Imminent Threat

[kelcarry]

I have read and replied to many threads that mention stand your ground, castle doctrine, home defense, all sorts of what ifs, shotgun ammunition etal but I always come back to the one inalienable certainty about firearm defense in any way shape or form----imminent threat. In SC, and I would think in most if not all states "imminent threat" is the cornerstone of whatever follows in the laws that govern firearm protection by individual citizens. As far as I am concerned before I purchased my first firearm, I looked in the mirror at myself and I convinced myself that if I am in imminent threat of my life, I will do whatever it takes to avoid any kind of confrontation and if it fails I will do all in my power to kill my adversary. Based on this, my threshhold for imminent threat, IMO, is pretty high, but if it is met, many of the arguments or comments I tend to read at times on these forums become irrelevant to me. I have seen comments ranging from possible psychological problems, to only shooting so and so in the arm or leg or whatever, to using birdshot in a shotgun, or, if it is only you/wife (no children or others in home) to being ready to do battle in other rooms to protect your silverware etal. If the first three comments are important to you, I find ownership of a firearm to be a disability to you that will get you killed. If the last comment is important to you, kindly appreciate the fact that your silverware is replaceable and will not miss you but your are not replaceable and someone will miss you. Open for discussion. I am sure much will be repeats of many posts but you can always find that jewel of a comment that will make me and others a better firearms owner who embraces CC.

 

[eagleeyes]

that's right by law there has to be an imminent threat.....lets say you are looking out your window and see someone breaking into your vehicle parked in the street or even down your own long driveway ..the law here says you can't go out brandishing your weapon or firing at them because you are not in immediate life threatening situation and if you do go out to stop them chances are your permit may be revoked here in florida

 

[brushmark]

I don't believe theft is worth a life, would not shoot (or even draw) for that. However, if someone comes into my house, (3 big dogs, sons and a husband who work out and shoot) I would not ask what they wanted, I would shoot. I would have to think if they are breaking into MY house they are out for violence, and that is exactly what they will get. I would rather answer the prosecutor's questions than the funeral directer's or my daughter's rape counselor's. I would protect their lives no matter the cost.

 

[~OtisM~]

It equates to intent, ability, opportunity, jeopardy. That determines imminent threat and your peers will judge u by that standard in court. Google it and learn it and live it and say it to yourself everytime you strap your gun on and leave the house. It could keep you out of prison.

 

[tcox4freedom]

I don't believe theft is worth a life, would not shoot (or even draw) for that. However, if someone comes into my house, (3 big dogs, sons and a husband who work out and shoot) I would not ask what they wanted, I would shoot. I would have to think if they are breaking into MY house they are out for violence, and that is exactly what they will get. I would rather answer the prosecutor's questions than the funeral directer's or my daughter's rape counselor's. I would protect their lives no matter the cost.

Nice post.
In SC, the law takes into account that someone breaking into you house or trying to car jack you already is willing to do you severe bodily harm (or worse), in order to carry out their crime. This protects the victim from having to make that decision. (Imminent threat is already "implied" within the law in South Carolina.)

Link Removed

The stated intent of the legislation is to codify the common law castle doctrine, which recognizes that a person’s home is his castle, and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person’s place of business. This bill authorizes the lawful use of deadly force under certain circumstances against an intruder or attacker in a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle. The bill provides that there is no duty to retreat if (1) the person is in a place where he has a right to be, including the person’s place of business, (2) the person is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and (3) the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily injury, or the commission of a violent crime. A person who lawfully uses deadly force is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known the person is a law enforcement officer.
H.4301 (R412) was signed by the Governor on June 9, 2006.

-

 

[Flanmedic51]

'Brandishing' is relative to the situation and if you live in a State with retarded laws. I have no problem drawing my weapon if someone was to steal or attempting to steal my vehicle. If someone is going to commit a felony against me they will be looking down the barrel of a .45. Doesn't mean I'm going to immediately pump lead into them, but they don't need to know that. The assumption that someone may be armed in the committal of a felony certainly is not unreasonable and one should be on alert for that. Its like the notion of someone demanding your wallet and although you're armed, you give it to them because you PREDICT it to be the easy way out. I don't live my life on assumptions of what criminals may or may not do to me or my family when there is gray area concerning a possible life threatening situation during an otherwise felonious criminal act. Obviously if immediate life threat is present, then you're already involved in the "worst case scenario" and drawing and firing your weapon is the only choice. My 2 cents...

 

[~OtisM~]

'Brandishing' is relative to the situation and if you live in a State with retarded laws. I have no problem drawing my weapon if someone was to steal or attempting to steal my vehicle. If someone is going to commit a felony against me they will be looking down the barrel of a .45. Doesn't mean I'm going to immediately pump lead into them, but they don't need to know that. The assumption that someone may be armed in the committal of a felony certainly is not unreasonable and one should be on alert for that. Its like the notion of someone demanding your wallet and although you're armed, you give it to them because you PREDICT it to be the easy way out. I don't live my life on assumptions of what criminals may or may not do to me or my family when there is gray area concerning a possible life threatening situation during an otherwise felonious criminal act. Obviously if immediate life threat is present, then you're already involved in the "worst case scenario" and drawing and firing your weapon is the only choice. My 2 cents...

Enjoy prison.............

 

[Nightmare45]

This is the reason you need to know your own stats laws, Texas does allow the use of Deadly force to protect property including property of a third person, look it up it is to long for me to report here. Would I use deadly force to protect property, several years ago I would have said no, but after my aunt, great aunt were looted after Katrina in Mississippi and New Orleans, my attitude has changed. PS: Two stolen trucks helped my thought process.

 

[kelcarry]

that's right by law there has to be an imminent threat.....lets say you are looking out your window and see someone breaking into your vehicle parked in the street or even down your own long driveway ..the law here says you can't go out brandishing your weapon or firing at them because you are not in immediate life threatening situation and if you do go out to stop them chances are your permit may be revoked here in florida

It is interesting that you picked on the one thing that is allowed in SC (But only at night) and only if you call out to effect a citizen's arrest (SC Code of Laws-Section 17-13-20). In short, if I actually saw or could presume with just suspicion BG's design to commit a felony, and attempt to arrest said BG, I can ensure said arrest even if the life of the BG should be taken. Not sure when this went into effect (probably civil war or earlier) but it has met case law--therefore in SC, you break into my vehicle at night and I go out there and tell you to stand still for a citizen's arrest with my firearm pointed at you and you decide to run, I can take your life "by any means necessary"--may not be pretty, but is legal.

 

[kelcarry]

The assumption that someone may be armed in the committal of a felony certainly is not unreasonable and one should be on alert for that. Obviously if immediate life threat is present, then you're already involved in the "worst case scenario" and drawing and firing your weapon is the only choice. My 2 cents...

Hey Flanmedic51: The 2 quotes from your response are contrary to each other. You cannot ASSUME a felony and then actually believe "imminent threat" allowing you to present your firearm and possibly discharge same. As a previous reply has said succinctly, your opinion concerning "brandishing" is illegal and, as has happened in cases, can get you put in prison and can, in severe cases, get you killed. I actually understand your comments and they do make sense, but they are still illegal.

 

[Flanmedic51]

The assumption that someone may be armed in the committal of a felony certainly is not unreasonable and one should be on alert for that. Obviously if immediate life threat is present, then you're already involved in the "worst case scenario" and drawing and firing your weapon is the only choice. My 2 cents...

Hey Flanmedic51: The 2 quotes from your response are contrary to each other. You cannot ASSUME a felony and then actually believe "imminent threat" allowing you to present your firearm and possibly discharge same. As a previous reply has said succinctly, your opinion concerning "brandishing" is illegal and, as has happened in cases, can get you put in prison and can, in severe cases, get you killed. I actually understand your comments and they do make sense, but they are still illegal.

Not in Maine my friend. Drawing your firearm is considered non lethal force, which in the protection of my property is legal if someone is trying to steal/rob. If I subsequently believe my life is in danger then I shoot. That's why in those instances it wouldn't be brandishing. I hope that offers clarification.

 

[tcox4freedom]

It is interesting that you picked on the one thing that is allowed in SC (But only at night) and only if you call out to effect a citizen's arrest (SC Code of Laws-Section 17-13-20). In short, if I actually saw or could presume with just suspicion BG's design to commit a felony, and attempt to arrest said BG, I can ensure said arrest even if the life of the BG should be taken. Not sure when this went into effect (probably civil war or earlier) but it has met case law--therefore in SC, you break into my vehicle at night and I go out there and tell you to stand still for a citizen's arrest with my firearm pointed at you and you decide to run, I can take your life "by any means necessary"--may not be pretty, but is legal.

That's something I did not realize kel.

 

[mappow]

Latest history for the above was Johns Island last year I think. Scarlett A. Wilson, Solicitor for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, refused to prosecute due to SC Law concerning after dark burgley/theft.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

As far as I'm concerned, you start it, I'll end it... Gun or no gun.

That goes for those damn solicitors that keep coming on my porch to leave flyers for Obama!

(Of course the above statements are made in jest, not to be taken as literal intent and as such that all my guns were lost in the boating accident last May.)

Thank you for playing!

 

[kelcarry]

Not in Maine my friend. Drawing your firearm is considered non lethal force, which in the protection of my property is legal if someone is trying to steal/rob. If I subsequently believe my life is in danger then I shoot. That's why in those instances it wouldn't be brandishing. I hope that offers clarification.

That is why most replies on questions or threads that allude to some action a member feels is correct are usually answered with "check your state law". I do not recall if you mentioned this in your initial reply but if it is good with authorities have at it; personally, as I said in one of my last replies, I can understand the how and the why of such an action and if it is good with Maine, it is good with me. Do not, however, use such tactics elsewhere without checking---as I said, you will go to jail or worse--get killed. I still think "brandishing"
may be good for you but it can easily be construed as "imminent danger" to someone else, even in Maine--be careful how you use it.

 

[Rhino]

One minor nitpick.

...I convinced myself that if I am in imminent threat of my life, I will do whatever it takes to avoid any kind of confrontation and if it fails I will do all in my power to kill my adversary.

In most places, imminent danger ceases when the threat ceases. Your goal therefore cannot be to kill or you'll be in big trouble. You shoot to stop the threat. If that means the perpetrator dies, then so be it. But if the perpetrator falls without dying for example, and poses no further danger, the imminent threat has ceased and you must stop firing. Self defense under imminent threat gives you the right to stop the threat, not to execute.

Enjoy prison.............

He doesn't live in your backwards state.

Link Removed

 

[kelcarry]

One minor nitpick.

In most places, imminent danger ceases when the threat ceases. Your goal therefore cannot be to kill or you'll be in big trouble. You shoot to stop the threat. If that means the perpetrator dies, then so be it. But if the perpetrator falls without dying for example, and poses no further danger, the imminent threat has ceased and you must stop firing. Self defense under imminent threat gives you the right to stop the threat, not to execute.

He doesn't live in your backwards state.

Link Removed

Absolutely agree with your "nitpick". What I mean is not execution, but it does mean that when I have presented my firearm and am in imminent danger I aim at center mass and will continue to shoot until I presume the imminent threat is over. Someone lying there with no weapon in hands and obviously injured is, IMO, no longer an imminent threat. I can tell you though, if that SOB has caused me to discharge my firearm, I am aiming to kill and will have no remorse whatsoever. As I said in my thread and replies, I will do everythng I can to avoid a confrontation including SA precursor planning, avoidance, and even running away or driving away if I can. I will be screaming loudly about not wanting any confrontation hoping for witnesses. If all fails, I will defend myself and not worry about anything but my life and sure as hell will not be worrying about the BG.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

I can tell you though, if that SOB has caused me to discharge my firearm, I am aiming to kill and will have no remorse whatsoever.

Seems to me that you missed the whole point of "shooting to stop the threat" thingy..

Can't wait to see the Prosecuting Attorney bring THAT comment up in court!!

 

[fudo]

that's right by law there has to be an imminent threat.....lets say you are looking out your window and see someone breaking into your vehicle parked in the street or even down your own long driveway ..the law here says you can't go out brandishing your weapon or firing at them because you are not in immediate life threatening situation and if you do go out to stop them chances are your permit may be revoked here in florida

That is NOT true everywhere.

 

[Rhino]

Absolutely agree with your "nitpick". What I mean is not execution, but it does mean that when I have presented my firearm and am in imminent danger I aim at center mass and will continue to shoot until I presume the imminent threat is over. Someone lying there with no weapon in hands and obviously injured is, IMO, no longer an imminent threat. I can tell you though, if that SOB has caused me to discharge my firearm, I am aiming to kill and will have no remorse whatsoever. As I said in my thread and replies, I will do everythng I can to avoid a confrontation including SA precursor planning, avoidance, and even running away or driving away if I can. I will be screaming loudly about not wanting any confrontation hoping for witnesses. If all fails, I will defend myself and not worry about anything but my life and sure as hell will not be worrying about the BG.

That works for me. Thanks.