Alligator - If you think the following is not in character with this thread, feel free to remove it. I just think it's somewhat relevant to the responsibilities and consequences of the options being discussed.
I would recommend that anyone who carries a firearm for self defense on the trail read about the Harold Fish case. This is the report of the case and exoneration https://www.law.umich.edu/special/ex...px?caseid=4266 , and this is a more detailed report on the case and trial http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15199221/n.../#.XN_1G8hKiUk
In a nutshell, in 2004 Harold Fish, a retired school teacher was hiking in Arizona. He came across Grant Kuenzli and Kuenzli's dogs at a trailhead/parking area. According to Fish, he fired a warning shot at the ground when Kuenzli's two unrestrained dogs charged at him. Kuenzli, who had a history of some mental and behavioral issues, then ran towards Fish threatening him. Kuenzli was unarmed. Fish shot him in self-defense. The time from the dogs charging to Fish shooting Kuenzli was approximately 10 seconds total. Fish then rendered aid to Kuenzli, flagged down a car at a nearby road (no phone service), and cooperated with police. There were no direct eyewitnesses other than Fish and the dead man who had attacked him. The Sheriff's deputy investigating the incident considered the shooting justified. Th prosecutor, however, disagreed and brought murder charges against Fish. There was conflicting testimony from both sides regarding Kuenzli's past mental health history and behavior, and the trial judge excluded a lot of defense evidence regarding Kuenzli's past. Fish was convicted of 2nd degree murder, spent over three years in prison, and racked up some $700K in legal fees. The conviction was eventually overturned on appeal and he was exonerated 5 years later in 2009, when the appeals court ruled the trial judge had errored in jury instruction and in excluding evidence about Kuenzli's prior behavioral issues. Fish died in 2012, leaving his family still heavily in debt.
I own guns and have a concealed carry permit. But as I posted on page one of this thread, carrying and securing a gun 24/7 over the course of a long hike isn't easy nor convenient. Even if you choose to carry a gun on the trail, if you and those with you can run away from an attack, do so. You only "stand your ground" when other options aren't available. Actually using a gun in self-defense leads to lots of severe consequences - legal, financial, emotional, etc. Whatever you were doing, like hiking, is now over for the foreseeable future. Without any delay, you have a legal duty to report the incident to police and emergency medical services, and render first aid to the person you shot if safe to do so. Use of deadly force standards vary in different states. Police will obviously question you. DO NOT make statements regarding your mental state or perception of the attack nor your level/degree of fear at the time. The ONLY safe thing you can say to police after an incident where you shot someone is, "I was/we were attacked. I shot to stop the attack. I would like to speak to my attorney before further questioning." And the ONLY person you can safely talk to about the incident is your attorney.
And at least some of this holds true for any physical defensive actions you take against an attacker that injures or kills them, even if you fought him/her off with trekking poles, pepper spray, a knife, a stick, or even if you were unarmed. While I believe police and the court system are generally on the side of people protecting themselves, sometimes what we say without being careful can result in adverse legal (and financial) consequences.
Originally Posted by 4eyedbuzzard
Alligator - If you think the following is not in character with this thread, feel free to remove it. I just think it's somewhat relevant to the responsibilities and consequences of the options being discussed.
Reply With Quote