Defense Lawyers point of view for using your concealed firearm

Definitely a good read. One thing too is if you are carrying and have to use your weapon, I personally would holster the weapon as soon as possible. I do not expect a cop to automatically know who is the innocent member in the incident. Do not expect the person on the phone to relay everything 100% to the arriving officer. Holding a firearm when a cop shows up has the potential for a tragic mistake.

Second thing is invoking your right to silence is highly important. The use of a firearm in a defensive manner that results in an injury or fatality is not something that happens everyday for law abiding citizens. You most likely didn't do everything 100% right and you better believe that can hurt you. Think of anything you had to do the first time in your life and the mistakes made. Furthermore you probably will be emotionally affected and saying anything that can be construed against you will be used against you. If anyone thinks not talking is an admission of guilt then that person is in a for a rude awakening. Innocent people can and do go to jail.

The gun can save your life but your brain can save your liberty.

Good article. My favorite line:

quote:

---

At this point, your immediate plan should be not to get shot by the police

---

ETA: Reading that section to my dog right now.

quote:

---

don't forget to have $25K-50K in the bank to pay his fees up front.

---

Especially if you remain silent.

quote:

---

statements were given no charges filed,

---

quote:

---

with that said, if I remain silent, I imagine my chances of going home within the next 48 hours are just a tad above 0%.

---

You are wise.

quote:

---

While I found the article to be a "good read", it seemed to be very self-serving. Think of this, if you are so calmly able to analyze the situation to determine if using your weapon is necessary, as the author suggests, shouldn't you be able to just as calmly explain yourself to the officer? Again, don't be an idiot, don't say more than you need to, but explaining yourself to the responding officer doesn't seem to be a horrible idea.

---

thats a terrible idea and could cost you some time in prison and a hefty civil suit.

quote:

---

thats a terrible idea and could cost you some time in prison and a hefty civil suit.

---

Used to happen frequently until laws were passed with regards to civil immunity and permissive CCW schemes had expanded to most states.

quote:

---

Again, don't be an idiot, don't say more than you need to, but explaining yourself to the responding officer doesn't seem to be a horrible idea.

---

The reason is very simple:

If you are not accustomed to regularly shooting a living human being, when you are forced to, you will be absolutely hysterical.

Regardless of how justified I felt I was - the rush of adrenaline, the overwhelming of emotions, the constant questioning of my actions - all of these things put me in a terrible position to make a statement. I can say with almost utmost certainty that I would be crying my eyes out and be short of breath if I had to take a person's life, or even if I simply shot someone and didn't know his or her fate. The dust must settle and the smoke must clear in your own mind before you are of sane mind enough to make a legal statement.

Remember, regardless of whether you are hysterical or emotional, anything you say can be used against you in court.

My best advice: "Officer, I was in fear for my life and I will make an official statement when my attorney is present."

quote:

---

For example, you have to call 911 because an intruder broke into your house and you shot him in fear for your life. The intruder is wearing a mask, gloves, and a hoodie. The intruder has a weapon (considered deadly). After you shoot and kill him, he drops where he is. What physical evidence does the officer have if you give no statement?

---

Location, location, location.

While I agree with your critiques about not carrying condition 0/1, that doesn't completely downplay everything else he's saying.

If you shoot an unwelcomed intruder that comes into your home, you have a lot more legal protection than if you engage this person in an open area. The biggest reason is Castle Doctrine.

It's more difficult to rationalize a self defense encounter from a concealed carry perspective versus a home defense perspective. The law in Louisiana for Justifiable Homicide specifically states "dwelling, place of business, and motor vehicle" as three key areas. If it doesn't fall into these three, you have a lot more burden of proof that your life was in danger.

And even though he's not talking about Louisiana specifically, I think he's focusing on concealed carry as a whole, not something like home defense.

quote:

---

Can you point me to examples of where a justified use of a firearm later led to prison time and/or a civil suit? I've heard this many times before, even from an attorney that spoke at our CHP class, but I've not read where this has actually occurred.

---

I know the guy that shot the black guy that was trying to kill a police officer in baton rouge a few years back had to deal with a lawsuit. since then, the state has modified the laws to favor the justified shooter.

Thats not what I am talking about though. You absolutely do not want to tell a police/investigator anything without a lawyer present. You are asking to frick up and say the wrong thing in a tense situation that may cost you in the long run. what you tell a cop in the heat of the moment may end up being the deciding factor in what is justified and what isnt.