I have the app and know the current laws in my area. But when every county and town starts passing its own laws I can’t keep up with them all and I doubt that the reciprocity app does or can either.
Sorry it was my mistake. The program I downloaded was on my Iphone. Go to you apple play and download the app. The app is easy to use. Be sure and scroll down to the bottom of the screen and you will see the link.
We call that a sympathy verdict. The most common examples are battered women who kill their batterers in their sleep. They are guilty according to the law, but sometimes the jury does the the wrong thing for the right reason.
The Reasonable Person Test is something prosecutors will use in determining if the actions were self-defense or not. They’ll weigh whether or not a “reasonable person” would have thought the same things we thought to be true and would have reacted the same way we reacted in a given situation.
Hi Steve I think you will find having the right mind set will help. When you think about different things that can happen, where they will happen, for example in church. If you work these problems out in you head by thinking about them you will find that when an incident happens you do not have to think about it. You just react. This is just like making plans on paper but a lot more serious. I used to skydive and at the time a new jumper could not speak up about jumping until he had proven himself by having his first jump. I went through the sequence of jumping in my mind over and over. When the time comes to jump a lot of new jumpers scoot back from the door. In their mind they were not ready. When the time came I did not have to think about it I just reacted and jumped.
Hi William, thank you for your insight. Reading all the comments for the community has been very informative. I personally do exactly what you said. To the best of my ability, I attempt to stay in condition yellow and run various scenarios in my head while observing the people around me. I am not paranoid or afraid, I just enjoy training and being prepared, It keeps my brain alive.
I was a LEO. My wife is a retired LEO. We’ve both been on training teams specializing in RBT with Simunitions and firearms quals in recent years for LEO certifications at the state, federal, and international levels.
There are a lot of good cops who truly have that intent/aspiration and a bunch more who pay it lip service. There are some more who will try really hard to avoid being put on the X. They will stand just off the X and “establish a perimeter” – string yellow tape, direct traffic, find the coffee…I’m sure you know what I am talking about. And there are some who know they would not step into the path of the Grim Reaper to save a school bus load of children. Then there’s the rubber gun squad. Finally, there are some cops who will immediately stand in that gap without hesitation. Most of them have already done so and everybody knows who they are.
I don’t paint with a broad brush – positive or negative. And I couldn’t tell if you were trying to imply all cops are brave and noble souls ready to lay down their lives to save others or not. But the simple truth is that some are and some aren’t…just like any other group you want to compare them to. And there is a great big gap between what people say they will do and what they actually do when things get scary.
Carry responsibly and protect your loved ones and also be a good Ambassador of your community.
Just because its not “reported” doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. If a CCW is present and only 1 or 2 people are shot, it won’t make the headlines. Indeed, the Sutherland Springs church shooter who killed 20+ people (IIRC) wasn’t widely reported on because the hero used an AR15 to stop the murderer and the media just can’t have that.
There are two sets of Mass Shootings data, and they have vastly different outlooks.
Mass Shooting defined as 4+ people shot
Or something like that, it may be 3 or more shot. Those sites are usually run by anti-gun organizations and the reason they count it this way is to inflate the number of mass shootings so it looks like there are more than there are. These shootings are almost exclusively gang related (with handguns). Unfortunately, there will never be a good guy in those situations to stop them.
Mass Shootings as defined by the FBI
The FBI has criteria that fits what most people think of when they think of a mass shooter. Additionally, they include shootings even if there are only one or two people killed because of the intent of the shooter. Their criteria is at the beginning of each report. I have linked in another thread here all of the FBI Mass Shootings Reports to date. There will probably be another report this May covering 2020.
I pulled out the data from the reports showing the number of shootings and the number of stops by civilians, both armed and un-armed. The reason for the inconsistent number of years in each report is the first one came out in 2013 and encompassed all the shootings they had data for dating back to 2000. This report should have the most questions marks as finding data about older shootings was quite difficult before the proliferation of the internet. Then for a few years, they released a report every two years and in 2018 and 2019 they were only one year. I am pretty sure it will be a yearly report from now on.
| Report Year(s) | Shootings | Unarmed Civilian Stops | Armed Civilian Stops | % Armed Civilian Stops |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 28 | 3 | 0 | 0% |
| 2018 | 27 | 3 | 2 | 7.4% |
| 2016-2017 | 50 | 4 | 4 | 8% |
| 2014-2015 | 40 | 4 | 2 | 5% |
| 2000-2013 | 160 | 21 | 5 | 3.1% |
| TOTALS | 305 | 35 | 13 | 4.3% |
With the exception of 2019, stops by armed civilians was generally trending up which matches more or less with the increase in the number of CCW permits (currently sitting at 8%). Considering a majority of the shootings (especially the larger ones) take place in gun-free zones one would think that number would be lower.
It is also important to note that a few armed civilian stops included multiple armed civilians at the same incident and they managed not to shoot each other nor be shot by responding police.
That paragraph says a lot. Thanks for typing that Todd… 
You are right. If you do not want to use your weapon when it is needed to save a life then do not carry it. I had an incident in my neighborhood concerning a friend of mine that was ex military and had some PTSD. He and his wife were having an argument about his going to the doctor. His next door neighbor called the police. I was driving by after the incident had started. I saw about ten to fifteen police officers in in full combat gear. One of them was almost 100 feet from the house laying on the ground with his AR-15 pointed down the street. From where he was the front door could not be seen. No way could he have been an asset from his position. The man’s wife was standing next to me in the street by this time. She was afraid that the police would shoot or hurt him by the way they were acting. I contacted the on scene commander, explained my history with the man in the house and asked if he would allow me to go in and talk with him. I was not permitted to go in. Thank goodness he came out on his own about ten minutes later. I may be wrong but I do not believe the officer down the street wanted to be in harms way.
I live in California so liability is a big issue for me. That said I’m 70 now so personally would be on the fray. I own nothing. Everything is in a trust my wife is executor of as well as I. So sorry I missed it. By the way I train at Front Sight at least 6 times a year to stay proficient.
RIP Sir Prayer up!
Remember the code of the Old West, never shoot a guy in the back? I once read a humorous opinion on that.
Scenario 1: You shoot him in the back. He’s surprised, confused, and he dies quickly.
Scenario 2: You yell out “■■■■■■■!” He spins around, sees you aiming at him. He has a moment of sheer terror, frozen in time, as he realizes he’s about to die, and you pull the trigger and shoot him in the front.
Which way was more humane?
When you have a scumbag shooting at innocent people, humaneness is a non factor. The quickest and safest means possible to stop the threat should be the only consideration.
If I walk away without cuffs I’m as happy either way.
So you never shop with friends, relatives, and neighbors? There are quite a few news stories with CC stopping bad guys (frequently in stores too) how many times have the customers started shooting each other in those news reports? I’ll take my chances with friendly fire rather than being defenseless.
So that’s what you got from this:
I’m all for intervention. Don’t get me wrong. But folks should talk about this stuff realistically, not idealistically. Know the possibilities, probabilities, and make good plans and choices accordingly.
???
Try again, @Greg1
Why? You didn’t respond with any examples of CC friendly fire. Before we can talk realistically we need to define the problem.
2 Likes