Montana250
New member
By the way, thanks for contributing. I was actually Suspended for posting this same thread on another site. Was told I was "inciting arguments"....:no:
Another Case Of C & C Gone Wrong?
- Thread starter Montana250
- Start date
6shootercarry
New member
Inciting arguments? Naaahhh.. More like soliciting opinions. Getting differing opinions from mature and reasonable folks is how meaningful and thought provoking conversations begin. Relationships are built from there.. Social networking.. It’s all good..
ecocks
New member
Hmmmm.
I have to say that just because I carry doesn't mean I cannot honk my horn or yell at someone else to move.
That said, the situation should warrant the honk and my yell should be without obscenities or personal comments.
Under those conditions, I see nothing wrong with shooting when you are being attacked and either your tactical position, lack of skill or other disparity of force exists in such a way that you are in fear for your life or others.
Like the VA IHOP shooting a few years ago and the Memphis parking space shooting earlier this year, there once again seems to be a rush to judgment when we can already see a changing of the stories and the investigation is still underway.
I must have missed what Miller was on probation for, was it in one of the linked articles?
I have to say that just because I carry doesn't mean I cannot honk my horn or yell at someone else to move.
That said, the situation should warrant the honk and my yell should be without obscenities or personal comments.
Under those conditions, I see nothing wrong with shooting when you are being attacked and either your tactical position, lack of skill or other disparity of force exists in such a way that you are in fear for your life or others.
Like the VA IHOP shooting a few years ago and the Memphis parking space shooting earlier this year, there once again seems to be a rush to judgment when we can already see a changing of the stories and the investigation is still underway.
I must have missed what Miller was on probation for, was it in one of the linked articles?
Some of you hit on one important point. Mr. Miller COULD HAVE DRIVEN AWAY. I am not sure if Mr. Miller was in his car or out of his car. Certainly if he got out of his car he is in really big trouble--now you have the "show me what you got suckah" offensive show, which is wholly indefensible if you are a CC. If I am on a jury and driving away was an option, Mr. Miller is sure as heck guilty of something and its more than just bad judgement. If Mr. Miller had been up against a wall and continually had yelled (in earshot of witnesses) "I've got no beef with you--lets forget the whole thing--I'm sorry" and then got pummeled, and then waited for the police, his shooting would be justified, backed by witnesses and his actions, and odds are the prosecutor would not have even thought about bringing charges; just because he initiated things with some honking and yelling Mr. Vigeant should have said to himself that "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never harm me", instead of allowing his machismo take hold.
He was not on probation but rather out on $1,000 bond for a harassment case. It was in some of the stories and I don't know any other details. Normally when you are out on bond you can't carry a gun but that is up to the judge so I have no idea whether Miller was restricted or not.
I found it
Link Removed
6shootercarry
New member
Last edited:
You can call it whatever you want to and yes I am assuming, have no facts on it etc. but I do not believe Miller when he says he was being punched in the face. Before I acept his version I will have to have some additional evidence and I admit that I should not do this but I just get this feeling.
A clip from the news article: "According to Miller's arrest warrant, the men were in the drive-through lane at the McDonald's near U.S. 17 Bypass and 38th Avenue North when Miller began arguing with Vigeant about moving his vehicle."
I don't know anything about you or your training but one thing I learned that makes ALOT of sense is this:
"When you are armed, you must realize that you just lost your right to initiate ANY type of confrontation that could possibly escalate into a violent encounter. You must now have a very mellow attitude on life and your fellow mankind.
You just lost the right to flip off the motorist who just cut you off in traffic. You have to ignore the scumbag who just "wolf-whistled" at your wife/girlfriend. If someone wants to pick a fight with you, you lost the right to respond in any way other than a kind, friendly manner while walking away. As an armed person you must be more likely and willing to avoid trouble that an unarmed person would be. You have the legal and moral obligation of de-escalating any situation that you are presented with unless you are faced by someone displaying all three of the "attack potential" elements. Carrying a loaded firearm among your fellow citizens is an awesome responsibility that is not to be taken lightly.
Remember, once you strap on your weapon, you must carry with it a great measure of discretion and judgment, along with an easy-going attitude."
Direct from "5 rules for (CCW) Concealed Carry Weapon"
5 rules for (CCW) Concealed Carry Weapon
Read and understand these rules and I think you can answer your own question.
It seems that in many situations there are some very "iffy" and dynamic scenarios that get played out literally in seconds. As you sit in your easy chair, far from those situations, try to put yourself on a jury,think about yourself as the defendant and your CC defensive actions, be as "liberal" as you can be with ultimate gun control/violence on the top of your agenda, and examine the possibilities of you having used your CCW. If there is any doubt in your mind that your actions may have been premature, incorrect or illegal, note them and remember them. I found the previous poster, takemine2 and his reference to the 5 roles of CCW to be very good advice. Study them and remember them; god-forbid you should or could find yourself in a "situation", the actions you take in the next few seconds could be very life-changing for you legally and financially. I must say once again that this forum is about as good as it gets for a group of members who show an inordinate respect for their CC responsibilities and the very informative and respectful replies that are presented on these threads.
I do not know how it applies to other states but the law on "Stand Your Ground" for South Carolina is below.
Read it very carefully and break out the 4 rules of "Stand Your Ground".
1) You must not be breaking any law
2) You must not be the attacker or initiator of the incident
3) You must be in a place you have the right to be
4) The amout of force used must be necessary (That is where you must decide in an instant. Choose wisely)
Note that the "or another person" is the "Alter Ego" principle for SC
Read it very carefully and break out the 4 rules of "Stand Your Ground".
1) You must not be breaking any law
2) You must not be the attacker or initiator of the incident
3) You must be in a place you have the right to be
4) The amout of force used must be necessary (That is where you must decide in an instant. Choose wisely)
Note that the "or another person" is the "Alter Ego" principle for SC
ecocks
New member
I'm not buying this one.
Exercising 2A does not preclude standing up for basic common sense.
As in many statements with absolutes whoever wrote this originally should have chosen something other than ANY to make their point.
I can't say that I disagree with you. There will always be situations where you may have to speak your mind. Basic common sense will tell you HOW to confront that person that you may have some issue with. The outcome of the situation is all in HOW you handle YOU in any confrontation and the matter of the laws of your state, IMHO.
Something else to look at:
UseofForce.us: Introduction
ecocks
New member
There are situations where you MAY but also there are several where you SHOULD.
While belting on a gun, open or concealed, doesn't make you a superman, a cop or the neighborhood vigilante, does that mean you just walk away from someone being abused or bullied if you would have normally said something when unarmed?
Understand, I am not talking about someone assaulting you, there you were presumably not the instigator.
I don't know the answer. There have been times when I was involved as a bystander such as when someone cut a line at the bank and another time when two truckers were mouthing off in a restaurant about being forced to eat with a n****** in the booth next to them.
I was younger then but the bullying of the young black man was particularly disturbing to me. If I had a gun on would I have said something? Morally, should I have or have not said anything if armed? You can probably argue that both ways; if you walked away and something happened to the young man or if you got involved, fists flew and you were in fear for your life from one of the two guys and pulled to defend yourself.
While belting on a gun, open or concealed, doesn't make you a superman, a cop or the neighborhood vigilante, does that mean you just walk away from someone being abused or bullied if you would have normally said something when unarmed?
Understand, I am not talking about someone assaulting you, there you were presumably not the instigator.
I don't know the answer. There have been times when I was involved as a bystander such as when someone cut a line at the bank and another time when two truckers were mouthing off in a restaurant about being forced to eat with a n****** in the booth next to them.
I was younger then but the bullying of the young black man was particularly disturbing to me. If I had a gun on would I have said something? Morally, should I have or have not said anything if armed? You can probably argue that both ways; if you walked away and something happened to the young man or if you got involved, fists flew and you were in fear for your life from one of the two guys and pulled to defend yourself.
wjh2657
New member
I carry with a TN HCP. But I have also sat on several criminal and civil juries (I don't "duck" jury duty and end up being picked on a regular basis from the alternate list.) Since the other man did not have a weapon and the incident was the result of a verbal altercation, and shooter was already out on bail, I have a pretty good idea which way this will go. I don't agree completely either way and I don't know all of the story, but neither will the jury, after all of the " objections" and " jury will disregards." They in fact will be left with just about what we have.
Given that shooter had several options available and this was the worst one, He will be in quicksand. "You don't have a legal need to retreat" isn't worth the paper it is written on BTW( it is the law in TN too), you do have a moral obligation to try to avoid the confrontation.
I'd guess the shooter is going down for Manslaughter. I'm not saying that is what I would recommend, so don't shoot the messenger. I am saying ,that based on my experiences with juries and how they are instructed, he is in deep Kim Chee.
A jury, contrary to the BS passed around on forums by those who have never served on a jury, has to make a decision based on the evidence and the law, not their conscience. They will not be trying to find him innocent, that is supposed to be presumed, they are trying to find him guilty. I am pretty sure that there is enough legal evidence here to hang him!
BTW , by Tennessee law, once it enters the stage of an altercation, you must make every attempt possible to leave the scene. If the other party pursues you and continues the altercation, SD may kick in (if all the other conditions are right.) Staying in line at a drive in is not attempting to leave the scene. No retreat only applies it starts as a SD situation. (Unprovoked attack, i.e.out of the blue with no warning or you tried to extricate yourself from incident.) You can't move a house, but you can move a car, so Castle Doctrine is real shaky here. In Castle Doctrine (TN) an altercation inside your own home also is nullified if the shooter was party to an altercation with an invited guest inside his house (In this case the business has "invited" the guest, you are both guests in the business' "house."
Depending on the mood of the community, the shooter may get off because the prosecutor doesn't want to push the issue, but shooter being out on bail does not endear him to the Prosecutor's Office!
Like I said I don't know all about the case and this just a "wazzou" call, but it does illustrate that carrying a weapon does put you in legal peril and calls for a lot of swallowing your pride and acting with common sense.
From civil jury experience, the "Out on Bail" card alone means the shooter is toast. Whatever he did own and whatever he had saved is probably gone to the other guy's relatives. And, if they are as mean as the "victim" apparantly was, they will pursue it!
Given that shooter had several options available and this was the worst one, He will be in quicksand. "You don't have a legal need to retreat" isn't worth the paper it is written on BTW( it is the law in TN too), you do have a moral obligation to try to avoid the confrontation.
I'd guess the shooter is going down for Manslaughter. I'm not saying that is what I would recommend, so don't shoot the messenger. I am saying ,that based on my experiences with juries and how they are instructed, he is in deep Kim Chee.
A jury, contrary to the BS passed around on forums by those who have never served on a jury, has to make a decision based on the evidence and the law, not their conscience. They will not be trying to find him innocent, that is supposed to be presumed, they are trying to find him guilty. I am pretty sure that there is enough legal evidence here to hang him!
BTW , by Tennessee law, once it enters the stage of an altercation, you must make every attempt possible to leave the scene. If the other party pursues you and continues the altercation, SD may kick in (if all the other conditions are right.) Staying in line at a drive in is not attempting to leave the scene. No retreat only applies it starts as a SD situation. (Unprovoked attack, i.e.out of the blue with no warning or you tried to extricate yourself from incident.) You can't move a house, but you can move a car, so Castle Doctrine is real shaky here. In Castle Doctrine (TN) an altercation inside your own home also is nullified if the shooter was party to an altercation with an invited guest inside his house (In this case the business has "invited" the guest, you are both guests in the business' "house."
Depending on the mood of the community, the shooter may get off because the prosecutor doesn't want to push the issue, but shooter being out on bail does not endear him to the Prosecutor's Office!
Like I said I don't know all about the case and this just a "wazzou" call, but it does illustrate that carrying a weapon does put you in legal peril and calls for a lot of swallowing your pride and acting with common sense.
From civil jury experience, the "Out on Bail" card alone means the shooter is toast. Whatever he did own and whatever he had saved is probably gone to the other guy's relatives. And, if they are as mean as the "victim" apparantly was, they will pursue it!
Last edited:
doming83
New member
You should avoid conflict whenever possible even if you dont have a gun. seriously does it really matter if some one gets angry at you, honks he's horn, cusses you out . Why does it matter does your pride matter that much that u have to reduce your self to thier level. i've had people get ticked off and cuss me out did i ever get mad yes, but i dont know them, ill probly never meet em again in my life time, i say who cares. The only time you should use your gun is if your life is in danger. If you cant swallow your pride and u get involved in the altecation u have no right to use deadly force, you get puched in the face take it like a man. I say he should rot in a cell and lose all he's rights. And running away from the sene of the crime. It doesn't make him look guily, it make him guilty.
I suspect that the shooter now thinks that it would have been much better to be patient, swallow his pride, and go home without having to go through all that is in store for him.
I take the view that I do not have the right to "stand up for my rights" in many instances that would result in such a confrontation. If one cannot hold his temper and walk away swallowing his pride he should not carry.
If he had tried to avoid a confrontation, not honked his horn, and had tried to drive away or at least locked his doors, he might have been OK. I suspect that he might be prosecuted in time, and very probably have a civil lawsuit files.
What did he prove, except that he acted foolishly?
FWIW one reason I carry CS Foam in my car is to hopefully prevent having to shoot someone if it happens to me.
Regards,
Jerry
I take the view that I do not have the right to "stand up for my rights" in many instances that would result in such a confrontation. If one cannot hold his temper and walk away swallowing his pride he should not carry.
If he had tried to avoid a confrontation, not honked his horn, and had tried to drive away or at least locked his doors, he might have been OK. I suspect that he might be prosecuted in time, and very probably have a civil lawsuit files.
What did he prove, except that he acted foolishly?
FWIW one reason I carry CS Foam in my car is to hopefully prevent having to shoot someone if it happens to me.
Regards,
Jerry
Let's be honest...most of us males have a hard time walking away from a confrontation, especially one which we did not initiate, especially in front of other people, because of pride. And I'm not saying that's wrong; a men should stand on principle, when necessary. That's what a man does. I'm kind of a grouchy old shit, and not the easiest guy to live with, so my wife often tells me. At the same time, I know she feels safe in my presence, that if a situation arises in which her personal safety is in question, that I'm gonna step up and handle it. So, I'm betting most of us on this forum are like that. But now, we're carrying. What to do?
We all remember the grand master martial artist, usually a little Oriental fellow, who smilingly defuses the situation, often in a personally humble manner. Talks his opponent in circles with a smile, and in the end, no blood is shed. The Grand Master seemingly swallows his pride and avoids the conflict, even tho he could have presumably dismembered his opponent in record time. Being trained as a martial artist (I hold a legitimate black belt), I can tell you that these people exist (btw, I'm not one of them). There are other very serious and deadlly folks around, too...think Navy seals and other paramilitary types. Anway....
IMO, this is what WE are now. Regardless of our physical size, mental and emotional makeup,and any other training we might have, we're now walking among the general populace while secretly possessing the means to end life in a very immediate and violent way. So, we must act accordingly.
Am I making sense, here, or just slinging BS? I realize we can't just turn and walk away from any/all situations, but our whole demeanor has to be calm, rational, and confident. Did I mention friendly? Someone's giving you shit about cutting in front of them in line, you smile, apologize and remove your ass. Someone whistles at your old lady, you smile and nod (she is fine, isn't she?). Someone INSULTS your wife, you gotta deal with it. But you have to do so knowing you could conceivably kill this guy very fast and HE doesn't even realize it.
We're sheepdogs. The sheep around us don't know we're there, but they might be happy to find out about us when we help THEM with a serious, violent situation. Just remember, some of those sheep can be obnoxious assholes. But, they're still sheep. (Unless, of course, the guy you're starting to argue with IS a Navy Seal, and YOU don't realize it!)
My 2 cents. I'm willing to swallow my pride and take a flying leap, if that's the concensus.
We all remember the grand master martial artist, usually a little Oriental fellow, who smilingly defuses the situation, often in a personally humble manner. Talks his opponent in circles with a smile, and in the end, no blood is shed. The Grand Master seemingly swallows his pride and avoids the conflict, even tho he could have presumably dismembered his opponent in record time. Being trained as a martial artist (I hold a legitimate black belt), I can tell you that these people exist (btw, I'm not one of them). There are other very serious and deadlly folks around, too...think Navy seals and other paramilitary types. Anway....
IMO, this is what WE are now. Regardless of our physical size, mental and emotional makeup,and any other training we might have, we're now walking among the general populace while secretly possessing the means to end life in a very immediate and violent way. So, we must act accordingly.
Am I making sense, here, or just slinging BS? I realize we can't just turn and walk away from any/all situations, but our whole demeanor has to be calm, rational, and confident. Did I mention friendly? Someone's giving you shit about cutting in front of them in line, you smile, apologize and remove your ass. Someone whistles at your old lady, you smile and nod (she is fine, isn't she?). Someone INSULTS your wife, you gotta deal with it. But you have to do so knowing you could conceivably kill this guy very fast and HE doesn't even realize it.
We're sheepdogs. The sheep around us don't know we're there, but they might be happy to find out about us when we help THEM with a serious, violent situation. Just remember, some of those sheep can be obnoxious assholes. But, they're still sheep. (Unless, of course, the guy you're starting to argue with IS a Navy Seal, and YOU don't realize it!)
My 2 cents. I'm willing to swallow my pride and take a flying leap, if that's the concensus.
wjh2657
New member
After I had been dragged in by the MPs for one of my usual liberty calls in Kin Village gone bad with a fight ensuing, I received some really good advice from an old Korean War vet, Gunny Balfour. He was an Instructor at the NCO School in 3rd Div at that time. He told me that people who can't control their anger try to justify it by getting other people to turn to anger. In short if he makes you angry, he wins!
Now, every time I run into some Butthead who tries me I just remember: If he makes me angry, he wins! I don't want the SOB to win!
Now, every time I run into some Butthead who tries me I just remember: If he makes me angry, he wins! I don't want the SOB to win!
Hey doming83: I agree with everything you and others have said about your responsibilities when you are CC, but getting "punched in the face and taking it like a man" is not necessarily one of them. You have to admit that there are some limitations on that statement, particularly if you truly fear that the first punch is a precursor to others and serious injury. If someone punches you in the face and they are a lot bigger and a lot stronger and a lot meaner than you, you have a right to defend yourself. Iif he outweighs you and has the look of Ghengis Khan on his face and in his demeanor, you'd better defend yourself or it could be the last time you "take it like a man". You can try and retreat, which in SC is not necessary, but if you do and he is still going after you, all bets are off and the only way to even the playing field and protect yourself from serious injury, is, unfortunately, the use of your CCW--and when you do use it, you had better be willing to REALLY use it. I go thru scenarios with myself concerning possible situations and am convinced that I will defend myself. You had better convince yourself of same if you CC; if you CC and only think about retreat and "take it like a man", you may be better off without a CCW because there is a good chance after the beating your CCW will be used against you.
