When to Engage a Threat?

[DireWulf]

Something that a few of you may want to take into consideration. it would be highly advisable for personnel to acquaint themselves with the particular laws of the state they are in.

What works in Florida or Utah may not necessarily apply to Nevada (for example).

Good point, sir. A good rule of thumb I usually apply to things like this is:

The suspect must have the ability, opportunity and take overt action that demonstrates motivation, to cause serious injury or death to you or another person.


1) Ability: AK47

2) Opportunity: You're in his sphere of physical influence and he can see or will soon see you and pose a threat to you. It must be reasonable. You can't shoot a man on the other side of an impassable raging river threatening to kill you with a bat.

3) Overt action/motivation: Verbal threats of violence or death, aiming the weapon, pointing the weapon, firing to name a few.

For me personally, all three of these aforementioned things are needed.

The Means, Motive and Opportunity rule of thumb is what most states base their justification clauses on. Study your state's and those to plan to travel to.

[glocktogo]

I usually carry in a laptop case, since I have my work laptop with me most of the time. My Glock is always condition one or zero, depending on who you ask, I have the compartment unzipped but the weapon is not visible. I have been in several situations where I felt something may be amiss, be it someone who didn't look right or a feeling I got. In those instances, I always slide my hand into the pocket of that case and have my hand on the weapon, pulling it out, aiming and firing would take about a second.
In a situation like the IHOP, I would be in the mindset to take him out once he shouldered or postured to fire and identified himself as a no shit threat. I'm not approaching him or talking to him, up until I drop him, I am evaluating my target...what his likely actions will be when rounds fly, who is in my way, what covered position I will be moving to if I have to maneuver and where he may move to. I will use all the time I have to play out what needs to be done and how to do it until I am forced to act.
A phrase that was drummed into me from the time I was a young private at Ft. Benning was Speed, Surprise and Violence of Action. In order to win an engagement, it is almost always necessary to have at least two. If I engage him immediately when he decides to act with a rapid burst of accurate .45 caliber rounds, I will have all three. Maybe he will get off a shot first but he will likely miss or not even fire unless he has some really good training with that weapon and on how to react during contact.
I may not be a top shot with a pistol but I know I can empty that Glock 21 in two seconds into the kill zone of a target at 20 yards without using the sights and I know from experience in Afghanistan that I don't panic when someone shoots at me.

The others have been pretty nice, but I'm flat out going to call BS. You might be able to empty a G21 AT the "kill zone" of a target at 20 yards in 2 seconds without using the sights. I would place the emphasis on might, because that's .18 splits sustained for a G21 with 11 rounds if using a 10 round mag. It drops to .14 splits if using a full cap mag. I find you tale to be incredibly tall, so to speak.

[DireWulf]

The specific comment of interest was this:



Thats 10 to 14 rounds.
Let's just low-ball this and say that you only have 10 rounders and don't top off, so you have exactly 10 rounds.
That's 5 rounds per second.
Splits of .20 seconds.
Getting all of those shots into even the "C" zone of an IPSC without sights at 20 yards at that cadence is extremely impressive.

I would love to see it.

It also begs the question of why wouldn't you use the sights at 20 yards? Point shooting at 20 yards that fast and with those results?

[2theXtreme]

Absolutely! I travel to Utah quite a bit from Wyoming, and there are some distinct differences between the two states. What flies in Wyoming may not fly in Utah and vise-versa.

Could you be a little more specific? I not asking you to go into heavy detail. Just some of the things that change for you when crossing borders.

[2theXtreme]

Good point, sir. A good rule of thumb I usually apply to things like this is:

The suspect must have the ability, opportunity and take overt action that demonstrates motivation, to cause serious injury or death to you or another person.


1) Ability: AK47

2) Opportunity: You're in his sphere of physical influence and he can see or will soon see you and pose a threat to you. It must be reasonable. You can't shoot a man on the other side of an impassable raging river threatening to kill you with a bat.

3) Overt action/motivation: Verbal threats of violence or death, aiming the weapon, pointing the weapon, firing to name a few.

For me personally, all three of these aforementioned things are needed.

The Means, Motive and Opportunity rule of thumb is what most states base their justification clauses on. Study your state's and those to plan to travel to.

That is an excellent rule of thumb indeed. I'm definitely putting that one in the memory bank. You are a wealth of info Wulf! What would be the best way to go about finding out what "rule of thumb" each state uses for their justifications? Look up old trials from said state?

[Zhurdan]

Could you be a little more specific? I not asking you to go into heavy detail. Just some of the things that change for you when crossing borders.

-Officer notification (if you get pulled over). In Wyo, you don't have to say a word. In Utah, they generally already know when they run your plate, but you are obligated to state that you have a permit and a gun... (IN THAT ORDER, preferably, as to not alarm them.)

-Establishments that allow or disallow. You'd damn near never see a sign in Wyoming, but they are out there in Utah, best keep an eye out so as not to get asked to leave (Yes, I know, concealed is concealed)

-Carrying where there are alcoholic beverages available. In Wyo, can't carry if the business makes more than 51% of it's sales in alcohol. In Utah, you're not supposed to carry in an establishment that serves alcohol regardless. (No, I don't ever drink and carry). (This one has only been confirmed with a phone call to UT Bureau of investigation, they wouldn't give it to me in writing, nor can I find it in their statues)

-Castle doctrine - Utah has it, Wyoming has similar verbiage.

There's a few.
Like IG said, learn the states you plan to be in or visit.

[2theXtreme]

-Officer notification (if you get pulled over). In Wyo, you don't have to say a word. In Utah, they generally already know when they run your plate, but you are obligated to state that you have a permit and a gun... (IN THAT ORDER, preferably, as to not alarm them.)

-Establishments that allow or disallow. You'd damn near never see a sign in Wyoming, but they are out there in Utah, best keep an eye out so as not to get asked to leave (Yes, I know, concealed is concealed)

-Carrying where there are alcoholic beverages available. In Wyo, can't carry if the business makes more than 51% of it's sales in alcohol. In Utah, you're not supposed to carry in an establishment that serves alcohol regardless. (No, I don't ever drink and carry). (This one has only been confirmed with a phone call to UT Bureau of investigation, they wouldn't give it to me in writing, nor can I find it in their statues)

-Castle doctrine - Utah has it, Wyoming has similar verbiage.

There's a few.
Like IG said, learn the states you plan to be in or visit.

Ahh yes, very very good points indeed. I don't consume alcohol at all but 51% of sales in alcohol? Being a little specific huh WyO?

[Zhurdan]

Ahh yes, very very good points indeed. I don't consume alcohol at all but 51% of sales in alcohol? Being a little specific huh WyO?

Essentially, they're allowing carry in Bar and Grill type restaurants. Actually talked with Gov. Mead about quite a few quirky issues with Wyo's gun laws during his campaign. He pushed thru the Constitutional Carry law here. It went into effect July 1st.

ETA *sorry for the side track*

[2theXtreme]

Essentially, they're allowing carry in Bar and Grill type restaurants. Actually talked with Gov. Mead about quite a few quirky issues with Wyo's gun laws during his campaign. He pushed thru the Constitutional Carry law here. It went into effect July 1st.

ETA *sorry for the side track*

Well great for you guys! No side track at all. It's all relevant to when to and when not to engage a threat. Can't engage without a weapon...

[BrianS]

Getting all of those shots into even the "C" zone of an IPSC without sights at 20 yards at that cadence is extremely impressive.

I would love to see it.

Just a draw and 1 shot 1 A zone hit with no sights at 20 yards consistently would impress the heck out of me.

Maybe I am easily impressed due to unfamiliarity with not using the sights at all but contact distances.

Also I would not verbally challenge a guy with a rifle. If it's just a guy carrying a rifle it's not my business though I might leave or call the cops depending on demeanor and the setting. If he was shooting people or threatening to do so I wouldn't want to attract his attention prior to me shooting him if that was my plan.

The legal standard as I have been taught is AOJP. Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy and Preclusion. Direwulf touched on the principles while using different words.

AOJP Fairly in-depth here:

http://www.useofforce.us/3aojp/

PS Some of this guys talk on Preclusion I disagree with, and some jurisdictions have requirements to retreat if you can while some don't. But that will give you some general ideas.