When in a Crowd

[DonFromTexas]

I attended an affair, parade actually, attended by over 100,000 people. I was CC but got to thinking exactly how I should respond if someone got out of line. My recollection of training was that unless I AM PERSONALLY threatened, I cannot shoot! Darned if I can find the legalese of how that would play out, can someone help me here? I would not feel right waiting until 99,999 other people were shot to react.

[joelamosobadiah]

I attended an affair, parade actually, attended by over 100,000 people. I was CC but got to thinking exactly how I should respond if someone got out of line. My recollection of training was that unless I AM PERSONALLY threatened, I cannot shoot! Darned if I can find the legalese of how that would play out, can someone help me here? I would not feel right waiting until 99,999 other people were shot to react.

I can't imagine a scenario where any sort of mass shooting can occur and you not feel personally threatened...I'm not teh guy to respond with the "legalese", but here is my thought process:
1. Am I in immediate danger? If there's gunfire in my immediate vicinity (ie within same four walls) then yes I consider myself in danger.
2. Are others I'm with in immediate danger?
3. Can I (and others that are with me) retreat out of danger? If there's gunfire within earshot inside a shopping mall, but I can't see what's going on and I have an exit door behind me, I'm gone. Likely won't help anybody if I run towards the gunfire.
4. Can I neutralize the threat without putting others in harm? If I'm in a concert and somebody opens fire, I'm not gonna be able to shoot through the crowd, however, given retreat isn't an option, I may be able to get low, work my way through the people to get in position to shoot or otherwise stop the threat.

There's so many variables it's hard to quantify them all. For example, I'm in a mall, I hear gunshots in the direction my wife last went. Yeah, despite the fact I have an exit right behind me, I'm headed towards where I think she went.

[FCH]

I suspect you would be justified in using deadly force to prevent the murder of others

BUT in a crowd, how would you be sure to comply with rule number 4 of firearm safety?

Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

Texas Statutes - Section 9.32: DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON

...
(a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if the actor would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31; and
(2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
(B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.

[The Annoyed Man]

This ^^

[stingeragent]

+2 to the above. Knowing your target is also very important, especially in a situation like this. If you have 1 person shooting, and lets say 50 people running around, crawling over each other, ducking to the ground, there is a LOT of commotion going on, and the shooter is most likely not stationary. Gotta make sure you tag the bad guy and not the other 50 people running around trying to save themselves.

Edit: You gotta keep in mind, you aren't protected under the law if you injure or kill a bystander. So even if you do manage to take down the bad guy, but accidentally hit someone else as well in the process, your still on the hook for that innocent person.

[oljames3]

I attended an affair, parade actually, attended by over 100,000 people. I was CC but got to thinking exactly how I should respond if someone got out of line. My recollection of training was that unless I AM PERSONALLY threatened, I cannot shoot! Darned if I can find the legalese of how that would play out, can someone help me here? I would not feel right waiting until 99,999 other people were shot to react.

Know the law. Texas laws for the use of force and deadly force to start. http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/S ... m/PE.9.htm

Know yourself.

Know what you can and cannot do.

I cannot ride to the sound of the guns as I once did. Our plan is that my wife and her Ruger LCR .38 (5 + 2 speed loaders) will get herself and our party to our car or a safe place. I and my BTA-90 (12 +1 and spare mag) will do my best to make that possible. In the car, she will reload while I drive and call 911 if no one else can. I'm not as big a sheep dog as I was once and my flock is much smaller. I am keenly aware of my limitations.

[Ruark]

You gotta keep in mind, you aren't protected under the law if you injure or kill a bystander. So even if you do manage to take down the bad guy, but accidentally hit someone else as well in the process, your still on the hook for that innocent person.

This specifically comes comes from 9.05:

• Section 9.05: RECKLESS INJURY OF INNOCENT THIRD PERSON
  
  "Even though an actor is justified under this chapter in threatening or using force or deadly force against another, if in doing so he also recklessly injures or kills an innocent third person, the justification afforded by this chapter is unavailable in a prosecution for the reckless injury or killing of the innocent third person."

Companies like [Pre-paid legal service] and CCWSafe will take your case in you are charged with hitting a bystander in a justified self-defense shooting, but I'm not sure how easily a DA can define your shot as "reckless." The key would be if we're talking about a simple pass-through, or if you fired wildly, missing half your shots and hitting innocent people. Or maybe you shot the attacker point blank with a .375 H&H Magnum that killed him, then went through six apartments and killed somebody else. Anybody ever heard of this kind of prosecution?

[RoyGBiv]

Playing devils advocate ......

In the midst of an active shooter situation where folks are being shot randomly and at a high rate which is worse......
You hitting an innocent accidentally but taking down the shooter or not taking the shot and allowing the carnage to continue?

[Excaliber]

Playing devils advocate ......

In the midst of an active shooter situation where folks are being shot randomly and at a high rate which is worse......
You hitting an innocent accidentally but taking down the shooter or not taking the shot and allowing the carnage to continue?

Also playing devil's advocate, if you take the shot, miss and paralyze the president of the local chapter of Everytown for Gun Safety, you lose your guns, your home, and your freedom and play "what if I hadn't....." for the rest of your life.

If you allow the carnage to continue and you escape, you don't lose your guns, your home or your freedom, and play "what if I had...." for the rest of your life.

Real world. Tough choices.

[ELB]

Playing devils advocate ......

In the midst of an active shooter situation where folks are being shot randomly and at a high rate which is worse......
You hitting an innocent accidentally but taking down the shooter or not taking the shot and allowing the carnage to continue?

Also playing devil's advocate, if you take the shot, miss and paralyze the president of the local chapter of Everytown for Gun Safety, you lose your guns, your home, and your freedom and play "what if I hadn't....." for the rest of your life.

If you allow the carnage to continue and you escape, you don't lose your guns, your home or your freedom, and play "what if I had...." for the rest of your life.

Real world. Tough choices.

OK, playing devil's devil's...devil's... (devil's-squared? cubed? ) advocate: Many cite conviction as a given for a missed shot. At least under sec 9.05, you have to be proved "reckless".

PC Sec 6.03:

(c) A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.

Based on recent history and the general "atmosphere" of Texas, I don't think this would be a slam dunk to prove in Texas. Of course the long chorus of replies saying any missed shot is inherently reckless certainly will help the prosecution's case as to proving "standard of care".

It will help your case that if you miss with one of the shots, at least get the scumbag(s) with another one. At least in that case the prosecutor is going to have to try to convince the jury that it was better not take a shot and let Jihadi Bill or Psycho Phil expend the rest of his ammo on the crowd. (Would help to testify that you know about every actual mass killing/terrorist attack in the last 20 years, I think).

It is not a slam dunk that this argument will work either, but would be tough to read through one of these http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html, know you had a doable if not guaranteed shot.

[RoyGBiv]

OK, playing devil's devil's...devil's... (devil's-squared? cubed? ) advocate: Many cite conviction as a given for a missed shot. At least under sec 9.05, you have to be proved "reckless".

PC Sec 6.03:

(c) A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding his conduct or the result of his conduct when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.

Based on recent history and the general "atmosphere" of Texas, I don't think this would be a slam dunk to prove in Texas.

This is my belief as well.... Jury would need to find the action "reckless".... Although, IANAL.
Would be interesting to hear a lawyers take on this.

[twomillenium]

I attended an affair, parade actually, attended by over 100,000 people. I was CC but got to thinking exactly how I should respond if someone got out of line. My recollection of training was that unless I AM PERSONALLY threatened, I cannot shoot! Darned if I can find the legalese of how that would play out, can someone help me here? I would not feel right waiting until 99,999 other people were shot to react.

There is nothing illegal about "getting out of line" . (unless it is a prison line).
When and who was your instructor?
CHL/LTC holders are responsible for knowing and keeping up with the changes in the law pertaining to their license.
Read the CHL16 found at the TDPS concealed handgun website.

P.S. I once started to attend an affair, but my wife said no.

[OneGun]

In a crowd, when people are running in a hundred different directions, you may not have a clear shot at the BG. The Waco incident at Twin Peaks showed how confusing the situation can become in an instant. I haven't been in this scenario, but I wouldn't shoot into a crowd. I remember my CHL instructor, a SWAT instructor, saying that although I may have the legal right to shoot, I am still responsible for everything that happens from the time the bullet leaves the gun until it comes to rest. The law does not protect me from harming a third-party.

Taking cover in this situation seems more prudent that trying to shoot a BG in a crowd.

[stingeragent]

The devils advocate thing is tough as there is no way to predict what will happen in any given situation. I think one thing a proficient CHL holder has over a random gunman is this. Most robber's, or terrorists , or whoever decides to start shooting most likely won't have a lot of training. They are typically going to try and do the most damage as fast as possible. To that end, once they fire that first shot, they are most likely not going to be scanning the room looking for targets with a firearm. They will most likely be trying to take the easy shots closest to them. You could hypothetically use that to your advantage to maneuver yourself into a better position to take a clean shot.

[KC80]

I attended an affair, parade actually, attended by over 100,000 people. I was CC but got to thinking exactly how I should respond if someone got out of line. My recollection of training was that unless I AM PERSONALLY threatened, I cannot shoot! Darned if I can find the legalese of how that would play out, can someone help me here? I would not feel right waiting until 99,999 other people were shot to react.

I can't imagine a scenario where any sort of mass shooting can occur and you not feel personally threatened...I'm not teh guy to respond with the "legalese", but here is my thought process:
1. Am I in immediate danger? If there's gunfire in my immediate vicinity (ie within same four walls) then yes I consider myself in danger.
2. Are others I'm with in immediate danger?
3. Can I (and others that are with me) retreat out of danger? If there's gunfire within earshot inside a shopping mall, but I can't see what's going on and I have an exit door behind me, I'm gone. Likely won't help anybody if I run towards the gunfire.
4. Can I neutralize the threat without putting others in harm? If I'm in a concert and somebody opens fire, I'm not gonna be able to shoot through the crowd, however, given retreat isn't an option, I may be able to get low, work my way through the people to get in position to shoot or otherwise stop the threat.

There's so many variables it's hard to quantify them all. For example, I'm in a mall, I hear gunshots in the direction my wife last went. Yeah, despite the fact I have an exit right behind me, I'm headed towards where I think she went.