What are the draw gun and open fire rules for the different parties in the title?
Coming from a European country, as a civilian, we may only use a firearm in self-defense if our life is under immediate danger and a firearm happens to be accessible but a firearm wasn’t kept for the express purpose of self-defense; the latter scenario is “going equipped” and is an offense in and of itself.
For example it is not OK to keep a gun in the car “in case” you need it, and then need it and draw it. But it is OK if one is going to a firing range, comes under mortal threat, loads the gun (remember, the gun must be transported unloaded) and then draw it.
Furthermore, a second restriction is that the use of the firearm must be proportionate. So if someone is not an immediate mortal threat, the bearer cannot fire. Defense of property is not an acceptable reason.
How do these draw gun/open fire rules vary in the US? Is it different for civilians, LEO, etc.?
Another question I had was the Trump shooter - did the Secret Service wait to open fire only after the shooter proved himself to be a lethal threat to Trump?
If your life is in immediate danger of life or limb having to load your weapon means you’re already dead.
State depending, more than likely property is not defendable.
Civilians to stop the threat when in danger of death or grave bodily injury may/will occur.
LEO? Let’s ask, @Johnnyq60
ATF? Hide your dog!
Great question. So far I have read that the snipers were told to NOT shoot the suspect.
The Secret Service will need to explain that reasoning to a Committee.
Private citizen is the one I’ll speak to because that’s what I am and what most of my training has been for:
You are facing an imminent deadly threat.
Another way of phrasing it, you are facing imminent threat of serious bodily harm or death, or certain crimes like “forcible felonies”, arson of occupied structure, kidnapping, etc
There is also a standard that the force used must be objectively reasonable.
From what I have heard there was a sniper who had a chance to take the shooter out and was told to stand down but did not. He took the shot after the shooter fired and neutralized him. I read he was arrested for disobeying a direct order and was released the next day and terminated.
@Jay89
What if someone is trying to forcibly take your vehicle while you were in traffic (carjacking) can you use deadly force? The person committing the carjacking may or may not be armed, you don’t know that. Would you be able to articulate that you were in fear for your life. Would that be considered protection of property or protecting your life?
Or you would have to retreat or run if possible to have a chance to load your firearm. Thats why I always have a round in the chamber. I live by this rule. If its not chambered its not loaded.
@Johnnyq60 I suppose the courts would take into account the disparity in apparent force between the carjackers and the victim; for example an elderly person vs. a bunch of young thugs. As carjacking involves the forcible (or at least non consensual) removal of the owner from the car, it probably can be classified as protection of life.
Now if the carjackers had already ejected the victim and were driving off, and the victim pulls a gun and kills the fleeing carjackers, then the courts would say it isn’t protection of life anymore but perhaps revenge, or protection of property.
It is another debate but would you have a round in the chamber for a Glock which doesn’t have a safety selector?
There are only two possibilities you can believe 1 is the secret service is a bunch of bumbling incompetent clowns or 2 it was planned and aided. You choose whichever you want to believe.
There are probably at least several threads on this forum where chambered or not has been, heatedly at times, discussed and debated. The general consensus is it depends on your firearm knowledge and ability, comfort level, etc., and on a rare instance, the type of handgun (such as an old or replica that does not have a sear to prevent the hammer falling accidently without a pull of the trigger). I believe the majority here does believe in chambered vs unchambered for a variety of reasons, but we all need to do what we believe is right, safe. etc.
Age and experience wise, I’m joining the party late The good news is that I know I don’t know so that’s a good start to learning.
Some things like gun safety are universal but I’ll need to get my knowledge of local and federal firearms regulations up to speed, as well as familiarity and experience with firearms.
If I carry a Glock with a round in the chamber, it will only be after much practice, especially with drawing. Most of my practice with the Glock has been on putting lead downrange accurately and not drawing from a holster. BTW are there shooters here who can consistently get a bullseye with a Glock’s iron sights at 25m or 27 yards? For me it is quite difficult to consistently do.
@Jay89 Not necessarily true. Castle Doctrine in my state says that if you are in your house or car and a break in occurs, it is automatically assumed that you are under immediate mortal threat. There is no decision with respect to the law to be made.
The good news is that I know I don’t know so that’s a good start to learning.