Bryan Man Shooting Behind Restaurant - CHL goes out with gun

[jerry_r60]

http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/Poli ... =phone&c=y" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Article says people heard what sounded like shots behind a restaurant in Bryan. Turned out to be a man shooting at bottles behind the restaurant, which is in town.

An off duty police and a CHL holder went out with guns drawn. The way I read it, it's two people, the officer and another person with a CHL. I don't know if the officer asked the CHL holder to go but if not, this seems like a very fine line of escalating by seeking out the person with deadly force instead of remaining inside. Had the CHL holder had to shoot, it could have made things difficult. It's an interesting situation to consider. Go on offense as a defense? Are you under threat inside when you hear what sounds like gunfire outside? Does none of that matter until you are outside and MWG turns on you? Does going out with it already drawn make a difference?

As mentioned, maybe the CHL holder and police worked together but it's an interesting hypothetical to consider even if not.

UPDATE: On the news it was clarified that it was the off duty officer that was also a CHL holder, not two different people. This story still makes for some interesting thought but I wanted to update with the new facts.

[jmra]

Someone shooting outside the restaurant may well have endangered people inside the restaurant (possibility of a stray bullet going through a window). Confronting the individual could be considered both self defense and defense of a third party.

[jerry_r60]

Someone shooting outside the restaurant may well have endangered people inside the restaurant (possibility of a stray bullet going through a window). Confronting the individual could be considered both self defense and defense of a third party.

Yes, I thought about that. Of course if the CHL was already outside and saw him, that would make it much more clear as well. Hearing the sound and then seeking it out it interesting. It's clear the intent was to protect himself and others, it just looks like it might not play so straight forward if it had to go to court.

[jerry_r60]

I've updated my original post. A TV news story has said that the Off Duty Officer was the CHL holder, not two different people.

[mojo84]

Your idea that responding is "escalation" is contrary to what I consider equates to escalation.

[jerry_r60]

Your idea that responding is "escalation" is contrary to what I consider equates to escalation.

I was commenting that it can become a fine line. I didn't articulate it well but I was saying it can become a fine line between responding and escalation, to a jury for example. Playing vigilante vs self defense or defense of others.

An extreme example might be intentionally patrolling rough neighborhoods and when there are shots fired, seeking out the shooter in defense of others. I using an extreme example on purpose. I'm certainly not saying this is the case here, just trying to think how some of this can be played out if it went to court after a shooting.