I was on a jury for a self defense case where the whole reason it even went to trial was because the accused was in his front yard. Typical anti-gun prosecutor trying to punish a law abiding citizen for defending himself and family. We deliberated for all of 2 minutes and unanimously found him not guilty. I think about that and cringe every time I hear someone brag about getting out of jury duty. Had it not been for a jury of levelheaded citizens, an innocent man would have went to jail.
We too said not guilty!! In 2 minutes.. I even asked the prosecutor afterwards, why did you even try this case. He was mumbling something and the judge called him away. I left thinking how glad I was to make sure this 8 vet and pistol training officer was not charged with 25 minimum for that bs
@@drew2fast489 read again. He said it was a self-defense case. In other words he was either attacked or felt threatened to the point where deadly force was necessary.
Also don’t forget in a lot of states it comes down to pointing the weapon at someone. I was 22 in Georgia and had an incident where these two individuals (father and teenage son) loved pulling to the stop sign in front of my house and doing burnouts. I finally had enough and yelled at them when they did it while I was outside. The two decided to get out of the truck and start walking intently toward me on my property. I kept my home defense AR by the front door whenever I went out so I reached in and grabbed it. I stepped back out with my AR in the lowered ready state and advised to the two if they make one step further I will shoot. They ran back to the truck and called the police which my wife had already done. Once they had ran back to the truck I stepped back inside sat my AR down, removed the magazine and waited for the police. Once the cops arrived I came outside without my weapon and with both hands in the air to show I was not a threat. The cops got my statement and the guys statement who had to admit that he sent his son home and I did not point the gun at him. The officers determined that since I had not directly pointed the gun at the two that I was not the aggressor and indeed was simply ready to defend myself. This infuriated the guy whom I heard screaming at the cops about how I was allowed to just have an AR15 outside without consequences and the officers basically said “yes, you aggressed on his property and he did not point the rifle at you”. Had I lost my cool and waved my AR at the two then I would have been in trouble; however, since I kept it at a lowered ready state, had two aggressors coming towards me and also presented myself once the cops arrived in a non threatening and non aggressive manor that I was not at fault in any way shape or forum. The guy was furious and was warned by the officers to not go on my property again. I never heard them do another burnout in front of my house after that.
Lol that's awesome .they sound like some ignorant jerks ..why not go to a racetrack for things like that 🤷♂️..people have no respect anymore SMH . I also keep my AR-15 for home defense but I hope I never need it for that
The only thing that could have been better would be a video camera of some sort, upholding your statement of being in a low ready position should the other guy have decided to be a royal a$$.
You had excellent presence of mind to keep the weapon at low ready. I think as long as any armed citizen can keep their cool and only point a gun at someone when they are in “imminent danger of death of serious bodily harm” then they can stay on the right side of the law in most situations. It’s easier said than done but lawfully carrying a weapon requires a higher level of responsibility.
BUT you are missing the point that they could LIE and even if you PROVE later by camera or witness you STILL may have been locked up and that is a nightmare for so many long-term reasons. So I would be careful on that type of interaction because different jurisdictions MIGHT view that as "brandishing" EVEN if you never aimed it at them too ❗ I totally agree with you that you SHOULD be able to do what you did -- but in todays SICK leftist world it is a HIGH RISK that a scumbag left wing prosecutor will use you to get votes from scum.... Costing you a fortune in legal fees at a minimum.
@@TheMrMused The incident occurred way back in the early 2000's before home security cameras and ring doorbells became popular. I agree footage would have been nice to sure up my statement but fortunately for me the guy was so sure just having the AR was a crime that he didn't think to lie and say i pointed it at them.
I shot an attacker, in my front yard and was arrested, charged with attempted homocide, released on RoR and "sweated" by the cops for 2 weeks as they scrambled to find any shred of blame to pin on me. Charges were dropped and record expunged when they realized it was 100% THEIR fault for refusing to stop the attacker after multiple requests, and hearing recorded phone threats, over a 12 hour period. NEVER DEPEND ON COPS OR GOVERNMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING OR TELL THE TRUTH
Funny how the right pretends to love the police, but when things don’t go your way, the right wing is so quick to slam “the cops”, as if they are suddenly BLM. You cant have it both ways, right wingers.
Very interesting to hear that interpretation... The country I live in has far stricter gun laws than the US, but over here the considerations are different when it comes to the "castle" definition: If your property is enclosed by a fence, that property still is considered part of your home. And anybody overcoming the obstacle of the fence, be that by breaking it, or climbing over it, is already considered to be breaking into your home.
I like that more to be honest, a fence is no different than a wall of a city, or the gates of an actual castle. They didn't consider a kings throne rooms or bedroom as his castle they called the whole damn thing the castle and that included the outer walls.
In the USA you should post no trespassing signs, that makes all the difference, it’s been determined that your property shall be marked to identify clear markers, we have specific special signs that must be used, therefore you cannot use a cardboard crayon sign, etc.
Here's an idea don't shoot them in your front yard after you chase them out of your back. Everybody knows what happened that night Nobody cared though because he didn't belong to anybody over here
As a former urban LEO and former prosecutor Massad continues to elegantly educate us all. "Pulling it all together" in a sage precise comprehensible manner. Massad you are a "gift" to our world 💪🇺🇸✝ Thank you kind Sir❗
@@gangoffour6690 IMO you are a fool ❗ His wisdom is prolific... I have been an officer and a prosecutor and can assure you he is one of the BEST sources of lawful advice on the internet. 💪 Your UN-hinged comment reveals your ignorance, and that you have "other issues."
@@LJ-jq8og : yeah, really. Kind of a weird statement "people like you are why I need a lawyer before I even think of defending myself" No idea what the person is trying to communicate with that statement. No idea. Perhaps being a criminal defense attorney for 34 years has turned my brain into channeling everything into a question.
@@horacesawyer2487 Agree. I can only hope for the writer of that "bizarre" comment, that they hastily mis-read something ? Perhaps inebriated ? IF not, then they have significant issues. I am sure you have seen your "share" of this in your travels too. 😊 I just did not "statistically" expect to run into someone with that type of impairment on this channel. 🤔
Mr. Ayoob is a fantastic man. I remember as a young kid reading my dad's firearm magazines. Countless articles by him that I read and took to heart. I'm glad I did. He taught me so much about responsible ownership and usable tactics at a young age that either backed or supplemented what I learned from my dad. Most of it, if not all, still stands to this day. I still use his techniques to teach my friends and others as they learn how to be responsible and proficient with firearms. So cool to see he is still instructing people and being a damn good example of what it is to be a responsible firearm owner.
“He speaks better than any college professor I ever had.” He does so because he’s been teaching self defence and about the laws governing this topic for literally four or five decades, if not longer. I started reading his articles published in ‘Guns and Ammo’ magazine 4 decades ago, and he was already a nationally recognized expert on the topics even then.
I try to watch Ayoob once a week. Thinking though situational self-defense *regularly* and then hearing related case law presented cogently is incredibly helpful. Thanks for all you do here.
Civil lawsuits are almost never mentioned. Just when you think a criminal court case is settled, you can almost always expect a civil lawsuit to follow. Remember to learn from other's experience and hope you, yourself, can avoid going through the same situation. Great points based on past situations.
Yes. Another excellent reason to maintain a calm and disciplined attitude as much as circumstances permit. I can't think of any situation where it's better to go off half-cocked than to respond in a measured, level-headed way to perceived threats. Again, as much as possible. I know that some things do happen fast and, in that case, we can be deprived of that precious few seconds to respond coolly.
I have been a follower of Mr. Ayoob teachings since the early '80s and I hold my thoughts of Mr. Ayoob with the upmost reverence. The definition of a wise man and most compassionate for those behind the trigger and those in front of the muzzle and from him will you only get the truth.
I am so grateful to Massaf Ayoob and others for educating those willing to learn so we don't make the same foolish mistakes as others have. It is never a good idea to voluntarily remove any barriers that stand between you and an "aggressor". You expose yourself unnecessarily into a situation you may not fully understand. When an intruder breaks in, he/she is the aggressor and coming into a situation, they may not understand giving you, the defender, the element of surprise, if you are prepared. Had Reeise just kept his door closed he never would have felt compelled to shoot, or he could have retreated and closed the door to see if the "drugged out" guy dressed in his Saturday Night Fever costume tried to kick the door in rather than standing their waiting for the "right moment" to blast that kid in the chest.
This should be played in any Permit to Carry classroom as well. Some things I had no idea about, but am glad to know now. Extremely effective 'storytelling' as well.
Having read all of Massads books I could get my hands on, now getting to listen to the professor is awesome. He has really educated me and influence my way of thinking since I was a kid. Thank you for putting him in a public forum.
Check out some other guys like Pat Mac, Mike Pannone, Kyle Lamb, Larry Vickers, Jerry Miculek, Travis Haley. Massad is of an older doctrine and some of his stuff will get you killed. Judged by 12 or carried by 6. Choice is yours.
It's bonkers to me that I used to read his articles in gun magazines in drug stores when I was a snot nosed teenager. (You can't forget that odd name!) Now I'm in my mid 50s and he's still around. He's living proof you can be old but not a Fudd.
@David Meyer I swear I thought the same thing. Sounds very similar. Every once in awhile, Massad teaches a class at Top Gun range here in Memphis. I'd like to take the class, but it's like $1,800 or something.
Great video as always. Force trouble to come to you, don't go to trouble. Staying inside with your doors locked leaves no question who the aggressor was. In most of the U.S. at least you'll have the protection of the castle doctrine too.
Mr Ayoob, thank you for taking the time to go over these very important issues. You're always giving things to ponder that I had taken for granted. Like you said, better to find out here, than later. Thanks again.
Massad, you explain these matters more eloquently than anyone I’ve ever had the pleasure to watch. It’s no wonder at all why your services are in such high demand, Well Done Sir, Again!
This Man brings back many childhood memories, I used to read handgunner magazines, as well as Soldier of Fortune. Always a good read, and I learned a lot. I want to take this moment to thank Mr. Ayoob for his teaching, guidance, and frankly, candor , in matters such as these.
@JamesRockon though, maybe now with RU-vid, he seems a tad less "mythical" or "mysterious ". Lol. But , it did just strike me that I'm 50+ and he's been doing this since before I was born..
Yes, 💯 : as a teen I read a few Harris publications Combat Handguns, Guns & Ammo, SoF(by Robert K Brown USAR ret). Ayoob wrote about many use of force events, guns, holsters.
Great episode. One thing I would suggest, is that you remind people of a previous show you did. And (I am paraphrasing) you made a great point that leaving your home to confront folks was tactically not a very good decision. I live in a rural area. We have people trespass on the farm, and I always am reminded of your good advice. I am inside, my door is locked, I am armed and in control of my situation, once i go outside all of that goes out the proverbial door. Great show
Not everyone trespassing on your property has criminal intent. Especially in broad daylight! Lots of people are just uninformed or stupid. I am not afraid to talk to anyone. And I sure as hell am not going to bring a goddamned gun with me to tell someone to get lost.
@@jstravelers4094 Well, a couple points. Our property is clearly marked with locks on the access points. That answers intent. Two, I do have a gun with me, because most often they (when I run across them) have guns illegally hunting. Three, 99%of the time the conversations are not adversarial, just a warning. Four, trespassers who get hurt still can sue the land owner, so we are fairly firm in our warning. Five, you know nothing of what you are speaking of or my situation or area. Six, when we know of trespassers we call the sheriff, but sometimes surprises happen. I’d rather be armed 2 miles in the woods than unarmed when I meet someone who clearly intended to trespass on our land and is armed.
I learned not only from this vid. but also, from the comments. That speaks to the quality of the instructor IMO. For more than 25 years of learning from your entertaining wisdom, thank you Mr. Ayoob.
Thank you SO much for this. It's those little details that hang people every day; and this has gone a long way in clearing them up as relates to this subject.
When I bought my first firearm for home defense about 41 years ago, the first thing I did was read "In The Gravest Extreme" on the advice of my boss. It was the best education a new gunowner could give themself at the time. Turns out even now Massad Ayoob is still the best. Thank you for a lifetime of solid firearms advice.
I always recommend that book to anyone interested in getting a gun for self defense, I even have an extra copy just for a loaner. This may sound strange coming from a lifelong pro 2A guy, but I'm proud of the two times potential gun owners, after reading it, decided NOT to buy a gun.
@@faryldaryl3975 So you are proud you talked someone out of try and learn how to defend one's family and themselves? will you be just as proud if they are attacked or possibly murdered by taking your advice?
I feel like I am sitting in a classroom, listening to a very knowledgeable “professor “ telling us the right and wrong things in life ! Thanks Massad and WC !
I agree, and disagree. Massad IS a knowledge person, with more experience than most of us can imagine. However, "classroom" examples and "real world" don't often overlap well, if at all.
For many decades many have benefited from Massad Ayoob, thank you. I do agree with his opinion here, but I want to think in broader terms than this. I’m glad he mentioned the curtilage doctrine, but for me I view our woods as curtilage. Yes, his advice to remain inside in most cases certainly makes sense for a residential track home in the city. That’s because their properties are very small, easier to tactically manage, and there might be innocent bystanders in that neighborhood. But for those of us that live in the woods or rural country, like me. It takes some foot patrol to do a thorough threat assessment. Some would even use an UTV. And so, I’d rather leave my house to do that myself, rather than wait for the police, and/or allow the suspect to flee. That is IF I call for law enforcements assistance, Nonetheless, this is good advice. But the bottom line is what will the court say.
It was suggested that if your property is fenced/walled, the entire property is considered to be part of the house. Which makes sense to me. A "no trespassing" sign tacked to a tree is far less of a deterrence than "no trespassing" signs placed at 5-foot to 6-foot intervals on a fence that must be breached to enter the posted property.
I used to watch Massad all the time. One thing he said that I remember is that a staircase is the perfect killing zone. Wait at the top of the staircase and the bad boys will come to you. No cover for bad boys on the staircase.
Depends on the staircase boyo. Some wouldn't provide you any cover or concealment either, against an unknown force multiplier. But I get your point using choke points to engage. I totally agree. Maybe I'm just in a bad mood, but is there anything else super obvious you want to state?? I mean, you didn't mention the OODA loop at all...I figure staring with your face against the wall might be the best way to surprise everyone lol
I just wanted to thank you for all of these informative vids that you are putting out. With each successive one, I feel more and more knowledgeable. Whether it’s examples given, the laws of the land, or safety practices, I feel better prepared than before. I really enjoy the explanation and breakdown of laws concerning the individual events that show why things went the way they did and how to prevent it. A calmer, more knowledgeable mind is much better off than one operating strictly on emotion. In the heat of the moment, I’m sure everyone experiences emotions, but I feel the more a person understands and tries to implement these teachings, the less likely the innocent will be liable/subjected to possible criminal prosecution, injury, or even death. Sir, Thank you again for what you are doing.
This is really good advice. From a safety standpoint, you don't want to be standing in your front yard in the open with no cover or concealment in a dangerous situation. The interesting thing about the St. Louis incident was I never saw any video of the people who were destroying property and trespassing in the neighborhood. Stay in your home hidden behind locked doors with your tools and engage only if someone is breaking in or you are in imminent danger.
That couple are both idiots. If I actually felt uncomfortable about a group of people marching down the public street past my house.....I might have my rifle laying across my lap as I sat on my front steps watching them walk by. But there is no way I would point my weapon at anyone on the public street. No matter what they said.
Absolutely. It's also hard to convince a jury that you were thinking about your family and defending them when you decided to leave them to defend themselves while you went outside to further engage a perp. Not only is it more dangerous to you, it's more dangerous to your family if a gunman takes you out of the fight. If you're chasing somebody down, it's no longer self-defense. That's a clear case of your emotions getting you into jail. Being a gun-owner requires restraint. Heading outside to pick a 2nd fight in a more dangerous arena is the opposite of restraint.
@@Skank_and_Gutterboy" If you're chasing somebody down, it's no longer self-defense." Well that is the way it is supposed to be, But a few days ago a homeless guy tracked someone down long after he said he was attacked and the DA said it is Self defense.
* * The McCloskeys were STILL ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY while they were ATTACKED by a HOSTILE MOB that was threatening them AND ENTERING their property ! ! ! ! ! WTF ??? * *
@@DCsGladiator Oh my! IMO If you're a firearms owner and you do NOT know who Ayoob is - you need to get caught-up IMMEDIATELY! Massad Ayoob is one of the more notable firearms and self-defense experts of the last 50 years! His book "In The Gravest Extreme" which deals with what happens in the aftermath of a self-defense shooting, is one of two books which I feel EVERYONE who owns a gun for self-defense needs to read! (The other one being Col. Jeff Cooper's seminal work "Principles of Personal Defense")! I often give copies of both books to friends who are new shooters, or who are not familiar with these two men. Ayoob is admittedly kind of "an acquired taste" for some folks, because he has his own way of thinking, and is not afraid to puncture platitudes or egos, and he has what some people consider to be a rather high and mighty way of speaking. But I really like him, and I do not believe he's a egoist, unlike some of the self-agrandizing "Experts in their own minds" who are out there pushing THEIR way of shooting, or selling Time-shares and Condos on their property in the desert to their students during breaks in training. Please do yourself a GREAT favor and pick up the works of Ayoob (and Col. Cooper) at your earliest convenience and familiarize yourself with them..
Right about 4 minutes, he brought up a very good point. I was involved in a lethal Force encounter, and I opened my door and advanced toward the threat. I fired one shot, and the threat retreated. When I had to make a statement, the detective had the law book opened at "homicide".(Texas) People should be allowed to face the problem that threatens themselves, their family, and their property, in my opinion. Even if it takes 3 doors to get to that menacing threat. We shouldn't have to be scared of technicalities in court when it comes to defending our life, land, and family members/neighbors. Criminals should be extremely afraid of the consequences when they violate the respect of any of the aforementioned people/items' rules of conduct. Harsh and swift punishment is what truly discourages criminals from attempting to make anyone a victim. Brutally punish those that seek to inflict harm in exchange for money. This is the only way that criminals will think very carefully before they find their next victim.
Problem is, when you open the front door and head out to hunt the guy down, it stops being self-defense and now you're the assaulter, batterer, or murderer. Not only does it put you in legal jeopardy, you now have target-fixation to the point of abandoning your family. That's not a position I want to be in.
Just like the man said, the totality of the circumstances are generally weighed. In your example, you gave little context as to what the threat was or why you thought it a threat. If someone just escaped from a serial killers car and is running as fast as they can and start banging on your door at 2am, trying to open it, one could consider that a threat and fire. Not knowing the circumstances, it would be scary for any homeowner. Someone, probably not in there right mind, trying to enter a house. To me, justifiable to shoot in that split second. But then there's the consequences of knowing if you waited a bit more, maybe a tragedy could be avoided. Totality of circumstances in each case must be weighed.
It's my understanding that during the McCluskey trial the mother claimed that she had heard someone yell let's burn the house to the ground. One has to wonder what it would feel like if a crowd of people were outside your house with the possibility of someone throwing a Molotov cocktail inside. Question is do you wait inside or do you go out and nip it at the bud?
personally I feel that one ought to be allowed to walk around on their own land carrying their own guns, especially when a threat is obvious. That being said, maybe it's a decent middle ground to walk out with a pistol in your pocket, not visible, unless someone really lights up a bottle with some hanky tied on it?
@horace sheffield After months of violent riots, don't you think that the destruction needed to stop? You bet your ass that they needed to be told to STOP.
Exactly my thought. Imagine a growing crowd entering your property with force (like in the McCloskey case), you retreat to the house and then start to defend yourself and in response they start to set fire on your home (while you are inside). You may be on the safe side regarding the law, but you loose in every other aspect.
There were incidents of private citizen's homes being burned down by Molotov cocktails? Pardon my question, I'm totally ignorant on this topic and am just curious.
New York Times: “He was a Princeton-educated corporate lawyer. She provided legal services for the poor. Now they are accused in a Molotov cocktail attack on a police car.” Portland Police Bureau “On Thursday, December 31, 2020 at about 7:45p.m., Central Precinct officers became aware of a gathering in the area of Southwest 3rd Avenue and Southwest Main Street. As the crowd grew to an estimated 80-100 people, some individuals in the crowd began to engage in violence. At least two Molotov cocktail-style firebombs were thrown, and large, commercial grade aerial fireworks were launched at the Federal Courthouse and the Justice Center. “ If those that riot will attack police, I believe they will attack your home.
This calls for intelligent threat assessment. Is that what the McCloskeys did? Were Molotov cocktails or bombs of any sort in evidence during that incident?
Great video! I love listening to Mas explain situations with actual case studies and scenarios to illustrate his points. I can't tell you how many times I've referenced his videos during conversations.
Here in Alabama we have stand your ground law , and as a detective I’ve worked several cases where the suspect was shot outside the residence and all cases were no billed at grand jury !
Detective Thompson, in Alabama, does the Stand Ground Law work along the lines that there is a clear and present threat to one's life, *regardless* of location? I am an investigator also, and wish to hear a colleague's perspective on this.
Even so, the criminal case is only a small part of your problems. When it comes to civil cases, Stand Your Ground is only an affirmative defense and not an immunity from a lawsuit, in many states. You are much more liable to suffer in a civil suit than a criminal one. Many people discount this and if the media takes up the case against you, you are almost certainly going to have eager lawyers looking to come after you.
Yes regardless of location , I've had cases where neither party were on there own property, I've had road rage case and ,also a gas station case and several others ! As to the other comment, civil can be terrible but still not as bad as losing your freedom !
GREAT Video as always Sir!! - When I saw the videos of this incident one other thing jumped out at me about their actions. From a tactical/operational standpoint... The moment they exited the home they gave up a significant source of cover/concealment. From the angle of the street, they were very exposed to anyone in the crowd who wanted to let a round or two fly. When we discuss this situation in my classes I point out how easily a shot could have run out from the crowd and made the incident far more tragic thank it was.
My biggest fear is that defending yourself makes you guilty. I’m armed, trained and practice constantly at a range. But even then, I always take the non aggressive attitude if (and I pray it doesn’t) that should arise. Stay secure inside, communicate immediately with law enforcement, position yourself in a defensive posture, know where your rounds will travel. Then and only then will I respond discharging my firearm, keeping in mind, I’m not “shooting to kill” because those words will make me out to be the aggressive one. Thank you for everything you do sir. This type of educational information is here the asking. Be safe.
@Ying Li if you're discharging your firearm that means the other person is threatening your life in which case you always shoot to kill... anybody with basic firearms training knows this
I can't get enough of these videos. Ayoob's knowledge of the law, the courts and jury attitudes is unsurpassed and invaluable. I completely agree with pretty much everything he said. The added section on curtilage was fascinating and I need to research more about that.
This is an extremely thorough, reasonable, and well-cited perspective. Love that you cover details of some of the relevant case law. Thanks for the insight!
Well said, Mr. Ayoob. I taught my family if there is suspicious activity outside of our dwelling, to initiate the family plan. Stay in the home, kids get to safe place (pre-designated), wife call 911, I am in the ready behind barrier and at an oblique from either of the doors. My wife gives the dispatcher a safe word. Everyone in the home is trained how to safely operate a firearm. So far only had one scare, everyone in the home executed the plan and county sheriff arrived as predicted (5min). Person turned out to be elderly with dementia. No one was harmed. Many times protectors want to go outside and meet the threat head on, You are right, stay in the dwelling. Thank you for this great video and example, ( albeit unfortunate example).
In the small town where I grew up, the chief of police lived across the street. I was a teenager at the time, but I remember a conversation he had with my father. He stated "If you shoot them in a doorway or coming through a window... make sure the body is inside the house when officers arrive... no questions will be asked."
Not good advice for the modern era. Forensic science will show that you moved the body, which can get you in big trouble even if the initial shooting was justified. Massad says as much in his book Deadly Force (2nd ed, pg. 143)
Like always excellent presentation. Been following MAS since the late nineties early 2000s. Always had great articles in gun magazines back then and still do today(you tube).
Mr Ayoob your videos are always great …i love soaking up as much knowledge and wisdom that I can …and you as an elder in this community provide just that …much respect to you sir !!!
I appreciate the sobriety of the content presented here. The advice is so sensible and there is intelligent description of context. Neither defensiveness or promotion. Just really well done, thoughtful talks.
OMG! I am an XParalegal 201 court cases, holder of 13 CCW Permits 13 states, 1996 NRA instructor and watched over 100+ Gun Case videos! THIS lesson on "be the defender" inside your "CASTLE" is sooooo important.... Thank you!!!
Yes, 1000 reasons to leave this dumpster fire of a state of Commie-fornia. No .1, grusome. No.2 Nancy. No.3 Paul Pelosi’s hammer. I guess it runs in the family
Just throwing it out there but your typing doesn't look like that of an ex paralegal. All of the habits you had while working just fallen out of you or something?
Excellent as always. Thank you! When someone outside begins preparation for starting your house on fire while you’re inside that’s a different scenario requiring you to go outside to stop the intended assault/attack. A post addressing this scenario would be helpful. Thank you.
That is common sense, I mean.. if someone has to tell you that you can go engage someone lighting your house on fire, and that fire puts your life at imminent risk... I question how they survived thi long in the first place.... It is rather simple, If you feel that your life is absolutely at risk, or you are at risk of severe bodily injury, then take the shot. I mean, it is an obvious scenario, and you know when it happens.... or just ask yourself, could I convince a jury that my life was at risk, and the answer is yeah or most likely, then go for it.
Even in New York state, which is a notoriously anti gun state, it is explicitly stated in the law that you have the right to shoot anyone in the act of committing arson on your dwelling.
@@100percentSNAFU Love seeing it in writing. The prosecutors look for ways to falsely prosecute law abiding citizens in order to keep the criminal’s family and friends from rioting with no regard for the law abiding citizen protecting himself.
Absolutely right! I keep seeing these news reports about people going out in their front yard to deal with angry callers. People come to the door looking for trouble, and out the door goes the family. Make sure your doors are locked, including the back and side ones, and make sure they will hold against an attack. They should be able to stop a break-in anyway!
this actually just happened in New Mexico I think. Police were serving a warrant late at night, went to the wrong house… and right when they realized it was the wrong house, the husband stepped out and was carrying a gun. They hit him with a flashlight and the guy raises his hands and gets mag dumped. The wife screams picks up the gun and fires back, believing that the cops were robbers that just killed her husband. She wasn’t charged, but neither were the officers because the husband stepped out of his front door carrying a pistol.
You’re wrong about the reason why that shooting by the police was justified. The flaw in your logic is that the police are involved. The police are always justified in stopping a perceived deadly threat to themselves or others, except when committing illegal acts. Going to the wrong house to serve a warrant is not illegal. That case falls under the “awful, but lawful” scenario. That being said, if the husband managed to injure the police and survive the encounter, self defense may have been an effective defense, but maybe not, given the police announced themselves and he left his castle. I also would not take the fact the wife was not charged as equivalent to being innocent of crimes. Charges are often political, and this could easily have been a political choice not to charge her in order to avoid drawing more negative media attention, as this case is not a good look for the police.
@@akovar50 So in other words, the police are completely and totally above the law. If I went to the "wrong" door, and shot the guy inside, I would go to prison for second degree murder, and so would you, and so would anyone without a badge. Twenty-first century policing has completely gone off the rails. Who would've thought that agencies first birthed as "Prohibition Enforcement," staffed with literal gangsters, would turn out to be the worst criminals. Really is true what they say about fruit born of poisoned trees.
That’s not true. If the police are at the wrong house they carry the liability simply because they are now breaking a constitutional amendment (fourth amendment). Shooting at the cops would NOT be justified in that specific situation BUT the police department including those participating would be unjustified in what they did because as you stated, the police would be committing an illegal act (warrantless search). With your logic the police would not be liable even if they made clear physical entry into the wrong home which isn't at all true. There is actually multiple precedents of police making warrantless entries into wrong homes and ending up in firefights and almost always the police were found liable in both criminal and civil court. Liability doesn’t change because of a communication mistake @@akovar50
The lawn of their house and surrounding area is part of their castle. They were absolutely correct in going outside to guard their house by confronting the threat.
Thank you very much for the wise words and the sound advice. It is indeed far better to hear this ahead of time than to hear it from a (possibly activist) judge later.
I'm not suggesting others to agree with me and my decision not to follow you anymore, because you show with your body language that you are pleased that those lawyers who wanted some free television publicity and sabotaging gun owners rights buy acting ignorant, should have been used as examples for what you don't do if you own guns. They staged the whole thing and the cops wasn't called till they were gone. If you waste your time giving them any, I'm taking a break from you. Take care my friend.
They were in a gated community where the rioters broke an iron gate down to enter and the McCloskeys heard them threatening to burn their house down with them in it and kill them and two of them aimed firearms in their direction. You should not have to wait until a molotov cocktail breaks threw your window when an angry mob is outside waiting for you to do something about it. I agree that in most cases you are better off staying inside but these people were committing felonies against them threatening both their lives and property and this came at a time when people were murdered by violent protesters and building were indeed burned to the ground in and around the city of St. Louis.
I think what went wrong is that they were pointing their guns at people. The idea of staying in your home. When there's mobs outside that have earned a reputation of burning buildings down might not be a great idea
@@elultimo102 They had broken through a gate and were on private property. They were marching down a street, but it was not a public street, it was a private community. Massad's points still apply, in that if they had stayed inside while armed they would have been very hard to prosecute at all. Their fear is understandable, as these "protesters" had burned buildings and killed people.
Excellent video! You raise many legal issues that we as firearm owners should consider before exiting the safety of our homes. The moment you exit your home all legal issues come into play. I once had a neighbor who knew I owned a handgun. She was experiencing some serious imminent threats from a friend of her daughter. One day she asked me if I would respond to her apartment with my handgun to "save" her and her daughter if the male concerned arrived at her apartment. I had to tell her that the best advice I could give her was to stay inside her apartment and dial 911 and let the police deal with this issue. I had to explain to her that the LAST thing I would do is arrive outside her apartment with my handgun. When I explained the legal jeopardy I might experience in great detail my friend finally realized why I could NOT help her in this emergency situation. She finally understood! Thanks again for the great advice. I'm also a former armed security guard and a current CCW holder.
I'm too damn old and scared to be wandering outside to confront anyone. I have no problem waiting for them to come to me. Nothing outside worth anyone dying for. Plus gives me a chance to calm down and prepare. Think!
