Download This Issue - US Concealed Carry

If you have
only one
option, you
can only
respond to
one type of
situation.
Whether you only have a deadly weapon or only have a collection of joint locks or
only have a sweet disposition and a way with words, hoping you will run into the
right problem to match your skills isn’t a strategy. It’s actually kind of dumb.
Lower Levels
[ BY RORY MILLER ]
“Why should someone who knows how to shoot and carries
a gun also learn how to use lesser levels of force?”
It didn’t sound like a serious question,
at first. More like the kind of
thing you would use to start a conversation
or an argument. Still, it made
me think and sometimes things have to
be put into words.
To begin with, the things that should
be obvious are:
Legally, ethically and practically,
shooting someone is rarely the right answer.
The competing harms doctrine
(see below) stipulates that deadly
force is justified if and only if you believe
yourself or a third party to be in
immediate danger of death or serious
physical injury. Maine’s statutes
on competing harm reads (Maine
of Force
Criminal Code Part 1 Chapter 5):
103. Competing harms
1. Conduct that the person believes
to be necessary to avoid imminent
physical harm to that person or another
is justifiable if the desirability and urgency
of avoiding such harm outweigh,
according to ordinary standards of reasonableness,
the harm sought to be prevented
by the statute defining the crime
charged. The desirability and urgency
of such conduct may not rest upon considerations
pertaining to the morality
and advisability of such statute.
[ 2007, c. 173, §18 (AMD) .]
2. When the person was reckless or
criminally negligent in bringing about
the circumstances requiring a choice of
harms or in appraising the necessity of
the person’s conduct, the justification
provided in subsection 1 does not apply
in a prosecution for any crime for which
recklessness or criminal negligence, as
the case may be, suffices to establish
criminal liability.
[ 2007, c. 173, §18 (AMD) .]
To boil it down, in the eyes of the
courts and in the minds of most humans,
people are more important than
stuff. Some state statutes differ, for instance
Texas Penal Code 2.9.42 reads:
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO
PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified
in using deadly force against another
to protect land or tangible, movable
property:
(1) if he would be justified in using
force against the other under Section
9.41; and
38
USCONCEALEDCARRY.COM n CONCEALED CARRY MAGAZINE n MAY/JUNE 2011