Got my CHL today and 3 hours later my first incident!

[Excaliber]

Separate from this incident, I honestly do not believe that enough is taught in CHL class about the use of deadly force.
Incidents and senario's should be discussed along with their consequences.
Thanks to everyone for their comments.

Let's see, my mother was beaten and robbed when she was 60 and about $40,000 in cash and goods were taken. No suspects ever found. My dad had two trucks stolen and drove into a playa lake and his truck shop burglarized twice. No suspects found. I have had four spare tires stolen from my truck and car at separate times, years ago I had a set of custom wheels and tires stolen. No suspects found. Had a cotton stripper stolen and no suspects.

You're right. It's time to move on to another forum.

You'd do yourself a disservice to give up on this forum so quickly.

It's apparent that you've had some very disturbing personal experiences with crime and its consequences, and I certainly understand that you would have very strong feelings about this as well.

You'd get no argument from me in believing that the CHL class is not a comprehensive review of the laws surrounding use of deadly force, incident fact patterns, or their consequences. It would be more useful to see the class as an introductory primer or high level overview rather than in depth training. When you finish the course, you're not done - you've only just started on a very long journey toward knowledge and competence in managing responses to criminal behavior.

One of the most valuable aspects of this forum is that it offers members a place to share details of real world incidents and have the fact patterns reviewed by others with more knowledge and experience in managing criminal encounters. This process lets each of us learn from the experiences of others, and helps us build the best of the "lessons learned" into our own planning for the time when we may find ourselves in similar situations.

This process necessarily involves hindsight and brings up questions and opinions which are often uncomfortable for the person who actually lived through the incident. None of these are intended to embarrass or belittle the person who shared the experience. They are learning points intended to help the original poster think about his incident from perspectives he may not have considered, and to educate others who may not have ever had a similar experience but want to be prepared if they face one in the future.

Forum members tend to react fairly strongly when the facts related in a post indicate that deadly force was used without legal or moral justification because they are very sensitive to how precarious our second amendment rights are at this time in history, and want to avoid giving any ammunition that could be portrayed as irresponsible use of firearms by CHL holders to those who would like to ban gun ownership entirely. It's a group effort to keep each other within the bounds of the law and gain respect from some of those who view us with suspicion or fear. Critques of mistakes posted here are much less costly than when they are critiqued by the criminal justice system.

It would appear that you had some reservations about your own actions as indicated by your statement that you omitted certain relevant information in your incident report to law enforcement, and I suspect that some of the legal issues raised by forum members may well have involved things you were unaware of or hadn't given much thought to before.

I invite you to take the after action review posts in the spirit in which they were intended, and continue to enjoy the benefits of forum membership by learning from the experiences of others.

[TacShot]

Well, Tallinthesaddle, it may have been a rough ride through that one. Just to let you know you aren't the first to get a lecture or two and you won't be the last. You were honest enough to tell your tale and it bought you a bit of gruff. The lesson to be learned here is to listen up to some of these buzzards who may not be too polite at times but can pass on a lot of the thought they have given to similar situations. It don't appear you have thin skin, and maybe you learned something. Lord knows, we all do every time we read through the stuff on this site. Anyhow, welcome. Stick with us and you'll find a wealth of good information here.

[KBCraig]

Add my welcome, and my apology for failure to observe the proprieties; I honestly didn't notice that you were a new member.

If you're living in rural West Texas, you have a different situation than those living in other parts of the state. Population density is much different. LEO-to-citizen ratios are VASTLY different, and response time can be measured in hours instead of minutes.

So, in your situation, no actual harm was done when you fired two shots over their heads, and you're very unlikely to suffer legal repercussions. At the same time, you have to realize that those who reacted with horror at your actions, did so because you had no legal justification for firing, and could be prosecuted for Deadly Conduct for doing so. You weren't stopping a theft, and you didn't intend to use deadly force in order to recover stolen property. You fired to hasten their departure, which started as soon as they saw you with a shotgun.

At best, those two, and those they tell about it, will hesitate to target you again. But for others, you're just as vulnerable as before. As has been said many times before, there are no "safe neighborhoods" so long as criminals have cars.

No matter how far in the boonies you are, you have to keep your stuff locked up.

Kevin

[hankintexas]

[diatribe] This thread has made me violently ill. No, not the author's actions, albeit not the way I may have handled things, but the way not ONE SINGLE person has seen it fit to take this oppurtunity to welcome someone to the forum and suggest, politely and without mallice, some education and/or alternative solutions to the situation.
This author may not have done things the way you or I would have, but does this really necessitate heckling and berating commentary? I'm sure some of you truly believe that "yelling" is the right way to handle things. To this person, in the heat of the moment, he did what he thought was right. He had adrenaline going, and probably wasn't thinking clearly.
Just in shooting IDPA the few times I have, I've done some things that afterwards I thought to myself, "Gee, I wonder what part of the brain thought that was a good idea..."
Of course, not everyone here is an ambassador; Lord knows I'm not. but still. really?
anyone remember the guy who had his work trailor (welder et al) stolen out of his carport? Boy, that thread turned into a real pearl of wisdom. "Ah works with mah hands" and all that. this reminds me of that thread.
I guarantee TallInTheSaddle will not be back because of all this, and now he's going to miss out on actually learning A LOT.
I know I have learned quite a bit from the lively discussions here. not to mention a smokin' deal on a Kimber.
not everyone responds to criticism the same way, and written text can be very poor in conveying the proper context of one's words. I think most of us saw that in the thread about trying to carry without changing dress styles.
the point being I think a great oppurtunity for us all to learn, and to help someone else to do better in the future was missed.
and I fear that person may not get the chance to get that chance to see his errors and be able to correct them, if/when this situation arises a second time.
[/diatribe]

I am sorry that I jumped in with such a short tempered reply. I too am a new member to this board and should have tempered my reply. I was not there and can not say what I would have done in the same situation.
I will try in the future to think it through before posting short tempered comments. Sorry.

[casingpoint]

Tallinthesaddle, you must be from Pasadena. If not, maybe you should visit sometime. The citizens there have demonstrated great tolerance for folks fed up with crime.

When you carry on the hip in the kitchen, you sweep everybody in the basement-unknown

[couzin]

Forum members tend to react fairly strongly when the facts related in a post indicate that deadly force was used without legal or moral justification because they are very sensitive to how precarious our second amendment rights are at this time in history, and want to avoid giving any ammunition that could be portrayed as irresponsible use of firearms by CHL holders to those who would like to ban gun ownership entirely. It's a group effort to keep each other within the bounds of the law and gain respect from some of those who view us with suspicion or fear. Critques of mistakes posted here are much less costly than when they are critiqued by the criminal justice system.

Er ya go! Well said!!!

[dukalmighty]

It's never a good idea to fire a warning shot,in Law Enforcement it's not allowed if you are justified to fire then the situation warrants use of deadly force and you need to become fully aware of what those laws are and the legal ramifications,as far as during the day unless your life is in danger you cannot use deadly force to prevent theft of property.Unless they break into your home that's a whole nother ball of wax,and under castle doctrine deadly force is justified.By shooting in their direction I believe that is a felony and a felony conviction will stop your chance of getting a chl but also effectively prevent you from legally touching a gun for several years

[nedmoore]

Why was your shotgun unloaded? LOL! Was anything missing from the trailer?

[dihappy]

Let's see, my mother was beaten and robbed when she was 60 and about $40,000 in cash and goods were taken. No suspects ever found. My dad had two trucks stolen and drove into a playa lake and his truck shop burglarized twice. No suspects found. I have had four spare tires stolen from my truck and car at separate times, years ago I had a set of custom wheels and tires stolen. No suspects found. Had a cotton stripper stolen and no suspects.

You're right. It's time to move on to another forum.

Or get a dog :)

[KinnyLee]

Hello. Welcome to the forum. We've all done stupid things, the more important thing is that we all learn from it. Hope you stick around.

[flintknapper]

Separate from this incident, I honestly do not believe that enough is taught in CHL class about the use of deadly force.
Incidents and senario's should be discussed along with their consequences.
Thanks to everyone for their comments.

Let's see, my mother was beaten and robbed when she was 60 and about $40,000 in cash and goods were taken. No suspects ever found. My dad had two trucks stolen and drove into a playa lake and his truck shop burglarized twice. No suspects found. I have had four spare tires stolen from my truck and car at separate times, years ago I had a set of custom wheels and tires stolen. No suspects found. Had a cotton stripper stolen and no suspects.

You're right. It's time to move on to another forum.

You'd do yourself a disservice to give up on this forum so quickly.

It's apparent that you've had some very disturbing personal experiences with crime and its consequences, and I certainly understand that you would have very strong feelings about this as well.

You'd get no argument from me in believing that the CHL class is not a comprehensive review of the laws surrounding use of deadly force, incident fact patterns, or their consequences. It would be more useful to see the class as an introductory primer or high level overview rather than in depth training. When you finish the course, you're not done - you've only just started on a very long journey toward knowledge and competence in managing responses to criminal behavior.

One of the most valuable aspects of this forum is that it offers members a place to share details of real world incidents and have the fact patterns reviewed by others with more knowledge and experience in managing criminal encounters. This process lets each of us learn from the experiences of others, and helps us build the best of the "lessons learned" into our own planning for the time when we may find ourselves in similar situations.

This process necessarily involves hindsight and brings up questions and opinions which are often uncomfortable for the person who actually lived through the incident. None of these are intended to embarrass or belittle the person who shared the experience. They are learning points intended to help the original poster think about his incident from perspectives he may not have considered, and to educate others who may not have ever had a similar experience but want to be prepared if they face one in the future.

Forum members tend to react fairly strongly when the facts related in a post indicate that deadly force was used without legal or moral justification because they are very sensitive to how precarious our second amendment rights are at this time in history, and want to avoid giving any ammunition that could be portrayed as irresponsible use of firearms by CHL holders to those who would like to ban gun ownership entirely. It's a group effort to keep each other within the bounds of the law and gain respect from some of those who view us with suspicion or fear. Critques of mistakes posted here are much less costly than when they are critiqued by the criminal justice system.

It would appear that you had some reservations about your own actions as indicated by your statement that you omitted certain relevant information in your incident report to law enforcement, and I suspect that some of the legal issues raised by forum members may well have involved things you were unaware of or hadn't given much thought to before.

I invite you to take the after action review posts in the spirit in which they were intended, and continue to enjoy the benefits of forum membership by learning from the experiences of others.

Excellent!

[dubya]

I understand the flight part. As someone who has a farm I understand the law enforcement response time part.
I certainaly don't see shooting people for trespassing even when marked.
I also see horrific crime and criminals these days.

So, beyond criminal trespassers on the OPs property with his family present... what would all of the "let them leave" suggestors suggest if they had continued to hook up the trailer to try to tow it off?

I will tell you I do not have patience for criminal trespass. It's not worth shooting someone but how do you know their ultimate intentions on your property. There are kidnappings and killings every day. And, we've had a trailer stolen and it's obviously not fun. Shooting is a serious issue and a last resort to "stop" a serious level crime. Now what do you do if they continue? Yes, I know the thing to do is let them leave so they can come another day but what do you do it they do not desist? I am not trying to stir this up; I am asking a serious question about what you think you should do if the crime continues. I don't care to shoot anyone - certainly not over property. But, in the same vein of what is proper what would you do?

[Excaliber]

I understand the flight part. As someone who has a farm I understand the law enforcement response time part.
I certainaly don't see shooting people for trespassing even when marked.
I also see horrific crime and criminals these days.

So, beyond criminal trespassers on the OPs property with his family present... what would all of the "let them leave" suggestors suggest if they had continued to hook up the trailer to try to tow it off?

I will tell you I do not have patience for criminal trespass. It's not worth shooting someone but how do you know their ultimate intentions on your property. There are kidnappings and killings every day. And, we've had a trailer stolen and it's obviously not fun. Shooting is a serious issue and a last resort to "stop" a serious level crime. Now what do you do if they continue? Yes, I know the thing to do is let them leave so they can come another day but what do you do it they do not desist? I am not trying to stir this up; I am asking a serious question about what you think you should do if the crime continues. I don't care to shoot anyone - certainly not over property. But, in the same vein of what is proper what would you do?

Dubya poses a very interesting and legitimate question here, so I'll try to get the discussion started. There's a lot more to think about here than simply deciding if you're a "roll over and play dead - let the criminals get away with whatever they want and let the police deal with them" or a "by golly I'm not going to let some low life criminal get away with property I've worked hard for" kind of guy or gal. I suspect this thread is about to become a lot more lively than it already has been.

My suggested approach starts with asking yourself a few questions (preferably well ahead of time - during an incident there will be too much going on to do a good job here):

1. Am I willing to risk being seriously injured or killed to protect my property?
2. What are my options for direct intervention while staying within the law?
3. Am I willing to act on the edge of justification where my actions could easily be interpreted as unlawful, at least initially, with the risk that I could be arrested on a felony, endanger my livelihood, and have my weapons seized and vindication, if it ever comes, may take years?
4. What is the law enforcement response time like where I live?
5. Is there a point where possible permanent loss of the property in question may be an acceptable option in order to achieve my objectives in the answers to questions 1 through 3?

My priority order for these incidents is:

1. Come through the incident alive.
2. Come through the incident without serious injuries to any innocent party (and ideally without serious injuries to anyone).
3. Stay solidly within the law so I don't incur $40,000 in legal bills in order to protect a $2500 trailer
4. Protect and retain the property that is rightfully mine.

I'm not a lawyer, but I can see several possible options for the situation posed that would either require you to leave cover and attempt to detain criminals who are already inside the cover of their several thousand pound vehicle and may or may not be armed with firearms. Success would depend upon whether you were facing "good bad guys" who would surrender when challenged and wait to be arrested, or whether the actors were "bad bad guys" who would actively and forcibly resist any attempt to stop them from completing their crime. If they decide to drive at you, engage you with weapons, or simply drive away you'd have a pretty nasty set of big time problems that would need to be solved in a hurry.

I can also see several possible ways to interfere with the driveability of the truck, the trailer, or both by puncturing tires, disconnecting wiring harnesses, releasing hitch locks, etc. These would still involve some exposure, but if the approach was made from blind angles it might be able to be accomplished before the BG's figured out what was going on. This would impair their mobility to the point that they wouldn't be able to haul the trailer any distance and they'd be forced to abandon it. This one is still pretty dicey, because if your approach was observed, you might find yourself in a close range confrontation with bad guys engaging you from two different angles as they exit from both sides of the truck - not good.

The best option I can see right off the bat is to fight this battle with car keys and cellphone. Get in your own vehicle and follow the departing vehicle / trailer while staying on the phone with 911 until either a law enforcement unit can intercept them on the road, or the BG's arrive at a fixed destination that you can watch until police arrive . There is some risk to this, but IMHO it's at an acceptable level, and it's not nearly as dicey as a direct confrontation whose success would depend on compliance from the BG's. It would also give you an excellent chance of getting the trailer back pronto.

[boomerang]

I think it's good to shoot bad guys in the act.

I think it's bad to fire shots in the air to try to scare bad guys. I think it's bad to fire warning shots in general.

[Excaliber]

I will tell you I do not have patience for criminal trespass. It's not worth shooting someone but how do you know their ultimate intentions on your property. There are kidnappings and killings every day. And, we've had a trailer stolen and it's obviously not fun. Shooting is a serious issue and a last resort to "stop" a serious level crime. Now what do you do if they continue? Yes, I know the thing to do is let them leave so they can come another day but what do you do it they do not desist? I am not trying to stir this up; I am asking a serious question about what you think you should do if the crime continues. I don't care to shoot anyone - certainly not over property. But, in the same vein of what is proper what would you do?

I think it's good to shoot bad guys in the act.

I think it's bad to fire shots in the air to try to scare bad guys. I think it's bad to fire warning shots in general.

Are you suggesting that, in the situation Dubya specifically asked us to respond to, you believe the use of deadly force is justified?

Or are you speaking in general about situations where deadly force is justified, and just avoiding answering Dubya's question at all?