T Nation

Self Defense/CCW in Philadelphia

Interesting story involving concealed carry and a potential group beating in the wonderful city of Philadelphia.

Link to story here w/ video: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/Old_City_Shooting_01_17_10

Cliffnotes - Asian guy w/ CCW is out with girlfriend and bumps into a drunk frat stud doing pullups on some scaffoliding. Words are exchanged and frat stud and his buddies start following Asian guy and girlfriend for a block or two. Asian guy pulls gun (thinking it’s going to scare the other guys). In fact, one kid is not scared (beer muscles) and charges him and starts throwing punches. Asian guy pumps six rounds into the kid. He is being charged w/ attempted murder I believe.

Was Asian guy reasonably in fear of seriously body injury and/or death?
Was shooting an unarmed assailant w/ a group reasonable?
Did he think kid was going for the gun?
Is it possible that Asian guy was feeling tough with his CCW, and decided to bump frat stud purposely?
What do you think will happen?

yada yada yada

Also, shooter was a law student at Temple in North Philly. I’m assuming he had the gun on him for when he got back home in N.Philly, as this happened in old city.

Victim was an ex-lacrosse player from Villanova who’s father is a partner of a city law firm and whose close relative (uncle?)is involved in city politics.

EDIT: fixed link

I would normally first think to defend the Asian guy but 6 rounds… is a lot. Besides that the article is not working and I cannot get the full story. If it went as you paraphrased though then I would say that the Asian kid did what he had to do to defend himself. He was under attack by a group of many and did what he felt was necessary to defend himself(and his girlfriend which I would guess was a LARGE factor). I personally would have handled the situation to a less deadly outcome but that’s irrelevant I guess.

Also Villanova students starting fights with Temple students? Come on Nova think a little…

This was a big story in PA and created a lot of discussion on some of the gun boards in PA.

According to PA. law he is able to use deadly force if he was in fear for his life.

He tried to retreat by getting away from them. The group pursued them as the victim attempted to retreat. He drew his weapon and issued a warning. Knowing the victim was armed and prepared to use a weapon in self defense the drunk in question decided to attack and had a considerable size advantage. The victim was further burdened with the responsibility of defending the woman from assault. If he was incapacitated she was at the mercy of 6 drunks who already exhibited hostile intent towards them.

What would a prudent man do?

He tried to run and was pursued, he tried to deescalate and was attacked any way. Facing 6 to 1 he shot until the lead attacker, stopped his attack, and ended the threat. 6 shots with a Glock can be made in a second or two. That’s not even a workout for my G19.

To me it was a good shoot. No use getting beat by 6 guys in the middle of the night. What if they push it a little too far and wind up killing him.

The problem is it happened in Philly to a politically connected guys kid. Philly is anti gun and so are the Philly PD. This shooting is not prosecuted in any of the counties around Philly but the city has it’s own rules so they will prosecute this guy. Probably wind up pleading to a lesser charge and doing time. Anywhere else it would have been ruled a clean shoot. Hopefully he didn’t say anything to the investigators until his lawyer arrived.

The shooting was justified but because the guy that got killed is connected,hes going to do time…Our politics sucks.

The guy acted within his rights to me. When a guy pulls a gun but just wants to be left alone, and you charge him, you get what’s coming.

Someone definitely should have interceded though and save this guy. Look at all those people milling about watching it all happen! Cowards.

That’s fucking retarded. He acted in self defense.

The kid who got shot had what was coming to him. Plain and simple.

I agree that it was justified…just unfortunate it had to turn out that way. The “victim” had people making statements trying to spin him off as a hero, protecting his friends from the gunman.

Tough lesson to learn.

[quote]hedo wrote:
This was a big story in PA and created a lot of discussion on some of the gun boards in PA.

According to PA. law he is able to use deadly force if he was in fear for his life.

He tried to retreat by getting away from them. The group pursued them as the victim attempted to retreat. He drew his weapon and issued a warning. Knowing the victim was armed and prepared to use a weapon in self defense the drunk in question decided to attack and had a considerable size advantage. The victim was further burdened with the responsibility of defending the woman from assault. If he was incapacitated she was at the mercy of 6 drunks who already exhibited hostile intent towards them.

What would a prudent man do?

He tried to run and was pursued, he tried to deescalate and was attacked any way. Facing 6 to 1 he shot until the lead attacker, stopped his attack, and ended the threat. 6 shots with a Glock can be made in a second or two. That’s not even a workout for my G19.

To me it was a good shoot. No use getting beat by 6 guys in the middle of the night. What if they push it a little too far and wind up killing him.

The problem is it happened in Philly to a politically connected guys kid. Philly is anti gun and so are the Philly PD. This shooting is not prosecuted in any of the counties around Philly but the city has it’s own rules so they will prosecute this guy. Probably wind up pleading to a lesser charge and doing time. Anywhere else it would have been ruled a clean shoot. Hopefully he didn’t say anything to the investigators until his lawyer arrived.[/quote]

You have presented the above in the best possible light to the shooter and I know of no official published account that supports the above. I believe what actually happened is still quite unknown. I also believe whether or not he attempted to retreat is seriously in question. The group followed him for several blocks. I read no account of him “running”. Where do you get your information?

Well guys I wouldn’t rush to judgment here. I don’t have a position on this yet, as I, nor anyone else for that matter, has all the facts. The initial local accounts have been decidedly pro-“victim” and they even had the nerve to try to spin some “hero” angle claiming that he was putting himself between the shooter and his friends who wisely retreated. Yeah, bullshit. I know. I haven’t read the statute, but I have been lead to believe that in PA he may have had a duty to attempt retreat (if possible) before using deadly force on an unarmed threat.

I may ask one of our armed guys tonite how the statute reads. There is no evidence to date that he did so. If someone has something factual, please post the link. This incident occurred in “olde city”, an area of a few square blocks populated by dozens of bars, restaurants and nightclubs. I lived in the area long ago. It is the scene of rowdy behavior and past shootings. The area is fairly well patrolled by the PD. I’m not sure what establishment this kid could have been with a gun and not be subject to search. Probably a smaller bar/tavern or restaurant, but certainly not a club.

Frankly, knowing the locale, I have a problem believing he could not retreat for help. Moreover, I think this is yet another instance where someone with a gun was emboldened and instead of retreating, he didn’t and know his life hangs in the balance to be decided by the DA and a jury. He is well represented though.

He was retreating at the time of the shooting, you can see the video here: http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/Old_City_Shooting_01_17_10

Also, the shooter didn’t flee the scene, he stayed there to call the police. Not the actions of an guilty man.

These charges are a joke, a few less violet meatheads running around is a good thing.

hmm, pretty sure when I have a gun pointed at me my first instinct would not be to run towards it.

I saw the video. Obviously the DA disagrees with your interpretation of retreat and so do I. This does not mean I support the wounded in any way.

I keep thinking that the shooter had a role in provoking the entire incident…feeling a little tough with his CCW. I doubt those kids would have followed him for that long if he kept his mouth shut and ignored them. Also, you can see in the video that the shooter’s girlfriend is yelling at the kid in the white hat, and he pushes her. Maybe it was the girlfriend who opened her mouth. I don’t know.

I believe the statute requires reasonable retreat before using deadly force. But, maybe there weren’t any cops in the immediate area, and he couldn’t very well run and leave his girlfriend behind. Even if he did run, the guys (former-athletes) probably would have chased him down. I still think that if he was so scared for his life that he or his girl would’ve called 911 while being followed. Instead, he relied on his gun. Although I disagree with how he handled the situation (and as BG said, we don’t know all of the facts yet), I still think six men on one probably justifies the shooting, especially when one charges for the gun. I’m sure there’s a fear of that person taking your gun and trying to use it against you.

Here’s the relevant part of PA’s statute (18 Pa.C.S.A. Ã?§ 505):

"(2) The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat; nor is it justifiable if:

(i) the actor, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or

(ii) the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:

(A) the actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by another person whose place of work the actor knows it to be; and

(B) a public officer justified in using force in the performance of his duties or a person justified in using force in his assistance or a person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape is not obliged to desist from efforts to perform such duty, effect such arrest or prevent such escape because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom such action is directed. "

Wouldn’t a key issue be who instigated an assault on the other?

The police certainly had no way to know that the rushing person engaged in an act that would constitute assault. Or even if the rushing occurred before the brandishing of the gun.

If the shooter did not have reasonable fear of death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping etc, then his brandishing of the weapon was assault upon that man, hoodlum punk as he may be.

At that point (if so) I don’t think it matters that the rushing man tried to grab the gun and/or threw punches. He most certainly had reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. It may matter in the exact charges, but not as to whether the shooting was legally wrongful.

Now personally I think he got his just desserts, but legally the shooter may have been utterly unjustified in brandishing his weapon.

The enlarged video is not clear enough nor the frame rate fast enough for me to have any idea whether it was reasonable for the shooter to fear for his life or for serious bodily injury or for his girlfriend in those regards. I don’t know the area: it might be extremely unlikely for such to occur with a number of other people also present right at the spot, with apparently reasonable lighting and so forth, and without being able to see faces or see gestures, there’s no way to tell if a reasonable person would consider such assault to be likely or whether this harassment with no sign of elevating further.

This wasn’t exactly being cornered in a dark alley.

I think an idea that the police should have dropped the matter is missing that they didn’t have enough facts to be clear on things such as these.

Just based on the disagreements in this thread I would be surprised if they can find 12 people who agree he is guilty. I’m happy about that, but I don’t think it should even go that far. It’s a shame that DAs are never held responsible for their abusive of discretion. Ung is going to spend tens of thousands defending these frivolous charges, I hope he can hit up the rich jock’s family for the tab.

That dude probably thought he was hot shit till Ung merced him.

“An armed society is a polite society.”

Good shoot in my book.

One guy and a girl vs several (probably) drunk guys is a disparity of force and I would be in fear for my life. What exactly do you guys think was gonna happen? The guy who charged the couple would have just tossed them around and left?

If he did try to leave the situation and the group pursed, then too bad for the group.

And yes, I do carry on a daily basis.

He had the right to shoot. He pulled his weapon in fear of getting stomped and his girl getting beat. The dumbass tried to take his gun and is now dead. Luckly this was caught on video. If it was word for word he would prob get life.

doing anything but using that weapon (unfortunate he had to kill the guy) would of resulted in a potentially life threatening beating for him and his girlfriend.

So, if the law states you can point the weapon at someone threatening your well-being (and the shooter has money) he should be fine.

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
Well guys I wouldn’t rush to judgment here. I don’t have a position on this yet, as I, nor anyone else for that matter, has all the facts. The initial local accounts have been decidedly pro-“victim” and they even had the nerve to try to spin some “hero” angle claiming that he was putting himself between the shooter and his friends who wisely retreated. Yeah, bullshit. I know. I haven’t read the statute, but I have been lead to believe that in PA he may have had a duty to attempt retreat (if possible) before using deadly force on an unarmed threat.

I may ask one of our armed guys tonite how the statute reads. There is no evidence to date that he did so. If someone has something factual, please post the link. This incident occurred in “olde city”, an area of a few square blocks populated by dozens of bars, restaurants and nightclubs. I lived in the area long ago. It is the scene of rowdy behavior and past shootings. The area is fairly well patrolled by the PD. I’m not sure what establishment this kid could have been with a gun and not be subject to search. Probably a smaller bar/tavern or restaurant, but certainly not a club.

Frankly, knowing the locale, I have a problem believing he could not retreat for help. Moreover, I think this is yet another instance where someone with a gun was emboldened and instead of retreating, he didn’t and know his life hangs in the balance to be decided by the DA and a jury. He is well represented though.[/quote]

Bodyguard,

Interesting discussion.

As opposed to the media, the DA, and folks from NJ, (FI26 excepted) I presented the situation in a favorable light to the person who was the victim not the aggressor. My perspective does have the benefit of being far closer to the facts than the media and presented through an objective eye of a CCW holder of 20 years and NRA instructor in several disciplines.

I am an “armed guy” and well trained on my own dime in when and how to use my concealed carry weapon. A lot of info was presented on this shoot at the time, including the video. The shooting was clearly justified based on the public information. I stand by my opinion that in Bucks, Montgomery and Chester counties this guys isn’t charged or even arrested. In Philadelphia or the peoples Republic of NJ he is lynched for using a gun to defend himself.

Emoboldened with a gun…hardly. He had a group of 6 drunk individuals pursuing him. “running away” is a euphemism for retreating from the fight. the fact he shot only the lead aggressor leads me to believe he was in control and acting rationally. Many people would have been spraying and praying at that point. Perhaps the group felt emboldened by their numbers and felt the asian guy was simply an easy mark to prey upon for some fun. People have a right to walk the streets and the right to defend themselves when attacked…subtle nuances aside. Gangsters and thugs spray and pray 6 rounds into the crowd, probably holding the “gat” sideways. 6 controlled rounds, center of mass hits, is prudent use of a firearm in self defense.

[quote]hedo wrote:

Bodyguard,

Interesting discussion.

As opposed to the media, the DA, and folks from NJ, (FI26 excepted) I presented the situation in a favorable light to the person who was the victim not the aggressor. My perspective does have the benefit of being far closer to the facts than the media and presented through an objective eye of a CCW holder of 20 years and NRA instructor in several disciplines.

I am an “armed guy” and well trained on my own dime in when and how to use my concealed carry weapon. A lot of info was presented on this shoot at the time, including the video. The shooting was clearly justified based on the public information. I stand by my opinion that in Bucks, Montgomery and Chester counties this guys isn’t charged or even arrested. In Philadelphia or the peoples Republic of NJ he is lynched for using a gun to defend himself.
[/quote]

Sad but true.

The thing is, we don’t know how the incident started. There’s a lot of missing information here.

From that tape, yes he looks justified. However, if he couldn’t get a handle on his bigmouthed broad, and she started this shit, he may be going to jail because of it.

[quote]
Emoboldened with a gun…hardly. He had a group of 6 drunk individuals pursuing him. “running away” is a euphemism for retreating from the fight. the fact he shot only the lead aggressor leads me to believe he was in control and acting rationally. Many people would have been spraying and praying at that point. Perhaps the group felt emboldened by their numbers and felt the asian guy was simply an easy mark to prey upon for some fun. People have a right to walk the streets and the right to defend themselves when attacked…subtle nuances aside. Gangsters and thugs spray and pray 6 rounds into the crowd, probably holding the “gat” sideways. 6 controlled rounds, center of mass hits, is prudent use of a firearm in self defense.[/quote]

Again I agree- but HOW DID THIS START? Really? That’s my question. I do get the feeling that this wasn’t a case of “I was just walking and they started following me.”

Something brought this on.