A. Barton Hinkle impugns the motives of ALL Open Carry Virginians

[Superlite27]

One could just tell them, with good command language. I armed stay away, I prepared to defend myself.

Or simple a STAY BACK

Good verbal commands not only inform the potential attacker your aware but alerts witnesses that your in danger.

If it is legal to open carry why would it be brandishing to exposé your firearm with out drawing it?

One second your CCW next your open carrying.

There are to many variables in each situation to know or say what well work or not.

The mentally ill and those who are intoxicated on drugs or alcohol some times just don't pay attention or care.

Where it is legal defensive display can be very effective in stopping an attack with out shooting some one.

Doesn't a person have to see an attacker before issuing a notification?

.......because crooks never sneak up on unsuspecting victims, right?

They also must wear signs announcing they are crooks. They would never pass themselves off as harmless and well intentioned.

Better just notify everyone approaching you so that you can inform those crooks who are attempting to sucker punch you before they strike out of the blue.

I can see the trip down the grocery store aisle......

"I'm armed. Stay away. I'm prepared to defend myself."

"I'm armed. Stay away. I'm prepared to defend myself."

"I'm armed. Stay away. I'm prepared to defend myself."

"I'm armed. Stay away. I'm prepared to defend myself."

.......and on, to the next aisle.

Or, one could simply open carry and let their visible sidearm inform sneaky and disguised criminals that one is prepared to defend themselves.

 

[marshaul]

It's OK, I impugn A. Barton Hinkle.

The Coen brothers film was better, anyway.

 

[speed41ae]

if you pull it you must shoot it

I agree with you, BUT what if someone punches you and runs away as you are drawing? My understanding is that you cannot shoot someone that is no longer a threat.

 

[Grapeshot]

I agree with you, BUT what if someone punches you and runs away as you are drawing? My understanding is that you cannot shoot someone that is no longer a threat.

A punch, unless somehow potentially deadly, would not in and of itself justify use of deadly force.

 

[skidmark]

I agree with you, BUT what if someone punches you and runs away as you are drawing? My understanding is that you cannot shoot someone that is no longer a threat.

A punch, unless somehow potentially deadly, would not in and of itself justify use of deadly force.

Even a potentially deadly punch (which has nothing to do with the law's focus on my reasonable apprehension of an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm) has nothing to do with the fact that the puncher, now fleeing, no longer presents such a threat.

Let's see if anybody can come up with a better "example". Something like two or three scruffy-looking guys following a lone female into a parking garage? Or the apparently bat-s**t crazy guy waving his sign-on-a-stick like a baseball bat as he comes along the sidewalk (but still outside the mythically magic 21-foot "circle of danger")?

Bueller? Anybody?

stay safe.

 

[Lyndsy Simon]

A punch, unless somehow potentially deadly, would not in and of itself justify use of deadly force.

I disagree.

First, a punch *is* potentially deadly force. As evidence, I present to you an instance of a man dying from head trauma incurred during an MMA fight: Douglas Dedge. If that's not enough, here's a video of a man who died after hitting is head on the sidewalk during a fistfight outside a store. Note that unlike the first case, this man was hit only once.

Second, if you're carrying a weapon and someone throws a punch at you, you are not in a fistfight - you're in a fight for your life over control of your weapon. This applies to anyone who carries a weapon, but it applies particularly to open carriers. If an attacker can clearly see that you are armed and still chooses to assault you, you can only assume that the purpose of the assault is to subdue and disarm you.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not suggesting that one should be out getting in fistfights and shooting people. I am however firmly stating that as a 30-year-old man who does all he can to avoid violent confrontation, if someone walks up and assaults me I believe that being in fear for my life is a completely reasonable and justified response. I will respond as appropriate.

 

[Lyndsy Simon]

Even a potentially deadly punch (which has nothing to do with the law's focus on my reasonable apprehension of an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm) has nothing to do with the fact that the puncher, now fleeing, no longer presents such a threat.

Let's see if anybody can come up with a better "example". Something like two or three scruffy-looking guys following a lone female into a parking garage? Or the apparently bat-s**t crazy guy waving his sign-on-a-stick like a baseball bat as he comes along the sidewalk (but still outside the mythically magic 21-foot "circle of danger")?

Bueller? Anybody?

stay safe.

Both of those situations sound like a good time to have an ASP Defender in your hand - options are good to have.

 

[skidmark]

Both of those situations sound like a good time to have an ASP Defender in your hand - options are good to have.

Might be a good notion, but the object of the exercise is to demonstrate when The Defensive Display of a Firearm would be considered justified, for the purpose of convincing the General Assembly that it ought to be passed into law.

stay safe.

 

[B. Reddy]

A Colorful Solution

A general question: Other than open carry, how can one inform a potential threat that they are armed without risk of brandishing?


TFred

Maybe one of these fine products?

http://www.dsmsafety.com/ccw.html

 

[JoeSparky]

Punches HAVE been deadly and as such do have the potential to be lethal. The problem is with the original query is once the punch is thrown and the one throwing HAS WITHDRAWN you have no LEGAL justification to defend yourself with force that may be potentially lethal! it don't matter where you are in your draw stroke once the agressor has dis-engaged you are no longer at imminent threat of great bodily injury or death.

 

[Blk97F150]

Maybe one of these fine products?

http://www.dsmsafety.com/ccw.html

Or just flash the ever popular 'Concealed Carry Badge'... :uhoh:

 

[marshaul]

Might be a good notion, but the object of the exercise is to demonstrate when The Defensive Display of a Firearm would be considered justified, for the purpose of convincing the General Assembly that it ought to be passed into law.

stay safe.

Not needed, IMO.

Consider the carrier who is threatened with unambiguously potentially-lethal force and draws his firearm, at which point the threat immediately desists. Now the law has put him in a tricky situation, with perverse incentives to boot: either he can commit the criminal (but likely legally safe) action of shooting his former assailant, or he can assume the likelihood that he will be convicted of brandishing, now that his assailants have conveniently run off with all the evidence. Maybe this "shouldn't" happen under the current law, but it has.

My own feeling is that we should give folks the benefit of the doubt so long as they manage to avoid actually shooting anybody, precisely to avoid these perverse incentives.

On the other hand, this is all apparent enough that I'm forced to conclude that any legislator who would not spontaneously propose defensive display legislation of their own accord at their first legislative session (much less any who would oppose it once proposed) is suffering from a sociopathic inability to care about the communities they purport to represent. So I'm not enthused about the possibility of reform. Virginia's government is beyond corrupt.