TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:

jocat54 wrote:

Keith B wrote:

jocat54 wrote:Sorry, but there would have been 2 shot at Walmart---a beating is a beating (and no such thing as fair fight or light punches--if you punch me(lightly or hard) I will try my best to shoot you)

Being too quick on the trigger is worse than being too slow. Without seeing what was happening, you can't make that judgment. A single punch to the body does not necessarily justify use of deadly force and if you jump the gun (no pun intended) you will end up with a charge of manslaughter that you will not beat.

A single punch to the body will get you shot.

Sure hope I never have to serve on a jury where you shot someone for one punch to the body.

Keith

If possible, I will not even take one punch to the body. If I am being threatened and have time I will tell the perspective assailant to stay back and if I have time, warn him that if he attacks me I will shoot him.

If he advances on me in a threatening manner I will shoot him and anyone else threatening me.

I have stated on another forum that I walk with a cane (sometimes barely), and one punch to the body could kill me as I have a medical device implanted in my abdomen. If he manages to get one punch in, he will surely not get another.

How would you vote on this one Keith?

VoiceofReason wrote:

Keith B wrote:

jocat54 wrote:

Keith B wrote:

jocat54 wrote:Sorry, but there would have been 2 shot at Walmart---a beating is a beating (and no such thing as fair fight or light punches--if you punch me(lightly or hard) I will try my best to shoot you)

Being too quick on the trigger is worse than being too slow. Without seeing what was happening, you can't make that judgment. A single punch to the body does not necessarily justify use of deadly force and if you jump the gun (no pun intended) you will end up with a charge of manslaughter that you will not beat.

A single punch to the body will get you shot.

Sure hope I never have to serve on a jury where you shot someone for one punch to the body.

Keith

If possible, I will not even take one punch to the body. If I am being threatened and have time I will tell the perspective assailant to stay back and if I have time, warn him that if he attacks me I will shoot him.

If he advances on me in a threatening manner I will shoot him and anyone else threatening me.

I have stated on another forum that I walk with a cane (sometimes barely), and one punch to the body could kill me as I have a medical device implanted in my abdomen. If he manages to get one punch in, he will surely not get another.

How would you vote on this one Keith?

It would still depend on disparity of force. We could be talking about you shot a Girl Scout for punching you cause you didn't buy a box of cookies.

To be clear, I am not saying I would never shoot someone who punches me, even once, but there are way more things involved in the decision to shoot than just saying 'Anyone who punches me will get shot.'

KingofChaos wrote:

speedsix wrote:...part of the good to be found in carrying concealed is that, knowing if other, more mild responses don't work or wouldn't be appropriate, we do have deadly force...this lets us have a more confident mind and lets us find ways to de-escalate or respond more moderately...at least that's the way my 62-year-old mind takes care of my 62-year-old body...I may not have gotten better with age, but I sure have mellowed...

That's mostly what I was getting at. I think that there are other options other than deadly force if you're simply punched once. Maybe you take the punch and call the police. Maybe you get back up and sock him back. Maybe you're a 70 year old man, and the guy is looming over you menacingly and you shoot him. I just don't think shoot should be the automatic response.

I never said it should be an "automatic response". I'm just saying that in certain parameters, that one punch MIGHT require a serious, deadly response. It is situational. I'm glad some folks are big guys who can go toe-to-toe with a crew of dudes; though I don't consider myself a weakling, neither am I a "Golden Gloves" or Paul Bunyan type, either. I understand that once upon a time, some folks would have been willing to "tussle" in a manly manner; lots of bad guys today won't...they are going to have a "crew" with them, or they are armed, or both. I read an article from a link on this site written by an LEO about his perceptions of bad guys through his current dealings with them. It pretty much mirrored what I read in the news on a regular basis. Once again, I'm NOT advocating popping lead into folks if they look at you wrong, not in the least. But then again, that ONE PUNCH may be the wrong punch...that is all I am getting at.

Correct me if I am wrong but a person is not required to give someone a “free punch”. I don’t think we are required by law to suffer a certain amount of injury before resorting to deadly force.

I am not a cop (now) and I don’t believe I am required to attempt to physically subdue someone.

BTW. If it is a full grown man, woman, or a teenager it will be an automatic response from me upon getting punched. If I am sent to prison for that, so be it.

If whoever punches me, hits the bulls eye, it won’t matter anyway because I will be dead before the police or ambulance gets there.

@Heartland Patriot

Forgive me if I seemed like I was putting words in your mouth. This all got started because another member, not you, said it would be his automatic response, and a couple of us thought that was kind of ridiculous. I fully accept that there may be a situation where pulling the trigger may be the answer. I just don't accept that pulling the trigger is always the answer.

KingofChaos wrote:@Heartland Patriot

Forgive me if I seemed like I was putting words in your mouth. This all got started because another member, not you, said it would be his automatic response, and a couple of us thought that was kind of ridiculous. I fully accept that there may be a situation where pulling the trigger may be the answer. I just don't accept that pulling the trigger is always the answer.

Understood, but not necessary. I just wanted to make it clear that I can see both sides. Its all about the circumstances. Have a good one.

I applaud this mans restraint I am glad his restraint did not cost hm his life. As for whether or not to shoot. It really depends on the situation. It is hard for me to envision a situation where someone wants to kick my tail. What I will say is that I will do everything in my power to avoid shooting a person. Avoiding bad places and circumstances, try to de-escalate situation by walking away, not mouthing off, not puffing up at an insult. However if all else fails, and the person is not such that I am certain I can deal with them with less force (children/pre-teens/elderly nuns...etc) and they are bound and determined to hurt me and mine then I will stop them. I will use whatever force I need to to make sure my kids and I go home at the end of the day.