Probably COULD Have Fired in SD.

[KYGlockster]

I was on my way to work yesterday and I was running a little late. I was stopped at a red-light on Winchester Avenue where I was turning leftds onto Greenup Avenue in Ashland by the Ashland Town Center. There was a black SUV in front of me, and he was the first car stopped at the light.

When the light turned green, the car in front of me SLOWLY proceeded through the light and once through the light turned into the road where Giovanni's is located. Being as he was driving so slow, I was rather close to his vehicle, and when he turned into Giovanni's he slammed his breaks and veered rather quickly into the turning lane with no signal. I had to slam on my brakes to keep from hitting him and he noticed and laid on the horn. As I drove by him, I attempted to get my hand out of my partially-rolled-down window to give a friendly wave as a kind gesture.

After I had passed him, I noticed he had pulled back out onto Greenup Avenue and got behind me. I thought this was odd, so I slowed down to see if he would pass. As I slowed down, he immediately sped around my vehicle and cut me off right in the middle of Greenup Avenue, where I nearly hit him again when he stopped right in the middle of the right-hand lane. As soon as he stopped he jumped from his vehicle and ran back towards my vehicle.

As he got to my door, he reached for my door handle, at which time I threw my door open to knock him back so I could get out of the vehicle. My window was rolled down from when I tried getting my hand out to wave, and I didn't want him to have an upper-hand on me (I was NOT thinking about rolling the window up).

As I got out of my vehicle I grabbed my pepper-spray from its holder on my duty-belt (I was in uniform and he realized it as I got out) and threw my hand up and told him to back away. This is when he realized who I was (the badge on my shirt and the belt were obvious) and that he could possibly be in SERIOUS sh*t. He immediately began apologizing and said, "I only stopped you because I thought you flipped me off. My son was threatened by a guy who drives a truck that looks just like yours a couple days ago and I thought you were him." This of course is false because A) nobody drives a truck that looks like mine, and B) he is going to stop someone in the middle of the road because they POSSIBLY flipped him off? Illogical.

Now my mind is coming back to me and the man is continuing to apologize and beg my forgiveness (it is funny how that happens when you are in a uniform and not street clothes; had I been in regular clothes I fear this wouldn't have turned out so well). I began informing this man that had I stayed in my vehicle I could have shot and killed him because he was attempting to gain entry into my occupied vehicle. I stated this information with several "choice" words thrown in, but I believe he got the picture. I decided not to arrest the man (although I did get his name and DOB from his I.D. and called and had him checked for warrants), but I DID give him an IMPRESSIVE talking to, and hopefully he will think twice before doing something foolish like this again.

It just happened that as I was talking to this man an APD officer arrived and pulled in behind me (I had not informed dispatch that I had the man detained on Greenup Avenue in my POV). As the officer exited his vehicle I sent the man on his way, and the officer arrived and asked what had happened. I informed him what had happened and he shook my hand (I had never met this officer before) and introduced his self to me. Yes, we are still in the middle of the road. He couldn't believe I let him go, but in this case I believe the fright in the man's eyes were a good sign that he learned a good lesson, and giving him a felony record would have done nothing but ruin his life.

So, what would you all have done in this situation? Would you have stayed in your vehicle and fired once the man opened your vehicle's door? Would you have not fired? Would you have did what I did? Would you have done something different? Keep in mind I was in my POV, but I was also in my official uniform heading to work. Let me also say how you completely lose sight of everything around you when you are involved in a situation like this. I was zoomed in on this guy and NOTHING else.

I did pull a "weapon," but it was nothing more than pepper-spray. Being as the man was not armed and I was OUT of my vehicle, I decided in an instant that my pepper-spray was a more logical choice. FOX pepper spray hurts like hell and will change someone's mind in a HURRY, that I can ASSURE you. I keep wondering what I would have done had I stayed in my vehicle and allowed him to open my vehicle's door. I'm glad it turned out like it did, because had I not exited my vehicle I fear I would have shot this individual, and that is something I really don't want to live with if I don't have to.

 

[Grapeshot]

The answer is quite simple and you should be well aware of it - no need to query the forum.

Lethal force must always be the last resort - end of story. Surprised you even asked.

 

[langzaiguy]

Definitely a last resort. I don't think I would have gotten out, would have drove away if possible.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Recommend OP stop giving people the finger while driving ... where I grew up, that was grounds for go-time.

 

[Citizen]

SNIP So, what would you all have done in this situation?

Just apply the standard tactics of self-defense.

One of the standard tactics is create distance; distance is your friend.

In this case, if possible, put it in reverse and back up. I've done this before. A mild situation where a guy stopped in front of me and got out to confront me. I say mild because it turned out he wasn't all that mad in the first place. As soon as I saw him stopping in the middle of the road, I deduced his next move--get out and try to confront me. I simply glanced in the rearview mirror to confirm nobody behind me, put it in reverse and backed up fifty feet or so. He didn't even bother to walk that distance to me. He just gestured, got back in the car, and drove on.

Back up, if possible. If its clear, maybe drive around to the right and then away if possible.

Oh, and roll up the window.

As others pointed out, lethal force should be the last option. I would expand on that and say threatening lethal force by showing a gun should also be pretty darn far down the list if the approacher has empty hands. Laws vary from state to state, but I've heard of more than one person who showed a gun defensively in a traffic situation, and ended up in hot water because the antagonist was neither armed, nor had disparity of force.

 

[markush]

Recommend OP stop giving people the finger while driving ... where I grew up, that was grounds for go-time.

That was my fist thought also. The OP was in a hurry, was brake checked and honked at...then was "Friendly" enough to roll down a window and "wave". Sir, if that's the truth I recommend you for Sainthood!

 

[Citizen]

I'm still wondering why the OPer wrote that he probably could have fired in SD.

I'm wondering if there is law in his state that allows that when defending against bare hands while seated in a car. Otherwise, I can't help but wonder if maybe his comment is indicative of police attitudes in his area.

 

[Citizen]

Is not the stock phrase, "In reasonable fear of imminent great bodily harm"? Could'a kind'a beggars imminent.

I'm always careful about that one.

I think we make a mistake, and fall into the government's (prosecutors') trap, when we agree with the underlying premise: if he didn't shoot the aggressor, it proves lethal force wasn't warranted because the danger wasn't imminent, or wasn't whatever, etc. This is the argument against warning shots and defensive displays.

I understand that early in law school you're taught that the law recognizes it cannot every possible situation--too many possibilities to foresee. The name of the doctrine is equity or something.

I've read a few accounts over the years where a warning shot, or merely displaying the gun, might well have worked to avert further bloodshed.

By saying that my failure to shoot my aggressor proves lethal force was not justified, the prosecutor, judge, or whoever, is essentially removing the opportunity to use judgement and measured response. They're basically converting my right to defend myself into an obligation to kill or badly injure my antagonist if I want to avoid grave injury or death myself. For example, if I can snap a knife-threatener out of his aggressive mindset with a shot into the dirt, and thus avoid having to kill him by waiting until he actually rushes me, I avoid taking a human life. And, it helps me avoid the risk of maybe not stopping him with one shot or several in the middle of his rush.

So, I'll take a "coulda". I'll accept a warning shot or defensive display. Weasel-y state lawyers (prosecutors) who want to twist things in an attempt to gain a conviction for political points are just that: weasels. The correct solution is to rebutt them thoroughly, not accept their premises as we sometimes see on gun forums.

 

[PALO]

Reminds me of the Sanderson case. He was not charged. Iirc , there was also no civil action against him. I think the prosecutor is full of poop when he says "the original decision to pull a gun, under all these circumstances, seems highly questionable," . I think the prosecutor said that purely for political reasons, to try to appease the liberal UW community , which was largely "outraged" at this case of self defense

He reasonably was apprehensive he was about to be carjacked.

Regardless, the fact pattern is somewhat similar to your incident. Iirc (and I may not be) he was not even arrested. He was interviewed and released. Then, later the prosecutor decided no charges to be filed after the investigation was complete.

A classic "lawful but awful" shoot. The shooter had no way of knowing that Sanderson was just a kid, high on LSD, acting goofy and likely wouldn't have harmed the driver. What DOES matter in determining justification is the facts and circumstances (totality thereof) known to the shooter at the time he decided to shoot. Clearly, this was justified. A lot of libs used this case to argue against "allowing" people to carry guns, etc. What this case teaches is - if you are going to do LSD and can't control your actions, you have nobody to blame but yourself if your actions become acting aggressively towards a driver stuck in traffic, sliding across his hood and ripped the car door open.


http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20000921&slug=4043831

----excerpt

King County prosecutors will not file murder charges against a pizza-delivery driver who fatally shot a University of Washington student.

Prosecutors say the driver acted in self-defense, although Chief Criminal Deputy Prosecutor Mark Larson faulted the driver's decision to fire a legally registered weapon at 19-year-old James Sanderson.

"This tragic case illustrates some of the problems that occur when handguns are used pro-actively in self-defense," he wrote in a Sept. 12 letter to Sanderson's parents.

Sanderson was a freshman when he took LSD with a friend April 12. Walking on University Way Northeast, Sanderson began to act oddly, according to witnesses.

He became agitated with a waitress at a pizza place and shoved a man on the sidewalk. He walked into traffic, jumping up and down in the street. He hugged strangers and shouted.

At Northeast 50th Street and University Way Northeast, Sanderson jumped on top of a pizza-delivery car.

The driver cracked open his door and asked Sanderson what he was doing. After a brief exchange, the driver pulled his handgun from its holster and told Sanderson that he was armed.

Sanderson grabbed the door and yanked it open. The driver fired a single shot

 

[Maverick9]

Though this might seem harsh, why did you blow your horn?

The person had already made the turn, you didn't hit him, no contact was made. Blowing the horn was an AGGRESSIVE measure on your part.

Thus YOU started it. You followed too closely, you blew your horn FOR NO REASON to no effect. Contributing to road rage by a uniformed officer? Disgraceful.

Suggest you calm down and stop acting like a hormonal teenager.

 

[77zach]

I'm still wondering why the OPer wrote that he probably could have fired in SD.

I'm wondering if there is law in his state that allows that when defending against bare hands while seated in a car. Otherwise, I can't help but wonder if maybe his comment is indicative of police attitudes in his area.

In Fl carjacking is a forcible felony justifying deadly force. Not sure about KY

 

[CharleyCherokee]

Though this might seem harsh, why did you blow your horn?

The person had already made the turn, you didn't hit him, no contact was made. Blowing the horn was an AGGRESSIVE measure on your part.

Thus YOU started it. You followed too closely, you blew your horn FOR NO REASON to no effect. Contributing to road rage by a uniformed officer? Disgraceful.

Suggest you calm down and stop acting like a hormonal teenager.

Unless I misread his post the guy in front was the one that honked the horn not him.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Sanderson grabbed the door and yanked it open. The driver fired a single shot

what else would one expect?

 

[WalkingWolf]

Let's see~following too closely, then followed by an obscene gesture, and IN UNIFORM to add to it. If I was the OP I would keep my mouth shut about this incident and hope it does not make it into the newspapers.

I remember a incident years ago at medical center where a lady was arrested by the University police. The city police were called for transport. The lady was dirty, and carped her britches. One of the newspaper columnists happened to be in the hospital with his son. When the city police drove away they flipped the University officer the bird. The incident was in the Monday paper and the two city officers received 3 days each unpaid vacation.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

What would I have done? Hopefully rolled up my window and verified my doors were locked. If he would have proceeded to try to get into my vehicle, I'd point my pistol at him and yell to back off or I'll shoot. I'd most likely not shoot unless the boundary or the vehicle was penetrated somehow, such as the window breaking. In the meantime, I'd probably call the policia and tell them to get the lunatic away from meh. Sound reasonable? I won't try to refer to the legalities in Texas because I'm on my phone and can't cite easily, but I think I'd be covered unless there's some bad case law somewhere

I've actually been 'attacked' (yanking door handle, punching vehicle, following me, chasing me down, repeating) in a case of serious road rage but wasn't armed with a firearm at the time. Come to think of it, I've been 'followed' and verbally threatened before too. My city is stock full of idiots on the road :/

 

[PALO]

What would I have done? Hopefully rolled up my window and verified my doors were locked. If he would have proceeded to try to get into my vehicle, I'd point my pistol at him and yell to back off or I'll shoot. I'd most likely not shoot unless the boundary or the vehicle was penetrated somehow, such as the window breaking. In the meantime, I'd probably call the policia and tell them to get the lunatic away from meh. Sound reasonable

That sounds entirely reasonable. Fwiw, ime and I think case cites back this up, OCers and people with CCW's do tend to be pretty reserved and very responsible in their decision to shoot/not shoot. Clearly, the opinion of the anti's that if shall issue is instituted (e.g in FLA) that carnage would ensue - well crime has only continued to go down to a 4 decade low, and that includes both Part I and Part II offenses.

I've investigated a few circ's where CCW'ers could have legally shot, but didn't.

 

[Maverick9]

Unless I misread his post the guy in front was the one that honked the horn not him.

Yeah, but I didn't believe him.

I had to slam on my brakes to keep from hitting him and he noticed and laid on the horn

Who lays on the horn in a situation like this, the guy who had to slam on his brakes or the guy in front who may or may not hear tires?

A person driving too slowly is not a defense for following too closely. The OFFICER blew his horn - maybe he'll admit it, maybe he won't. IDC. Point is his actions caused the beginning of the altercation and thus would not have been a 'pristine' operator in any shooting.

HTH

 

[MrOverlay]

I'm still wondering why the OPer wrote that he probably could have fired in SD.

I'm wondering if there is law in his state that allows that when defending against bare hands while seated in a car. Otherwise, I can't help but wonder if maybe his comment is indicative of police attitudes in his area.

KRS § 503.055
Use of defensive force regarding dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle --
Exceptions.
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or
great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is
intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of
unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered a
dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was
attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling,
residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an
unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had
occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) of this section does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or
is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner,
lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from
domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against
that person;
(b) The person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in
the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of the person against
whom the defensive force is used;
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is
using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful
activity; or (d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a peace officer, as
defined in KRS 446.010, who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling,
residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties, and the
officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or
the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person
entering or attempting to enter was a peace officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any
other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right
to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or
she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a felony involving

 

[Citizen]

KRS § 503.055
Use of defensive force regarding dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle --

Thanks.

I suppose one could argue that reaching for the driver's door handle was not an attempted forcible entry, but were I on the jury I'd vote to aquit because the other driver clearly wasn't reaching for the door handle in order to pass along coupons for a free oil change. I wouldn't be quibbling over whether using the door knob to open an unlocked door involved force.

On the other hand, for myself, I wouldn't shoot either for reaching for the door knob with empty hands. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt and wait and see if the locked door made him give up. If he started yanking on it, or trying to bust the window, then I might escalate. Anything to avoid killing someone. And, the legal aftermath and expense.

 

[Jamesm760]

That was my fist thought also. The OP was in a hurry, was brake checked and honked at...then was "Friendly" enough to roll down a window and "wave". Sir, if that's the truth I recommend you for Sainthood!

Same thoughts here.