The Gun Counter

SeekHer wrote:If you do kill someone your better have a good lawyer on speed dial and be prepared to give no statement to the police until they arrive other then your name and address...

the only thing ill tell the police is my name, my address, my lawyers name, his phone number and the location of anything i had to move to secure the scene, like the bad guy's weapon.

other than that, "sir, i will be glad to give a statement just as soon as i can talk to my lawyer."

One more interesting point a cop actually told me once was:

1) just tell them the basics (name, address, "I felt threatened for my life, drew my weapon and fired." ask for your lawyer and that is all you say)

2) After that statement, immediately request medical attention. This does two things:
A) Gives you a medical record of having an elevated heart rate and blood pressure after the shooting if you do go to trial (criminal or civil) to help prove you were under stress (you feared for your life)
B) Then one of the first things they'll always do is dope you up to help you calm down after a stressful event. These means anything you say by accident can not be used because they can't use any statements you make while they know you are under the influence (since you do not have the legal capacity to waive your rights) This gives you time to sit down with your lawyer, carefully go through the events as you remember them and craft a statement to hand over to the police instead of sitting in an interrogation room trying to answer questions on the fly.

once he is in range to do me harm.

If he's in the same room as you, but not already "in range to do you harm", then you live in quite the palace! :-)

consensus seems to be:

1- know the law for your location.
2- situational awareness is key.
3- warning shots are generally bad/unsafe/unnecessary/etc, but exceptions happen.
4- letting drunk belligerent people into your house is bad for business.

also not a bad idea to memorize some form of: My lawyer will give you a statement after I speak with him.

mulligan wrote:consensus seems to be:

1- know the law for your location.
2- situational awareness is key.
3- warning shots are generally bad/unsafe/unnecessary/etc, but exceptions happen.
4- letting drunk belligerent people into your house is bad for business.

also not a bad idea to memorize some form of: My lawyer will give you a statement after I speak with him.

that is about the sum of it... i will say that #2 on your list is perhaps the most useful... i have been in countless situations where i was aware of something being wrong long before anything overt happened. I personally feel that this awareness saved me from some serious headaches more than once.

If someone is already to the point where he's doing something that makes me feel the need to shoot him, he doesn't get a warning.

He gets a shot.

Jered wrote:If someone is already to the point where he's doing something that makes me feel the need to shoot him, he doesn't get a warning.

He gets a shot.

I agree, then up it to "anything (anyone) worth shooting is worth shooting twice".

IIRC the law in most places says that if you are justified in shooting, you should not warn. If the behavior is not bad enough to justify killing then a warning will only get you in trouble.

A warning shot is a damn good way to get convicted. Just ask Harold Fish. (goole it if you aren't familiar)

Say this out loud "I was afraid for my life, so I fired a 'warning shot'"
Were I on a jury, I wouldn't believe it either.

kparker wrote:

once he is in range to do me harm.

If he's in the same room as you, but not already "in range to do you harm", then you live in quite the palace!

THIS one will DEFINITELY open the eyes of the anti-gunner, if you can get them to play along.

Give them a toy gun, start from across the room, when you "attack" they try to draw and "shoot" you before you tag them.

**NEVER** happen.

Funny how quick they realize the total emptiness of their "position."

Cops/DAs complain about the "CSI effect" -- juries refusing to convict on solid, but not "CSI wiz-bang" solid, evidence. We poor self and family-defenders have to worry about the "movie effect" -- otherwise sane people wondering "why didn't he just shoot the gun out of his hand/shoot him in the leg" or some other sort of nonsense.

Your friend is -- sadly -- an idiot with no grasp of reality. In some ways I envy her naivete.

DD