When is it legal to brandish a firearm?
- Thread starter ishi
- Start date
crazycathed
New member
I just finished my CWP class. in the drills we did we were taught if someone walks on you and demands money or something in a threatening manner, we were to back up as we told them in a commanding voive to walk away. if they still advanced we were to pull our pistol and hold it to our side so they can see it as we continued to retreat telling them to back up and walk away. we were to NEVER point our pistol at someone unless we were 99% sure we had to shoot them.
gdcleanfun
Banned
I do not believe that you spend much time in California, or that you are familiar with the gangs and how they operate there. Kids are NOT hands off in that state! No one is. No one is safe in that state!
Last edited:
Brandishing
I prefer Front Sight's method when the decision is made: to go to the ready (gun in front at a 45 degree angle down - not muzzling anyone - but quick to the presentation if the situation advances) in a quick, very visible manner - yelling "back off or I'll shoot". If it settles right there - make the call to the police to report. If it gets ugly: Gun up and two dedicated shots to the thoracic cavity and if necessary - one to the head. The point is pre-determine today where that line is where you make that decision.
The gun down at your side is light years away from being useful and may be taken away from you. Another point: You will only be one-half as good as you are in your training when this happens -- at the side just will not do.
I prefer Front Sight's method when the decision is made: to go to the ready (gun in front at a 45 degree angle down - not muzzling anyone - but quick to the presentation if the situation advances) in a quick, very visible manner - yelling "back off or I'll shoot". If it settles right there - make the call to the police to report. If it gets ugly: Gun up and two dedicated shots to the thoracic cavity and if necessary - one to the head. The point is pre-determine today where that line is where you make that decision.
The gun down at your side is light years away from being useful and may be taken away from you. Another point: You will only be one-half as good as you are in your training when this happens -- at the side just will not do.
Keep in mind that SD situations are not "black and white". There are various methods out there. It's important to learn many methods of SD and figure out which ones work best for you. It's important to train for various situations and train properly.
Whatever you do, don't do what another list member posted in an earlier post on another thread and say something foolish like "we're not going to hurt anyone are we?"
gf
tattedupboy
Thank God I'm alive!
tattedupboy
Thank God I'm alive!
Jay
New member
Statistically, can't say. I would offer that if you call, you'll have the opportunity to give a description of the perp, and possibly prevent another person from being a victim. I have had the situation come up twice, handled it the same way twice, and the outcome delayed me only a few minutes. You certainly are not bound by what I did. But it worked for me. I'm not trying to convince you of how to handle that situation.... matter of fact, I sincerely hope that you never have to deal with anything like that at all....... ever.
Last edited:
crazycathed
New member
this is why we were told to be descreet when grabbing your gun. if someone walks around the corner and sees a man holding a gun towards someone else, he doesen't know what's going on. he goes back around the corner and calls the police saying he just saw a man pointing a gun in the street. we were told it would be much less hassle to hold the gun as such so everyone on the street doesn't see it, just the prep. we were also told if you have time to line up a shot thru your sites you have time to get away. I was taught to point at hip level as soon as I draw, then bring the gun up to eyesight that way I can shoot at any time between the the draw and sight move.
ecocks
New member
Two more cents....
Something plain. Seems like it was said a couple of times but doesn't come across somehow.
Simply, the generally accepted definition of being "allowed" to "brandish" (putting aside for a few moments the exact definitions of both those words) is only when you are preparing to shoot in a justified use of lethal force situation. If your reaction time allows you to see the other is disengaging and you can hold fire to allow them to continue disengaging, then it is what you would do. On the other hand, if you hold fire "to see if they will disengage" then you were not in imminient danger and, obviously, not drawing to fire but to brandish in the accepted definition of most states' statutes.
I understand Ziggy's comment though that she would rather explain to LEOs or the court that she drew and didn't fire rather than she drew, they disengaged and she fired anyway rather than letting them runaway and report her for threatening them. She envisions a situation where she will have enough time to react and many others dont. She obviously understands her risks and is prepared to pay the consequences. That is her right AND her responsibility. Give her credit that if she has trained properly and prepared herself mentally, she will draw and use her weapon in accordance with that training to the best of her ability.
Perhaps an alternate scenario to consider is when you draw in defense of another (as allowed in many states) or defense of property (per a few states). Still another is what happens if someone brandishes at YOU? Don't picture a mugging, think along the lines of an escalating argument between shoppers, drivers or
nhl_checking a property owner and a suspected trespasser (you being the suspected trespasser).
Would you back-off (disengage) or would you react to their display with deadly force yourself?
Something plain. Seems like it was said a couple of times but doesn't come across somehow.
Simply, the generally accepted definition of being "allowed" to "brandish" (putting aside for a few moments the exact definitions of both those words) is only when you are preparing to shoot in a justified use of lethal force situation. If your reaction time allows you to see the other is disengaging and you can hold fire to allow them to continue disengaging, then it is what you would do. On the other hand, if you hold fire "to see if they will disengage" then you were not in imminient danger and, obviously, not drawing to fire but to brandish in the accepted definition of most states' statutes.
I understand Ziggy's comment though that she would rather explain to LEOs or the court that she drew and didn't fire rather than she drew, they disengaged and she fired anyway rather than letting them runaway and report her for threatening them. She envisions a situation where she will have enough time to react and many others dont. She obviously understands her risks and is prepared to pay the consequences. That is her right AND her responsibility. Give her credit that if she has trained properly and prepared herself mentally, she will draw and use her weapon in accordance with that training to the best of her ability.
Perhaps an alternate scenario to consider is when you draw in defense of another (as allowed in many states) or defense of property (per a few states). Still another is what happens if someone brandishes at YOU? Don't picture a mugging, think along the lines of an escalating argument between shoppers, drivers or
nhl_checking a property owner and a suspected trespasser (you being the suspected trespasser).Would you back-off (disengage) or would you react to their display with deadly force yourself?
tattedupboy
Thank God I'm alive!
Something plain. Seems like it was said a couple of times but doesn't come across somehow.
Simply, the generally accepted definition of being "allowed" to "brandish" (putting aside for a few moments the exact definitions of both those words) is only when you are preparing to shoot in a justified use of lethal force situation. If your reaction time allows you to see the other is disengaging and you can hold fire to allow them to continue disengaging, then it is what you would do. On the other hand, if you hold fire "to see if they will disengage" then you were not in imminient danger and, obviously, not drawing to fire but to brandish in the accepted definition of most states' statutes.
I understand Ziggy's comment though that she would rather explain to LEOs or the court that she drew and didn't fire rather than she drew, they disengaged and she fired anyway rather than letting them runaway and report her for threatening them. She envisions a situation where she will have enough time to react and many others dont. She obviously understands her risks and is prepared to pay the consequences. That is her right AND her responsibility. Give her credit that if she has trained properly and prepared herself mentally, she will draw and use her weapon in accordance with that training to the best of her ability.
Perhaps an alternate scenario to consider is when you draw in defense of another (as allowed in many states) or defense of property (per a few states). Still another is what happens if someone brandishes at YOU? Don't picture a mugging, think along the lines of an escalating argument between shoppers, drivers or
Would you back-off (disengage) or would you react to their display with deadly force yourself?
We could argue about this all day, but the fact remains that no two situations involving a CCW holder and a potential criminal are ever alike, and therefore what may work in one situation may not work in another. I am a firm believer that brandishing can be done legally if it stops the threat without any shots being fired. Other times, however, you'll have no choice but to shoot. It all depends on the situation.
FedAgent1896
New member
"brandishing" is illegal.... Period
"brandishing" is a term used to describe ILLEGAL exposure in a way that is threatening... ergo, brandishing is illegal. "The only warning a ['bad guy'] should have that you ar carrying concealed is the muzzle flash."--- unknown
"brandishing" is a term used to describe ILLEGAL exposure in a way that is threatening... ergo, brandishing is illegal. "The only warning a ['bad guy'] should have that you ar carrying concealed is the muzzle flash."--- unknown
Last edited:
tattedupboy
Thank God I'm alive!
So what is it called when, being in imminent danger, you draw your weapon and point it at the aggressor, and he then starts to retreat before you get off a shot?
BTW, welcome to USA Carry FedAgent1896.
tag1737
New member
It's called defending yourself.
IMO, and as FedAgent1896 said, by definition, "it's never legal to brandish".
Every situation is different and will require a different response. When you can see a threat unfolding at a distance, drawing your weapon and screaming "STOP" is the best option IMO. There is a good chance it will end the agression and require minimal paperwork.
If you have already been shot, stabbed, or injured in an assault, draw and fire is appropriate, again IMO.
IMO, and as FedAgent1896 said, by definition, "it's never legal to brandish".
Every situation is different and will require a different response. When you can see a threat unfolding at a distance, drawing your weapon and screaming "STOP" is the best option IMO. There is a good chance it will end the agression and require minimal paperwork.
If you have already been shot, stabbed, or injured in an assault, draw and fire is appropriate, again IMO.
tattedupboy
Thank God I'm alive!
I think we're just splitting hairs here. Legal or not, if you display a weapon in a threatening manner, whether to intimidate someone or to defend yourself, it's all brandishing in my book.
gdcleanfun
Banned
Below are four different NRS (Nevada Revised Statutes.) I am not a lawyer, nor any kind of instructor, but I interpret the gist to be that if a person "draws or exhibits any of such deadly weapons in a rude, angry or threatening manner not in necessary self-defense, or who in any manner unlawfully uses that weapon in any fight or quarrel, is guilty of a misdemeanor," but if I reveal a hand gun or other weapon drawn in the case of self defense then it's not brandishing. Instead, it's being used in a lawful manner. I could not find where the code says that the weapon needs to be discharged or it needs to "touch" another person, etc. I also interpret this to mean that if I hold someone at gunpoint, because they were in the middle of committing a felony, until the LEOs arrive, that it is not brandishing. I don't have any case precedents.
---
From the Nevada Revised Statutes:
First:
NRS 202.257 Possession of firearm when under influence of alcohol, controlled substance or other intoxicating substance; administration of evidentiary test; penalty; forfeiture of firearm.
...
4. A firearm is subject to forfeiture pursuant to NRS 179.1156 to 179.119, [forfeiture laws] inclusive, only if, during the violation of subsection 1, the firearm is brandished, aimed or otherwise handled by the person in a manner which endangered others.
Second:
NRS 202.290 Aiming firearm at human being; discharging weapon where person might be endangered; penalty. Unless a greater penalty is provided in NRS 202.287, a person who willfully:
1. Aims any gun, pistol, revolver or other firearm, whether loaded or not, at or toward any human being; or
2. Discharges any firearm, air gun or other weapon, or throws any deadly missile in a public place or in any place where any person might be endangered thereby, although an injury does not result, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
[1911 C&P § 344; RL § 6609; NCL § 10292]—(NRS A 1989, 820, 1240, 1243)
Third:
NRS 202.287 Discharging firearm within or from structure or vehicle; penalties.
...
(c) A person who discharges a firearm in a lawful manner and in the course of a lawful business, event or activity.
Fourth:
NRS 202.320 Drawing deadly weapon in threatening manner.
1. Unless a greater penalty is provided in NRS 202.287, a person having, carrying or procuring from another person any dirk, dirk-knife, sword, sword cane, pistol, gun or other deadly weapon, who, in the presence of two or more persons, draws or exhibits any of such deadly weapons in a rude, angry or threatening manner not in necessary self-defense, or who in any manner unlawfully uses that weapon in any fight or quarrel, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
2. A sheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, constable or other peace officer shall not be held to answer, under the provisions of subsection 1, for drawing or exhibiting any of the weapons mentioned therein while in the lawful discharge of his duties.
[1911 C&P § 174; RL § 6439; NCL § 10121]—(NRS A 1967, 486; 1989, 1240)
---
From the Nevada Revised Statutes:
First:
NRS 202.257 Possession of firearm when under influence of alcohol, controlled substance or other intoxicating substance; administration of evidentiary test; penalty; forfeiture of firearm.
...
4. A firearm is subject to forfeiture pursuant to NRS 179.1156 to 179.119, [forfeiture laws] inclusive, only if, during the violation of subsection 1, the firearm is brandished, aimed or otherwise handled by the person in a manner which endangered others.
Second:
NRS 202.290 Aiming firearm at human being; discharging weapon where person might be endangered; penalty. Unless a greater penalty is provided in NRS 202.287, a person who willfully:
1. Aims any gun, pistol, revolver or other firearm, whether loaded or not, at or toward any human being; or
2. Discharges any firearm, air gun or other weapon, or throws any deadly missile in a public place or in any place where any person might be endangered thereby, although an injury does not result, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
[1911 C&P § 344; RL § 6609; NCL § 10292]—(NRS A 1989, 820, 1240, 1243)
Third:
NRS 202.287 Discharging firearm within or from structure or vehicle; penalties.
...
(c) A person who discharges a firearm in a lawful manner and in the course of a lawful business, event or activity.
Fourth:
NRS 202.320 Drawing deadly weapon in threatening manner.
1. Unless a greater penalty is provided in NRS 202.287, a person having, carrying or procuring from another person any dirk, dirk-knife, sword, sword cane, pistol, gun or other deadly weapon, who, in the presence of two or more persons, draws or exhibits any of such deadly weapons in a rude, angry or threatening manner not in necessary self-defense, or who in any manner unlawfully uses that weapon in any fight or quarrel, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
2. A sheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, constable or other peace officer shall not be held to answer, under the provisions of subsection 1, for drawing or exhibiting any of the weapons mentioned therein while in the lawful discharge of his duties.
[1911 C&P § 174; RL § 6439; NCL § 10121]—(NRS A 1967, 486; 1989, 1240)
Last edited:
Boomboy007
New member
Nice reference work, Fun Lady.
You guys in Nevada seem to really do things right (open carry, etc.). I know that in several states, brandishing a firearm NOT in self defense, like you described, is a felony rather than a misdemeanor. If you are found guilty, it is bye bye to your permit forever. :cray:
You guys in Nevada seem to really do things right (open carry, etc.). I know that in several states, brandishing a firearm NOT in self defense, like you described, is a felony rather than a misdemeanor. If you are found guilty, it is bye bye to your permit forever. :cray:
gdcleanfun
Banned
Tatted, splitting hairs? You bet! Point - counter point? Of course! Isn't that what the law does, something called technicalities? :dance3:
New Threads
-
Hunter Constantine or Phlster Enigma, for running?
- Started by sigsag1
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-