Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting. The answers (here and other places on the web) are all over the map. Personally, I side with those who say that having a CCL is not synonymousl with being deputized as (or defacto) LE. Every situation is different, but unless my or someone else's life - especially the life of a loved one is in danger, I'm erring on the side of caution. Bad things happen. They happened before I got my CCL and they"ll continue to happen after. My reason for getting a CCL was to lower the odds of the bad things happening to me or mine. If that makes me weak or selfish, so be it. As someone else pointed out, too many bad things can happen when well meaning, but untrained (or undertrained) people take matters into their own hands.
It is interesting the breadth of answers you'll find here. I'm encouraged to see we don't have a lot of cowboys taking a "gunzablazin'" approach to the question, though I have no doubt plenty of bombastic blowhards are out there. That crowd does the gun owner community and more specifically those who support CC rights a major disservice with their pompous vitriol because others group all of us in with them. Most gun owners are not trigger happy nut-jobs walking around packing and just hoping for a chance to use their weapon in a "situation." Sadly, all it takes is one and suddenly that person is the definitive gun owner.
Also, some of the answers raised a really interesting point. A few have acknowledged the state in which this hypothetical situation occurs may shape their reaction. In some states it wouldn't matter if you did everything right. Some states are very hostile to Second Amendment rights (CA, MA, IL, and NY come to mind).
What is sad is these states have placed a legal gun owner in a position where he may have to choose between saving a life (assuming the situation reached that point) or protecting his own legal well-being. I wonder if we will ever see a lawsuit filed against one of these hostile states. By restricting the Constitutional rights of its residents, the state is essentially taking on the burden and responsibility of offering a heightened level of protection for its citizens. But we all know it doesn't exactly work out that way. I believe the family members of victims of gun crimes in these states should be able to file suit against their state for being an accomplice to wrongful death or whatever may be appropriate. At a minimum, I feel the state should be held accountable for negligence in such cases.
It also would not surprise me to see a lawsuit in which the family of a victim file suit against a lawful gun owner who witnesses a crime but for any number of reasons determines not to intervene. This would assume lawful gun owners have a responsibility to intervene, which we know is not true. However, it still would not surprise me to see this type of legal battle because of the hostile slant toward gun owners.
I'd be interested to hear what others think of these potential legal battles stemming from our hypothetical scenario.
As a resident of Ill. I'm forced to question my logic for living here every day, it seems since I see the red and white signs popping up on doors every day blacklisting legal weapon owners. Other reasons specific to Ill. are our dufus governor, and battle-scarred roads as well but I'm sure there are greener pastures elsewhere in the u.s.
As a resident of Ill. I'm forced to question my logic for living here every day, it seems since I see the red and white signs popping up on doors every day blacklisting legal weapon owners. Other reasons specific to Ill. are our dufus governor, and battle-scarred roads as well but I'm sure there are greener pastures elsewhere in the u.s.
I hear you. I often question why sane people would want to remain in those places, too. But at the same time, if that's home to that person, I can see why it would be hard to just up and move elsewhere. It's hard to just sit back and let idiocy reign and I don't blame people for wanting to stay and fight it.
I realize I'm in the wrong for stating this, but as more and more of these signs go up it's become my decision to simply ignore them except in the presence of metal detectors or government offices. I don't feel the need to carry on a everyday basis just yet where I live unless things further deteriorate but if I'm simply going to the grocery store or walmart then I see no reason to leave my weapon in the truck since it's safest being on my person than out there in the parking lot.
Interesting. The answers (here and other places on the web) are all over the map. Personally, I side with those who say that having a CCL is not synonymous with being deputized as (or defacto) LE. Every situation is different, but unless my or someone else's life - especially the life of a loved, one is in danger, I'm erring on the side of caution. Bad things happen. They happened before I got my CCL and they'll continue to happen after. My reason for getting a CCL was to lower the odds of the bad things happening to me or mine. If that makes me weak or selfish, so be it. As someone else pointed out, too many bad things can happen when well meaning, but untrained (or under trained) people take matters into their own hands.
What you encounter is what we used to call "Sea Lawyers", in the Navy. Those were the guys that were complete experts on any given legal situation, when in fact, they knew nothing of the kind. You often hear somebody say, "The law says....." when in fact, he heard it from a friend that said it was true. Too many times I have heard that over and over.
You also find a lot of folks that say a CCL allows this or that, when, to be truthful, they don't even have a CCL, but they were told that that is how it works, so to them, it's law in their mind. One of the big downfalls on our CCL conditions is that they allow people to bypass the requirements. For instance, in my state if you got out of the military in the last little bit, you are exempt from taking the class. I fail to see how that exempts you. Being in the military doesn't teach you a single thing about state and federal law. It doesn't teach you a thing about what to do in any given situation. And then, you find that very person, that was exempt from taking the training, being the loudest on the forum, about what is legal and what to do in any given situation. You would think that with something as important as life and liberty, that the armchair quarterbacks would just shut up and stay out of it. On the flip side of the coin, you have to ask yourself why a person would seek legal advice on an annonomous forum in the first place.
With any shooting situation, you have to first worry about Federal and State laws. Every state is going to be different, even if you think they signed the same thing as the last state you were in. Just because my state adopted the "Castle Doctrine" from your state, doesn't mean that they used it as written. They modified it to fit our current laws so that our laws do not conflict. On top of that, in some states, you even have to be concerned with County by County, or City by City laws and ordinances.
I often see where somebody says that they are going to buy a gun, over the fence, and then use it for self defence. If their state requires licensing, or permitting, they can never use the gun for self defense, without looking at jail time. I don't care if they are in the right and follow everything in their heart. When the other shoe drops, the law is going to be taking them away. People say that your first duty is to yourself and to your family. What good are you to your family if you are serving a 10 year stretch at the State cross bar hotel? Now, you have burdened your family beyond belief.
I laugh when I see where somebody thinks it's cute to have been exempted from going through training, prior to obtaining their CCL. What purpose does it serve to walk around illiterate the rest of your life?
Hopefully, a person can weed through the chaff and look for decent answers to their question. At the same turn, I would hope that people are not seeking legal advice from a forum like this one.
What you encounter is what we used to call "Sea Lawyers", in the Navy. Those were the guys that were complete experts on any given legal situation, when in fact, they knew nothing of the kind. You often hear somebody say, "The law says....." when in fact, he heard it from a friend that said it was true. Too many times I have heard that over and over.
You also find a lot of folks that say a CCL allows this or that, when, to be truthful, they don't even have a CCL, but they were told that that is how it works, so to them, it's law in their mind. One of the big downfalls on our CCL conditions is that they allow people to bypass the requirements. For instance, in my state if you got out of the military in the last little bit, you are exempt from taking the class. I fail to see how that exempts you. Being in the military doesn't teach you a single thing about state and federal law. It doesn't teach you a thing about what to do in any given situation. And then, you find that very person, that was exempt from taking the training, being the loudest on the forum, about what is legal and what to do in any given situation. You would think that with something as important as life and liberty, that the armchair quarterbacks would just shut up and stay out of it. On the flip side of the coin, you have to ask yourself why a person would seek legal advice on an annonomous forum in the first place.
With any shooting situation, you have to first worry about Federal and State laws. Every state is going to be different, even if you think they signed the same thing as the last state you were in. Just because my state adopted the "Castle Doctrine" from your state, doesn't mean that they used it as written. They modified it to fit our current laws so that our laws do not conflict. On top of that, in some states, you even have to be concerned with County by County, or City by City laws and ordinances.
I often see where somebody says that they are going to buy a gun, over the fence, and then use it for self defence. If their state requires licensing, or permitting, they can never use the gun for self defense, without looking at jail time. I don't care if they are in the right and follow everything in their heart. When the other shoe drops, the law is going to be taking them away. People say that your first duty is to yourself and to your family. What good are you to your family if you are serving a 10 year stretch at the State cross bar hotel? Now, you have burdened your family beyond belief.
I laugh when I see where somebody thinks it's cute to have been exempted from going through training
Hopefully, a person can weed through the chaff and look for decent answers to their question. At the same turn, I would hope that people are not seeking legal advice from a forum like this one.
Good post Elk Hunter! Believe it or not, there are states that don't require anyone to have a CCL, unless they are seeking reciprocity in other states. I fail to understand how you can require someone to demonstrate training and proficiency before they operate a motor vehicle, but allow them to strap a deadly weapon on their hip (or in their purse) with absolutely no demonstration of proficiency with the weapon or understanding of the law. That just strikes me as irresponsible.
There is way too much missing data. Every scenario is different, with the first one being, "What state are you in?" Every state is completely different, even if that state has the Castle Doctrine in place. In some states, you can only defend your life, or the life of your family.
How crowded is it, are you sure he has deadly intent, what is your backdrop? Lots of questions that need to be answered in a very short amount of time.
Maybe it's best to step out of line, and exit the building. Get the perp as he exits, but again, that's not legal in some areas because you have to be clearly "defending life".
Like I say, too many unanswered questions.
Yeah that is exactly what I was going to ask.... "what state am I in in this scenerio" lol.
Hoonestly I don't think I'd do anything unless the situation was lethal to myself or the clerk.
Good post Elk Hunter! Believe it or not, there are states that don't require anyone to have a CCL, unless they are seeking reciprocity in other states. I fail to understand how you can require someone to demonstrate training and proficiency before they operate a motor vehicle, but allow them to strap a deadly weapon on their hip (or in their purse) with absolutely no demonstration of proficiency with the weapon or understanding of the law. That just strikes me as irresponsible.
Yeah, I know, I live in one of those states. Also remember it is an open carry state.
Remember though, the weapon is not deadly. I've had mine laying on my coffee table, watching it. It hasn't killed anybody or even come close to killing anybody in a long time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
