You are assuming that if I get into a defensive situation, that the attacker will be at arms length from me. Statistically, that is likely, but not certain. What if my attacker is 10 yards away? Personally, I'd rather have the capability to make aimed shots further away if need be.rosieK said:Hey Y'all: Not trying to be impudent but what do most of you 3ATers think you will be doing with your firearm? It is a close-in defensive CC firearm ideally made for point shoot vs aimed shoot (that certainly is one reason it has literally no sights). Sights and lasers are nice to have; have at it if it makes you feel better but spend some time on learning how to point shoot. Aiming with a sight or even acquiring a laser takes fractions of a second that you do not have when someone is less than 10 ft from you and probably only 5 ft (statistics are heavily weighted on the 5 ft distance); point shoot will provide you with the quickest reaction and, when practiced within the small distance, it will amaze you how your eyes and nose will connect to your arm and the aim of a firearm. If you want the 3AT to be an effective defensive firearm, learn, practice and spend time with point shoot; it will amaze you, once you master it, how little the sight will matter.
+.9rosieK said:Hey Y'all: Not trying to be impudent but what do most of you 3ATers think you will be doing with your firearm? It is a close-in defensive CC firearm ideally made for point shoot vs aimed shoot (that certainly is one reason it has literally no sights). Sights and lasers are nice to have; have at it if it makes you feel better but spend some time on learning how to point shoot. Aiming with a sight or even acquiring a laser takes fractions of a second that you do not have when someone is less than 10 ft from you and probably only 5 ft (statistics are heavily weighted on the 5 ft distance); point shoot will provide you with the quickest reaction and, when practiced within the small distance, it will amaze you how your eyes and nose will connect to your arm and the aim of a firearm. If you want the 3AT to be an effective defensive firearm, learn, practice and spend time with point shoot; it will amaze you, once you master it, how little the sight will matter.
I wouldn't want to be standing in court trying to prove someone I shot from 10 yards away was an "attacker".dirksterg30 said:... What if my attacker is 10 yards away? ...
This is just ridiculous, some related light reading at this link, you may want to invest in some trauma plate for the kiddos.diamond said:...
Consider a hostage situation. A guy grabs your child. He stands 10-15 yards away. He doesn't see you and you have a clean and clear headshot. I would take that shot with my P3AT...with or without custom sights.
...
Sorry but that is utter BS. A threat is a threat no matter the distance...doubloon said:I wouldn't want to be standing in court trying to prove someone I shot from 10 yards away was an "attacker".
GREAT POST- GREAT EXAMPLES - GREAT SUGGESTIONS!doubloon said:On the topic of defense...
...I suggest finding a defensive combat professional in your area and getting some training. The advice you get there will be based on fact and experience and much better than anything you'll get from guessing what to do...
A segment from the Outdoor Channel's Best Defense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vaC6jCIyLo
On the subject of opinions ...
Sorry but that is utter BS. A threat is a threat no matter the distance... [/quote]burley said:[quote author=doubloon link=1266987844/0#11 date=1268495656]
I wouldn't want to be standing in court trying to prove someone I shot from 10 yards away was an "attacker".
Timothy Lamont Lewis was indicted for murder to which he pleaded not guilty. The jury found Lewis guilty of manslaughter and assessed a fifteen-year sentence. Lewis now appeals, arguing that the evidence does not support the conviction, admission of a photograph resulted in prejudicial error, and the court improperly limited the scope of his voir dire. We affirm.
In his first point of error, Lewis argues that the evidence is factually insufficient to support the jury’s rejection of his self-defense claim. Specifically, Lewis claims he acted out of fear of death or serious bodily injury and he attempted to retreat.
The defendant must first produce “some evidence” supporting self-defense. Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589, 594 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); In re S.S., 167 S.W.3d 108, 114 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, no pet.). Once the defense is raised, the State “bears the burden of persuasion to disprove the raised defense.”
A person commits manslaughter by recklessly causing an individual’s death. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 19.04(a) (Vernon 2003). Self-defense is justified when a person “reasonably believes” that “force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force.” Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 9.31(a) (Vernon 2003). The use of deadly force is warranted only where “self-defense is justified under Section 9.31, a reasonable person would not have retreated, and when deadly force is reasonably necessary to protect against another’s use or attempted use of deadly force.” Bumguardner v. State, 963 S.W.2d 171, 173 (Tex. App.—Waco 1998, pet ref’d) (emphasis original); see Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 9.32(a)(1)-(3) (Vernon 2003).
Lewis testified that he feared Branch and Davis planned to cause him death or serious bodily injury. He further claimed that throughout the incident, he attempted to retreat to the inside of his home, but Branch stood in a “baseball stance” with the pipe and blocked his exit. Morris testified that Branch stood near a car, but later testified that Branch was chasing Lewis with the pipe. According to Williams, Branch stood still while holding the pipe.
The evidence is conflicting as to (1) the circumstances surrounding the gun’s firing; (2) Lewis’s conduct during the altercation between Davis and Richardson; and (3) whether Branch blocked Lewis’s exit such that no other avenues of retreat existed. However, it was the “exclusive province” of the jury to resolve these conflicts. Wesbrook v. State, 29 S.W.3d 103, 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); see Mosley v. State, 983 S.W.2d 249, 254 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).[1] In doing so, the jury could reasonably conclude that Lewis did not act in self-defense.
A quick google for <your state> penal code deadly force should turn up sufficient hits to do some reading on your own.james__12345 said:...
I could have swore I remember reading that in Texas you can even chase down and shoot someone for stealing from you if you feel its the only way to get your stuff back and you remained in direct pursuit from the time of the took it to the time you dealt with them. That doesn't sound too consistant with them having duty to retreat. Maybe that wasn't Texas though.
...
§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.