TexasCHLforum.com

Excaliber wrote:It's definitely a good idea to work through the details before you find yourself in an actual situation.

In the interests of continuing plan refinement, if the BG is between you and the approaching police, and the BG selects that moment to initiate an attack on either you or the police, which of you can safely fire without endangering the other?

Consider also that, if you fired on the bad guy, both the police and any witnesses would in all likelihood see what appears to be you shooting at the police.

{{{Sigh}}}... thanks a lot, Excaliber.

This is a lot harder than I thought at first.

Let's see...I don't want to lose sight of the BG. I don't want to get in his way if he gets up and escapes. I don't want him to attack me again. I don't want the police to mistake me for a BG and shoot me. I can't trust 911 to convey the correct information to the responding officers. This is a dilemma wrapped in a conundrum.

The guy that was shot six times while holding the BG at gunpoint had his back to the officers. Apparently that's a bad idea, even when your wife tells the officers that her husband is the one with the gun, please don't shoot him. So I think I should be facing the officers, at least enough that they can see my hands and my gun, but I clearly cannot even appear to point my gun in their direction. So, if possible, the entering officers should be at 90 degrees or less to me, with the BG in view but not with the officers in the line of fire. If possible, I want the officers to see my strong hand and the fact that my finger is not on the trigger. The gun needs to be pointed toward the floor and directionally away from the officers.

Am I getting warmer?

chasfm11 wrote:

mgood wrote: If he's on the floor, injured, it may be difficult to justify shooting him again. So you may be standing there with a gun on him. You may be afraid that if you put your gun away, that this person may suddenly decide to continue the fight, but equally afraid that if you don't put your gun away, the police will shoot you when they arrive on the scene. I think that's what this discussion is about.

Yep, that is exactly it for me. Pardon me if I have more than a little reservation that me standing there with gun still pointed at the BG when the LEOs show up will not go well for me in several ways. Our daughter has been a police dispatcher in a local town in the DFW area for several years. I'll simply say that not all dispatchers are top performers and that not all messages delivered via 911 phone calls are correctly communicated to the responding officers.

So, hypothetically, what would you use as the criteria for adding more lead to the situation if the BG does fall to the ground and initially doesn't move. As I weight the risks of a) maintaining a continuing cover, b) withdrawing far enough that a firefight doesn't erupt before the LEOs get there when the BG surprisingly is up and moving around and adding enough "insurance" to the situation that will later get me a long term in prison, none of the options look very good.

I'm still formulating plans, so this is open to corrections, improvements, derision, etc.

I think the best thing to do is position yourself so that the BG is between you and whatever direction the police would be arriving from. You want the officers to see both you and the downed BG when they arrive. Until the police arrive, I would keep my gun at the ready, trigger finger on the slide in the safe position, muzzle pointed at the ground. If the BG wakes up and becomes a threat again (moves toward me, grabs his gun, whatever, I shoot him again. If he attempts to escape, I let him go, but only if he doesn't present a threat to anyone else in the house. As the police are arriving, I prepare to holster my gun and raise my hands, palms facing the officers.

I was turned off by their pushiness and their prices.

Interesting. He wastes a lot of space with his advertising rather than printing only relevant and important information. He also doesn't have any information about what to tell 911; no location, no description of the GG or BG so the police can distinguish between them.

rdcrags wrote:In another thread it was pointed out, and I think rightly so, if the 911 operator tells you to put down your weapon, place the phone down without hanging up, and claim later that you didn't hear such instructions.

I'm not sure I understand the thinking behind that. If the 911 operator informs the police that you were instructed to put down your weapon and the police arrive and see you holding a weapon, might they not be confused? I think a better way to handle it would be to tell the 911 operator that you will not put down your weapon until the police arrive, because you are holding the BG at gunpoint. Even if the operator insisted that I put it down, I would refuse. I would tell her, please inform the police that when they arrive, I will be the one holding the BG at gun point.

fickman wrote:I'm in intrigued and cautious at the same time.

Non-CHLers have always construed us as wanting to be vigilantes or cops without badges. . . I'm afraid of perception issues. If you can do the leg work to convince them that you're not anticipating using a firearm, know the role of the CHL, and just want to prepare for a worst-case scenario (just like any of those pseudo-self defense classes for females), then there is something worthwhile here.

It'll be hard to approach them without looking like this is for CHLers to "play" policeman. You might keep that in mind as you proceed.

I've thought about that. I haven't totally formulated my approach yet, but here's my basic thought process. The Reserve Officer program is for people who want to play policeman in their spare time. The VIPS program is for people who want to help the police from time to time. The (newly suggested) CHL program is for people who have no desire (or time) to play policeman but want to develop a relationship with the PD, understand the rules of engagement used by the PD and perhaps foster learning on both sides that will result in protocols that can save lives.

budroux2w wrote:That's almost not a bad idea. Emailing your respective city official/police chief and ask if there is specialized training regarding "good guy with a gun", and perhaps get information directly from the source on what they would like to see in this situation.

I submitted a suggestion to the Richardson PD regarding CHL <-> RPD interaction. Richardson has an Explorer program for youngsters, a Reserve Officer program and a Volunteers program, so they might be amenable to the idea of a CHL program that enhances interaction with the police and citizens and improves outcomes for all of us.

I will let the Forum know what comes of my suggestion.

Beiruty wrote:Best strategy is
1) Clear communication with responding officers.
2) Just hope that said officers are well trained to handle a good guy with a gun.

Which begs the question - should CHL holders be working with their local PDs to train for such scenarios? Should CHL holders (if they want to) be involved in FOF training with local PD? Would local PD allow that? Should CHL holders be querying their local PDs on their training policies vis a vis GG vs BG scenarios involving CHL holders? Would local PDs be accepting of citizen review of the training?

There's been a lot of discussion in the IFF thread as well as the Costco thread about surviving an encounter with the police. The purpose of this thread is to discuss possible protocols for surviving the aftermath of a deadly force encounter. For purposes of this discussion, we're going to assume that you have drawn your gun and fired it and a single BG is disabled but not dead. There are no other BGs. You have the BG at gunpoint, and you have just called 911.

What information is vital to give to 911? Your description? The BG's description and condition? The fact that you have the BG at gunpoint? Discuss.