Defensive gun use, and a reminder to talk to a lawyer before anyone else

[RicInOR]

Are the other youths all charged with murder?
Should be.
If they handn't been advancing on the man, then they wouldn't be shot at.

 

[Member 24180]

Talk to a lawyer before anyone else, not just police. Anything you say to others is discoverable by law enforcement and the prosecution. Good advice.

Another piece of good advice is to remember that you can never use deadly force in defense of property.

 

[Head Shot]

Erased

 

[whirrr]

Unfortunately, USCCA no longer offers their services in Washington state due to Bob Ferguson.

 

[Howard1955]

I'm thinking about the Tueller Drill, and how quickly a do-bad can close the distance and stick a "hunting knife with a 10 inch blade" into a geezer.

I think gramps is lucky to be alive.

 

[BDA.45]

NEVER talk to police before an attorney. E.V.E.R!

 

[BDA.45]

I know it's been posted a thousand times but it's worth the 46 minutes of watching......In fact, I'm gonna watch it again right now for the umpteenth time...

 

[awshoot]

I'm thinking about the Tueller Drill, and how quickly a do-bad can close the distance and stick a "hunting knife with a 10 inch blade" into a geezer.
...

If one does end up talking to the police, don't mention "Tueller Drill" or "force multiplier" -- In the opening statement in the Drejka trial, the prosecutor made a big deal about Drejka using such terms despite never being in the police or military. Obviously rule #1, don't talk to police without an attorney, but rule #2 in the event of violating rule #1, is to not talk about anything you've learned.

 

[Camelfilter]

If one does end up talking to the police, don't mention "Tueller Drill" or "force multiplier" -- In the opening statement in the Drejka trial, the prosecutor made a big deal about Drejka using such terms despite never being in the police or military. Obviously rule #1, don't talk to police without an attorney, but rule #2 in the event of violating rule #1, is to not talk about anything you've learned.

Yah. If anything is said at all. It should be:

"fearing for my (or my and loved ones) life, I stopped the threat. As you may imagine, I'm quite distraught over the entire occurrence & will help your investigation in any way possible, with my attorney present..."

 

[HA556]

Justified shoot, end of story!

 

[wired]

Another piece of good advice is to remember that you can never use deadly force in defense of property.

Depends on the state. Several states allow it.

 

[Member 5605]

People forget one simple rule:

Cause - effect

Action - reaction

 

[revjen45]

1) "He also was just turning his life around, had signed up for college, etc."
Thank you. I actually didn't forget that, I just didn't realize that young Ja'Quan was a prodigy and signing up for college @ age 14. Oh, the humanity! If he just hadn't made some bad choices he would have cured cancer
2) "The problem is that he apparently didn't actually see the knife... he related that the guy had something in his hand."
Hey, it works for the cops...
3) "But he was wrong for pulling the trigger!"
In that situation I would have shot too. I'm 72 with various injuries that prevent me from going mano-a-mano with the Junior Criminals Brigade. I can't back up without stumbling, can't run, can't fight. I can still shoot well enough to resolve the situation in my favor, at least a lot better that I could taking them all on with my cane.

 

[cigars]

So what if you don't have carry insurance or your carry insurance won't cover the $400 grand that it takes to get to trial? I guess that's what separates us from places like Afghanistan.

 

[Member 24180]

wired,

Yes. You are right. I stand corrected and I should not have said "can never use deadly force in defense of property." I was referring to WA and should have qualified as such along with saying that you should never use deadly force in defense of property. Coincidentally, WA is one such state that allows deadly force to thwart the commission of a felony which, on its face, would include defending property. But people shouldn't get caught up in the language of the RCWs. The case law applying those statutes often deviates from a common sense reading and is reflected in the pattern jury instructions that will apply to you when you are prosecuted.

RCW 9A.16.050

Homicide—By other person—When justifiable.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

But even though WA recognizes the use of deadly force per the above RCW, note the following pattern jury instructions.

WPIC 16.02 Justifiable Homicide—Defense of Self and Others

It is a defense to a charge of [murder] [manslaughter] that the homicide was justifiable as defined in this instruction.
Homicide is justifiable when committed in the lawful defense of [the slayer] [the slayer's [husband] [wife] [registered domestic partner] [parent] [child] [brother] [sister]] [any person in the slayer's presence or company] when:

1) the slayer reasonably believed that the person slain [or others whom the defendant reasonably believed were acting in concert with the person slain] intended [to commit a felony] [to inflict death or great personal injury];

2) the slayer reasonably believed that there was imminent danger of such harm being accomplished; and

3) the slayer employed such force and means as a reasonably prudent person would use under the same or similar conditions as they reasonably appeared to the slayer, taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances as they appeared to [him] [her], at the time of [and prior to] the incident.

WPIC 16.03 Justifiable Homicide—Resistance to Felony

It is a defense to a charge of [murder] [manslaughter] that the homicide was justifiable as defined in this instruction.
Homicide is justifiable when committed in the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony [upon the slayer] [in the presence of the slayer] [or] [upon or in a dwelling or other place of abode in which the slayer is present].

The slayer may employ such force and means as a reasonably prudent person would use under the same or similar conditions as they reasonably appeared to the slayer, taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances as they appeared to [him] [her] at the time [and prior to] the incident.

So my advice is that people should not use deadly force where they or others are not in immediate threat of great bodily harm or death, at least here in WA.

 

[EPS]

USCCA!

No can't have it in Washington.
Thanks to Little Bobby Ferguson and his cronies..
But if you are a illagal alian .
You can kill cops and rape women and kids.
No problem.
But self-defense insurance .
For get about that.
Here in Washington we Prosecute Cops .
After a good shoot.
With body cam footage.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Unfortunately, USCCA no longer offers their services in Washington state due to Bob Ferguson.

USCCA and Washington State

Good evening what about going into Washington State from another state. If one should get into a situation. Would we be covered?

community.usconcealedcarry.com

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

If one does end up talking to the police, don't mention "Tueller Drill" or "force multiplier" -- In the opening statement in the Drejka trial, the prosecutor made a big deal about Drejka using such terms despite never being in the police or military. Obviously rule #1, don't talk to police without an attorney, but rule #2 in the event of violating rule #1, is to not talk about anything you've learned.

I am listening to the LOSD vlog right now where Andrew describes how the prosecution bastardized the "Tueller Drill" and that Drejka is screwed because the defense did not object. Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill's Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

 

[awshoot]

I am listening to the LOSD vlog right now where Andrew describes how the prosecution bastardized the "Tueller Drill" and that Drejka is screwed because the defense did not object. Drejka Analysis: When the Tueller Drill's Corrupted – Law of Self Defense

Definitely worth reading the whole thing while it is freely available. Even if you think Drejka got what he deserved:

If it sounds like I'm offended at these legal proceedings, this apparently deliberate or incompetent misleading of the jury, that's because I am. And I'm offended not over any particular personal interest in Michael Drejka. I have no personal interest in Michael Drejka. Perhaps Drejka would have been convicted even without this misleading of the jury, and the outcome would have been the same.

In that case, however, he would have been convicted justly. This conviction, based on this vile misrepresentation of evidence critical to the Drejka's defense, and without any challenge even by the defense (!), is not a just conviction.

 

[nwslopoke]

This writer along with any notion that the 75 yo shooter needs to be scrutinized for this shooting over the facts that lead up to this shooting, is a huge reason these things keep happening.

Stop coddling and making excuses for bad behavior. It's getting mostly minority kids killed. Like any other PROGRAMMING. Garbage in garbage out. These kids are being programmed with garbage. Every 15-20 years the program gets updated but the programmer uses a familiar format.