Opinion on drawing a weapon in different situations

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

I have grown up on a farm, lived in suburbia, and then back out to 10 acres, and now in a different state in a townhome. Every residence has presented a different scenario for protection of personal property on your own private property. I still have not read all the laws for Oregon, only because where I live, I would not walk out aim a weapon at someone that is stealing or vandalizing my personal property, such as a vehicle or in a storage area. Why, well, for the reason that unless I was presented a threat, and in a suburban area, I feel, drawing a gun on someone to protect personal property might be too much and.....again, I do not know the law, but I believe, Oregon doesn't have a law allowing such personal property protection. let alone, I would not shoot someone for mealy stealing from me or vandalizing, but if the law permitted, It is a very useful tool in stopping, apprehending, or holding one in such case until the police arrived. A Shot gun pointed at one tweeker stealing out of your car, will hold them from getting away allot better than a loud voice and a flashlight. Yet this is where I am confused. Yes, it at times can benefit in the fact that the perp may not get away, but, at times it could make things get worse. This changes in the area that you live. When I lived on 10 acres and not in suburbia, I would not have a thought of going out with a fully loaded gun to confront and detain a suspect violating laws on my property. But now in a city area, the same thing doesn't feel right and I believe isn't even legal to do.
I'm not trying to impeach on what I feel is right or what I like to do, I am asking for others opinion on the topic. One should be able to protect their property, but drawing a gun, should be done if you are at all options of having to use that gun in lethal force. Yet, it is a common old time theme to use a gun as fear for protection of property.

tell me what you think, and please don't accuse or critique me, I am asking a viable question of multiple different situations and think it is a good question. Thanks
mark

Read More

 

[jonn5335]

I was thinking the same thing yesterday and was thinking I should invest in some pepper spray or a taser but I think the rubber bullets would be more effective it's not worth shooting someone for tearing a $100 cd player out of my dashboard

 

[Burt Gummer]

I understand the logic. Even though you have a pistol at the ready you will run into situations that call for more than your bare fists, but not enough of a threat to warrant a pistol draw.

The best secondary option is the Kimber PepperBlaster II if you want to also carry a spray. Forget those squirt-squirt bottles at 7-11, absolutely worthless.

I am not skilled with how to fight with a knife, but I guess that is an option. Does anyone know how long a folding knife you can carry legally (concealed specifically)? If would be easy to carry one next to my pistol at my six. Someone told me 3" once.

Edit: Hard to find a definitive answer. It appears - not sure - that if a concealed folding knife has a blade that is 3.5" or shorter and folds close; and locks in place when opened, that is OK. Lots of internet comments that police love to confiscate all knifes, especially the expensive ones; gee I wonder why. The knife cannot have any spring or assistance in opening. Larger handle length as opposed to the blade is OK.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/166.240

 

[duran21]

I would contact them with my pistol open on my belt. It's not drawn but is ready at a moments notice if the BG decides to attack instead of run. Plus a good military/police style flash light with strobe will blind the bad guy

 

[Mark W.]

In Oregon the only lawful reason for a private person to point a gun at someone is for self defense.

In Oregon there is no blade lenght law. Eugene and maybe a couple others citys have laws on the books that pertain to blade lenght.

 

[Burt Gummer]

That is what I am hearing. Also that a lot of police still believe a 3.5" max blade law is on the books so they confiscate longer ones .

I think I'll pick up a Benchmade Griptilian 3.45" black folder - only about 3 oz in weight to ride next to my CC. Many say the Chris Reeve is the best, but it is 3.5x the price. In my work (limited energy) I've always wanted to add a nice knife as a tool anyway.

 

[Jammer Six]

Speaking as an instructor, there is no way to present an answer, because there is no answer that will fit every situation, or even every law. Not to mention that the statutes are only one source of law and are not, therefore, a complete answer, even if read correctly.

The real answer is this: you must make your decision on the spot, taking into account all the facts specific to that instance.

If you're wrong, you go to jail, and will never carry legally again.

The law will hold you accountable for the decision you make, whether you made it on the spot or tried to make it in advance. Believe me, it is not possible to make a decision involving weapons in advance. (Well, or don't believe me. That's up to you, too.)

 

[Misterbill]

I understand the logic. Even though you have a pistol at the ready you will run into situations that call for more than your bare fists, but not enough of a threat to warrant a pistol draw.

The best secondary option is the Kimber PepperBlaster II if you want to also carry a spray. Forget those squirt-squirt bottles at 7-11, absolutely worthless.

I am not skilled with how to fight with a knife, but I guess that is an option. Does anyone know how long a folding knife you can carry legally (concealed specifically)? If would be easy to carry one next to my pistol at my six. Someone told me 3" once.

Edit: Hard to find a definitive answer. It appears - not sure - that if a concealed folding knife has a blade that is 3.5" or shorter and folds close; and locks in place when opened, that is OK. Lots of internet comments that police love to confiscate all knifes, especially the expensive ones; gee I wonder why. The knife cannot have any spring or assistance in opening. Larger handle length as opposed to the blade is OK.

ORS 166.240 - Carrying of concealed weapons - 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes

Um, there's not a bit of difference legally between using a knife or using a gun in a self-defense situation. If you're on solid legal defensive ground, you're fine. If you can't use or threaten to use lethal force legally, you can't pull out a knife and make some claim that this is "less illegal" than using a gun would have been.

They are both deadly weapons, period. Same goes for a baseball bat, screwdriver, or ANY other object which a reasonable person would assume capable of doing grave bodily injury or death. Heck, I'm aware of a case in which an argument over who was next in line at a tennis court resulted in a minor altercation where one guy hit the other once with the tennis racket. -He was charged with ADW and only got the charges reduced after spending a lot of money on lawyers.

Pepper spray, or a stun gun (depending on the specific state laws) is about it for less-lethal defense outside your dukes.

 

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

i understand your questioning of this law, as everystate and some cities have their own laws, which, i have first hand experience with, half a inch too long in one city, yet the rest of the state had a different length law. eventually the case was thrown out, yet years later I found it was still somewhat one my record and effected a rental agreement. Very good thing to bring up and think about.

 

[salmonriverjohn]

Count on it, if I find someone snooping around my place, in the remote area that I live, and he has gotten past two Queensland healers, one Rottweiler, and one German Sheppard, you can be damned certain my shotgun, pistol or other will be drawn and ready. Oh, and I forgot to add in the wife, even the dogs give her a wide berth.
I did get myself into a bit of a pickle for holding a man half in/half out of a neighbors window that he was crawling through in a burglary. His buddy that was lifting him in took off and left him to the mercy of me and mister Winchester until the police arrived. This was long ago in Portland and Michael Shrunk got me out of that mess. I guess it wasn't my property and I had no legal right to "detain" him at gun point according to the LEO on sceen. Thanks Mike!

 

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

Speaking as an instructor, there is no way to present an answer, because there is no answer that will fit every situation, or even every law. Not to mention that the statutes are only one source of law and are not, therefore, a complete answer, even if read correctly.

The real answer is this: you must make your decision on the spot, taking into account all the facts specific to that instance.

If you're wrong, you go to jail, and will never carry legally again.

The law will hold you accountable for the decision you make, whether you made it on the spot or tried to make it in advance. Believe me, it is not possible to make a decision involving weapons in advance. (Well, or don't believe me. That's up to you, too.)

I agree 100% percent with you, yet, in suburbia, if you witness someone out in front of your house, causing damage to your vehicle for some reason out of smite, or stealing off of it, it is not a scene to pull a gun, yet if you go out with a knife and then a gun is pulled, I would guess a open carry situation would be a good idea. It is still that decision in each situation that makes the difference. the hardest part is moving from a state that allows deadly use to protect ones home and personal property. I had some young kids that were stealing in the area and broke into a pull barn of mine and all it took was a blast in to the sky, on my own 10 acres and the kids knew too, it was done. could things have changed very quickly, yes, and thank god nothing did, because I could have been sitting in a prison hoping my attorney would be able to set me free, even though we are innocent until proven guilty. No one deserves to be killed unless they are threatening the life's of others. Very interesting answers so far, and I thank all of you for them

 

[Misterbill]

You cannot use or threaten deadly force to protect property in Oregon. PERIOD.

I see no upside whatever to leaving the safety of one's house to confront a prowler rummaging through your car.

1. Call the cops and say: "This is Joe Blow at 123 XX street, I have a prowler prowling through my car. I HAVE A GUN and am prepared to defend myself if necessary." I absolutely promise you the cavalry is coming just as fast as they can at that point. Unless you're in the boonies, probably a matter of 3-7 minutes tops.

2. Don't leave the defensible position that's your house. Why go outside of your defensive position to confront an unknown, possibly violent, possibly armed person over a freakin car stereo? Would you die over anything that's in your car? I sure as Hell wouldn't, so why leave cover?

There's a lot of hoopla and bluster out there about holding the badguys for the cops etc. THAT IS NOT MY JOB. It holds a thousand potential safety and legal risks for me over what in the end, is likely to end in a misdemeanor petty theft or trespass charge.

The first step in self-defense is avoiding situations where you need to use defensive tactics and tools.

Simply turning on the lights and shouting out the window is going to get the teenager prowling your can to run like Hell 99% of the time. Going out and playing Officer Obie gains you nothing but stroking your ego.

 

[kev1]

I will only draw and fire if I am trying to save my family from a life or death situation. Or me of course. I just cant see loosing everything to defend myself in court over a car stereo. With that said if a threat is in my home at the same time as me one of us will not make it. As much as I hate a theif its just not worth pulling a gun to stop a crime outside the home, unless its life or death. I know some will say thats weak but I like my house and cars and every thing that will be lost to get a good lawyer. Just look at some of the justified shootings and what happend to the victim in court. Thats my two cents

 

[salmonriverjohn]

You cannot use or threaten deadly force to protect property in Oregon. PERIOD.

Agreed. Yet if you lived where I do Misterbill, and it being AT LEAST an hour away from the nearest LEO you would find the call and wait scenario most likely wouldn't work. I'd never shoot someone unless my or a member of my family's life was in jeopardy, but one wouldn't get past the many posted fences unless they were up to no good PERIOD, and anyone willing to go to that extreme is very likely up to the worst case scenario. I for one wont hide away in my home and hope for the best.

Quote, There's a lot of hoopla and bluster out there about holding the badguys for the cops etc. THAT IS NOT MY JOB. It holds a thousand potential safety and legal risks for me over what in the end, is likely to end in a misdemeanor petty theft or trespass charge. end quote.

Were not talking about someone stealing gas here, as it's a mile from the road to the porch. Letting someone into your abode before reacting, well that's up to you. And that sir isn't hoopla.

 

[Jammer Six]

And that sir isn't hoopla.

No. That's posing. Hoopla is usually punctuated correctly, and is much easier to read.

 

[hermannr]

I also live out a bit...but it's only 1/2 mile to the county road. It is my policy to OC...all the time...unless I have a coat on becasue it is cold. The one situation (in over 40 years) that could have turned very bad for me, that OC stopped...and it never left the holster.

Oh yes, may I add...my neighbors (especially the one's that don't live up here all year) know I always carry, and they like the idea...no-one on my road has ever been robbed...

 

[salmonriverjohn]

No. That's posing. Hoopla is usually punctuated correctly, and is much easier to read.

If you knew me, you wouldn't say that. But good for you Jammer Six, you have just painted many with the same brush, and it would seem that you have placed me in the middle of good company, for that, I thank you. And now it appears that we have a firearms instructor posing as a spelling and grammar teacher. Man, all that and it didn't cost me a dime for such a fine "edumacation", go figure.

Quote,
The law will hold you accountable for the decision you make, whether you made it on the spot or tried to make it in advance. Believe me, it is not possible to make a decision involving weapons in advance. (Well, or don't believe me. That's up to you, too.).

I, like many others carry openly while on my property by choice and concealed when away. Why you may ask? Because a cop is far to heavy. All one need do is look at the insanity and violence occurring daily to draw a conclusion and make a choice. As you stated, believe me, well, or don't believe me. That's up to you too. Oh I believe you Jammer Six, yet I will make my own choice. Posing? I think not, but there is such a thing as imposing.

 

[Misterbill]

salmonriverjohn:

I don't give advice on the internet as to specific tactical situations. I try to stay in generalities.

While your legal exposure in the deep boonies may be slightly less than someone in suburbia, I will point you to a guy in Washington who was recently convicted of manslaughter after laying in wait in his rural garage to catch burglars. In this case, as will be the case if you ever (God forbid) have to use defensive force, it will be asked whether there was an immediate (or "imminent" in Washington) threat of grave bodily injury or death to you.

It won't matter how far you are from the cops, as the case in Okanagan county showed last year. The question will simply be whether or not you had a reasonable belief that your life or someone else's was in imminent danger.

This is the main thing I stress to anyone interested in self defense shooting.

EVERYTHING you did will be subject to a jury's second guess.

If you're sure you're gonna die if you don't shoot, then by all means shoot and deal with it later. But what I see a lot of is the attitude that you have the right to "defend your castle" from all comers, regardless of intent or ability. That's not how it works. Not ANYWHERE. Now if that description doesn't fit you, then ignore it.

But I feel it necessary to add: If you shoot a guy for prowling your car, and I don't care HOW far you are from the cops, you are very likely to be successfully prosecuted for homicide of some degree.

You'll need to demonstrate to the cops,the prosecuting attorney and (God forbid) a jury, that this went beyond simple theft and on to a direct and imminent threat to life and limb. How scary it may be to be an hour from the nearest cop, how isolated you felt, has no bearing. You did, or did not, have a REASONABLE apprehension of immediate or imminent danger of deadly harm. If the answer in the jury's eyes is no, I hope you enjoy prison.

The deep boonies is the one and only place I would ever say a warning shot may do you good. (Make sure it's into a backstop!) You're very unlikely to get charged in such an instance. But I still see no good tactical advantage gained from exiting your residence unless you're concerned about livestock theft from the back 40. And even then I'd advise extreme caution.

I live in an extremely friendly to self-defense shooting area. I am am intimately familiar with my county prosecutor's office and the makeup of any likely jury. *I* would be very reluctant, from a legal and tactical standpoint, to leave a secure area to confront an intruder in my non-residential property. Once they demonstrate an intent to enter my occupied residence, God help them. But someone prowling a car or looking for some easy-to-steal tools does not constitute in Oregon, a valid excuse for lethal force. No matter WHERE you live.

I'm not trying in any way to bust your balls. I simply want you to be aware of where the law stands and your risks. They are not insubstantial and in a state with no right to use deadly force in protection of property, you need to be VERY aware of those risks.

God Bless and good luck,

-Bill

 

[Misterbill]

No. That's posing. Hoopla is usually punctuated correctly, and is much easier to read.

It was funny on first reading, but really, I don't think that was what the poster was getting at.

 

[Jammer Six]

It was meant to be funny. Sorry, salmonriverjohn.