banishing a weapon but still go to jail? why for prote cting a bussiness...but havent

M

mary gilbert

New member
Encounter at my bussiness..banished a gun now its looking like jail..cop says 3 guys agaisnt my word. Cop wants me to go back to my place of bussiness. Why am I going to jail ..they threatens me first?
-
 
Did you send it to a far away land? BRANDISHING a weapon IS a crime, even if it was 'in self defense'. You threatened them with a weapon, you did not defend yourself. Threatening with weapon =crime. Defending with weapon = POSSIBLY justifiable. If you don't understand what you've done and how the law works regarding your firearm, you need to not own a firearm.
 
Kino Wolf said:
Did you send it to a far away land? BRANDISHING a weapon IS a crime, even if it was 'in self defense'. You threatened them with a weapon, you did not defend yourself. Threatening with weapon =crime. Defending with weapon = POSSIBLY justifiable. If you don't understand what you've done and how the law works regarding your firearm, you need to not own a firearm.
Click to expand...

In some states brandishing is NOT illegal in a situation where using deadly force is warranted. I doubt theres mamy gun owners to "warn" peolple otherwise. The reality is in many outdoor / in public situations the writing is on the wall before SHTF, and can many times be de - escalated with a friendly warning. Things like armed robery and home invasions are another story.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk
 
Indiana Code does not contain "brandishing" language, but our Code does contain a "pointing" clause.....

IC 35-47-4-3
Pointing firearm at another person
Sec. 3. (a) This section does not apply to a law enforcement
officer who is acting within the scope of the law enforcement
officer's official duties or to a person who is justified in using
reasonable force against another person under:
(1) IC 35-41-3-2; or
(2) IC 35-41-3-3.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally points a firearm at
another person commits a Class D felony. However, the offense is a
Class A misdemeanor if the firearm was not loaded.
As added by P.L.296-1995, SEC.2.

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. A gun owner should be proficient not only in the use of their firearm, but also in knowledge of the laws regarding the employment of that firearm. I think all firearms owners should be trained, but I do not think the State should mandate such training.
 
snatale42 said:
In some states brandishing is NOT illegal in a situation where using deadly force is warranted. I doubt theres mamy gun owners to "warn" peolple otherwise.
Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
What the heck does the above mean? Presumption of imminent danger of death or great bodily injury is the precursor to any use of a firearm. Brandishing is not illegal? If you presume that 3 guys with a gun are about to harm you, for example--you are not brandishing when you present your firearm to defend yourself and in that milisecond, they drop their disguised fake gun and surrender. If all they do is swagger into your store and all they do is talk trash, show me the imminent threat. Not enough facts in this thread that are spelled right or composed correctly to understand what happened. Threatened? How and with what? If police are on this guys case is has to do with more facts than just 3 guys against 1 as far as discussion with police is concerned.
 
Washington:

[h=2]RCW 9.41.270[/h][h=1]Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm — Unlawful carrying or handling — Penalty — Exceptions.[/h]

[TD="align: right"]
[/TD]
(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

(2) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (1) above shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. If any person is convicted of a violation of subsection (1) of this section, the person shall lose his or her concealed pistol license, if any. The court shall send notice of the revocation to the department of licensing, and the city, town, or county which issued the license.

(3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:

(a) Any act committed by a person while in his or her place of abode or fixed place of business;

(b) Any person who by virtue of his or her office or public employment is vested by law with a duty to preserve public safety, maintain public order, or to make arrests for offenses, while in the performance of such duty;

(c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;

(d) Any person making or assisting in making a lawful arrest for the commission of a felony; or

(e) Any person engaged in military activities sponsored by the federal or state governments.
 
kelcarry said:
What the heck does the above mean?
Click to expand...

Simple.. it means that if you were/are justified in employing your firearm in self defense, or the defense of another, you become exempt from the brandishing, or pointing statutes.

Sec. 3. (a) This section does not apply to a law enforcement
officer who is acting within the scope of the law enforcement
officer's official duties or to a person who is justified in using
reasonable force against another person under:
(1) IC 35-41-3-2; or
(2) IC 35-41-3-3.
 
Last edited:
When running a business, you can't simply brandish a weapon when a customer talks tough. In my opinion, if a shopkeeper has a weapon pointed at him by a customer/bad guy, it is time to fire to kill, not brandish.
 
airambcat7 said:
If you pull a gun, pull the trigger!
Click to expand...

Sure... And when the parking lot video shows you shooting someone who has dropped their knife and is turning to retreat, now the charges against you are manslaughter or murder instead of only brandishing a weapon. Yeah, that's a real smart move.
 
airambcat7 said:
If you pull a gun, pull the trigger!
Click to expand...

And then go to jail...... because the camera footage shows the perp dropped his gun and started to turn away when you shot him.....He was NO LONGER A THREAT...... Training to ALWAYS pull the trigger once you draw your weapon is STUPID! Training to pull the trigger IF the threat is still there is the proper way...
 
Kino Wolf said:
Did you send it to a far away land? BRANDISHING a weapon IS a crime, even if it was 'in self defense'. You threatened them with a weapon, you did not defend yourself. Threatening with weapon =crime. Defending with weapon = POSSIBLY justifiable. If you don't understand what you've done and how the law works regarding your firearm, you need to not own a firearm.
Click to expand...
Not even remotely true.
 
After correction of spelling, and filling-in the blanks, I'm still having that first post, "there's more to this story than meets the eye" moment.
 
kelcarry said:
What the heck does the above mean? Presumption of imminent danger of death or great bodily injury is the precursor to any use of a firearm. Brandishing is not illegal? If you presume that 3 guys with a gun are about to harm you, for example--you are not brandishing when you present your firearm to defend yourself and in that milisecond, they drop their disguised fake gun and surrender. If all they do is swagger into your store and all they do is talk trash, show me the imminent threat. Not enough facts in this thread that are spelled right or composed correctly to understand what happened. Threatened? How and with what? If police are on this guys case is has to do with more facts than just 3 guys against 1 as far as discussion with police is concerned.
Click to expand...


It's pretty self explanatory. If the USE of deadly force is warranted, then the THREAT of deadly force is warranted. I don't recall speaking of a situation of 3 armed men threatening me with a gun, OBVIOUSLY that's a shoot and not threaten situation. I also didn't say you HAVE to threaten before shooting did I? See, as human being's we have this thing called judgement, what that does is it allows us to analyze a situation and take the action we feel is appropriate. Same rules apply. Maybe in one situation in a state where it's legal, threatening is appropriate, in many others shooting in self defense is the correct action. Why is this such a foreign subject to you? When the Police are forced to draw on somebody, don't they say STOP, FREEZE, GET ON THE GROUND? Why? Because it's better to de-escalate a situation and make the BG stand down than to shoot whenever possible. Sometimes it's not possible, but in many situations it is.
 
Kino Wolf said:
Did you send it to a far away land? BRANDISHING a weapon IS a crime, even if it was 'in self defense'. You threatened them with a weapon, you did not defend yourself. Threatening with weapon =crime. Defending with weapon = POSSIBLY justifiable. If you don't understand what you've done and how the law works regarding your firearm, you need to not own a firearm.
Click to expand...

Want to put some money on that? Aside from your post count here, I don't know if your new to guns in general or not, but assuming you know all the laws of all the states is a bad bet! Cracks me up that you would say "If you don't understand what you've done and how the law works regarding your firearm, you need to not own a firearm" when it appears in this situation they YOU are the one who doesn't understand the law. So Again, It IS legal in many places when the use of deadly force is justified.

NH RSA 631:4

IV. A person who is anywhere he or she has a right to be and who responds to a threat which would be considered by a reasonable person as likely to cause serious bodily injury or death to the person or to another by displaying or brandishing a firearm or other means of self-defense with the intent to warn away the person making the threat shall not have committed a criminal act under this section.



Wisconsin Stat. § 939.48(1)

(1) A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.


I could go on but I'm sure you get the point, I'm sure others in their states can post many more.
 
airambcat7 said:
If you pull a gun, pull the trigger!
Click to expand...


And when all the witnesses or video shows the guy back down or drop his weapon if he had one when you drew, then you just shot an unarmed person who was no longer a threat! Enjoy prison! Statements like this is what hurts gun owners. We like to think gun owners have more common sense but then something like this is said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 142 (members: 0, guests: 142)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,523
Messages
610,662
Members
74,992
Latest member
RedDotArmsTraining

Share this page

Back
Top