What Would You Have Done??

[Traildust]

So I just started blasting.....

[Briar Friar]

I’d me in more trouble for leaving my wife at McDonald’s with a crazy person


OP. I think you did fine. Glad you didn’t need to use it

I agree on both counts.

My bad…I thought Arrowsmith was referring the OP title question more to the video than his McDonalds incident.

[AtTheWall]

so i just started blasting.....

word !

[Death from Above]

If I am in the red car... the guy in the video is dead

[CEO]

Something like this happened to my wife's coworker. Stopped at a red light in Gunspoint and a guy comes up and starts banging on her passenger side window and yelling inappropriate things. She's behind other cars so she can't move. My wife is behind her and sees what is happening. Wife grabs her pistol out of her purse. Luckily the light turned green and they took off. Friend was loaded and ready to start blasting if he broke the glass.

[tvc184]

I had a similar incident happen to me at of all places at the McDonalds in Eastland. A guy high on something came out of Mc Donalds. I looked up and when we made eye contact he came around and started punching my window. I leaned back and drew down on him. He backed off and walked away. When my wife came out I told her I was probably going to jail for brandishing. I think the guy was too high to realize what had happened. We drove off and never heard anything other than some friends that were inside said the guy had been acting crazy inside McDonalds as well.

The guy in this video might not have been so lucky. What do you think ??

https://fb.watch/aI3y_rS3S-/

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I’m not sure if this helps with your scenario but…..

There was actually a law in Texas about displaying a deadly weapon to stop from having to use deadly force. It is there I believe for people who mistakenly say, if you pulled a weapon you had better use it. That is not true.

Sec. 9.04. THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE.

The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

As you can see part of the law on self-defense specifically states, “as long as the actor’s (you) purpose is limited to creating the apprehension…”.

I think this law clearly means to let the other person legally know, if necessary, I will use deadly force.

Chapter 9 in the penal code on self-defense also has this…


Sec. 9.02. JUSTIFICATION AS A DEFENSE.

It is a defense to prosecution that the conduct in question is justified under this chapter.

In a “defense to prosecution”, if evidence at trial of self defense is submitted to a jury, the burden is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you had no reasonable belief of self-defense. This is part how “defense to prosecution” is defined in the penal code.

(d) If the issue of the existence of a defense is submitted to the jury, the court shall charge that a reasonable doubt on the issue requires that the defendant be acquitted.

It depends entirely on the district attorney but if this case came up for review and the taking of charges, the district attorney would not only have to look at the legality of you displaying a deadly weapon (which I think is likely reasonable in that situation) but also whether he thinks he can convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that you had no reasonable fear that situation. In my county I don’t think the district attorney would ever file charges if your situation happened like you described.

In my opinion …….



.

[Quackerbox]

Legendary

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[gatorgrizz27]

I don’t think you did anything wrong. Only additional thing I’ve heard in these cases is to call the local PD and file a statement. Generally, the first person to do so has the “advantage” if there is an investigation.

I’m not a fan of unnecessary interaction with LEO or paperwork, but if the bum called the cops and said “I walked up to ask this guy if he knew where 7th Avenue was and he put his gun in my face, his tag number was XJJ654” it might not be a great situation.

[Solo7]

I'm afraid these situations are going to get worse.

[Chew]

[tvc184]

I don’t think you did anything wrong. Only additional thing I’ve heard in these cases is to call the local PD and file a statement. Generally, the first person to do so has the “advantage” if there is an investigation.

I’m not a fan of unnecessary interaction with LEO or paperwork, but if the bum called the cops and said “I walked up to ask this guy if he knew where 7th Avenue was and he put his gun in my face, his tag number was XJJ654” it might not be a great situation.

Other officers may have a different opinion but……

On several cases that I have worked, including murder, I ended up arresting the person that made the call. They will often even bring up, hey but I’m the one that called the police.

The first suspect is the person that called 911. It is like there is some unwritten rule, if I place the call then I’m on home plate and safe.

Uhhhhh…… no……

Besides that, I have never heard of filing a statement. My agency which generally did not make reports for somebody that was not a victim.

If that is not enough, such a statement will put you at the scene by your own admission. I would not volunteer such information unless it benefited me and I’m not sure how admitting to being part of the incident would be a benefit.

[Quackerbox]

I don’t think you did anything wrong. Only additional thing I’ve heard in these cases is to call the local PD and file a statement. Generally, the first person to do so has the “advantage” if there is an investigation.

I’m not a fan of unnecessary interaction with LEO or paperwork, but if the bum called the cops and said “I walked up to ask this guy if he knew where 7th Avenue was and he put his gun in my face, his tag number was XJJ654” it might not be a great situation.

It's not "tag your it"

And I'm sorry you feel that way

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[gatorgrizz27]

Other officers may have a different opinion but……

On several cases that I have worked, including murder, I ended up arresting the person that made the call. They will often even bring up, hey but I’m the one that called the police.

The first suspect is the person that called 911. It is like there is some unwritten rule, if I place the call then I’m on home plate and safe.

Uhhhhh…… no……

Besides that, I have never heard of filing a statement. My agency which generally did not make reports for somebody that was not a victim.

If that is not enough, such a statement will put you at the scene by your own admission. I would not volunteer such information unless it benefited me and I’m not sure how admitting to being part of the incident would be a benefit.

Good to know, thanks.

[eastover53]

Other officers may have a different opinion but……

On several cases that I have worked, including murder, I ended up arresting the person that made the call. They will often even bring up, hey but I’m the one that called the police.

The first suspect is the person that called 911.

This is good to know.

I’ll be darn sure to remember that if I come across an accident or something suspicious.

[RifleBowPistol]

When you go to McDonalds, you should expect to run into strange, messed up individuals. I don't go to McDonalds, unless there is nothing else around. There are a few areas, I go, where that is about the only place to eat. I have to really think about, do I want to walk in that place and deal with whatever is in there or wait till I am in some other area, and get lunch.

Wal-Mart and McDonalds are two places where you can count on seeing some strange stuff walking or rolling or crawling around. Then McDonalds, usually has a higher percentage of highly odd, strange, messed up individuals than Wal-Mart.