Has anyone read this book? "After You Shoot"

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

I just got this book yesterday . . . I haven't read it all yet, only the first five chapters . . . very thought provoking!

Basically it has said that if you end up shooting in self defense, it is best to already have YOUR OWN lawyer in advance . . . and you call them, and to let them call 911, and let them speak into the voice recorder of our government!

If you don't have a lawyer . . . you should get one . . . but if at the time of the shooting, you have not selected one yet . . . when you call 911 only say something like "I've been assaulted, please send police and ambulance to (your address) THEN HANG UP! Do not give them a chance to ask any questions, remember the fifth amendment!

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s220/ShawnTVT/Book.jpg


What do you think?

[Jim]

I dunno. First thing that came to my mind about having my lawyer call 911 is that might generate a lot of questions and suspicion.
I do think that would be something to check on, though. Maybe some of our resident LEOs can weigh in on this.

[fishnbob]

I have heard that some of the CWP classes teach students to call 911 and say "there has been a shooting, I need help immediately." Give your address and nothing more and hang up. They will try to keep you on the line, that's their training. I wouldn't tell them nothing more 'cause that 911 tape can & will be used against you in a court of law. Seems to me a smart prosecutor would want to know why you are more concerned about your defense than the hapless jerk you just blew away trying to protect yourself & family. I can hear the questions now. "You took the time to call your lawyer?" "How did you know poor deceased Mr. Meth Head wasn't still alive and you could have saved his life so we could rehabilitate him and make him a productive citizen?" I was advised by the LEO in my class to not leave but 1 witness to testify!

[1Shirt]

One more gig for lawyers to make a buck off you! The call for 911 with limited info makes sense however in todays litigious world. Goes back to the old saying " when seconds count, the police are at least minutes away". Think I will get the book.
1Shirt!:coffeecom

[cajun shooter]

Part of my firearms training class to rookies was for them to catch a quick case of lock jaw. You might think at the time that everyone who shows up at the scene is there to help you but that is not so. You had a millisecond to decide to pull that trigger and the rest of the world including your fellow officers will have months or years to decide if you were correct or wrong. They were of course given classes by office attorneys on the In's and outs of using a gun. A police officer only has the same rights as a private citizen when it comes to the use of deadly force. I had to testify in court about the training that was given to them when it came to more than one shot. My classes contained the message that you continue to fire until the threat is gone; a wounded man can kill you even though he will also die. Not much comfort for you. I would suggest that anyone who carries a gun for the purpose of protection seek out training by a legal team. The stuff that is shown on TV today will have you serving a prison term. Later David

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

I got a few more chapters read . . . I'm also interested in hearing from gun friendly LEO's . . . in the book it mentions that after a officer shoots a person, they are given a time off with pay, and counsel, they do not run their mouth to anybody else until they have a statement that counsel has approved of.

They also say that the first 24 hours after a shooting, that your brain does not always work right, not a good time to be blathering on . . .

I'm enjoying the book . . . the questions that have come up so far have been addressed in the book . . . I don't want to give it all away . . .

Back to reading for now!

[Jim]

.....They also say that the first 24 hours after a shooting, that your brain does not always work right, not a good time to be blathering on . . .

My father, God rest his soul, was a Psychology prof. I remember him telling me that people chatter after a stressful or traumatic event because that is the brain's subconscious method of relieving the stress. Verbalizing thoughts helps the person hear himself and process the impact of the event.

That information and a dollar will buy you a donut.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

I'll also mention something that was brought up in this book, that I also experienced first hand . . . while I was a juror in fed court . . . we were instructed that we could ONLY use what the witness's said on the stand, and any evidence entered in the case to come up with a verdict . . . not anything a lawyer suggested . . .

If you need to blather on, you need the lawyers ear for that, not the police, or media . . . as the lawyer has a special relationship with the client, and can not be questioned about that . . . your spouse or neighbor can . . . so can the law!

[klcarroll]

I have tremendous respect for our LEOs and the job they do: …..But if you are involved in a situation where Deadly Force has been applied, ....the reality is simply this:

“THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN SAY TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER THAT WILL HELP YOU IN COURT!!!!!!!!!”

As the Miranda Statement so eloquently puts it; “Anything you say CAN AND WILL be used against you!” Any negative statements the LEO records will be admissible evidence in court: …..But anything you say that could be interpreted in your favor will be dismissed as “Hearsay Evidence”.

The three golden rules are:

1) Co-operate with any instructions issued by the LEO.
2) DO NOT behave in a threatening or aggressive manner.
3) SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!


Kent

[WILCO]

What do you think?

It's good to know the laws regarding this scenario. It's also good to have a respectable/knowledgeable attorney on hand that specializes in these matters. One thing for sure though, no matter what happens, once that trigger is pulled, your life is changed forever.

[klcarroll]

..........One thing for sure though, no matter what happens, once that trigger is pulled, your life is changed forever.


AMEN!


Kent

[spqrzilla]

Lawyers don't answer their phones and call 911 for you.

[firefly1957]

I was not impressed with the author when he was on gun talk he has excellent points but I think his ideas might tick a LEO off. Which may not matter if you get a bad officer responding to the event as his beliefs will set the tone of the entire investigation. (to expain I consider any person or officer bad if they do not believe people to have the right to protect themselves)
As far as the 911 operator training to keep you on the line I have read that those tapes are used both for and against the shooter a lot of that has to do with what is on the tape. Instead of saying there has been a shooting I would suggest something like "I have been attacked" or "A man broke into my home" followed by he/she/they needs medical assistance" And/or "I can not stay on line I am busy" or "I am covering them with a gun" and give your description for the responding officer. Many times a shot criminal will flee so there would be a need to let the 911 operator know that because the perp(s) may be a threat to someone else now.

[Ohio Rusty]

We were told in our CCW class to give just the facts short and sweet. tell 911 that there has been a shooting, the intruder is wounded, armed, is still dangerous and send the police along with an ambulance. Give your address twice and hang up.

Do not give any report info to the police !! Tell the police you will be happy to cooperate to fill out the report after you talk with your legal counsel. The police will do their best to get you to talk ....don't do it. re-iterate you will fully cooperate with your legal counsel present.

It is Guaranteed the police are going to cuff you and take you to jail, no matter the circumstances if you are innocent or the shooting was in self defense. The police are not the judge, the prosecutor or jury. They will only mark the DOA box on their empty report, treat the incident as if it is a homocide, and haul you away. Period. That is their only courrse of action they can take. Your determination of being innocent will come from a court of law and a trial, not the night of the shooting from the police.

You have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.... USE YOUR RIGHTS in this circumstance. You'll get bailed out, go home and everything will come out in the trial that follows. DO NOT SAY ANYTHING that can be put on a police report that the prosecutor can twist and use against you. The prosecutor isn't paid by the city or county to lose cases. It looks bad on them and the courts. The Prosecutor will try to burn you. Look how happy people are when they read in the paper the courts locked up and put away a bad person. The prosecutor WILL try to make you out to be that bad person and get good publicity for doing a good deed ..... putting you away in a jail.

I'm not a legal analyst, and attorney or any thing in the legal field. I have had experience in law enforcement and I can assure you the above is true and you need to keep your head on straight and don't do anything without consulting legal counsel first and have them with you when you do anything from finally making the report at the police station to appearing in court.
Ohio Rusty ><>

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Lawyers don't answer their phones and call 911 for you.

Mostly right . . . there was one interviewed that said he did and would . . . the other 6-7 were not as eager, two were totally against it, a couple would entertain the thought . . .

In conclusion . . . in theory it may be good to say nothing (including the 911 call) but is unlikely to find a lawyer who will do that for you, as they are far and few, and if you do call 911 say as little as possible. It is "public opinion" that the first caller into 911 is considered the "good person", and if you have nothing to hide, why did you not call? Just be VERY Careful what you say.

I want to bring something back to the forefront . . . in the book it mentions that in a situation where an officer is involved in a shooting . . . they have a lawyer on site immediately. They do not appear "guilty" for doing that, why should a civilian be treated differently? I'm still interested in hearing from LEO's on this, if this is not the case, please let us all know.

ETA:
George is mentioned in the book . . . http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6014022229458915912#

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

It's good to know the laws regarding this scenario. It's also good to have a respectable/knowledgeable attorney on hand that specializes in these matters. One thing for sure though, no matter what happens, once that trigger is pulled, your life is changed forever.

I agree.

I AZ there is no law which requires one to call anybody in a self defense situation . . . however it is politically correct thing to do.

Maybe instead of just writing "What do you think" I should write "Have you though this through?"

Hopefully this thread will stir some people to check out and think through, what they should do if they should ever have to shoot somebody.

Certainly it would be worth a case or two of ammo money to pay a lawyer for their advise PRIOR to any shooting.

[gasboffer]

I was a cop for twenty years. I remember one call, a woman said calmly into the phone, "Send someone out here, (gave address) a man is flopping around and bleeding all over my front sidewalk." Hung up. Report taken, no action against her.
The more you talk, the higher the odds are that you will say something that is going to cause you trouble later.

[nicholst55]

While I ordinarily wouldn't stop to piss on a burning ACLU office, they do have some good advice on the matter: ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform-immigrants-rights-racial-justice/know-your-rights-what-do-if-you#7)

Their advice essentially boils down to this: Do not resist arrest (you almost doubtless will be arrested for shooting someone); tell the police you have nothing to say except that you want an attorney; SHUT UP!

[MtGun44]

Be aware that you are likely to get really talkative and trying to show how you had good
reasons. DO NOT do this. Also, remember that the police are there investigating a
HOMICIDE. You must prove that you were in the specific allowable exception for self
defense. Never do anything to modify any evidence, ever, EVER. It can only make it
worse. I have heard all sorts of silly, "drag 'em inside" foolishness. The police are not
bad guys but also they are not their as your support team. They are (we hope) impartial,
but some seem not to be. You may well be confused or wrong about exactly what you did
and the order you did it in, don't say something that may prove to be an honest error, but
may look like a lie later on.

Understand exactly what is allowed in your state under self defense, stay inside those
requirements and shut the heck up beyond a basic, "I feared for my life, had to defend
myself," generic statement. Do not make a major statement without your lawyer in person.
"I'm not exactly sure, I am very upset and confused right now." is a good answer. Even if
you think you are not, you may very well actually be confused, and you will almost
certainly be upset and not thinking clearly. Zip it.

Bill

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Both the book and Jim above say that it is our natural reaction to deal with stress by talking, and talking alot, which may not be in the correct order of things as they happened, it takes awhile to get our brain in order, that is why we have to be very careful and say nothing. I think that is the reasoning for having a lawyer present if you could get one . . . to hold your hand and tell you to shut up, don't answer that now!

Give them only your name, location, and the need for help/assistance for removing the carcass.

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s220/ShawnTVT/Book1.jpg


[smilie=s:

[crabo]

Did he give any advice on how to find a good lawyer in advance?

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Did he give any advice on how to find a good lawyer in advance?

Yeah, if I remember he said that most state clubs will have a list of lawyers . . . then he has a list of questions to ask the lawyer, another good time to be quiet, and let them talk . . . listen to what they say, and take lots of notes . . . you want a person who may be the key to your life hanging in the balances. I'm a member of AZCDL . . . they have links to other sites, I'm still looking for a lawyer . . .

He also mentioned that they are some groups that offer a "membership" that will allow you to call them 24/7, and ask for advise, they will also "dispatch" a lawyer in your area for you . . . I remember that when I took my ccw course, they was a couple of guys who came by, and offered their services . . .

[Bret4207]

I don't know who said an officer involved in a shooting will have a lawyer on hand right away, but that's bull. IAB will be coming and their job is to fry anyone who can harm the agencies reputation or pocketbook. Plus, on my job anyway, you have no rights to speak of. That's part of the contract you sign and something that is written out in plain english- you do as you are told, spill your guts and toss anyone else involved under the bus or you get fired. They forced one guy to testify against his own brother or face termination for refusal to follow an order. And you guys think you have it bad? Our guys actually kidnapped a Sgt a decade or two back! Thankfully that era appears done, but you can trust me when I tell you that the cop not only has the court and press to worry about, he's got his own people looking to walk up his back to a promotion.

I have not read this book, but I'll give you my thoughts. If you have no choice but to shoot and do then say as much, briefly. It's fine to wait for your lawyer, cops understand that, especially if you let them know, "I don't think I did anything wrong, but I need to look out for my family guys." Cops tend to understand that. Anyone lawyering up "appears" to be hiding something, that's just the way it is. DO NOT ALTER THE SCENE ON ANY WAY. And for Gods sake, don't listen to the plant life IQ morons that tell you to drag the bad guy into your house or plant a knife or gun on him. You know the saying about "...tangled webs we weave in our effort to deceive". Even a dumb road Trooper like I was can spot things that don't add up.

FWIW- my advice is do not shoot until you know you have no other choice. Your life will effectively end as you know it, Castle Laws or not. All the armchair commandos giving advice on The High Road or Glock Talk or even here are not the people that will have to face the aftermath of a shooting. Chances are you will loose your savings, if not your home, to lawyers fees, you will forever be a "killer" in some peoples mind and that can affect more than just you. You may lose your job and you may not be able to deal with it yourself. It's not something to be taken lightly as I hear and see so many people do. "I wudda capped him!!!" Yeah, I've been told that several times about times I DIDN'T shoot even though I would have been justified. Well, ol' "Iwudda" isn't the guy that's gonna be facing the consequences.

I spent over 20 years listening to our deadly physical force policy every time I went to the range. "...remember, you and YOU ALONE will face responsibility for using deadly physical force...". Think about it.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Thanks Bret!

Good to here from someone who actually wore a uniform!

The book does say something to the effect of don't shoot unless there is no other choice, and then don't miss!

[Wayne Smith]

If you need to blather on, you need the lawyers ear for that, not the police, or media . . . as the lawyer has a special relationship with the client, and can not be questioned about that . . . your spouse or neighbor can . . . so can the law!

I believe every state has spousal privilege - they can't be forced to testify. Do you trust your spouse?

[Jim]

This entire thread is about what one should/should not do "after you shoot". At the risk of hijacking the thread(and forgive me if that is what it appears that I am trying to do), I submit that there is a conspicuous absence of information on what one should/should not do "before you shoot".

I have not come in contact with many people that have actually taken a life in self defense or the line of duty. However, the few that I have spoken with over the years that have, brought me to understand that the emotional upheaval this creates in one's life is massive and incomprehensible. Not to mention the financial burden that results from having to defend oneself from doing that which seemed, at the time, the right and lawful thing to do.

Like many here, I carry a side arm in the interest of defending myself and my wife against life threatening assault. However, I am not ashamed to tell you I will do ANYTHING, including offering an apology and walking away from a misunderstanding, if that will relieve me from having to use deadly force.

Rest assured, I will do what I must to defend myself and my wife. But, you may also rest assured, I will do anything I can to avoid using deadly force, even if I must retreat. If running or hiding is what I must do, I have no reservations about doing so. If am considered a coward, understand that I know those that think so won't be there after the event to support me.

I find no fault with the contents of the book or the author. I find no fault with any comments made in this thread or the authors thereof. I would respectfully ask that no one find fault with me or my opinion of what to do "before you shoot".

[klcarroll]

..........FWIW- my advice is do not shoot until you know you have no other choice. Your life will effectively end as you know it, Castle Laws or not. All the armchair commandos giving advice on The High Road or Glock Talk or even here are not the people that will have to face the aftermath of a shooting. Chances are you will loose your savings, if not your home, to lawyers fees, you will forever be a "killer" in some peoples mind and that can affect more than just you. You may lose your job and you may not be able to deal with it yourself.....................


Very eloquently said Bret! …….And your last point is the one that too many people fail to think through completely.

If you have any sort of soul at all, the details of that moment, …including the look on the other person’s face, will be burned indelibly into your memory.

That moment will haunt you for the rest of your life.

………And all of the clichés and clever “bumper sticker sayings” will offer no comfort at all when you wake up at two o’clock in the morning seeing faces from the past.


Kent

[klcarroll]

........Rest assured, I will do what I must to defend myself and my wife. But, you may also rest assured, I will do anything I can to avoid using deadly force, even if I must retreat. If running or hiding is what I must do, I have no reservations about doing so. If am considered a coward, understand that I know those that think so won't be there after the event to support me.......................


Jim, ......You will certainly not hear a critical word from me! The fact that you are "Armed and Capable" means that "Retreat" is one of your possible choices; ....NOT your only option, as it would be for an unarmed individual!

Endeavoring to AVOID a violent escalation of the confrontation shows both maturity and restraint.

Kent

[Jim]

Thank you, KL. I appreciate the vote of confidence.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Jim,

No hi-jack. It is inline with this whole thing. The book does go into "doing everything possible" before you pull the trigger . . . I just didn't and can't really go into the whole details of the book. I am cautious about copy write stuff . . . I do think that it would be a good book to buy, I'm glad I bought it! I also have the MA book mentioned above on back order . . .

My purpose of starting this thread was to get people thinking . . . certainly that split second it takes to pull the trigger will change ones life forever, even if there are no legal strings pulling them down . . .


- - - - - - - - - - -

Thank you Wayne!

I'm sure to bring that up with my lawyer when I sit down with them . . . I did not know that!

[Jim]

.....My purpose of starting this thread was to get people thinking . . .

You have accomplished your mission. This is the incentive I needed to contact a local attorney and make arrangements to have representation.

Thanks,
Jim

[MtGun44]

One more point on the "Don't even think about fiddling with the crime scene" part.

A federal prosecutor friend said that you might well find a jury that will understand a mistake
made under extreme duress, but you will be extremely unlikely to find anyone in the system
that will understand any sort of after-the-fact hanky panky with the evidence. Honest people
can make a mistake, only the guilty fiddle with the evidence. Plus you are about 99% likely
to get caught at it anyway. Turns out pretty much nobody is smart enough to make it work.

Bill

[Bret4207]

Jim, there's no cowardice involved at all in what you said. That is the response of a normal, moral human being. Those that don't think that way are the aberrations.

There's nothing wrong with being prepared, but as I've told so many anti-gunners, there is a huge difference between having a gun and WANTING to use it. They simply can't grasp that idea.

[JSnover]

Good thread! I haven't read that particular book but the smartest thing we can do is to gather reliable info/advice and sort through it at our liesure; after dinner, a slow weekend, etc. The time to learn this stuff is before you've been attacked, not after you've had to shoot someone.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Here is a couple of questions for the lawyer you are screening . . . remember . . . if they don't answer the questions the way you want, keep looking!

How much experience do you have with guns?

Have you ever had a self defense case? How did it go?

What should I do if I ever shot someone?

How much money would you need up front if I called you and told you I was involved in a shooting?

How much do you think the whole mess would cost?

Do you have any partners that you would consult with? Who are they?

What do you recommend I DO while I'm waiting for you to get to me?

Do you know about the Heller or McDonald cases?


There are more questions in the book . . . but that should get you started . . . I'm thinking of getting another copy to loan to my prospective lawyer, and see what they think . . .

Remember to bring a pad of paper and take notes . . . listen VERY carefully to the answers!

Need I say I like this book! I think everyone should have it or one similar . . . or at least read it once!

[MakeMineA10mm]

I was not impressed with the author when he was on gun talk he has excellent points but I think his ideas might tick a LEO off. Which may not matter if you get a bad officer responding to the event as his beliefs will set the tone of the entire investigation. (to expain I consider any person or officer bad if they do not believe people to have the right to protect themselves)
As far as the 911 operator training to keep you on the line I have read that those tapes are used both for and against the shooter a lot of that has to do with what is on the tape. Instead of saying there has been a shooting I would suggest something like "I have been attacked" or "A man broke into my home" followed by he/she/they needs medical assistance" And/or "I can not stay on line I am busy" or "I am covering them with a gun" and give your description for the responding officer. Many times a shot criminal will flee so there would be a need to let the 911 operator know that because the perp(s) may be a threat to someone else now.

While a whole lot depends on where you live and what the political situation is there, this post by Firefly is the best I've seen on the whole thread.

My wife is a 911 dispatcher, and I've been in law enforcement for over 20 years.

IN MY AREA, there are good cops and less-good cops. Some have an attitude that they'd write their own mother's a ticket for 5mph speeding, and that the law is extremely black-and-white, while others see the grey and try to be freedom-loving Americans and empathetic and take as little enforcement action as NEEDED to address a situation IF it needs addressed. IMO, the best officers are the ones who don't let their personal opinions or feelings get involved at all, analyze the situation, and make a determination on what to do from there. Unless you're in law enforcement in your area for a considerable-enough time to get to know all the officers, you won't know what kind of one you're getting when he shows up.

Still, you should cooperate. When asked questions, stick to SHORT answers that are glued to the facts. Don't speculate, insert opinions, feelings, etc., with the one exception of: "I was in fear for my life." That's the one feeling you should remember and express, repeatedly. That's important. If you get Mirandized or handcuffed, stop talking. Let your attorney do it AT THAT POINT.

If at any point you feel like you MUST talk to someone, tell the officer you don't feel good and that you feel like you're having a heart attack, and take the ambulance ride to the hospital. Talk to the doctor. He'll write it up as actually an anxiety/stress attack, but he'll also have patient-doctor privilege to a degree. (I've seen doctors subpoenaed and forced to testify, so even to him, be sure to express how you felt threatened and that you had no other choice. Hopefully, the doctor's psych training will also be able to be brought out by your attorney later, if need be, to point out that it is a principle that people run their mouths after traumatic events and it isn't always with truth, but with self-doubt and speculation.)

Also, be prepared to spend a few days in Jail while the investigation continues and you get your attorney and bond court happens, etc. I've never seen a good shoot go past the Grand Jury level in my area, and the vast majority of the time, no arrest or prosecution at all.

As far as not talking to the dispatcher, that's a bad idea, IMO. Different places will have different protocols, but in our area, if you describe a shooting and then hang up, you're going to wait LONGER for help to arrive, because they're going to wait nearby for at least one back-up officer before they approach. In addition, without on-going communication, the responding officers won't know who the good guy is (the guy who called 911), and you've now INCREASED your chances of getting handcuffed and otherwise treated roughly (until the situation is sorted out). You're best bet is to call 911, explain that you've been attacked and the attacker is down. Follow the dispatchers instructions and advice. Dispatchers are NOT trained to investigate or interrogate. They're getting basic information in order to get a call out so the officers can safely respond and know what they're getting into. They're also a communications conduit, so that the officers can talk back to you to give you instructions (such as to go ahead and put your gun down and walk out of the house, because they've got the outside situation secure, and they want to be able to identify you as the good-guy who is following their instructions).

Yes, it's a bad idea to run your mouth, but it's equally bad to hang up the phone. Just answer the basic questions they are going to ask: Where are you, what are you wearing, are you armed, are you in a safe place, where is the bad guy, etc. They're not going to ask you why you shot or how many times you shot, etc. The investigators and crime scene techs will figure that out later. In fact, hanging up on 911 may even be misconstrued as bad decision-making and used against you too...

This is one area where believing too hard in the anti-government, conspiracy-theory, far-right-wing stuff will run you a-foul of even the most conservative, pro-gun LEOs out there. Common Sense is most-important. I don't think I'd put too much weight in that book, but I have the benefit of being intimately aware of the LE and prosecutorial situation in my area.

[MakeMineA10mm]

Huh, somehow I missed Bret's post above. I agree with it too, 1000%. Don't know why, but it seems the whole thread didn't load when I clicked on it before...?

[MakeMineA10mm]

This entire thread is about what one should/should not do "after you shoot". At the risk of hijacking the thread(and forgive me if that is what it appears that I am trying to do), I submit that there is a conspicuous absence of information on what one should/should not do "before you shoot".

I have not come in contact with many people that have actually taken a life in self defense or the line of duty. However, the few that I have spoken with over the years that have, brought me to understand that the emotional upheaval this creates in one's life is massive and incomprehensible. Not to mention the financial burden that results from having to defend oneself from doing that which seemed, at the time, the right and lawful thing to do.

Like many here, I carry a side arm in the interest of defending myself and my wife against life threatening assault. However, I am not ashamed to tell you I will do ANYTHING, including offering an apology and walking away from a misunderstanding, if that will relieve me from having to use deadly force.

Rest assured, I will do what I must to defend myself and my wife. But, you may also rest assured, I will do anything I can to avoid using deadly force, even if I must retreat. If running or hiding is what I must do, I have no reservations about doing so. If am considered a coward, understand that I know those that think so won't be there after the event to support me.

I find no fault with the contents of the book or the author. I find no fault with any comments made in this thread or the authors thereof. I would respectfully ask that no one find fault with me or my opinion of what to do "before you shoot".

Another post I missed previously...

Jim,
Nothing cowardly at all. In fact, you can quite easily tie the idea of doing everything you can to NOT use deadly force, to the idea that this course of action will minimize your regret or guilty feelings later.

Everyone I know who has been involved in a deadly shooting situation had NO regrets whatsoever over killing the other person. They knew they were in a situation where the dead person gave them no other choice. They sleep well at night regarding that.

The only person I know who ever mentally disintegrated over a shooting, was a deputy who was sitting in the squad car drinking coffee while his partner walked up and did a traffic stop alone and got shot. The dpty. spilled his coffee while getting out of the car and returned fire, but neither he nor his partner killed or even wounded one of the bad guys. BUT, this dpty couldn't live with himself over his partner getting shot, and mentally disintegrated. It was very sad. This happened back in the days when LE was less tactics oriented, and frankly, there was nothing he could have done if he WAS standing on the other side of the car, but he couldn't deal with it.

My point is, that I really liked your comment about what we do BEFORE the shooting in terms of mental preparation. I agree 1000% with your idea of how to apply tactics as an armed citizen. It's much smarter to retreat, apologize, eat-****, rather than have to shoot someone. But, if you've done everything possible to avoid and your still stuck in the situation, having to use deadly force should not be something that you have to regret. Is it a sad, regrettable situation that the other person made choices that put you in that situation? Sure, but that's why he paid a price. He should have made different, better choices... Nothing morally or ethically wrong with a person who applies the tactics right and still gets forced into using deadly force, and I'd hope they could analyze that and not punish themselves for it, mentally.

[Jim]

An interesting thread, for sure.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

Interestingly there is now a proposed bill here in AZ.
http://capwiz.com/azcdl/webreturn/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trendtrack.com%2Ftexis%2Fwal ks%2Faz%2Ftext.html%3Fsession%3D102%26bill%3DHB258 3

Which says:
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 12, chapter 13, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 12-2204, to read:
12-2204. Request for emergency medical care or police; admissibility of statement; definition
A. IF A PERSON IS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY INVOLVED IN AN ACT THAT INVOLVES THE THREATENED OR ACTUAL USE OF DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE AND THE PERSON PROMPTLY REPORTS THE ACT TO AN APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE OR POLICE SERVICES, THE PERSON'S STATEMENT IS NOT ADMISSIBLE IN A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OR A CIVIL ACTION AGAINST THAT PERSON, EXCEPT FOR THE PURPOSES OF IMPEACHMENT.
B. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A STATEMENT THAT IS NOT ADMISSIBLE PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION IS NOT A PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC IN ANY MANNER.
C. THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO A PROSECUTION FOR FALSE REPORTING OR PERJURY.
D. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE" HAS THE SAME MEANING PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 13-105.
Sec. 1. Legislative findings
The Legislature finds that:
1. There are certain circumstances when a person may lawfully threaten to use or use deadly physical force.
2. Instances of threatened use or actual use of deadly physical force may need to be promptly reported to the appropriate authority to assist in the prompt dispatching of emergency medical and law enforcement personnel.
3. A person who threatens or uses deadly physical force has a deep rooted constitutional right to remain silent during the course of a pending criminal investigation.
4. There should be a balance between the potentially competing needs for prompt reporting of these instances and a person's constitutional right to remain silent, which could delay prompt reporting.

[Digger]

Good to see there is still a sense of justice here locally, don't know the details but probably the call the police hate the most ... domestic disturbance ....
http://www.recordcourier.com/article/20110209/NEWS/110209863/1062&ParentProfile=1049

note the last two lines
and yes ,try to recover from such a thing .....

[MakeMineA10mm]

Interestingly there is now a proposed bill here in AZ.
http://capwiz.com/azcdl/webreturn/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trendtrack.com%2Ftexis%2Fwal ks%2Faz%2Ftext.html%3Fsession%3D102%26bill%3DHB258 3

Which says:
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Title 12, chapter 13, article 1, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 12-2204, to read:
12-2204. Request for emergency medical care or police; admissibility of statement; definition
A. IF A PERSON IS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY INVOLVED IN AN ACT THAT INVOLVES THE THREATENED OR ACTUAL USE OF DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE AND THE PERSON PROMPTLY REPORTS THE ACT TO AN APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE OR POLICE SERVICES, THE PERSON'S STATEMENT IS NOT ADMISSIBLE IN A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OR A CIVIL ACTION AGAINST THAT PERSON, EXCEPT FOR THE PURPOSES OF IMPEACHMENT.
B. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW, A STATEMENT THAT IS NOT ADMISSIBLE PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION IS NOT A PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED TO THE PUBLIC IN ANY MANNER.
C. THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO A PROSECUTION FOR FALSE REPORTING OR PERJURY.
D. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE" HAS THE SAME MEANING PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 13-105.
Sec. 1. Legislative findings
The Legislature finds that:
1. There are certain circumstances when a person may lawfully threaten to use or use deadly physical force.
2. Instances of threatened use or actual use of deadly physical force may need to be promptly reported to the appropriate authority to assist in the prompt dispatching of emergency medical and law enforcement personnel.
3. A person who threatens or uses deadly physical force has a deep rooted constitutional right to remain silent during the course of a pending criminal investigation.
4. There should be a balance between the potentially competing needs for prompt reporting of these instances and a person's constitutional right to remain silent, which could delay prompt reporting.

Wow! That's a great idea and answers this topic very well.