Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

MountainCat...
That is great link with lots o' items to read...re-read, and consider, and re-consider... many thanks for the posting the link...

It is shocking at how being a victim does not protect you from your responsive (read: heat of the momment) actions...and that it is subjective as to when you can start to actually "defend" yourself... I think I am going to listen well to the little voice in my head, and keep practicing my CC draw to the Double tap/Double tap....

Also, can any one tell me if it is "Castle, Cassel, or Cassle" doctrine... i have seen it written every which way and just want to be accurate in my verbiage.

have a good and safe nite all!

Bluemont Out!

BluemontGlock wrote:MountainCat...


Also, can any one tell me if it is "Castle, Cassel, or Cassle" doctrine... i have seen it written every which way and just want to be accurate in my verbiage.


Bluemont Out!

Castle, as in "A man's home is...."

If it were me and I was in the same situation I would have just accepted the ass whoopin' and left. But if I were walking down the street and got jumped, the first chance I get it will be shots fired.
Every knows drunks and guns don't mix very well ( unless it's one of my redneck shooting session with friends ) so with the drinking it would have been better to leave the gun holstered.

CASTLE

Thanks for the clarification proshooter & vahunter...

"unless it's one of my redneck shooting session with friends "


Keep the faith, brother!

ProShooter wrote:

USMCGunner wrote:He brandished his firearm; legally speaking and did not use it.

Just for clarification, you cannot "brandish, legally".

Brandishing (18.2-282, COV) itself is a criminal act. The lawful display of a firearm is exempt if the person is "engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense". In other words, if its excusable or justifiable, then its not brandishing.

Aside from that, please refer to my legal disclaimer in the signature below.

hijacking the thread here a bit ....

But this is the second or third time someone on here has presented something different than what the VA Gun Owner's Guide teaches.



Now ProShooter, I AM NOT challenging you. But I've got to know, is this really the bible to CC in VA or not? I've read it cover to cover more than any other book in my life; "just to be sure." Is it out of date? Am I comprehending it's messages wrong, or is it just plain wrong? Is there a better reference out there? Maybe I just need to read it a 7th time. Granted, the book is based on a lot of case law. So misinterpreting is very possible.

Or Maybe I'm just misinterpreting your post ProShooter. I was trying to say that you can't just pull it out and say look what I have. There has to be some intent on it use, as I understand it. I was under the "assumption" that if not used, then it is brandishing. If it's simply pointed at someone, then it's assault ( of some higher degree ). If it is used (shooting) while attempting to stop a life threatening criminal act, then it is justified.

Scott,

I've got a copy of that book. A couple of comments: (1) make sure youve got the most current version. (2) you can find all the VA gun Code laws on line (http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm). The difference is that you know the online version is probably more current and authoritative. The book does organize things a bit for you. (3) The book (near the end I think) gives several scenarios for when you are and arent justified using your gun. Some I agree with and some I dont.

Having said that, IMO the VA Gun Owners guide is the definitive book BUT not the authoritative source. And, you have to weigh the opinion of the author with your interpretation of the law and situation.

Copy, thanks for the link and the perspective. I'll be reading that today. I just want to be doing it the right way. I got my permit almost 14 years ago as soon as I was legal and I used my military status to do so vs. a course. THAT is an example of an irresponsible move of someone young and probably not ready to carry. (I had to tie the hijack back to the original post...lol) Damn good thing I grew up.

Parris Island will do that to you.
Plt. #277 Item Co. 2nd. Btl.
Sept. 1963, Yes I am an Old Man, Shut up Henry.
Semper Fi!
Bill

USMCGunner wrote:

ProShooter wrote:

USMCGunner wrote:He brandished his firearm; legally speaking and did not use it.

Just for clarification, you cannot "brandish, legally".

Brandishing (18.2-282, COV) itself is a criminal act. The lawful display of a firearm is exempt if the person is "engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense". In other words, if its excusable or justifiable, then its not brandishing.

Aside from that, please refer to my legal disclaimer in the signature below.

hijacking the thread here a bit ....

But this is the second or third time someone on here has presented something different than what the VA Gun Owner's Guide teaches.



Now ProShooter, I AM NOT challenging you. But I've got to know, is this really the bible to CC in VA or not? I've read it cover to cover more than any other book in my life; "just to be sure." Is it out of date? Am I comprehending it's messages wrong, or is it just plain wrong? Is there a better reference out there? Maybe I just need to read it a 7th time. Granted, the book is based on a lot of case law. So misinterpreting is very possible.

Or Maybe I'm just misinterpreting your post ProShooter. I was trying to say that you can't just pull it out and say look what I have. There has to be some intent on it use, as I understand it. I was under the "assumption" that if not used, then it is brandishing. If it's simply pointed at someone, then it's assault ( of some higher degree ). If it is used (shooting) while attempting to stop a life threatening criminal act, then it is justified.

I am familar with the book but honestly, I have never read it. The thing about books is that they are only as valid as the day that they are printed. Laws change, case law happens, etc.

My comment was not so much directed at the scenario presented but rather what you said about brandishing legally. There is no such animal. That's like saying you can legally commit robbery.

... I know I am "preaching to a very knowledgeable choir" here....

a. Laws are Laws - no matter how arcane and twisted like a bowl of pasta; we, law-abiding citizens take the time to research/understand/question, etc - so that we continue to be law-abiding citizens; it part of our social-contract (we know the BG's don't give a crap about this stuff and will just do what is necessary "not to get caught" rather than "what is the right thing..."

b. Books are Books - the Va Gunowner's Guide starts off with a disclaimer for a reason; it is a secondary source and not a definitive one. Great book, and when take with "a" above, it is a very good guide for law-abiding citizens to better (not fully) understand the arcane (and I was tempted to state azzine) Laws.

c. What I find from the two above - is that a "reasonable" threshold is used to determine whether a violation of a law has been committed; that is the only "grey-area" in interpretations, case-law, or actions.

The OP's situation, as presented, was not and did not appear "reasonable" to those of us here who carry - and may have been in a situation where use of a firearm (no matter the escalation factor, draw, aim, fire...); and most thought that the young fella was not "reasonable" in his actions. While none of us were there - we took in the information as provided and did what we do on this forum; discuss, re-discuss, learn, argue/debate and move on, a bit smarter the following day.

Honestly, there are just too many variables in the "what-if's" we encounter, and what was posted. This was a "kid" by most our definitions, i.e. younger than the average poster/member here. We've all BTDT in the "young and dumb" column, and for the grace of god, most of us didn't make any stupid or unchangable mistakes.

Reality = would I go to the range or a shooting function with the young fella in the OP? Yes...; would I hang with him at a party where alcohol, testosterone/estrogen are present and elevated - Nope; but that is the same for even guys/gals I have known my whole life - if I believe that there will be any issue presented by their behavior that could cause harm or perception upon my status to carry - ain't doing it.

... and that is the maturity to determine (via reading laws, books, or experiences...) what is reasonable in our daily travels.

Good Morning All Virginia Gun Owners!

Well, I certainly appreciate the volume and number of "posts" that were written on this topic. Many of you "hit the nail" on the head regarding that volatile mixture of firearms, alcohol, youth and testosterone!

Particularly pertinent was the matter regarding not displaying or showing a firearm unless you intend to use it. Yes, "brandishing" is a separate offense (18.1-282). I believe my friend was not acting out of being macho, etc., because his personality is extremely stable and mature. His "issues" were that he simply didn't know enough "gun law" to protect himself in the face of challenges. Under Virginia "case law", taking an "ass-whompping" would have been preferable because, although he retreated and "asked for peace", his entreaties to these thugs were ignored. From what I gathered "after the fact", he semed to be screwed no matter which way he turned. He was in fact corned and no way to "retreat" further or merely run away.

Surprisingly, no one answered my "challenge" regarding whether or not he/she could afford to defend themselves in a court of law on a murder charge? Or explain why you are in jail on a "self-defense issue", the employer, etc., etc. Nor did I see (yet) any reply concerning the cost of proving "you were right" to use your firearm to defend yoursellf or your family.

This is the primary reason why Virginia needs a "castle law" and "stand your ground law". Yes, I am aware that if you weren't "doing anything wrong" and were engaged in "lawful activity", you do not need to "retreat", but that still doesn't address the issue of expensive lawyers to prove you were "right", nor will it excuse the pre-trial publicity of your arrest and confinement for using your firearm, etc., etc. Additionally, you won't be earning while you are confined and I wager most of us would not be able to afford to hire a "JohnnyCocoran" type attorney to defend us (BTW, do we have any of those here in the Old Dominion?) Just a litle humor there.

Several of you are concerned that I am not carrying these days. OK, you have a point, however, I believe that I have made some points here as well. Therefore, how about getting with your representatives and helping us with a proper "castle" and "stand your ground law" here in the Commonwealth.

BTW, does anyone know why the first effort in 2005 failed?

Thanks for all your support!

Albert

Good Morning All Virginia Gun Owners!

Well, I certainly appreciate the volume and number of "posts" that were written on this topic. Many of you "hit the nail" on the head regarding that volatile mixture of firearms, alcohol, youth and testosterone!

Particularly pertinent was the matter regarding not displaying or showing a firearm unless you intend to use it. Yes, "brandishing" is a separate offense (18.1-282). I believe my friend was not acting out of being macho, etc., because his personality is extremely stable and mature. His "issues" were that he simply didn't know enough "gun law" to protect himself in the face of challenges. Under Virginia "case law", taking an "ass-whompping" would have been preferable because, although he retreated and "asked for peace", his entreaties to these thugs were ignored. From what I gathered "after the fact", he semed to be screwed no matter which way he turned. He was in fact corned and no way to "retreat" further or merely run away.

Surprisingly, no one answered my "challenge" regarding whether or not he/she could afford to defend themselves in a court of law on a murder charge? Or explain why you are in jail on a "self-defense issue", the employer, etc., etc. Nor did I see (yet) any reply concerning the cost of proving "you were right" to use your firearm to defend yoursellf or your family.

This is the primary reason why Virginia needs a "castle law" and "stand your ground law". Yes, I am aware that if you weren't "doing anything wrong" and were engaged in "lawful activity", you do not need to "retreat", but that still doesn't address the issue of expensive lawyers to prove you were "right", nor will it excuse the pre-trial publicity of your arrest and confinement for using your firearm, etc., etc. Additionally, you won't be earning while you are confined and I wager most of us would not be able to afford to hire a "JohnnyCocoran" type attorney to defend us (BTW, do we have any of those here in the Old Dominion?) Just a litle humor there.

Several of you are concerned that I am not carrying these days. OK, you have a point, however, I believe that I have made some points here as well. Therefore, how about getting with your representatives and helping us with a proper "castle" and "stand your ground law" here in the Commonwealth.

BTW, does anyone know why the first effort in 2005 failed?

Thanks for all your support!

Albert

albertshank wrote: Surprisingly, no one answered my "challenge" regarding whether or not he/she could afford to defend themselves in a court of law on a murder charge? Or explain why you are in jail on a "self-defense issue", the employer, etc., etc. Nor did I see (yet) any reply concerning the cost of proving "you were right" to use your firearm to defend yoursellf or your family.

I think there's a pretty simple answer to this question - you can either pony-up and pay a lawyer and deal with the other consequences of defending yourself with a firearm - or - you can *not* carry a firearm, *not* defend yourself and be dead. Ultimately, the choice is a personal one. I choose to live and I choose to ensure that my wife and children live if I am presented with a situation that would require the use of deadly force to protect myself or any of my family members.

I do agree that Castle Doctrine is a necessity - so why don't I see it in the list of gun bills that VCDL is looking at for Lobby Day?

For those interested, here is the first of the two pages with deadly force case law:
http://www.virginia1774.org/Page5.html

The Barbosa case is somewhat similar. Here is a link that works:
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/ ... 577001.txt

From the Barbosa case:

Under these facts, we hold, therefore, that it was not
"necessary" for Barbosa to use deadly force to avert the
perceived impending "gang beating." The fact that he was
surrounded by Serna and his friends and that Serna "bumped into
his gun," stating he was not afraid, does not constitute an
"overt act indicative of imminent danger."

The jury was not given the option of a self-defense verdict.

allingeneral wrote: I do agree that Castle Doctrine is a necessity - so why don't I see it in the list of gun bills that VCDL is looking at for Lobby Day?

Because the bill(s) have not been drafted yet. But they will be.

Albert, The last one died in State Senate Committee after the House passed it and sent it to them for review and vote,,Former candidate Deeds helped it die as he was on that committee, We need to watch for the new one and make sure it addresses the issue in it's entirity and is not some patch work deal left open to interpretation by the courts at it's will. It will need to be useable anywhere we are allowed to legally be, not just our homes, It will also have to disallow lawsuits from being brought against the user in the event of a justified shooting.I personally would like to see it include protection of personal property also,..IE: house, it's contents, car or truck,boat etc:

Maybe we can add one of those fancy "non-amendable" clauses to the castle doctrine as well.

I'm not expert, but I have heard that enough case law exists right now for any lawyer worth his salt to defend you as long as you conduct yourself as the members of the forum here have suggested.

As for my response to the OP's second post here, I have two things to say:

1) I still do not think that we can be presented with an unbiased fact based representation of the events that took place. Do you mind telling us your young friends case information? We could then search and read more about the issue for ourselves.

2) I do have enough money to defend myself in court, I own my own business with 3 partners who all shoot with me on the weekends, own handguns, and express their desire to see the rights of fellow gun owners increased and / or clarified.

So in answer to your "challenge", I have no problem donating to the cause and investing my $$$ into solid case law which can be used to further the cause of others in a similar plight.

That said, I pray to God I die an old man who never had to fire his gun at another human being, but if my country asks me to fight for it, or someone tries to hurt myself or my wife, my family, present and future, I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

+1 Dustin!!

ProShooter wrote:
I am familar with the book but honestly, I have never read it. The thing about books is that they are only as valid as the day that they are printed. Laws change, case law happens, etc.

My comment was not so much directed at the scenario presented but rather what you said about brandishing legally. There is no such animal. That's like saying you can legally commit robbery.

This is where the internet is a PIA because the message gets lost in the words. Now I see what you were trying to say ProShooter, and I probably look like an idiot. What I meant by using the word "legally" is "technically" speaking. As in HE DID commit a crime in doing so. The whole point being that since he did not actually use his firearm to defend himself, he committed a crime by presenting it. Sorry guys for stirring the hornets nest with the confusion, but it did promote some good conversation and information. That said, I'm not an idiot...lol...I know brandishing is illegal.

Gunner-
The :point - counter point: is what it is all about here...
which is one of the main reasons why i enjoy it so much...

and we can do with a reasonable amount of deference for any demographic as long as they too are civil...

and a quote i think is fitting for this spot...

"The whole object of education is...to develop the mind. The mind should be a thing that works."

-Sherwood Anderson