What really ticks me off is, let me start it this way...


You're pulled into a alleyway while walking downtown.
Suddenly you're face to face with some low life bum who wants your money, your watch and possiable your clean undies.
He has a cheap nickel plated 9' to your head, you hace a concealed carry permit and a derringer with 2 shots of hydra shock.

When you reach for the money, you get the derringer instead, punch two shots into his arm, See where this is going? Bear with me. You go to the cops and report what happened etc

Heres where it gets funky, YOU COULD GET SUED. He could ditch the weapon or give it to a friend to run off with, and that would make you get charged with illegal use of a firearm. If that doesn't happen. Surely he will hire a shyster lawyer and target you for human rights for breaking his arm.

Bottom line- We need someone to write better laws.
I pray none of you ever get caught in this tyle of situation.
You could lose everything you own, just for trying to defend your life and property (money watch etc)

Your wallet or watch is not worth the trouble. Give them to him. If he gets agressive then you are in danger and then you are justified in the use of deadly force. Perhaps that is a thin moral line for some but no human life is worth a wallet or watch in my book.

A cell phone is a better choice of "weapon". Use it to call 911 and guide the cops to the bad guy. He will be taken off the street and you will be able to sleep at night, in your own bed.

Finally, don't aim for the arm. If you have insufficient cause to use deadly force, you have insufficient causse to discharge your derringer. Also, aiming for the arm is risky. If you miss he will likely fire and you, or a family member, or innocent bystander is now at risk. If you have to shoot go for the torso. Much higher chance of a first shot hit.

I agree that the law needs some improvement as you mention. I don't feel anyone should be able to sue for injury when they were in the process of commiting a felony.

Just my .02 as a former LEO.

Sadly, such a scenario is not unlikely to play out as you described. If I am being threatened with a firearm, with the attacker agressive or not, my life IS in danger. There is no way to judge the intent of someone in such circumstances. He could shoot me after I handed over my wallet just as easy as run away. Therefore the two shots from the derringer would be in the center of the chest of the assailant. After all, it's hard for a deceased dirtbag to wrongfully sue you.

My two cents as a former LEO.

Triple "S" comes to mind

Gun Runner

The POINT here folks, is to carry enough gun and place your shots well so these guys dont walk off with their gun. Make SURE the gun with his fingerprints on it remain on the scene.

A perfect example of why you should not carry a derringer. Those things are dangerous only to the bearer.

If you hit the guy in the chest with a bullet of suitable character he won't be hiding the gun and suing you. Afterall, you were scared for your life, weren't you?

Anyone that needs shooting, needs shooting well.

If I were the bum, I'd pop you right in the head with my cheap gun after you wasted all of your rounds on my arm. Then I'd say "I asked him for some change, and he pulled a pistol on me and shot me in the arm! What was I supposed to do? If I'd have been sticking him up, do you think he'd have shot me in the arm from two feet away with all the rounds he had?" Plus, you really SHOULD be sued by the taxpayers for causing a bunch of state-paid medical bills when all you had to do was either give the guy your wallet or shoot him correctly.

I would let him take what ever he wants, then call the cops as soon as I can. In most cases where someone has a concealed firearm and they try to use it on someone who is robbing them, they hurt themselves by missing (if you are in that situation you might miss from fear or shock), or you might get angry and pop a cap in their face which would kill him, or something else might happen. Just let him go with your belongings because it is better than him going with your life.

or you might get angry and pop a cap in their face which would kill him

What does killing him have to do with anything?

.....and we should have surrendered to the Krauts because someone may have gotten killed.

We should consider our personal safety above all things. Even freedom.

Out of the mouths of babes............

I would let him take what ever he wants, then call the cops as soon as I can. In most cases where someone has a concealed firearm and they try to use it on someone who is robbing them, they hurt themselves by missing (if you are in that situation you might miss from fear or shock), or you might get angry and pop a cap in their face which would kill him, or something else might happen. Just let him go with your belongings because it is better than him going with your life.

And where do you get those statistics from? Are you saying that no one has any business in carrying to protect themselves?

I'm of the opinion that the first shot, if you're at armed robbery distances (arms length), should go striaght for the face. Unless you merely graze the scumbag, he won't be shooting back anytime soon...which is good..because it gives you time to shoot him a few more times. You can have my wallet if you've got the drop on me.

Then say, as he walks away, "Excuse me, sir, but I have found some more". (Roy and Gene taught me to never shoot a man in the back)

You could avoid this situation by not allowing yourself to get pulled into an alley. Use your head before your gun.

You could avoid this situation by not allowing yourself to get pulled into an alley. Use your head before your gun.

I agree, we should use our heads.......but what if we substitute the alley for a dark street, or a "wrong part of town", or a subway late at night after I get off work. Maybe we should just stay home and lock the doors?

The point wasn't the alley, it was self-defense.

Your wallet or watch is not worth the trouble. Give them to him. If he gets agressive then you are in danger and then you are justified in the use of deadly force. Perhaps that is a thin moral line for some but no human life is worth a wallet or watch in my book.

A cell phone is a better choice of "weapon". Use it to call 911 and guide the cops to the bad guy. He will be taken off the street and you will be able to sleep at night, in your own bed.

Finally, don't aim for the arm. If you have insufficient cause to use deadly force, you have insufficient causse to discharge your derringer. Also, aiming for the arm is risky. If you miss he will likely fire and you, or a family member, or innocent bystander is now at risk. If you have to shoot go for the torso. Much higher chance of a first shot hit.

I agree that the law needs some improvement as you mention. I don't feel anyone should be able to sue for injury when they were in the process of commiting a felony.

Just my .02 as a former LEO.

I have to agree here; once someone's got the drop on you, there isn't much you can do. If you've got time to draw while someone's already holding a gun on you, shoot to kill. But that's a BIG IF. Plus, you're in very hot water if you admit to shooting with the intent of maiming someone.

On the other hand, if they back off after giving them what they wanted, you're no longer "justified" (here in AZ at least) in shooting. Anyone in such a situation has to judge for themselves what to do. Just realize that justification in ANY shooting, is going to be decided long after the fact, in court. Unfortunately, when you're in the middle of a mugging, that is NOT the time to debate whether or not to shoot.

Just my $.02

I see some differences of opinon hear. When being robbed your life is being threatened. You have only two choices. Roll over and let him/them have whatever they want up to and including your life, or, protect yourself. If you do decide to protect youself take the time to learn how to do it, and do it legally. Listen to the folks whom will tell you that a derringer is a really poor choice for a self defense weapon. Think about one thing. Will your family miss you when you become one of the stistics?

Carried a sidearm for years as an LEO. Always carried when off duty in the unlikely event it may be needed to assist with a criminal activity.

Now that I'm retired and drawing Social Security and Medicare, the firearms are left at home, unless on an extended motor trip. Getting a little long of tooth to even think of giving someone a hard time with a gun shoved in my face or ribs.

If I can't talk my way out of a situation and passively hand over whatever it is they want (material things can always be replaced), then I'll try to dazzle'um with my footwork! :p

i think that everyone here has a good opinion just wanted to say one thing. if a Derringer is what they want and they CAN USE IT TO EFFECT then thats fine, but most people cant confedently say that they can take down an attacker with one or two shots. I know a guy who carries a S&W 351PD (.22 magnum) and feels totally safe with it and is an EXTREMELY good shot. Then again i know someone that carries a .44 special and one that carries a .357 and they say thats all they'll carry because they feel safe with it. so if a derringer is what you have and feel safe with then thats what you carry. just a few comments from the peanut gallery.

Carried a sidearm for years as an LEO. Always carried when off duty in the unlikely event it may be needed to assist with a criminal activity.

Now that I'm retired and drawing Social Security and Medicare, the firearms are left at home, unless on an extended motor trip. Getting a little long of tooth to even think of giving someone a hard time with a gun shoved in my face or ribs.

If I can't talk my way out of a situation and passively hand over whatever it is they want (material things can always be replaced), then I'll try to dazzle'um with my footwork! :p

Good point!

Remember, if you do shoot you will be judged 3 times once by the criminal justice system, once by the civil justice system, and finally by the most important judge, God. Perhaps we can fool the first two, but not God. Shooting should only occur when there are no other options. Property loss alone does not justify deadly force, protection of family and self on the other hand demands it. Choose wisely! I for one do not wish to spend eternity in the theological palace if the eternal intonement with members of PETA, Al Queida, and liberal dem's.

I have to agree here; once someone's got the drop on you, there isn't much you can do. If you've got time to draw while someone's already holding a gun on you, shoot to kill.

Not that I would ever try this personally, or suggest than anyone else do it, but I've got two friends, who on separate occasions wound up with a bad guy holding a gun to their heads. Both guys pulled their pistols while they had guns held to their heads, and dropped the bad guys. (Neither bad guy died) Now that takes guts.....And until it happens to you, you'll never know if you've got what it takes to pull something like that off.

After all, it's hard for a deceased dirtbag to wrongfully sue you.

My two cents as a former LEO.

Ted but as a former LEO you are surely aware of the civil suit the scum bags relatives will file to try and get your money. ACLU!!! :mad:

Ted but as a former LEO you are surely aware of the civil suit the scum bags relatives will file to try and get your money. ACLU!!!

What would be cool is if you got sued for a million, and then filed a counter suit for a million. Your case is settled before theirs, the city decides to pay them off, and you collect your settlment before they get paid....That would be way cool....

Not that I would ever try this personally, or suggest than anyone else do it, but I've got two friends, who on separate occasions wound up with a bad guy holding a gun to their heads. Both guys pulled their pistols while they had guns held to their heads, and dropped the bad guys. (Neither bad guy died) Now that takes balls.....And until it happens to you, you'll never know if you've got what it takes to pull something like that off.

I saw something like that in The Deer Hunter. One of the guys made it.

I saw something like that in The Deer Hunter. One of the guys made it.

Robt. Deniro and company had to take on multiple bad guys...my guys only had one at a time...Still took guts though...



Posting edited for language.

Kdub
Moderator

And where do you get those statistics from? Are you saying that no one has any business in carrying to protect themselves?

I am not saying that people shouldn't carry to protect themselves at all. I said what I said because this happened to one of my family's friends and he wound up shooting hisself in his right shoulder with a 9mm, killing him a few hours later.

Well...I'll say it, as I'd guess others are thinking the same thing.

If you do take the moral responsibility to carry a gun, then you shouldn't 1/2arse it...carry a "real" gun, and learn when/how to use it AND when it's not advisable to shoot at all.

As in the example at the start...why in the world would you shoot him in the ARM? Either he's a threat to your life (or the life of another), orn he's not...if the first, shooting him in the arm doesn't end the threat...if the second, you shouldn't have shot at all.

Yeow guys, Chill out. The main point was we needed better people to write laws and vote for someone whos trustworthy, not where to shoot the "Bad guy" Sorry if i phrased it wrong and set you off with the incorrect idea.

But of course about the shooting for torso, im not too keen on killing people. If it came down to it life or death i would. But in this case, it would of been better to shoot his arm (Which in aspects i mean shoulder) that had his weapon. And this is a alley, there is no one behind him if you miss. On a side note, wern't those fictional movies, Real life is alot different...

As for derringer, course its not the best.. It was meant to dramaize it, the smallest gun used as a defense weapon in last resort still gets you in deep crap cause of those screwed up laws that people write where criminals are allowed to have rights to sue you if you use it "illegally"

-Sorry for the misunderstanding folks, but the point was as i said in the first paragraph.

But of course about the shooting for torso, im not too keen on killing people.

Then carry pepper spray instead of a gun. It would probably prevent him from shooting you better than a shot to the arm if that was the only alternative.