She did good!...Sort of

Being from Michigan, not sure what the laws are in Georgia. In Michigan, you technically don’t have to stop shooting until there is no longer a threat. But not if the person is running away. Some states say shoot until the threat stops. Some states (Like Michigan) says you can shoot until there is no longer a threat. To some this may be confusing. Here is a example from the CPL course I took. I don’t remember the state in the was, but the question was “You are in a armed confrontation and when you shoot the other person, they start to stagger and fall and their gun falls and slides under a dumpster. Do you keep shooting?” In that state the answer was no because the gun slid under the dumpster so there was no longer a threat. In Michigan you can legally keep shooting till they quit moving. (You don’t know if he has another weapon, gun, knife whatever and if he isn’t incapacitated he can still hurt you. What are your thoughts?

2 Likes

She could technically be charged with attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon when she “Took aim and fired another shot” as the guy was running away.

4 Likes

I had similar training and scenarios that opened up to this story. Instructor stressed to
ask yourself questions, if you should keep shooting after the bad guy or gal is down. When that
firearm goes under that dumpster is time to stop, but do what you have been trained to do, is call 911 or
make your presence known by requesting / shouting for 911 and that includes calling for Police and
Emergency / EMS to your location and follow you procedures and that training.

I will not put my firearm away and stay in full alert until police arrive and then surrender to them, give information to police, looking for witnesses, and invoking my right to remain silent; by all means ask for a LAYWER and shut up. A hard day at the office and not wise to celebrate either.

3 Likes

I agree, been told to let them RUN AWAY .

4 Likes

Technically yes, but in such case LAW shouldn’t be BLACK-OR-WHITE… and hopefully she won’t be charged.

However, I’m afraid, there will be at least one “lawyer” who smells money here… :zipper_mouth_face:

2 Likes

I agree @Jerzy and I think a strong argument could be made by a competent attorney that one extra shot in the “heat of the moment” would not be unreasonable (story only mentions her firing twice). I would hope a jury of her peers would agree with that even in a left leaning State/city.

So yes, when the suspect stops running stop firing…saying/knowing that and performing accordingly in a real situation when the adrenaline is pumping do not always align.

2 Likes

I agree and I hope she doesn’t get charged with anything.

1 Like

No lawyer would be able to argue against common sense if all was ok with the mental function of the public that makes up juries.

2 Likes

I agree. True lawyer knows it.
“Lawyer” can try to use it to show his existence…
But anyway, there shouldn’t be any charges here…

The story said she just took a shot and sent him running. She then purposely writes how she then took aim and fired another shot as he was fleeing. Says he was only hit once but leads you to believe it was in the back. She writes how since she was rescuing a police officer then the police wont charge her. No mention of the perp having a weapon. I guess it all depends on the state laws where this took place whether it’s legal to do so.
Did she do the right thing by coming to the aid of this peace officer? Morally most definitely. What if it wasnt a police officer would the police be so lenient? Roll of the dice.
We carry to protect our lives and the lives our loved ones. Once you take on the responsibility of other civilians into the equation. I hope your really prepared to loose your freedom or your life and your family’s finacial well being.