Check this video I found in reddit:
The question and title of the thread is “Whats the legality of giving this guy the room temperature challenge if you also had your ccw?“
Two thirds of the people commenting on this video saw no problem ventilating the fat drunk and were convinced that no consequences would come to them.
That is scary. It also means an amazing pool of clients for Andrew Branca is out there waiting to happen. I am sure he won’t mind a few extra motorcycle trips around the country. And with that, I am issuing my IANAL warning.
Let me share my opinions one by one, shall we? Now, after watching an incomplete video for sure, but it does not matter what happened before because the only thing we have is a drunk on the street tussling a bit with his possible girlfriend. And we have to refer to the old “what a reasonable Person would do in this situation?” which is what a jury would be asked to do. Let’s begin:
1-“Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.” I forget who said that, but it is right on the nose.
First assumption: “You are on my property” apparently are magic words that should have made the drunk idiot suddenly come to his senses, apologize and leave. Oops! It did not work.
Second assumption: Thinking he was in private property. He was not inside the house/apartment but on the steps. The sidewalk and street are also NOT his private property so he was not saying anything logical or legal but trying to be macho. I think even the drunk guy figured that out or simply did not give a damn.
2-“Do not escalate the encounter.” Addressing an obviously drunk idiot who appears to want to fight by insulting him with “You look ridiculous” and repeating the phrase as in taunting is not a smart strategic decision. That was 100% pure Ego aided by the use of the camera and IMHO the thrill of having a viral video in the internet.
3-Discovering that sober and young is not superior to drunk and armed. That one got erased pretty quick when the guy seems to have pulled a gun after he got jumped by the friends. And in case somebody missed it, that was escalation again.
I have no more information after that. But if fat drunk went to jail and the stupid kid only took that love tap to the forehead, I am happy with the results.
So, what was the correct course of action in this case? In my opinion, shut the hell up, go inside, lock the door and call the cops. Fat drunk guy was not a imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm till he pulled the firearm you did not know he had after you and you buddies escalated the situation. Pulling your own gun and shooting fat drunk when you are also responsible for the problem will not allow you to claim self defense.
So once again, I will copy/paste the following:
Your number one philosophy for personal security should be a life long commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.
Avoidance: The act of avoiding or keeping away from (Three Stupid Rule.) If you can safely retreat from the encounter, by all means do so. For instance, if you are out for a walk and feel threatened or intimidated by an occupant of a car, you should retreat in the opposite direction that the car is traveling.
Deterrence: The act of discouraging someone from taking hostile action against you by being aware of them and their possible intent.
De-escalation: The act of decreasing in intensity. To not let your ego or emotions get the best of you, to refrain from escalating the problem into more than it already is. As a CCW you may need to back down from non-life threatening, argumentative encounters in order to not allow things to spiral out of control.
When these things do not work, then and only then may you need to show or use the gun. Just because we are carrying does not mean that we need to use the gun. You want to do whatever is reasonably possible to avoid using the gun. But when your well researched, well thought out “line in the sand” has been crossed you need to act without hesitation.The “Three Stupid” Rule
“Do not go to stupid places, with stupid people, and do stupid things”
We all know that nobody wants thugs to dictate where they can or cannot go. Put there are simply some places, people, and things that you should avoid if you want to lower your risks. You can cut down on your risks by a good 95% if you just follow the three stupid rule.
Roger Phillips
“Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.” I forget who said that, but it is right on the nose.
I suspect it was Adam when Eve told him “I assumed that if the serpent said it was OK to eat the apple, everything would be fine.”
What a bunch of imbeciles.
Look at it this way. As a general rule, use of force laws are sort of a series of tests. First test is “was force used?” If the answer is yes, a law was typically broken. Punching someone in the face without their consent (think boxing) is a violation of the law. You are not legally allowed to punch someone in the face.
However…. then test two comes into play. “was there a justifiable reason for the use of force?” Ohhh…. that is where it gets sticky… The number of “excepts…” can and has filled several books.
Now, in this situation, the drunk fat guy pulls a gun, and he is in clear violation of the law. Why? Because he initiated the fight, or even if he didn’t, he participated in the fight, willingly. He gave consent to enter the fight, therefore, he cannot claim it was self defense. (in my state at least.)
That is why avoid, and deescalate are so important. Someone punches you, and you respond with a punch, when simply laughing and walking away is a viable option, that will become a problem in the investigation.
Problem with that last is, you don’t really know how far someone is willing to go.
Someone punches you, if you laugh and walk away (assuming you can) will they let you go in peace? Or will they hit you again or knife you when your back is turned? Keeping in mind that punches can be fatal…especially those to the back of the head and neck…
When do you say a lethal response is appropriate for being punched? I don’t think there’s a single answer, but leaving a hostile and aggressive person behind you, once that person has already demonstrated violent intent, seems questionable.
He agreed to enter the fight but when the second person entered that arrangement was broken.
Man domestics are always such a cluster fuck I don’t understand why anyone gets involved in them who doesn’t need to be.
Also is it just me or did his gun stick out like a sore thumb on his right side?
In my state being drunk and carrying a gun is a crime. Escalating a fight is also a crime. 3 stupid law should be taught in kindergarten.
Oh and “assumption” quote came from the Nam. Good friend of mine told me that. And it has been in several movies