Hey /k/. Noguns here, they interest me but I've never really

Depends on situation, local, and whether or not your local prosecutor office is headed up by a leftist cuck.

Example, in Eastern Washington (pretty red), a guy came up to a CCer and said "give me your wallet" after pulling a knife. CCer pulled a gun and held him up the cops showed up a few minutes later. That happened July 2015 (I was one of the responding officers), nothing happened to the CCer and the attempted mugger had a ton of charges.

A few months ago a guy in Seattle got cornered by a couple homeless guys, one with a knife the other with a pipe. Dude drew his gun and told them to fuck off, homeless people ran. Guy calls cops, tells them what happened, they take a report, no problem. Couple weeks later the guy gets a summons from the court, turns out he's been charged with brandishing a firearm.

In Washington the standard for lethal force is no other reasonable alternative to defend yourself or another person from imminent severe bodily harm or death. Some areas include pulling as "defending". Some other (mostly blue) areas basically say if you drew but didn't fire, you weren't *really* that afraid for your life, were you?

>>33764425
it depends on the state, some have castle doctrine, some have stand your ground, some have duty to retreat ect
thats whats so hard about self defense shooting and preaching it, its really not as cut and dry as "an axe murderer broke into my home and chased me through the house". Most of the time its a situation escalating quickly and the whole time youre not sure if its ok to draw your gun, or even better a seemingly calm scenario going from 0 to 100 in a few seconds. Basically go by this
>if something feels funny or uncomfortable, keep an eye on your surroundings, not just people but exits/entrances as well
>situation escalates and you feel really uncomfortable, have your hand on you gun but dont draw
>if, for arguments sake, its a person in your scenario thats closing in and seems threatening, shout to fuck off and youre armed
>they keep approaching you draw
9/10 this should scare any reasonable person off. you still may get charged with brandishing a weapon or something similar, depending on what happens
>they keep closing in, especially if they have a weapon, you fire and you shoot to mean it

and even then honestly it can still be a crap shoot (no pun intended). theres a lot of "what ifs to consider". you just better hope you have a good lawyer and are in a self defense friendly state. the best thing to have above all else is situational awareness

>>33764425
Broadly speaking, the use, or threat of, deadly force is lawful only when you can reasonably articulate why you felt the other person put you, or a loved one, in immediate danger that would result in death/serious injury, and you why had no alternative.

If someone is stealing your toolbox, you can tackle the guy, but you can't shoot him unless he escalates it. Don't shoot a retreating criminal. That's the police's job to apprehend him. There's a small caveat to that, but it's so small, you'll probably never actually come across it.

If you knew someone was a shady character, and chose to have an altercation with them instead of walking away before the situation escalated, then it's going to make deadly force harder to justify. If you initially aggravate a situation, and it escalates to the level of deadly force, it doesn't matter if they're the first to use it, you still are the initial aggressor, and it's going to make it impossible to justify deadly force on your end. However, if during sometime in that fight, you say something like "Hey, I'm done. I don't want anymore of this. I'm sorry," you've reclaimed innocence, and if they bring out deadly force, now you can respond in kind.

Basically, don't do anything that could be interpreted as you WANTING to be in the altercation.

Also, check about your state's laws when it comes to duty to retreat, or castle doctrine. If your state doesn't hate you, there will be some kind of castle law, and no laws requiring a duty to retreat. You can take a concealed carry course, and they'll most likely go over this stuff.

Call 911?

http://www.stickgrappler.net/2012/09/self-defense-southnarc-aka-craig_718.html

Read this.

>>33764597
>>33764902
>>33765127

All of these. If you are in a lethal force situation, even if your shooting was a "good" shooting, if you actually created or escalated that situation, there will be at LEAST civil litigation.

>>33764425

The only thing I can really add is that even if you are, by state law, under no obligation/duty to retreat, it doesn't mean that you SHOULDN'T retreat. It is much easier to justify, in court, that you had to shoot someone if you literally did everything you could have done to try to leave or deescalate the situation. Training is probably the best answer to that dilemma.

There shouldn't be any time for the person you're drawing on to turn and run, nor any time for you to give commands. It doesn't take a couple minutes to pull out a gun and fire. Your gun is out and they are shot inside of a second.

>>33764425
Statistics show that 95% of self defense with a firearm doesn't result in shots fired. Fact is, most criminals will run as soon as they see a gun. Your wallet isn't worth taking a bullet.

But as other anons have said, it's always better to deescalate a situation if you can. You really don't want to shoot someone if you don't have to.

>>33764425
Guns are for making whatever is threatening stop threatening you. In my opinion if they turn and run, don't shoot. Stopping the threat might require killing it, but it might not too. Either way the mindset should be about stopping the threat, not killing or not killing.

>>33764425
Shooting someone in the back is frowned upon by the legal system and has a decent probability of getting you in trouble with the law, unless you can show that you have good reason the person you shot in the back had a good chance of becoming a thread to you health again in the very near term.