Do "stand your ground" laws affect your mindset in a self-defense situation?

Discussion in 'Self Defense Tactics & Weapons' started by CampingJosh, Dec 29, 2010.

How do "stand your ground" laws affect your self-defense planning?

Poll closed Jan 13, 2011.
  1. The laws don't matter. I will stand my ground to defend myself whether the law is there or not.

    5 vote(s)
  2. The laws don't matter. If practical, I will try to retreat first before using deadly force.

    12 vote(s)
  3. The laws matter. Now I can finally defend myself by whatever means necessary.

    3 vote(s)
  4. The laws matter. Now I can defend myself without a thought toward what happens to "that vermin."

    2 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Sep 25, 2007
    For those of us who live in states with Stand Your Ground laws, the option of using deadly force in defense of oneself or of another comes without the threat of civil and criminal litigation (for the most part). (This same thing is true within the home of people in Castle Doctrine states.)

    It has been argued that the specific codified exemption from prosecution and civil suits works to embolden gun owners so that they are more likely to use deadly force in a self-defense situation where that person could possibly have evaded harm himself without inflicting serious injury/death on his assailant.

    Without having been there, no one knows exactly how he will react in a given situation. That said, how many of you take into account the intricacies of the legal ramifications of using a firearm in self-defense when planning responses to life-threatening situations.
  2. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Sep 25, 2007
    Also, I know the options listed above are not a perfect description of every mindset. Please share what yours actually is.

  3. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Jun 24, 2008
    my first choice will always be retreat if possible. the taking of a life no matter now worthless should never be taken lightly. but if presented with no other option i will send the sob to hell before god gets the news (quick). then i call an ambulance and say absolutly silent until i have my lawyer next to me.
  4. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Jun 24, 2008
    a little more on the subject, as it was once explained to me by a judge in a civil law suit against me " this isn't dodge city in the 1800's " lucky for me i was "on the job" at the time and i did not have to pay my own legal fees because it would of ruined me. cost is a big factor but not as big as countless hours of lost sleep, the second guessing yourself, the aftermath and effects on everyone involved. even creeps have families, wifes children mother and fathers. the taking of a life is an awesome thing not to be taken lightly. yes sometimes you're left no choice but in your mind you'll forever replay the situation and always wonder what you could of done differently, what words could you had used to defuse the situation etc.... for those that feel they would shoot first ask questions later either have never had to take a life or have more money than brains, and in my opinion are wrong headed.
  5. Jay

    Jay Active Member

    Mar 26, 2003
    I've taught folks for years, how to avoid a shooting situation.... then teach them how to shoot their way out. I'm a firm believer that the former is much preferable to the latter.

    Indiana Code....

    Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
    (1) is justified in using deadly force; only and
    (2) does not have a duty to retreat;
    if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
    (b) A person:
    (1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
    (2) does not have a duty to retreat;
    if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, or curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
    (c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, or curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the
    force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:
    (1) is not justified in using deadly force; unless and
    (2) does not have a duty to retreat;
    only if that force is justified under subsection (a).
  6. Boris

    Boris Former Guest

    Oct 1, 2010
    In a perfect world I would retreat as much as possible before I took deadly action. Then there is reality. I have a wife and two kids that I am rarely without atleast one of them. My first duty will be to make sure they can retreat to safety as fast as possible, not have me tripping over them as we all run because I can run faster than all of them.

    Even if we are all safe and trouble comes lookin' for any of us I will remove the threat to my family first, then to myself. I took an oath to protect my wife and family. I will honor that oath. Then I will worry about laws........

    edit: for them times I am all alone (rarely happens) I can run like no other for a looooong way and I wear my nikes everywhere.........
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2010
  7. carver

    carver Moderator Supporting Member

    My personal beliefs dictate that my first obligation is to win lost souls to Christ. I can't do that by putting bullets into the BG's. I will always look for a way out, other than using a gun, first. If I have no other options, then I will drop the hammer. Here in TX the law allows me to protect my property. If I return home, and find a BG running away with my TV, I can legally shoot him to protect my property. No matter what the law says I wouldn't shoot the BG for stealing my TV. No matter how low life the BG is, his life is still worth more than my TV. I will do what I can to stop him, or make him put the TV down to get away. But I won't shoot him.
  8. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Jun 24, 2008
  9. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Nov 19, 2008
    Akron, Ohio
    Oscarmeyer and Carver, excellent comments. I have spent considerable time thinking about what I would do in various situations and have had to deal with my own tendancy to react emotionally in circumstances where things like personal property is involved. I become so incensed when someone feels it's ok to steal or damage the property of others, or even worse mug them for it, that I just shake. At those times I have visualized opening up on someone. Then the enormity of taking a human life hits me and I'm scared to death it could happen one day. So much so that I fear I might hesitate in a life or death situation.

    I don't think a lot of people realize just what it means to take a life. People speak so casually about it. But even when in war it's something that is with you forever. One thing I'm sure of is you may have a righteous kill in the eyes of mans law but everyone will have to give an accounting to God one day.
  10. tcox4freedom

    tcox4freedom Well-Known Member

    The number ONE rule in self-defense is: "AVOIDANCE".

    So, I will always go out of my way to "avoid" placing myself in a situation where I may have to FIGHT. (Regardless of any laws!)

    That being said, the ability to "legally" stand my ground is one less worry that I have to be concerned with; "IF" I ever find myself having to resort to FORCE.

    Plus 1+ for carver!
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2010
  11. Jay

    Jay Active Member

    Mar 26, 2003
    Situational awareness, and assessing one's daily activities will usually reveal areas of opportunity that might invite a confrontation. Just to become aware of those areas, may go a long way towards modifying your activities to eliminate those areas. If you can avoid having to deal with any laws, you're better off.

    Just my two cents......
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2010
  12. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    Far too many variables.:rolleyes:

    The second story windows in my home are not really an option for running away. If I did, the BG would have command and control.:eek:

    On the street, running away from a threat to another just don't seem right.:(
  13. Slabsides

    Slabsides Member

    Jul 22, 2009
    L.A. (Lower Alabama)
    I go out of my way to avoid confrontation. But if all else fails and I am persued/cornered and faced deadly harm or I see an imminent threat to my family, I will not hesitate to use deadly force....regardless of any law anywhere. Period.

    I will NOT be ran from my own home. I will NOT be removed from my car. Fortunately, Alabama laws support this.
  14. bayhawk2

    bayhawk2 New Member

    Nov 9, 2010
    The "only" time you should draw your weapon is to "STOP an ATTACK".
    TCOX4 is right.(Avoid an attack at all possible).Being Macho is not an option.
    I know if I can,I'll just walk away.I'll call the police if needed.At one time
    arguments were settled by fist.Those days seem to be long gone.
  15. obxned

    obxned Active Member

    Mar 4, 2007
    No matter what the law says, the first rule of a gunfight is be somewhere else when it happens.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
Self Defense Tactics & Weapons Binghamton Standoff Apr 4, 2009