@Alexander8 , I’ll use my tactical advantage to safely exit. If I’m going to shoot a guy in the back and my gun goes “click,” I would be in the same compromised state. Either way, we’re all just keyboard warriors hashing out a hypothetical situation. It’s fun. It’s educational. It’s healthy to discuss.
But it’s also easy for me to say, “I would do x, y, or z.” When SHTF, and the adrenaline is pumping like a fire hose, it’s hard to say what I would actually do. I’ve never served in the military, perhaps you have, and if you have, thank you for your service! But in that SHTF moment, all I have to fall back on is my training and muscle memory, which is less than most military-trained folks. We would all respond differently. I enjoy your post @Alexander8 .
I would make the same assumption, that if I discharged my firearm in a place where I was not allowed to have it, the USCCA would not cover me. That rather fits into this “good guys with guns” topic. In a moment where I had the chance to stop an active shooter, I don’t think I’d have time to consider the legal or financial repercussions of my actions. But in my gut, I already know the consequences of my inaction. I don’t think I could sleep with the knowledge that people are dead because I didn’t do the right thing.
Again, I hope I never have to make such a decision. I’m curious if there have been any real-world scenarios where an active shooter was stopped by someone who willingly disobeyed local laws & regulations in order to save lives.
The way a sane and rational legal system works in a situation like that is one of 2 ways:
Prosecutors decline to prosecute (it’s called prosecutorial discretion…when justice would not be served by enforcing the law). It happens.
Prosecution occurs, but the sentence is extremely light. Often by plea bargain. This protects the sanctity of the law while acknowledging that justice in a situation like this is to merely acknowledge a law was broken in the process of saving lives.
Unfortunately, we don’t have a sane judicial system anymore.
This is an interesting conversation. What would you do if…? In the back of my head I’d like to say that I’d intervene but as somebody else mentioned, when the adrenaline is pumping who knows what you’d really do. I can say that I think my decision would be different if I were in the store alone, versus in the store alone with my kids, versus being in the store with my wife and kids.
There was a comment about carrying illegally. Why would somebody do that in the first place knowing that regardless of the situation (mass shooter vs. getting jumped in the parking lot) you’re in big trouble?
One argument I always hear in the news when these situations arise is that, “this is why it’s important to protect 2A” so a law abiding citizen could intervene. If those that legally carry don’t at least consider the possibility of intervening, then that argument goes out the window doesn’t it? There’s nothing wrong with saying “hell no, I’m getting my spouse and I out of this situation” but then we should stop using the statement used above shouldn’t we?
There is an old and obscure trick- I don’t recall the name, but perhaps someone here knows about it- where a jury can find that a defendant was technically in violation of a law, but decline to convict. It’s kind of like getting an “E for Effort” in school, where you deserve to fail but the teacher gives you a pass. The jury agrees that the prosecution proved the elements of the crime, but the case doesn’t move on to sentencing.
I hope someone here can educate me on this. I only know about it from a news story years back when a jury wanted to do this and the judge got really angry about it. He thought the defense attorney had tainted the jury. My lesson at the time was that juries have a lot more power than is normally acknowledged, but since jurors aren’t legal professionals they don’t really know the full extent of their options.
I agree. A lot will depend on whether I am alone or with my family. If with family members, my first priority would be to get them to safety. Until they are safe, I will not consider intervening unless the threat is re-directed towards us.
For this to happen regularly, the act of intervening must be protected and fall under some sort of “Good Samaritan” clause. The skeptic in me is worried that the people who has good intentions, but not enough training has a huge potential to do more harm than good. However, maybe bad guys will think twice if the threat of someone intervening becomes a real possibility and common occurence.
Not a trick, but it is called Jury Nullification, wherein, you have violated the law, but the jury believes the law is unjust or that you actions were justified, so they do not convict.
I think you may be referring to my comment. I don’t knowingly carry illegally but with the plethora of local jurisdictional laws growing every day it is becoming impossible to not break them. My out of state permit would allow me to carry in CO. Apparently Boulder, CO bans carry in public spaces. Am I expected to read all the laws of every town I might pass through? Is the Boulder City limits clearly marked so I know when I have entered a zone where State laws and the Constitution are apparently nullified? Thanks to the ongoing erosion of our rights it is far to easy to accidentally carry illegally these days.
I would hate to have to make that choice knowing the shooter is unloading an ar15 and I would be answering back with my 9mm Hellcat. Those are terrible odds. Plus…I would be derelict of my duty of getting my wife out of harms way. If I was in the situation where I was cornered…I would empty my clip on him and be killed trying. The best answer I think is to get away from the threat and then work out a plan until the good guys arrive. Hope I never have to find out.
I was having a problem putting myself in that scenario since I would not intentionally violate a law even if that law was unconstitutional. Though I can understand why others might.
Actually every police officer who goes to work has acknowledged by that choice the possibility of making such a sacrifice. I lost two fellow officer friends on the SWAT team at a hostage situation who did not wake up that morning wanting to die. But we volunteered for the duty to serve and protect.
That was probably the hypothetical scenario that I posted.
Everyone has to make their own decisions. There’s your neighborhood grocery with a no guns sign on the door. Do you want to eat? Are you willing to leave your firearm secured in your vehicle while you shop? Are you willing to break the law to shop while you carry?
I don’t presume to answer these for anyone here. And if I have knowingly or inadvertently carried in places where I wasn’t supposed to, I would not admit such mistakes here. (For the record, I have never done so, and I always follow the speed limit.) But for the sake of the question, I had to start in a scenario where thread topic “good guy with a gun” was carrying in a place were guns were not permitted.
Switch up the scenario if you’d like. You’re driving past a school, where firearms are strictly prohibited, and you see someone walk through the front door with two pistols and a loaded rifle slung over his back. Do you break the law and take your own firearm onto school property in the hope that you’ll save the lives of the children inside, or do you wait outside and call 911?
I’m not telling anyone what the right answer is for them. It’s an moral situation we’ve created with our laws.
Since you are subscribed to USCCA when you sign in look on your information screen you should find a link to concealed handgun laws in the United States. Just run you mouse over you state. It should light up then just click on it.
Don’t forget, our firearms aren’t our only weapons. If someone is 10 feet from me facing the other direction and shooting and I cannot leave for some reason (injured family member??), I would pray that I would be armed and calm enough to defend them.
If I didn’t have I firearm, I pray I would have the wherewithal that the heroes of Flight 93 had on 9/11. A blindsided tackle may give others the opportunity to leave - every second counts. Maybe we can stop a threat a different way. (If I get his gun that gets into a whole other set of legal what if questions…)
Others have already expounded on the fact that you can shoot someone in the back in self-defense for a variety of reasons (including defense of other innocents). If he’s still an imminent, unavoidable threat of death or grave bodily harm (shooting back at you, shooting other innocents) most states would consider that self-defense. (Again, too many legal variations for a one size fits all answer.)
I could not get the site to open. On you cell phone download the USCCA APP for Mobil. Mine works fine. I will get back to you when I check the trouble out on USCCA sign in page.