In OK we only use our CCW to defend family?

[teumessian_fox]

I was given a piece of paper that says,

Never point, or shoot your gun at a person unless 1) Your life is in danger at that moment, 2) The life of your mother or father, husband or wife, child or employee is threatened at that moment, 3) Your home is invaded and you believe the person will harm you or another person in your home, 4) Only the use of your gun could stop the harm or injury.

Are we to understand that, for example, a shooter (similar to the events in AZ) were to open fire at a public gathering, OK law forbids us from intervening unless said shooter is attacking the above specified family (or employee)?

After you ponder (and respond to) that scenario, also consider if a sister, brother, aunt, uncle, etc, were being shot/shot at. Can we intervene in that case?

How literal is that law?

 

[inactive]

The CCW does not really authorize anything other than the carrying of the weapon. The relevant law to the use of deadly force is the "Stand Your Ground" law. Check this sticky:

http://www.okshooters.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7710

In short, you can come to the defense of others. How wise that would be is another question entirely.

 

[BadgeBunny]

Plenty of discussion here:

http://www.okshooters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6

I would suggest you start with Michael Brown's article stickied at the top and work your way down from there.

ETA: I see Card is quicker on the draw than I am today.

 

[Nraman]

I think that the question is complex and it depends on circumstances and on how you view life.
If you are at QT and somebody walks in to rob the store, should you or should you not?
Well, the clerk and the company he works for have decided to give the criminal the money instead of resisting. I don't think we have the right to change that whether we like it or not. If the robber appears ready to kill or has started doing so, I think we have the moral responsibility to protect life.
You see two guys in the street having a shoot out. Do you get involved? That's a tough one, you don't know what the deal is.
I had a personal experience; I was driving in NYC a few decades ago when two men dressed like bums with guns were chasing and shooting at each other and were crossing right in front of me, I almost hit the second one. My thought at the time was to use the car as a weapon, luckily I didn't. The first man disappeared in the crowd, the second "bum" pulled from under his shirt a shield that was hanging around his neck, he was an undercover cop.
Another thing to consider is how innocent bystanders might suffer from your decision.

 

[TJay74]

Aslo some of the interpitation is if you felt like your life was in emminent danger in a situation like in AZ. had I been in the crowd my answer would of have been yes since there was a possibility that I would of had been targeted.

 

[Jefpainthorse]

All legalities aside... any time you find your self in a public, violent situation not of your own doing... that situational awarness we keep hearing about needs to stay in the game.

People start shooting... we start ducking. People start shooting at us? People start walking in our direction with guns?. People are walking toward us shooting other people down...

There are situations were you can tell the players without the scorecard. Other times- (like the Undercover Cop) ... things are obtuse. If you elect to go armed I hope you have the wherewithall to make good judgments...escape and evasion may be the best option... or maybe not. No two situations are ever the same.

There is a point were your life is in danger... and you make the appropriate conclusion.

 

[bulbboy]

moved