theft, with use of force with a deadly weapon.
2. Was the victim in his legal right to shoot the attacker when the attacker brandished his weapon? Hmm, I'm not sure on this. I want to say yes, but since the attacker never actually grabbed the weapon, that has me thinking that there would be a discussion of was the victim's life really at hand, since attacker did not point gun in a threatening manner at victim.
3. What threat does brandishing a weapon consititute? In this case, the attacker didn't physically have gun in hand, pointed at victim. Can your life be in danger if attacker has a weapon (gun inside waistband, knife in pocket) that he shows you, but does not actually have it in his hand?

These real life situations are great, because they allow us to analyze, after the facts, what the victim was legally allowed to do so that we may be better prepared for future occurrances.

If he felt afraid that his life was in danger he most likely will get the go-ahead from any jury in Texas, he could just easily argue that the criminal could have easily pulled the gun before he could react and would have lost his life.

Now the prosecutors could easily argue he wasn't in any threat of life from the criminal, but most juries won't listen to that especially when the defense says that the criminal had (most likely) past felonies, and an illegal handgun, and (possibly) was a member of a gang, and has been in and out of jail for decades.

That's the problem with criminals (usually, not always of course) is that they continue to commit crimes after they get out of jail, of course it doesn't help it's near impossible to get a job with a felony, but that's a different argument for a different time.

[bayouhazard]

2. Was the victim in his legal right to shoot the attacker when the attacker brandished his weapon? Hmm, I'm not sure on this. I want to say yes, but since the attacker never actually grabbed the weapon, that has me thinking that there would be a discussion of was the victim's life really at hand, since attacker did not point gun in a threatening manner at victim.

Morally, I look at it the same as someone who walks into a bank, asks the teller to hand over all the money, and displays a weapon.

Legally, it depends whether it happened in Saginaw TX or Saginaw MI. Thinking back to my CHL class, we learned that in Texas, "[a] person is justified in using deadly force against another" "to prevent the other's imminent commission of [...] robbery, or aggravated robbery." ("AGGRAVATED ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he commits robbery as defined in Section 29.02, and he [...] uses or exhibits a deadly weapon")

[Glock 23]

I know a few guys who wouldnt have blasted right through that door. One of them being shot before in an home invasion.

[KD5NRH]

1. What was the attempted crime, theft or robbery? My guess is aggravated robbery, because it was attempted theft, with use of force with a deadly weapon.

Aggravated robbery, for the reasons you stated, though aggravated is not specifically necessary to the justification for deadly force.

2. Was the victim in his legal right to shoot the attacker when the attacker brandished his weapon? Hmm, I'm not sure on this. I want to say yes, but since the attacker never actually grabbed the weapon, that has me thinking that there would be a discussion of was the victim's life really at hand, since attacker did not point gun in a threatening manner at victim.

He would be justified in using force, up to and including deadly force, as needed to stop the robbery. Lesser force, in this case, would clearly expose him to a significant risk of serious bodily injury. (Just noticed that this last is only specified in the protection of property sections - 9.42 in particular, which requires justification under 9.41, which implies that the robber would already have to have possession of, or be interfering with the property for that section to apply - thus, 9.32 is the relevant section.)

3. What threat does brandishing a weapon consititute? In this case, the attacker didn't physically have gun in hand, pointed at victim. Can your life be in danger if attacker has a weapon (gun inside waistband, knife in pocket) that he shows you, but does not actually have it in his hand?

Irrelevant; see above.

29.02. ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 and with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he:
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death.

29.03. AGGRAVATED ROBBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he commits robbery as defined in Section 29.02, and he:
(2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon;

9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately necessary as described by this
subsection is presumed to be reasonable if the actor:
(1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the force was used:
(C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery;

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:
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

[The Annoyed Man]

If someone had demanded something of me, and then displayed a gun to intimidate me into compliance, I would have shot him, plain and simple. If you show me a gun as a threat, then you are threatening the possibility of using it. That means you are asking me to shoot you, and that I will comply with.

Of course, all of this assumes that you can get your concealed weapon into play faster than the goblin can get to his.

[HerbM]

If someone had demanded something of me, and then displayed a gun to intimidate me into compliance, I would have shot him, plain and simple. If you show me a gun as a threat, then you are threatening the possibility of using it. That means you are asking me to shoot you, and that I will comply with.

Of course, all of this assumes that you can get your concealed weapon into play faster than the goblin can get to his.

If you make a credible reference to a gun (or knife) while trying to rob me you will likely get shot. They key here is credible -- if you make me a believer then deadly force is authorized.

If it is a gun, you are already using deadly force -- this form of reference is brandishing by your assailant. Showing it is clearer because then we know you aren't lying in an effort to intimidate (unless it is fake which we can not generally determine and should not worry about.)

[lawrnk]

If someone had demanded something of me, and then displayed a gun to intimidate me into compliance, I would have shot him, plain and simple. If you show me a gun as a threat, then you are threatening the possibility of using it. That means you are asking me to shoot you, and that I will comply with.

Of course, all of this assumes that you can get your concealed weapon into play faster than the goblin can get to his.

Where I may differ here from the person in Michigan is I think it is unwise to draw on an armed man without the intention of firing immediately.

[mr.72]

duplicate post

[mr.72]

he was attempting to commit aggravated robbery.

clearly deadly force is justified in the TX law.

IMHO the difference between pointing your gun at the BG in this scenario, vs. shooting the guy, is that if you just point it at him and allow him to flee, gain support from his backup guys in the beater car, then you are at very high risk of being shot at by the bad guy(s) as they drive by. However if you just shoot the guy right off the bat, then the other dudes are going to run hard in the other direction.

Common sense says it is very risky to point a gun at the bad guy without pulling the trigger.

[Liko81]

Okay, this is a real life situation, so let's talk hypotheticals here.

1. What was the attempted crime, theft or robbery? My guess is aggravated robbery, because it was attempted theft, with use of force with a deadly weapon.
2. Was the victim in his legal right to shoot the attacker when the attacker brandished his weapon? Hmm, I'm not sure on this. I want to say yes, but since the attacker never actually grabbed the weapon, that has me thinking that there would be a discussion of was the victim's life really at hand, since attacker did not point gun in a threatening manner at victim.
3. What threat does brandishing a weapon consititute? In this case, the attacker didn't physically have gun in hand, pointed at victim. Can your life be in danger if attacker has a weapon (gun inside waistband, knife in pocket) that he shows you, but does not actually have it in his hand?

These real life situations are great, because they allow us to analyze, after the facts, what the victim was legally allowed to do so that we may be better prepared for future occurrances.

1: The attempted crime was aggravated robbery; theft from another person by threat of deadly force.
2: If this happened in Texas, as soon as the attacker said "give me your money" with the threat of force to back it up, robbery is being committed. That provides presumption of justification not only for drawing, but firing.
3: Brandishing a weapon is not, by itself, any crime justifying drawing; it was the words AND the actions combined that justified the defender's response. However, if the guy had simply lifted his shirt to show the gun in an attempt to intimidate (typical banger behavior), the defender may have a plausible claim that his assailant threatened deadly force, which counts as use of force, and you are justified in drawing, which is the same threat of deadly force and justified as if it were the use of force to stop same. I do not think however that firing would be justified unless the other guy then went for his gun.

[mr.72]

drawing your weapon is typically the same as the use of deadly force. if you are justified to use deadly force, you are justified to use deadly force. if you are justified to draw, you are justified to fire. I don't think there is a distinction. perhaps a lawyer will chime in.