TTAG reader Bill writes:
“I have a question about a particular tactical scenario. I was reading through the Armed Citizen blog at nra-ila.org, which chronicles news stories of defensive use of firearms. One thing that came up more than a few times was a case of someone “holding” a criminal (i.e. at gunpoint) until police arrived. This strikes me as a bad idea for several reasons . . .
1. It’s not legally justifiable. Suppose the attacker calls your bluff? You can’t shoot him in the back as he runs away (I assume the act of threatening to shoot is not itself illegal but I’m not sure.) Some people may not realize this and could get themselves in legal trouble. Those that know they can’t follow through on it may not be able to bluff convincingly (I’m not sure I could).
2. You’re backing the attacker into a corner. He knows he’ll be arrested if he surrenders. Possibly he has a prior criminal record, or even outstanding warrants for other crimes, and could be looking at serious jail time. The idea of making a desperate charge at you could start looking like the least bad option. I would rather give him the option of fleeing and hope he takes it.
3. What if the police take a while to arrive? Your arms could get really tired. The attacker might notice this and see an opening. It also just seems like it would be an awkward, tense eternity.
Anyway, just wondering what the Armed Intelligentsia thinks about this one.