Ohio CCW Holder Misses Target Hits Another

[Keith B]

Road rage incident. Guy got out of the vehicle and threw a bottle at the CCW holders vehicle, cracking windshield. CCW shot at offender, but missed hitting another in the car. CCW was arrested, but charges had not been filed as of Thursday noon

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ss ... hoots.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[philip964]

He's in trouble. His target was running away.

[rotor]

Road rage incident. Guy got out of the vehicle and threw a bottle at the CCW holders vehicle, cracking windshield. CCW shot at offender, but missed hitting another in the car. CCW was arrested, but charges had not been filed as of Thursday noon

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ss ... hoots.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your quote was not quite what the article said. The guy in the Ford Focus argued with the CCW guy, "left and returned", then attacked ( my words) by throwing a bottle which hit the CCw car windshield breaking it, CCW then shot at fleeing attacker and hit someone in car used by attacker ( attacker -my wording). Not saying CCW holder is right but this was Cleveland- people argue, leave and return and attack is a little different then just a heated on the spot argument. To leave, come back and attack to me has more threat. What if the guy didn't pull his gun? Would he have been killed? Then again it was just a newspaper article so who knows what to believe. At my age ( over 70) a guy comes up to me and hurls a bottle at me at 2:30 am and I sure would be scared for my life, especially in Cleveland. Regardless, the CCW holder is probably in big trouble but maybe his life was in danger. Maybe we are only hearing the incident as related by the 3 people in the Focus. If the CCW holder was smart he would have his lawyer telling the story and the full facts wouldn't be out yet. The lesson- have a lawyer and don't blab without one.

[Keith B]

Road rage incident. Guy got out of the vehicle and threw a bottle at the CCW holders vehicle, cracking windshield. CCW shot at offender, but missed hitting another in the car. CCW was arrested, but charges had not been filed as of Thursday noon

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ss ... hoots.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your quote was not quite what the article said. The guy in the Ford Focus argued with the CCW guy, "left and returned", then attacked ( my words) by throwing a bottle which hit the CCw car windshield breaking it, CCW then shot at fleeing attacker and hit someone in car used by attacker ( attacker -my wording). Not saying CCW holder is right but this was Cleveland- people argue, leave and return and attack is a little different then just a heated on the spot argument. To leave, come back and attack to me has more threat. What if the guy didn't pull his gun? Would he have been killed? Then again it was just a newspaper article so who knows what to believe. At my age ( over 70) a guy comes up to me and hurls a bottle at me at 2:30 am and I sure would be scared for my life, especially in Cleveland. Regardless, the CCW holder is probably in big trouble but maybe his life was in danger. Maybe we are only hearing the incident as related by the 3 people in the Focus. If the CCW holder was smart he would have his lawyer telling the story and the full facts wouldn't be out yet. The lesson- have a lawyer and don't blab without one.

I didn't quote, I paraphrased. All that I stated was factual. You can read the rest in the link,

[rotor]

Factual? Do we know that for sure? You paraphrased the article. Your slant was somewhat different then mine. I don't know what the facts are yet. This is not an argument, I just don't know what really happened from reading the article and will delay judgement. Three people come back after leaving and throw something which breaks a window is probably fact. CCW shoots and hits someone, probably fact. Police have the whole story, I doubt it. Again, if involved in a shooting you need an attorney before you blab so what is reported may not be factual. Everyone thinks that they need to "tell their story" if involved in a shooting but one needs legal counsel first.

[Keith B]

Factual? Do we know that for sure? You paraphrased the article. Your slant was somewhat different then mine. I don't know what the facts are yet. This is not an argument, I just don't know what really happened from reading the article and will delay judgement. Three people come back after leaving and throw something which breaks a window is probably fact. CCW shoots and hits someone, probably fact. Police have the whole story, I doubt it. Again, if involved in a shooting you need an attorney before you blab so what is reported may not be factual. Everyone thinks that they need to "tell their story" if involved in a shooting but one needs legal counsel first.

Factual pieces from the article.

[TomsTXCHL]

CCW shot at offender, but missed hitting another in the car.

I'm sure I will be corrected if I am wrong, but it seems to me that my CHL class was very clear that I am responsible for the safety of innocent bystanders.

"Know your target, and what is beyond."

[Keith B]

CCW shot at offender, but missed hitting another in the car.

I'm sure I will be corrected if I am wrong, but it seems to me that my CHL class was very clear that I am responsible for the safety of innocent bystanders.

"Know your target, and what is beyond."

Yes you are. The quesiton on this one is was the person in the car that he hit innocent or were they an active participant in the road rage and attack? No matter, I would not want to have to go through the hassle on this one. I would be very upset if my vehicle got damaged, but not to the point of shooting if it was just a bottle at thrown and cracked the windshield. If the guy is not pulling a gun or trying to get into my vehicle, then I am going to use it as my shield.

[philip964]

If you miss your target, this is probably because your target is too far away and since running away, getting farther away all the time.

This sounds like punishment, rather than defense of life.

He's in trouble.