Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 1/7/2005 5:02:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 5:09:37 AM EDT by PAEBR332]
Since Saddleup77 won't post a poll about his "draw down yesterday, I thought I would. You can read about the incident here: Draw Down

Poll will allow multiple selections, so you can include the two best choices if you wish.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:10:07 AM EDT
Hard choices, I would say the top three would all aply.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:11:54 AM EDT

The poll graphics are wrong.


Bigfeet
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:12:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Hard choices, I would say the top three would all aply.



Then pick all three. The poll will allow it.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:12:59 AM EDT
Everyone's instincts are different and local.

That's why tourists are often victims.
A local can take one look at a person and know the deal.
If he says that the individual looked like a threat, he was a threat.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:13:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PAEBR332:

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Hard choices, I would say the top three would all aply.



Then pick all three. The poll will allow it.



Too late
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:16:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
Everyone's instincts are different and local.

That's why tourists are often victims.
A local can take one look at a person and know the deal.
If he says that the individual looked like a threat, he was a threat.



I have to agree, same thing here. Used to live in a bad area, got used to it after a few months. Not complacent, I just started to pick out the BG's easier.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:17:24 AM EDT
Saddleup77's case reminds me of the NBA official who called a technical on some badass (can't remember the player's name) for giving him "the look".  The official obviously felt his personal safety was being threatened even though there was no contact.  I can't criticize because I wasn't there but in the calm, peaceful environment that follows these confrontations by a few days, it's hard to sell the idea of a threat of death to someone who didn't witness it.  Bernie Goetz found that out.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:20:16 AM EDT
What are you trying to prove? And why do you think it is your job to poll whether his life was in danger or not? Who gives a shit as long as no one got hurt. If he did something illegal and got away with it good for him. If it was justified great. We all do have done questionable things in our lives. The man did what he thought he had to do at the time. I personally would have had my hand on my gat and warned him to stay away but he chose otherwise. Unless the cops come after him then he can consider this a learning experience and improve upon his actions for the next time something like this happens. I think you are looking to illicit a certain response even though you have run the gammut. Most people you will find will say not enough evidence for judgement.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:21:12 AM EDT
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and go with "maybe justified".

Afterall, he was being approached by someone who he felt was up to no good and someone who kept coming toward him after being told to stop.  That simple fact IMHO is enough to make one very suspicious of that guy's intentions.

However, I think there were several things he could have done differently that would have prevented the need to draw the weapon in the first place. Avoiding a known troubled area is one. Better verbal commands might have been another. And making an attempt to get more distance between him and this individual could be a third. Obviously, he could have handled it better.

But on the other hand, I'm not going to let someone I don't know, approach me in a suspicious manner and get too close to me. Once you allow them to get within 5 or 10 feet of you, it's too late. This is one of those situations that is kinda in the "gray" area. You sense a possible threat, but can't clearly identify it as a threat. You have a guy approaching you in a potentially hostile manner, but you see no weapon. Therefore you aren't justified to shoot, but you damn well can't just do nothing either.

I think I would have tried to create more space while determining this fellas intentions. Only when I had clearly identified him as a threat would I have drawn my gun. But again, I certainly would not have allowed this guy to get inside knife or grappling range of me either.  
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:23:56 AM EDT
No one was injured and no one was assaulted.  This is another instance of a gun being used to prevent a crime.

YMMV
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:24:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Stormtrooper:
What are you trying to prove? And why do you think it is your job to poll whether his life was in danger or not? Who gives a shit as long as no one got hurt. If he did something illegal and got away with it good for him. If it was justified great. We all do have done questionable things in our lives. The man did what he thought he had to do at the time. I personally would have had my hand on my gat and warned him to stay away but he chose otherwise. Unless the cops come after him then he can consider this a learning experience and improve upon his actions for the next time something like this happens. I think you are looking to illicit a certain response even though you have run the gammut. Most people you will find will say not enough evidence for judgement.



Well, as far as Saddleup learing something from this: He admits this was the FIFTH time he has drawn a gun in this same manner. Doen't sound like he learned much from the first four?

I also give two different choices for not enough info: Okay, but not enough info. Not okay, but not enough info.

Finally, the word you want is elicit.  Have a nice day.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:28:59 AM EDT
Good job on setting up the poll.  
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:31:20 AM EDT
JUSTIFIED !
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:37:57 AM EDT
Saddleup did what he thought was correct at the time. Right or wrong he was the 1 there.  Some folks here have more training than others.   Without being there how can anyone make a judgement call?
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:39:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Rocky9_5:
Saddleup did what he thought was correct at the time. Right or wrong he was the 1 there.  Some folks here have more training than others.   Without being there how can anyone make a judgement call?



I bet the local DA would begg to differ with you on this...

EPOCH
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:44:10 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:46:09 AM EDT
Are the pages of replies here going to be added to the collective sum???

Then 30 is definately doable.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:48:30 AM EDT
Well done but I think he could have gotten in trouble it the BG called the cops.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:49:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
Everyone's instincts are different and local.

That's why tourists are often victims.
A local can take one look at a person and know the deal.
If he says that the individual looked like a threat, he was a threat.



+1 instincts never fail you.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:50:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 6:01:43 AM EDT by Cincinnatus]

Originally Posted By EPOCH96:

Originally Posted By Rocky9_5:
Saddleup did what he thought was correct at the time. Right or wrong he was the 1 there.  Some folks here have more training than others.   Without being there how can anyone make a judgement call?



I bet the local DA would begg to differ with you on this...

EPOCH



But.....

Does "right and wrong" change when you enter a different municipality?

Does what constitutes "self defense" change when you cross a border?

If a DA says something is "wrong", is it?
He can say that it is illegal, yes.


Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:50:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 5:59:52 AM EDT by 2nd_Amendment]
Based on the information AS GIVEN, I don't think he was justified to draw his weapon. If there is more to it, that may change my mind, but as it was told, I would have to say "NO".

- no immediate threat
- no threat of immenent death or grave bodily harm
- no attempt to retreat
         etc etc etc

I think a hand placed on the weapon and several shouts of "Back away" "I have a gun" "Do not come any closer" etc, should have been given BEFORE drawing. Had that happened, my thoughts might be different but, again, as told on the other thread, I just don't think so.

It just seems like he was looking for someone to 'draw down' on. His CCW seems to be a first choice of action, not a last line of defense.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:50:39 AM EDT

Well, as far as Saddleup learing something from this: He admits this was the FIFTH time he has drawn a gun in this same manner. Doen't sound like he learned much from the first four?




What a stupid thing to say.  Let me axe you tough guy since you were there the other four times.  What would you have done when you saw the 250lb BG knock a women down and struggling with her to get her purse while punching her?  Would you have shot him or used your 1911 (or in your case, your Berreta Tomcat) to deescalate the situation.  Times over, you had two seconds to make your decision.  That was just one of the scenerios.  I've learned that you don't have to shoot someone to get your point across.


a gun in this same manner


Do you just make up this shit as you go along?  
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:52:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ilikelegs:
I would have drawn the gun on him, made him get to his knees and then kicked the fucker in the face.
He did a great job other wise.



That's just your "I Quit Smoking this week" persona talking.  I feel like kicking everyone in the face this week.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:54:28 AM EDT
When a squirrely Crack Head is heading towards you with that "look" in his eyes....

You can act, or you can wait and see.


Better safe than sorry.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:56:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:56:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Saddleup77:

Well, as far as Saddleup learing something from this: He admits this was the FIFTH time he has drawn a gun in this same manner. Doen't sound like he learned much from the first four?




What a stupid thing to say.  Let me axe you tough guy since you were there the other four times.  




Please tell me that was a joke or a typo.


Link Posted: 1/7/2005 5:58:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:

Originally Posted By EPOCH96:

Originally Posted By Rocky9_5:
Saddleup did what he thought was correct at the time. Right or wrong he was the 1 there.  Some folks here have more training than others.   Without being there how can anyone make a judgement call?



I bet the local DA would begg to differ with you on this...

EPOCH


That has nothing to do with anything.

Does "right and wrong" change when you enter a different municipality?

Does what constitutes "self defense" change when you cross a border?




You completely missed the point of the post.  REREAD...
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:00:23 AM EDT
You're right.
I did.

The DA WOULD have had a problem.

And that DOES have something to do with EVERYTHING.

I'll edit....
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:28:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By illigb:
No one was injured and no one was assaulted.  This is another instance of a gun being used to prevent a crime.

YMMV



Actually, according to NC law, the "bad guy" was assaulted...relevant laws:

1.  Assault by pointing a gun;

2.  Assault with a deadly weapon by pointing a gun.

Now, this is based strictly on what was said in the post...if there is more info that what was written, then the answer might be different, but based on what was reported, the "bad guy" could easily have charged him with assault.  Doesn't mean he would have been convicted, but most likely he would have been arrested....
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:37:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 6:38:23 AM EDT by Cincinnatus]
A few years ago, I was once riding in a NYC subway at 2 AM. (coming home from work).

I was alone in the last car.

Two young men enter the car.
One sits at one end, the other sits at the other end.
I am in the middle.

I was armed.

They seemed to be very aware of me and each other, yet would did not look directly at me.
I was looking directly at them.

20 minutes pass.  No one else gets on the car.  No one says a word.

One of them then loudly says to the other, "Are we gonna do this thing, or what?"




Were I to "draw down" on them, would I have been in violation of the Law?
Yes.
Had these two "gentlemen" broken any Laws?
No.
Were they about to?
What do YOU think?



Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:51:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
One of them then loudly says to the other, "Are we gonna do this thing, or what?"




Were I to "draw down" on them, would I have been in violation of the Law?
Yes.
Had these two "gentlemen" broken any Laws?
No.
Were they about to?
What do YOU think?



I would have waited till they posed a valid threat by making eye contact with me and starting to approach.  For all you know they could have just been doing a drug deal, graffiti or getting ready to smoke a rival gang member.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:58:43 AM EDT
A few years ago, I was once riding in a NYC subway at 2 AM. (coming home from work).

I was alone in the last car.

Two young men enter the car.
One sits at one end, the other sits at the other end.
I am in the middle.

I was armed.

They seemed to be very aware of me and each other, yet would did not look directly at me.
I was looking directly at them.

20 minutes pass. No one else gets on the car. No one says a word.

One of them then loudly says to the other, "Are we gonna do this thing, or what?"


waiting to hear the rest...

Link Posted: 1/7/2005 6:59:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 7:08:23 AM EDT by Cincinnatus]
...and this is just such a situation where one's "instincts" would come in handy.

Were they about to "graffiti"?  No.

"Smoke a rival gang member." No.  (this isn't "The Warriors", it's NYC)

I knew what they wanted to do.

The rest of the story....

So I stood up and stared at them.
Ready. (hands empty)
They got off at the next stop.
Bitches.


But as soon as they said "are we goona do this thing?", I would have been justified drawing a weapon.
It wouldn't have been legal...
But I guarantee any plain clothes cop would have pulled out a weapon.






So, I say he was justified.
Though probably in violation of the Law.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:03:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:


So, I say he was justified.
Though probably in violation of the Law.



Thats how I play the game.
"Right" and "Legal" are not always interchangable.

Good story.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:12:11 AM EDT
Justified.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:22:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
...and this is just such a situation where one's "instincts" would come in handy.

Were they about to "graffiti"?  No.

"Smoke a rival gang member." No.  (this isn't "The Warriors", it's NYC)

I knew what they wanted to do.

The rest of the story....

So I stood up and stared at them.
Ready. (hands empty)
They got off at the next stop.
Bitches.


But as soon as they said "are we goona do this thing?", I would have been justified drawing a weapon.
It wouldn't have been legal...
But I guarantee any plain clothes cop would have pulled out a weapon.






So, I say he was justified.
Though probably in violation of the Law.



How do you know when they said "are we goona do this thing?" they wern't discussing something they were getting ready to do outside the train.  Your to quick to assume.

BTW, ""Smoke a rival gang member." No.  (this isn't "The Warriors", it's NYC)"  umm news flash for you dude, NYC has gangs and gangs have rival gangs.  They have had gangs there for more than 100 years and will continue to do so for many mores.  Oh yea and guess where "The Warriors" was filmed
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:23:11 AM EDT
What if the guy would have kept walking at him?  WHat would Ramboi have done then?
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:23:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:31:24 AM EDT
I think we can all agree on something about this thread.  It reinforces the fact that you probably should carry mace/pepperspray along with your CHL.  Just my 2 cents...

EPOCH
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:34:18 AM EDT
Like I said, I hate to monday morning QB:  But, I would have turned to hide my glcok from the guy's eyes and put my hand on my Glock to be ready to draw and fire.  I am hesitant to draw a pistol if I am not justified, at that tie, it using it.  

That's Brandishing and I know it can be effective, but you begin to be on shaky legal ground.  

Once again, I wasn't there and No one was hurt.  
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:34:19 AM EDT
Typically I’m a ‘better safe than sorry’ type of guy, but in this case I’m going to have to go with: not enough info.  Something about the poster prevents me from backing him 100%.  Maybe it’s the fact that he seems to be bragging about the incident on the internet.  Maybe it’s the fact that he sticks his carry weapon in the front of his pants instead of using a holster like a normal person.  Maybe it’s the language of the thread (‘draw down’???).  Maybe it’s the racial overtones.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a poster child for the ACLU, but I got the feeling that Saddleup wouldn’t have reacted the same way if the ‘perp’ was white.

I’d like to hear about the other 5 times the poster had to ‘draw down’ on a guy.

Anyway, who am I to judge, I wasn’t there.  He’s still alive, so I guess he didn’t do too bad, but I’m still not convinced it was the best decision he could have made.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:37:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HKocher:
Typically I’m a ‘better safe than sorry’ type of guy, but in this case I’m going to have to go with: not enough info.  Something about the poster prevents me from backing him 100%.  Maybe it’s the fact that he seems to be bragging about the incident on the internet.  Maybe it’s the fact that he sticks his carry weapon in the front of his pants instead of using a holster like a normal person.  Maybe it’s the language of the thread (‘draw down’???).  Maybe it’s the racial overtones.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a poster child for the ACLU, but I got the feeling that Saddleup wouldn’t have reacted the same way if the ‘perp’ was white.

I’d like to hear about the other 5 times the poster had to ‘draw down’ on a guy.

Anyway, who am I to judge, I wasn’t there.  He’s still alive, so I guess he didn’t do too bad, but I’m still not convinced it was the best decision he could have made.



+1
exactly...
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:44:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SC-Texas:
Like I said, I hate to monday morning QB:  But, I would have turned to hide my glcok from the guy's eyes and put my hand on my Glock to be ready to draw and fire.  I am hesitant to draw a pistol if I am not justified, at that tie, it using it.  

That's Brandishing and I know it can be effective, but you begin to be on shaky legal ground.  

Once again, I wasn't there and No one was hurt.  



Mexican carry is BS in most instances. In a similar situation, I would have stepped back with my gun side away and placed my hand on my pistol. That Gives the bad guy your intention to defend, while still allowing for a fast presentation or other less than deady response. I think saddle went too far, but I can't say it was uncalled for. After reading his posts though, I'm wondering how old the kid is and has he had any freakin training at all...
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:47:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By txinvestigator:
What if the guy would have kept walking at him?  WHat would Ramboi have done then?



Double tap to the CNS.  He drew first blood.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:55:23 AM EDT
According to the law in florida, who allows me the ccw, in this situation he could have withdrawn. (That is required in all situations except your home.)In Florida this situation would not have met the legal requirements to authorize lethal force. The bad guy had no weapon visiable, not verbal threat was made, not physical harm was done or about to be done, and the potential victim could have left the seen.

In Florida Saddleup77, would be charged with brandishing a weapon, assualt with a deadly weapon, etc, etc.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:56:18 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/7/2005 8:02:33 AM EDT by Cincinnatus]

Originally Posted By Mmanwitgun:

Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:
...and this is just such a situation where one's "instincts" would come in handy.

Were they about to "graffiti"?  No.

"Smoke a rival gang member." No.  (this isn't "The Warriors", it's NYC)

I knew what they wanted to do.

The rest of the story....

So I stood up and stared at them.
Ready. (hands empty)
They got off at the next stop.
Bitches.


But as soon as they said "are we goona do this thing?", I would have been justified drawing a weapon.
It wouldn't have been legal...
But I guarantee any plain clothes cop would have pulled out a weapon.






So, I say he was justified.
Though probably in violation of the Law.



How do you know when they said "are we goona do this thing?" they wern't discussing something they were getting ready to do outside the train.  Your to quick to assume.

Because I knew.
I could tell.

How do you know anything?
I knew, and I was right.
I am 100% confident of their intentions.
They were "would-be" muggers who lost their nerve.



BTW, ""Smoke a rival gang member." No.  (this isn't "The Warriors", it's NYC)"  umm news flash for you dude, NYC has gangs and gangs have rival gangs.  They have had gangs there for more than 100 years and will continue to do so for many mores.  Oh yea and guess where "The Warriors" was filmed


One of these guys was black, and the other was a light-skinned Hispanic.
Anyone who's spent time in NYC knows that the "gangs" are rarely if ever integrated.
(nor do they dress as the Yankees, were makeup or rollerskate)
They were simply punks.

Link Posted: 1/7/2005 7:56:41 AM EDT
In Colorado Saddleup77 could/would have been arrested for Felony Menacing. Determining if he committed a crime would be up to the jury. In Saddleup's scenario drawing down on a panhandler is ridiculous and a perfect example of why some are against CCW.

My personal opinion about Saddleup77 thread is that he is a troll. He post a thread like this on an open forum for all the world to come and look at the mind set of a wacko gun nut that thinks it cool and brags about drawing down on a black, unarmed person that was not presenting a threat other than approaching him in a public place. Then allot of other gun toting wacko's jump in and pat him on the back or state in an open forum he should have shot him etc. etc. again for all the world to see and reinforce an extremely negative stereotype for the members of this board.

It is my opinion that Saddleup77's post was well crafted and worded to provoke a desired response from members of this board.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 8:09:34 AM EDT
I think he did the right thing. Why should he wait for the guy to get to him and become a problem when he was able to handle it before it got bad. I say good job. I wouldn't have arrested him. I've been a cop for 11 yrs in TX.
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 8:17:02 AM EDT
I would have shot the guy before I even got a good look at him. Fear is subjective, you know. That's what we do to colored folks here in Texas, anyway. Then I'd come here a brag about it just to get my mojo reelin. I might even right a song about it.

Here's a few bars -

Well I went to the car wash today in 29 degree rainy Dallas weather to
wash my car or shoot myself a hommie, but I didn't get the chance,
but you should have seen the look in his eyes when I whooped out my pride.
(Chorus) Ohhhh Dallas is a dangerous place if your part of a dark skinned race.
You'd better not be out at night unless your Glock is in your pants just right......
Link Posted: 1/7/2005 8:19:12 AM EDT
I chose "maybe justified."


I wasn't there and didn't experience the same things saddleup77 did, so I can't say for certain. Likely though, I would've acted in a fashion similar to his. I'm not going to second-guess the man on the ground on this one.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top