When does the presence of a firearm become force?

[SHEP]

"

Random question, when does the presence of a firearm become "force" ?

I have a few coworkers who are anti-gun and for the first 3 months of my concealed carry they were uneasy.

Is bringing a weapon on to someone else's property considered an act of force ?  It's not being directed / pointed at anyone, not on your person, but by it's sheer presence is it considered 'force'?" (Originally a question by UNFY on topic SUPPORT LB335)

Here's my opinion...

I don't consider the "physical presence" of a firearm force. The presence of a firearm AND people knowing that you have a firearm on you "could" be considered a form of psychological intimidation. Which is not considered force.

For example: You're out on the town with a friend, unarmed. A group of 4 men approach you and an argument ensues. The men become increasingly angry which is clearly evident by their: tone of voice, body language, facial expressions. They begin to take a fighting stance/posture. At this point, you have been shown a form of psychological intimidation.

You know what happens next could go 1 of 2 ways: fight or talk it out and part ways. Needless to say, being "outnumbered" is very intimidating.

Take the same example as above. But you are armed and one of the men has a knife in his hand and begins to approach you.

You know what happens next could go 1 of 3 ways: fight, flight or speak loudly and clearly to the man explaining what his next actions should be while you're drawing your firearm.

At this point, you have drawn your firearm and are prepared to use deadly force. This is the first show of force, possibly leading to deadly force.

To a co-worker, civilian or someone who is just uneasy and unfamiliar with firearms, this "physical presence" could be considered "intimidating".  But force, No.

[bullit]

I am looking for the original post from UNFY, but the scenario at the bottom is very confusing.  Displaying your weapon in the scenario described is a show of "force" and allowable under use of force laws in Nebraska.  When you pull the trigger, "deadly force" is now occurring and could be defensible in court.  Personally, I could care less what a civilian/co-worker felt i.e. intimidating if I understand your scenario correctly and doubt they would care as their life and yours has just been saved. 
Simply bringing a weapon (in this case a firearm) onto someone's property is not a display of force per se.  Begs the question how/why would they know?  If the idea or the suspicion of it is intimidating, leave and get new friends.
With regards to people KNOWING you have a firearm and/or carrying concealed, I ask why do they know and/or why would you tell them?  If they are uncomfortable with my carrying, my owning a gun, my stance on firearms, etc they move from the "friend" category to the "acquaintance" category.

[unfy]

Yeah, he quoted my question and then went about adding his own thoughts within the quote block by mistake.

His additions / opinion start with "In my opinion"...

I'll concur with his 'intimidation' idea though.

And....

With regards to people KNOWING you have a firearm and/or carrying concealed, I ask why do they know and/or why would you tell them?  If they are uncomfortable with my carrying, my owning a gun, my stance on firearms, etc they move from the "friend" category to the "acquaintance" category.

My ex's family is awesome.  Great bunch of folks.  They also happen to be uncomfortable with firearms.



edit: added 'by mistake', no harm no foul in my book.. honest mistake.

[SemperFiGuy]

Better try Flight, unless the flight exit is blocked.

Nebraska is a Duty to Retreat state.

No retreat when you safely coulda, then bye-bye to Right of Self-Defense claim in court.

sfg

[Dan W]

No retreat when you safely coulda, then bye-bye to Right of Self-Defense claim in court.

Law says   "The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating" ... How can one "know" for sure that whatever route you might take to escape is completely safe?

[SHEP]

The act of retreating is not always the best idea. Retreating usually consists of turning your back to your assailant. No matter what the situation is (retreat or stand your ground), you and your attorney will have to prove to a grand jury that the actions you took at that moment saved your life or the life of another. If you can prove to them that you were justified in drawing and firing your weapon without retreating, you're good, minus a lot of legal headaches.

[Kendahl]

How can one "know" for sure that whatever route you might take to escape is completely safe?

Driving away from a road rage incident where the bad guy hasn't displayed a gun would qualify.

Backing away may just encourage a bully but it looks good legally.

Judging from various incidents in Omaha, it appears that you don't have to retreat from your home or place of business.

[SemperFiGuy]

it appears that you don't have to retreat from your home or place of business.

Kendahl is quite correct.

Nebraska does have a Castle Doctrine [home is your castle].
Nebraska Statute 28-1409 (4.b.1) states:

(i) The actor shall not be 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;

So, if we don't invite people over for a visit and then make them boiling mad, all will be OK.

sfg