Massad Ayoob on what to do after a self defense shooting

[Reasonable_Argument]

Considering the number of people here who have said they carry a weapon I thought this might be relevant information.

[safeinOhio]

1. To take Ayoob's advanced handgun defense course

you will be required to have a BACKGROUND check and a personal CHARACTER letter. If all CCW teachers required that for their courses our streets would be safer. No CCW class, no permit. Perhaps this is also an idea that could be used by gun dealers and sellers too.

[glacierbay]

2. How would our streets be safer?

CCL holders are not the ones committing crimes, doing drive by's, killing rival gang members.

[safeinOhio]

3. There have not been any drive by's in my town.

There have been a couple CCW violations that led to the cancel of their permits. At least my town would be safer.

[GreenStormCloud]

4. In Texas CHLs can be shown to save more innocent lives than they take.

Legal concealed carry saves more innocent lives than it takes.

In Texas the detailed statistics are compiled annually by the Department of Public Safety and published on the internet. It is likely that the Texas experience with Concealed Handgun Licenses would be about the same in other states. The last year for which statistics are published is 2011 for convictions. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/index.htm


In 2011 there were 512,625 people who had CHLs. Out of those people there were exactly four (4) murder convictions. Out of the general population there were 553 convictions for murder in its various forms.

So very, very few CHL holders go bad, but some do.

The DPS also publishes an annual Crime in Texas Report. http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/10/citCh3.pdf
From that report, page 15:

Statistics on murder circumstances, victims, and
victim/offender relationships on the next page
include justifiable homicides. Justifiable homicide
is the killing of a felon by a peace officer in the
line of duty or the killing (during the commission
of a felony) of a felon by a private citizen. In
2010, there were 98 justifiable homicides, of
which, 50 were felons killed by private citizens,
and 48 were felons killed by police.


In Texas all homicides, even those that are clearly self-defense, have to go before a grand jury which will rule if the killing was justified or not. So those 50 justified private citizen homicides were ones in which the defender genuinely and legitimately feared for his life. Since most shootings are merely woundings there would be a much larger number of justified woundings in which the defender genuinely feared for his life, but that number is not kept. Obviously there are dozens of cases each year in which a CHL holder uses their gun to save themselves.


Dozens of innocent lives saved versus four innocents killed shows the concealed carry is working in Texas. As already stated, there is no reason to believe that other CCW states have a different experience.


Legal concealed carry saves innocent lives.

[glacierbay]

5. I believe I have a hell of a lot more experience than you do

in knowing who is or who isn't causing the streets to be unsafe and it isn't CCL holders causing the unsafe conditions.
I've dealt with drive by's and it sure as hell isn't CCL holders doing them.
Sure, there are some CCL people who could use safety classes, but to say that it will make the streets safer is, at best, ridiculous.

BTW, what were those violations?

[safeinOhio]

8. negligent discharge and

one involving a case of road rage.

[PavePusher]

11. And a back-ground check and a character reference will stop these things?

Heh.

Note that the back-ground check is generally a requirement to get the CCW permit required to carry in most places.

Another advocate for a Bureau of the Department of Redundancy, eh?

[Callisto32]

15. I like what you started there but..

how about "Bureaux of the Office of the Department of Redundancy Department"?

[PavePusher]

17. Sometimes, one attempts sublety as a method.

It doesn't always work, but it's fun to try.

[glacierbay]

12. I hope they got their permits revoked.

They deserve it. I have yet to deal with a CCL holder that's violated the law, and I doubt I ever will with the short time I have left in my career.

[Union Scribe]

13. They already do this to get a CCW

To read your post, you think it would somehow make a difference to do that process twice? Once for the class and once for the permit?

[Clames]

14. Wrong.

Does not require both. From Ayoob's website...

All students must show proof of having passed criminal record/character background check. Acceptable credentials include concealed carry permit, FID cas, FFL, or letter from a police department confirming background.

One again, get your facts straight before posting next time.

[Atypical Liberal]

16. It would be hard to get much safer than CCW permit holders already are.

To take Ayoob's advanced handgun defense course you will be required to have a BACKGROUND check and a personal CHARACTER letter. If all CCW teachers required that for their courses our streets would be safer. No CCW class, no permit. Perhaps this is also an idea that could be used by gun dealers and sellers too.


Considering how infrequently CCW permit holders are currently involved in crime - any kind of crime - it seems unlikely that additional permit requirements would make much of a difference.

[GreenStormCloud]

6. Excellent advice. N/T

[DWC]

7. +1 and I would add

Have your photo ID in your raised hand to give to the responding LEO(s) so that you do not have to reach in your pocket for anything when they arrive.

Semper Fi,

[Trunk Monkey]

9. I can say this much with out even having seen the video

If you think a 4 minute video is comprehensive advise on what to do after a self defense shooting you ar sadly mistaken

[Trunk Monkey]

10. With out question some of the best advice on this subject I've heard

Quoted from thehighroad.com

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=589272

Keeping Silent Isn't the Best Idea in a Self Defense Matter

But Don't Say Too Much.

Call 911. Be the first to report the incident and do so immediately. If you don't report it, or if there's a long delay, you will appear to have a guilty conscience.

Then, having taken LFI-I with Massad Ayoob, spending time with him and helping with a class of his in Sierra Vista, AZ not too long ago, I'll go along with his recommendation for when the police arrive.

[1] While one has a right to remain silent, clamming up is what the bad guys do. Following a self defense incident, you'll want to act like one of the good guys. You also won't want the investigating officers to miss any evidence or possible witnesses. What if the responding officers miss your assailant's knife that you saw fall down the storm drain? What if they don't know about the guy you saw pick up your assailant's gun and walk off with it?

[2] At the same time, you don't want to say too much. You will most likely be rattled. You will also most likely be suffering from various well known stress induced distortions of perception.

[3] So Massad Ayoob recommends:

Saying something like, "That person (or those people) attacked me." You are thus immediately identifying yourself as the victim. It also helps get the investigation off on the right track.
Saying something like, "I will sign a complaint." You are thus immediately identifying the other guys(s) as the criminal(s).
Pointing out possible evidence, especially evidence that may not be immediate apparent. You don't want any such evidence to be missed.
Pointing out possible witnesses before they vanish.
Then saying something like, "I'm not going to say anything more right now. You'll have my full cooperation in 24 hours, after I've talked with my lawyer."

Pleading Self Defense is Very Different From the Common Lines of Defense to a Criminal Charge.

A lot of folks point to the "Don't Talk to the Police" video that is making the rounds on gun boards. But it is about a police contact in general. It works fine when you aren't claiming self defense, and it's up to the State to prove your guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But things work differently if you are pleading self defense.

Basically --

[1] The prosecutor must prove the elements of the underlying crime beyond a reasonable doubt -- basically that you intentionally shot the guy. But if you are pleading self defense, you will have admitted that, so we go to step 2.

[2] Now you must present evidence from which the trier of fact could infer that your conduct met the applicable legal standard justifying the use of lethal force in self defense. Depending on the State, you may not have to prove it, i. e., you may not have to convince the jury. But you will have to at least present a prima facie case, i. e., sufficient evidence which, if true, establishes that you have satisfied all legal elements necessary to justify your conduct.

[3] Now it's the prosecutor's burden to attack your claim and convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that you did not act in justified self defense.

Let's go through that again.

In an ordinary criminal prosecution, the defendant doesn't have to say anything. He doesn't have to present any evidence. The entire burden falls on the prosecution. The prosecution has to prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the crime you're charged with is, for example, manslaughter, the prosecution must prove that you were there, you fired the gun, you intended to fire the gun (or were reckless), and the guy you shot died. In the typical manslaughter prosecution, the defendant might by way of his defense try to plant a seed that you weren't there (alibi defense), or that someone else might have fired the gun, or that it was an accident. In each case the defendant doesn't have to actually prove his defense. He merely has to create a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.

So in such cases, it probably doesn't pay for you to say anything to the police, at least early on. Let them do the work of trying to amass evidence to prove the case against you. There's no reason for you to help.

But if you are going to be claiming self defense, you will wind up admitting all the elements of what would, absent legal justification, constitute a crime. You will necessarily admit that you were there, that you fired the gun, and that you intended to shoot the decedent. Your defense is that your use of lethal force in self defense satisfied the applicable legal standard and that, therefore, it was justified.

So now you would have to affirmatively present evidence from which the trier of fact could infer that your conduct met the applicable legal standard justifying the use of lethal force in self defense. In some jurisdictions, you may not have to prove it, i. e., you don't have to convince the jury. But you will at least have to present a prima facie case, i. e., sufficient evidence which, if true, establishes that you have satisfied all legal elements necessary to justify your conduct.

Then it will be the prosecutor's burden to attack your claim and convince the jury (in some jurisdictions, he will have to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt) that you did not act in justified self defense. And even if you didn't have to prove self defense (only present a prima facie case), the more convincing your story, and your evidence, is, the harder it will be for the prosecutor to meet his rebuttal burden.

The specific discussion

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=589269