Shoot first and ask questions later? Only if death is imminent? Somewhere in between?

 

Consider this example, suppose you have a quality handgun and two magazines total with you, you see two "terrorist" walking past you into an event (any event will do) loaded down with assault weapons. Do you launch a pre-emptive strike against them and/or try to ambush kill them? Do you follow them and wait to be sure they are there to kill people? If you attempt to kill/stop them before they fire any shots are you going to be prosecuted? Can you be sure?

 

Again, what are the rules of engagement if you have your legal gun with you and you come across some heavily armed "terrorist" that by all means appear to be moving into position to kill multiple people?

I think firing first would almost always be a bad decision.

 

No way to protect yourself in court if you do.

 

Only exception would be if they pulled a gun and you thought they were immediately about to use it.

I think firing first would almost always be a bad decision.

 

No way to protect yourself in court if you do.

 

Only exception would be if they pulled a gun and you thought they were immediately about to use it.

 

From a legal perspective that sounds decent.

How do you know they are terrorists and not two law-abiding citizens who like to open carry?

Are we 100% sure that they are terrorists?

I'd say you have to wait until they're trying to hurt someone.

How do you know they are terrorists and not two law-abiding citizens who like to open carry?

 

I threw that out for discussion in my opening volley.

Are we 100% sure that they are terrorists?

 

Are we 100% sure of anything of substance?

Not going to shoot first and ask questions later.

 

I'll ask questions first. With my weapon in the cover position. Then it will play out from there. I can only use deadly force if my life or another's life is in danger.

 

I may be prosecuted depending on the prosecutor. If I only use deadly force when I can, I am covered.

 

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

My first thought would be to alert LE if possible.

Not going to shoot first and ask questions later.

 

I'll ask questions first. With my weapon in the cover position. Then it will play out from there. I can only use deadly force if my life or another's life is in danger.

 

I may be prosecuted depending on the prosecutor. If I only use deadly force when I can, I am covered.

 

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

 

^This. To an extent.

 

Dont ever fire your weapon unless you know that your life or others are in danger. You can openly carry in this country, so you need to determine whether there is a real threat or not, before taking any action.

 

Personally I would keep a close eye on the potential suspects and go from there. There is no real reason to even draw your own weapon just because someone is carrying openly. However keeping a close eye until police arrive and acting on the situation if they did attempt to fire their weapons would be what I would do.

Are we 100% sure of anything of substance?

 

Ok, how about we recognize them from an FBI poster.

Ok, how about we recognize them from an FBI poster.

 

Using a hypothetical if I saw Bin Laden a few years ago , I fire and take what ever comes to me.

 

If it's a random person I stay attentivery.

My first thought would be to alert LE if possible.

 

^ The first thing is to dial 911 and report what you saw. I think the people at 911 will then give you instructions of what to do. Whether they will or not, first thing, report what you see.

 

Don't ask me what I would do next... let's just say I would have laundry to do when I get home.

My first thought would be to alert LE if possible.

This is always the right answer.