CCW holder fires warning shot, faces charges.

[jordanvraptor]

you have a link for this update?

 

[aslinged]

Anybody know what would happen if he did fire straight into the road? Is there a ricochet risk? Does it depend on the weapon and the round?

Situation, tactics, etc, all aside it seems like a bad idea to fire into a hard surface directly below your jewelry box. If you know what I mean.

 

[jordanvraptor]

Ricochets can do funny things depending on caliber, speed, surface it hits etc. At the very least you could put an eye out...

 

[Sawdust]

Anybody know what would happen if he did fire straight into the road? Is there a ricochet risk? Does it depend on the weapon and the round?

Some what related to your question.

A security guard that I knew (only as an acquaintance) was showing off his holsters retention ability and promptly discharged his 1911 .45. The bullet passed through the side of his upper calf and hit the pavement. Through investigating the scene it was apparent that the bullet hit the pavement almost perfectly perpendicular to the ground. The "splatter" pattern of the bullet was completely even. The round appeared to have totally disintegrated on impact. The guard's boots showed no signs of impact from spalling or ricochet.

I realize that this incident is by no means definitive but just an example of what could/did happen.

 

[tionico]

Risk of ricochet is part of the why for one of the key points of gun safety.. KNOW your backdrop.


If I were ever in a situation to want to fire a warning shot, I'd take care to find a patch of grass, dirt, chunk of wood, something that will absorb the round. I'd never deliberately discharge a round against something hard, like concrete, asphalt, structural steel....... as mentioned, the ricochet is hard to predict.

 

[tionico]

Oh, and I'm glad to learn all charges were dropped agains this kid. Seems he was a bit irresponsible, even borderline crazy. But I did think he was within his rights, legally, to present the weapon and even discharge it as a warning, mainly based on the information that it was eight punks against he and his brother... which brother seemed to be taking the brunt of the assault. It also seems the report of the discharged round DID go a long ways toward putting a lid on the situation, already well out of hand and rapidly escalating.

Of course, his BEST plan would be to simply NOT GO THERE in the first place. THAT might be a start toward some wisdom.

 

[JUSTIficatioN]

stupid decision, no reason what so ever to fire a shot. especially into the pavement! reason enough to pull the gun i'd say, but it should have stopped at drawing and pointing the firearm, unless the man with the knife actually advanced on the man with the CPL.
thats my two cents.

 

[JUSTIficatioN]

unless the man actually advanced on the man with the CPL or his brother/friend/loved one i should say

 

[Chee-to]

Here's a quote from the comment section in the KATU article;

I guess one has to ask what occurred before the gunshot. Who was the aggressor? Just because your in a fight doesn't mean you did so by your choice. If the guy with the gun was minding his business and some jerk decides to pull out a knife and come at him then I would ask what else is the guy with the gun supposed to do? If this was Portland police the guy with the knife would be dead we all know this as fact. Why do we hold our citizen's to a higher standard then our police? How much backing up did the man with the gun do before firing a warning shot and did the man with the knife continue to advance? I don't think there is enough information to judge either way.

Do you think he's got a point ?

 

[clearconscience]

This guy was clearly not the brightest person. He would have been better off shooting and killing the guy IF he advanced than firing a warning shot. He's lucky that shot didn't kill someone walking/standing by.

He will be damn lucky to not lose his CHL.

On the issue of legaility of carrying in a bar or being drunk while carrying. I think most/all bars prohibit carry firearms in a place that serves alcohol. But a lot of places are moving towards that. Whenever I see a sign out front of any where that prohibits my right to carry I usually keep on walking.

 

[clearconscience]

Here's a quote from the comment section in the KATU article;


Do you think he's got a point ?

There's s a point here, but if the guy was advancing then he should have called the cops and kept the gun on him, I
f he backed off, wait for the cops.
If he came forward, shoot him.
The PPD also have great lawyers. I would have done the same thing minus the warning shot. You never, NEVER fire a warning shot. If there's reason enough to fire a warning shot, there's reason enough to use deadly force against the person putting your/someone else's life in immediate mortal danger.

 

[Benny503]

Ok take one step back.... can we use this incedent as a scenario for discusion.?What would you do at this time? Put yourself into the gunner and what would you really want to do... I dont want billy bob answer "I'll kill the guy!" I want the real training and static answer..... If I am hijacking this topic please let me know....TIA.

Some guy walking toward you with a knife, what would you do???

 

[The B]

my bad.. not used to this forum yet.

 

[Stomper]

I have a CHL, and I just finished a citizens' "police academy" here in Woodburn that had a teaching block on the use of force that our P.D. uses in their use of force policies and training. This included going through their "Range 3000" scenerio simulator... the only thing missing was the report & recoil from the G-19's...

BTW- The eight years of tactical combat training in the Army STILL kicked in for me even after almost 17 years...




The three factors in the use of deadly force against a threat are:

1. Intent
2. The means
3. The opportunity



Let's break it down...



1. Intent

Q:
Does (do) the threat(s) intend to cause serious bodily harm and/or death?


A:
Yes, a group of 8 voicing their intent, moving aggressively towards (with at least one wielding a deadly weapon) a group of 2 CLEARLY shows intent to do harm or inflict death.




2. The means

Q:
Did the aggressor(s) have the means to carry out the intent?


A:
Yes, a 4:1 ratio of an aggressive group moving against a smaller group CLEARLY has the means to inflict harm and/or death (even without weapons). It was documented that at least one of the aggressors was wielding a knife.



3. The opportunity

Q:
Did (does) the aggressor(s) have the opportunity to inflict harm and/or death?

A:
Clearly there was ample opportunity for the aggressor-group to carry our their intent.



PERSONAL CONCLUSION:

IMO- Had the aggressor-group advanced much further towards the 2 men, this would have been grounds for a justifiable shooting in self-defence... the warning shot is a personal no-go (for me).



FIRST-

Although it may (or may not) be a crime, I would NEVER imbibe libations while carrying. Even if you are justified (impaired or not) in the use of force, any lawyer could/would use that as a wedge to bring a case against you that you were negligent... DON'T BE STUPID, drink iced tea/coffee/soda/milk, and/or have a designated shooter!!


SECOND-

While a warning shot MAY be appropriate in some cases, keep in mind that EVERY SINGLE ROUND you fire is a liability that you are LEGALLY responsible for (this even applies to police officers at all times). If you have time to fire a warning shot, most times you have time to bark out "STOP/FREEZE, OR I'LL SHOOT!!!". There is no liability for doing THAT, and you don't need a big ol' Drill Sgt. voice (like I have) to do it... plus you save expensive ammo to pump into the threat.


THIRD-

Now this is germain to Oregon (I don't know about Washington State) but the Oregon Supreme Court has ruled that a citizen DOES NOT have the duty to flee from a perceived threat, meaning that you are NOT obligated to attempt to "run away". Whether you are carrying (any sort of weapon) or not, walk around with confidence like you own the place, this is a POWERFUL deterent to a potential attacker... (usually) they're looking for VICTIMS, not a potential fight, but again DON'T BE STUPID... armed or not, bravado can only take you so far!!



FINAL SUMMARY:

Getting a Washington State CPL is EASY-PEEZY for someone w/o a convition, or having been committed to a psychiatric facilitiy (even non-residents)... no training is required... clearly some training would be appropriate for the young man in the video.

 

[Trlsmn]

DON'T BE STUPID, drink iced tea/coffee/soda/milk, and/or have a designated shooter!!

That there is sig line material!

 

[Benny503]

SECOND-

While a warning shot MAY be appropriate in some cases, keep in mind that EVERY SINGLE ROUND you fire is a liability that you are LEAGALLY responsible for (this even applies to police officers at all times). If you have time to fire a warning shot, most times you have time to bark out "STOP/FREEZE, OR I'LL SHOOT!!!". There is no liability for doing THAT, and you don't need a big ol' Drill Sgt. voice (like I have) to do it... plus you save expensive ammo to pump into the threat.

Stomper thank you so much for you input, I learned a lot by reading your responded and still learning by puting myself into the sistuation. One quick question (well I have seen it happen in real life). The gunner pull out handgun and ordered the attackers "Back up or else I will shoot" the attackers keep approaching the gunner, the gunner have the gun point down to ground the whole time, his finger off the trigger. But the attackers have no weapon in hands approaching the gunner (yeah it sound stupid but I have seen it happen in person) The gunner out of number, because the attackers have no weapon. So the gunner pointed the firearm up in the air and shoot for warning shot. Is that the right thing for the gunner to do? Please serious advice need.... any input will be consider for situation prepare purpose

 

[Stomper]

IMO warning shots are ALMOST always a no-go... there are too many variables to go wrong with that and some innocent person may get tagged.. and YOU would be legally responsible for that.

Here's how I would handle a situation like this...


Every mob/group has a "leader" or an "instigator"... and being confronted/threatened by a large group (the group of attackers ARE the weapon) I wouldn't have my gun pointed at the ground, it would be aimed (for starters) straight at the face of the "loud mouth" of the group... OR the closest person who is a threat... a .45 auto WILL get his/her attention (believe it) with a "command voice" warning (time permitting) that they are about to leave this world (or to that effect). If that doesn't work and they keep coming... well as far as I'm concerned THEY pulled the trigger, not me. You are justified in usuing deadly force to prevent bodily harm and/or death to yourself or another.

A bit off topic, but I just saw a video of Chicago thugs beating an high school honor student to death in the street while a bystander was taking the video of it... saying "DAAAAM"... "DAAAM"... there would have been multiple shootings of thugs had I been there... but hey, Chicago basically has outlawed handguns... so everyone should be much safer, right?

 

[Stomper]

That there is sig line material!

LMAO.... DONE!!!

 

[tionico]

well, some possible good news....... just read that today, the US SUpreme Court has agreed to hear the chicago gun ban case.... should have a judgement by next spring or early summer. Second Ammendment Foundation just announced... they are leading the case, four plaintiffs suing Chicago to overturn the unconstitutional gun ban. At issue is whether the Second Ammendment actually applies to local and/or state governments. Duhhh... they need to have a full on court hearing to decide THAT???? What have they been smoking? Seems to me SOMEONE with a big enough legal hammer should have whopped the City of Chicago over the head when they put in that ban 26 years ago.......

but yeah, Stomper you're right. Warning shots are a waste, give a verbal warning, display the convincer, and use it if the verbal is ignored. Not until. Oh, and spot on with the aim of that thing.... point the skinny end right into the face of the bigmouth. And keep it there. A CT in the face is also rather effective, I hear...... like their Tee Shirt says... "helping bad guys make informed decisions". I saw that one on a sixteen year old girl I know who can hardly wait till she's old enough to legally carry. Already a crack shot, has taken a lot of the courses (her Papa's an instructor)

 

[NK777]

This is probably somewhat redundant but I'd like to state my view:

Warning shot! - Bad idea in my opinion
Drawing the weapon in this situation - Damn good idea (The threat was very real 8 to 2 and a knife presented)
Should he have fired on the man with the knife? If the man with knife had advanced absolutely and I would have without a second thought. A warning shot would not have been my choice.
Should you run away in this situation? Nope! there's a good chance a few of the 8 people will catch up to you and or your friend. For me running is not an option. It's not in me to run, I am not about to leave my friend defenseless by running, and I'm really not a very fast runner. IMHO you lose all tactical advantage by running.