What Should I Do If I Ever Need to Use My Gun in Self-Defense?

[Common Sense Party]

Michigan - -(Ammoland.com)-

A: You should first be certain that the threat is removed before you lower your guard.

Then, call 911 and say that there has been a shooting. Describe the immediate need for ambulance and police (and fire department if applicable).

Tell the 911 operator where you are, how many people are wounded etc. Do not have your gun in your hand when police arrive unless you absolutely must hold someone at gun point.

In either case, make sure that you describe yourself and your clothing. Fight the urge to start telling your story and stick to the relevant facts that the emergency responders need to do their jobs. Even if an individual was attacking you only moments before, once the threat is removed, you should do the responsible thing and promptly call 911 so that aid can be rendered. Remember that your goal is not to kill, but to protect yourself or others from a credible threat of death, great bodily harm that could lead to death, or rape.

If you effectively use your firearm, the death of the attacker(s) will probably be the result and a homicide investigation will be undertaken.

If possible, call 911 as the situation develops and create an audio record of any warnings that you give to your assailants such as “I have a gun, leave here now!” or words to that effect.
...

This information is provided by The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC (www.stevenwdulan.com) This answer is intended as general information and should not be relied upon as legal advice for any specific situation or case. The facts of each case vary and you should consult an attorney whenever you have specific questions.

more at: http://www.ammoland.com/2011/04/18/what-to-do-if-i-use-my-gun-in-self-defense/

Good advice? Hopefully no one will need to ever use it.

[bowens43]

1. More then likely you will shoot yourself or someone you love......

as a method of self defense, guns are statistically irrelevant. If you want to defend yourself in the home, get a big dog.

[slackmaster]

2. Please cite a verifiable source or that information

Did you just make it up, or are you simply parroting some ridiculous propaganda?

[mvccd1000]

58. I think you answered your own question. nt

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rrneck]

7. Lots of people live in places that dont allow pets.

Not everyone lives in a gated community you know.

[aikoaiko]

10. Dogs can be useful, but not when someone else is commited to malice.

Seriously.

[TheWraith]

13. "Statistically irrelevant"? There's an estimated 1 million to 4 million defensive gun uses per year.

In comparison, the number of people accidentally shot by a loved one is a few dozen.

[right2bfree]

36. so its not 2.5 million? someone is full of #$%^ and it aint me....

Yuppers

[slackmaster]

46. Why don't you cite some kind of verifiable source for a figure that is more to your liking?

I doubt that you can.

[right2bfree]

51. You source is a freaking joke. And you want me to take the onus?

Its up to you gun omners to post the real facts, not fiction.

Yuppers

[TheWraith]

50. Credible estimates range from 1 million to 4 million. Why is that hard to understand?

You know that 2.5 million is between 1 million and 4 million, yes?

[ileus]

17. I have little dogs to warn me when to get ready to shoot.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. Presumptively you have something to back up your assertions?

Love to see it

[oneshooter]

25. No, he is just blowing smoke out his anal cavity. n/s

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rl6214]

30. Holy shit

Not this steaming pile of bullshit again.

"More then likely you will shoot yourself or someone you love"

Since you mentioned statistics, you can surely provide some and cite some instances where this has happened.

[Common Sense Party]

31. Highly unlikely. Highly. But you live in your fantasy world where there

are no criminals, and nothing bad ever happens--except when caused by law-abiding gun owners.

[GreenStormCloud]

43. Check out this thread: "Armed burglars shoot dog. Homeowner shoots burglar."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=401286&mesg_id=401286

Now what was that you were saying that all you need for defense is a big dog? That guy had a pit bull and it was shot.

[WatsonT]

47. Guns are useless for self-defense. That's why cops just carry whistles

[Euromutt]

60. If you're concerned about your defense tool hurting the wrong person, a dog is a bad idea

In the United States alone, 4.5 million people are bitten annually by dogs. Of those, around 900,000 require professional medical attention. In 2006, 31,000 people underwent reconstructive surgery for wounds inflicted by dogs. Children aged 5-9 are disproportionately at risk, and 75-80% of wounds inflicted on that age group are to the face, head and neck. Moreover, in 75-80% of cases, the dog belongs to the victim's family or to a friend.

So, how effective are dogs as a method of self-defense, exactly? It'd better be good, given the associated costs.

[jpak]

3. ammoland.com - why can't these cowards say "after you shoot and kill someone"

don't do the crime if you can't do the time

words of wisdom

yup

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[aikoaiko]

12. Because it is often the case that being shot does not lead to death --

do you pay attention at all to statistics?

[jpak]

16. so why can't these cowards say "after you shoot someone and they are lying there bleeding to death"

cuz they want to desensitize the act

just like open carry advocates want to desensitize the presence of guns everywhere all the time.

yup

[aikoaiko]

18. Oh for fuck's sake stop being so dramatic.

The article talked about the wounded and potential for death as a result of a justified shooting. They did not back away from the reality of a shooting.

You've called the author a coward twice now and I don't know what you're talking about. How is it cowardly to give sound advice on what to do after being involved in a justified shooting? Explain how that is cowardly?

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

26. Hear, hear....!!! You got my vote for best-post-of-day. n/t

[jpak]

38. I didn't read it but it must have been really dumb

yup

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Logical]

21. Hit and run post again....yup

[GKirk]

22. You would have been so much happier

if they had said "after you blow their brains out" right?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. Beacuse the vast majority of the time, it is not a crime

[PavePusher]

27. Two reasons.

1. Self defense isn't a crime, no matter how much you squinch up your eyes, hold your breath and blow shit out your ass.

2. This: "If you effectively use your firearm, the death of the attacker(s) will probably be the result ..." is not actually quite true. I don't know how legal self-defense shootings compare to shootings in total, but better than 2 out of 3 people who get shot, survive. That's including suicides in the death total, by the way. Take them out and your odds rise to nearly 9 out of 10. Look up the numbers and do the math.

Cowards, eh? Name calling? On your first response? Seriously?

[WatsonT]

48. Why don't you say you'd prefer it is the homeowner who is shot

and lying in a pool of blood waiting to die when a disarmed person is murdered?

[TheCowsCameHome]

6. A: Post in the DU Guns Forum

ASAP

[LibertyFox]

8. Indeed

It's important to continue to point out that the goal of defense is not to kill someone. It's to diffuse a situation that is potentially life threatening and repel aggressive and unlawful force.

It's so easy to get defensive in the face of someone who either wants to curtail your right to defend yourself or refer to you as a criminal for merely possessing the means. It's easy to proudly exclaim that anyone who breaks into your house will get shot to death. Yet I highly doubt any of us want to have to take that action.

[givemebackmycountry]

9. Shit... -(Ammoland.com)-

When I think of responsible gun ownership I think of fucking -(Ammoland.com)-

Kinda like "AK-47's R Us"

Get serious.
This is some desperate shit, even for the "all gun, all the time" crowd.

[TPaine7]

11. So how was the quoted advice irresponsible? Or does that matter at all? n/t

[PavePusher]

28. Cite to where they've been irresponsible? n/t

[spin]

29. Try finding good advise on how to responsibly handle a defensive shooting situation ...

on the Brady Campaign web site.

You also ignored the fact that the advise is not from Ammoland.com

This information is provided by The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC (www.stevenwdulan.com) This answer is intended as general information and should not be relied upon as legal advice for any specific situation or case. The facts of each case vary and you should consult an attorney whenever you have specific questions.

[Common Sense Party]

32. Your post is unintelligible. It makes no sense whatsoever. Try again. nt

[oneshooter]

14. Speak to no one untill your lawyer is present. n/t

[RSillsbee]

15. Good Advice form Gunrigtsmedia.org

A post I found on gunrightsmedia.org

I worked police communications for fifteen years and was part of my department's Stress Management Division for a number of years also. In my opinion both Mr Suarez and the video clip raise valid points. As part of a typical stress reaction most people feel an urge to justify their actions. This is where you get into the potential "talking too much" situation that the video is trying to keep you out of.

As a call taker I can tell you that what and how I wrote the call screen could have a definite effect on the rest of your life. The officers responding to the scene of your incident most likely have never met you and have no opinion of how credible you are. But they have an established relationship with their comms people. What the call taker enters in the call is going to help the units responding to your incident form an opinion of you. That opinion may determine the initial course of the investigation. The complete C.A.D. record of your event, and the recording of the phone and radio traffic related to it are all part of the case record. What you say to me and how you say it, and what you don't say and how you refuse to say it are going to be reviewed by the detectives assigned to the case, the prosecutor, and possibly a jury.

Now this might be a shock to some folks, but as a call taker I really didn't care who if anyone got locked up. My first concern was with keeping my officers safe. If I felt you were being honest with me and answered my questions I would let the officers know that. My job was not to try to talk you into trouble. As long as I was satisfied that I got what I needed for officer safety I would not push you to make any kind of statement that would incriminate you. BUT if I felt you were being evasive or combative and trying to play games with me you can be sure the officers would know it and would start to wonder why. If they have conflicting statements (you and the guy you shot or his accomplice) or no statement at all, and inconclusive physical evidence which do you think would give you a better chance of having dinner at home with your family that night?

The comments on your call could either read:
Complainant states he/she was attacked by two subjs and fired in self defense. One subject down. Look out for second subj " X" race male ( height, weight, clothing) last seen on foot toward "Y".
Complainant is a (race/gender) wearing (clothing desc) ** Comp says weapon now holstered on right hip** Comp states first subj was armed with handgun. Subj dropped weapon in ivy. Second subj was armed with knife. Knife thrown onto roof. Unknown any additional weapons/drugs/alcohol. Fire/Rescue will stage until scene secure. Complainant states they are very upset and do not wish to say anymore at this time.
Or:
9-1-1 caller claims two subjs attacked him and he shot one of them. Disconnect. No further info at this time. Calling back. On call back caller refusing to answer to answer call takers questions. **complainant armed with firearm/ unknown what type/ unknown if weapons secured** When asked if person he shot was still on scene and needed medical attention caller refused to answer. When asked how many times subj was shot caller refused to answer. Unknown if second subj still on scene/ No lookout. Unknown additiional weapons/drugs/alcohol. Disconnect. Calling back. Voice mail on call back, left msg. Calling back again. Fire/Rescue advised and not responding until we can confirm a victim on scene for them. Voice mail on call back. Units statused on scene. No further.

Think "don't talk to the police" is always going to work in your favor?
That bad guy that got away because you wouldn't talk to me may very well be known to the officers in the area. If they catch him and he is known to them, even if his statement conflicts with yours it may boost your credibility.

[ileus]

19. Great article thanks for sharing. +1

[Common Sense Party]

33. You're welcome. Again, I hope none of us ever finds ourselves in such

a situation, but it'll be good to be prepared if it ever WERE to happen.

[applegrove]

34. WOW! The NRA is certainly selling the fantacy these days......plus they are

totally flushing it out. And making one feel helpful to authorities as we read.

[PavePusher]

57. Completely incomprehensible.

What the heck are you trying to say?

[right2bfree]

35. put your head up your kiester cuase you are going to jail.

Yuppers

[jeepnstein]

39. Not in many areas.

I've got Ohio law on my side if I have to shoot in defense of myself or my family. For some of us who deal in the "justice" system this is not such an abstract notion. People in ivory towers can go around claiming some kind of moral superiority when in fact they are just insulated from reality of life in some parts of America. Monsters are real and they walk around among us every day.

[rrneck]

54. +1000 nt

[GreenStormCloud]

44. We regularly post news stories of self defense in which the defender

is does not have charges brought. You have been active in some of those treads.

[right2bfree]

52. You think a few hundred DGU equals 2.5 million? Give me a break.

Yuppers

[GreenStormCloud]

53. I didn't claim that a few hundred DGU equals 2.5 million.

I was responding to your post #35 in which you said, "put your head up your kiester cuase you are going to jail. In that post you are claiming that any DGU will result in jail time for the defender. I pointed out that valid DGUs often are not charged.

[WatsonT]

49. Depends on the state

and circumstances.

Some states have taken the controversial route of allowing people to defend themselves when attacked by criminals.

I know I know, seems absurd right? Far better to let your family die in front of you than to raise your hand in violence against someone who is probably just down on their luck.

[DWC]

40. Excellent post. we need more like it. n/t

[S_B_Jackson]

41. What should you do?

1) Know the laws that govern both your gun ownership and usage in your locale.

2) Have an attorney - preferably one who is familiar with gun laws and self-defense statutes - on retainer.

3) Other than identifying yourself to police, do not speak to with them until your attorney is present. By the time the police arrive, the adreneline will be wearing off, and shock will be setting in. Your inclination will be to talk....DON'T!

4) Do not volunteer information; silence is your ally, not your enemy. Make sure that your spouse and your children do likewise.

5) Keep firmly fixed in your mind that you had no intent to kill. You shot only because it was necessary to prevent imminent physical harm to yourself, your loved ones, or to a third party. You shot until that threat no longer existed.

[YllwFvr]

55. Ive seen it suggested before to keep an attorney on retainer

But isnt that usually several thousand dollars? At this point, for me, thats not possible. I imagine it would be difficult for a lot of people.

[S_B_Jackson]

56. Not that much.....

For this purpose, the likelihood of needing their services is rather low and the retainer fee shouldn't be exhorbitant. Really, all you're looking for is a qualified criminal attorney, familiar with firearms law, who - if you need him/her - will be available to handle the initial aspects of the legal process should the SHTF. The atty my wife and I found charged a $750 fee for such a retainer....money that we both feel to have been well-spent for what we view as a form of insurance.

Of course, cost will depend largely upon how much access to the lawyer you want....time is money and they charge for everything - even answering a call.

[YllwFvr]

59. Thats not bad

Thank you very much. I just learned a dept wont cover an officer while off duty, its his responsibility should he need to use deadly force. I guess I will look around for an attorney.
Again, thank you

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

45. Hope there's plenty more bullets in your gun than required to protect yourself.