Duty to retreat AFTER shots fired?

[The Unknown 1087]

Alright so after being in the mall for a little bit. I was really curious and I don't think this has been asked. At least for as long as i've been a member here.

I know we have a duty to retreat in public unless its not possible to do so.

What if you are out in public and bad guy has opened fire at people around you, must you retreat?. If you have cover and know you can return fire and take the guy down, what happens?

I know its a what if, but I am just curious how the law works. If you're hunkered down somewhere and some guy is shooting at you or in your general direction you CANT just get up and run you'll be shot.

Hopefully this isnt a stupid question.

[imperialism2024]

In cases like this, it's too close to say one way or the other. It's up to the DA and jury.

Sorry if that's not a good enough answer, but I don't think that anyone can do better without getting hammered with Lang's Law or one of its corollaries.

[xXWildPonyXx]

if i was carrying and had cover and i felt it was a completable shot i would feel horrible if i didnt do it

lets say i was the guy at the gas station that watched the woman get gunned down he saw they guys gun jam i beleive. i would have used that time to shoot him after getting reliable cover. if you stop a mall masacre i would certainly hope the DA was a little lenient.

[The Unknown 1087]

Both answers so far make sense and are understandable.

I just hope it never happens.

[LittleRedToyota]

Hopefully this isnt a stupid question.

it is not.

couple things:

1. the duty to retreat applies only if you can retreat *with complete safety*. that is a pretty high standard. sitting behind some cover hoping the cover actually stops the bullets, that the guy doesn't move so you are no longer behind cover relative to him, etc. does not sound like "with complete safety" to me.

2. PA law allows you to use the same force, under the same circumstances, to protect an innocent 3rd party as you can use to protect yourself. i find it hard to imagine a mall shooting situation where everyone is going to be able to retreat with complete safety.

i highly, highly doubt you would be arrested, let alone prosectuted, double let alone convicted, for stopping a madman on a shooting spree. just don't hit any innocent bystanders yourself.

[xXWildPonyXx]

Both answers so far make sense and are understandable.

I just hope it never happens.

me too but like alot of people are saying these rampage shooting go in 3's there has yet to be a 3rd one yet sadly i hope it never happens but when people snap it usually causes other to think that it would be fun to do the same thing

i havent been carrying my spare mag along with me for my glock but in light of recent events i thought what would another 15 rounds of .40 hurt

[The Unknown 1087]

it is not.

couple things:

1. the duty to retreat applies only if you can retreat *with complete safety*. that is a pretty high standard. sitting behind some cover hoping the cover actually stops the bullets, that the guy doesn't move so you are no longer behind cover relative to him, etc. does not sound like "with complete safety" to me.

2. PA law allows you to use the same force, under the same circumstances, to protect an innocent 3rd party as you can use to protect yourself. i find it hard to imagine a mall shooting situation where everyone is going to be able to retreat with complete safety.

i highly, highly doubt you would be arrested, let alone prosectuted, double let alone convicted, for stopping a madman on a shooting spree. just don't hit any innocent bystanders yourself.

Thank you for that! Pretty much gives me a great understanding to my question. What threw me off was not "retreat to safety" thing but you answered that.

There was a mall shooting out west, wasnt there a citizen carrying and shot the suspect? or am i thinking of something else?

[RoyJackson]

If you're hunkered down somewhere and some guy is shooting at you or in your general direction you CANT just get up and run you'll be shot.

The law says you've got to try to retreat.
If some guy is shooting in your direction, and you would be in more danger by trying to leave the area....well, no reasonable person would put themselves in more danger, would they?

But what would you do then? Wait for the shooter to leave? Just curious, since the OP is somewhat ambiguous.

[The Unknown 1087]

The law says you've got to try to retreat.
If some guy is shooting in your direction, and you would be in more danger by trying to leave the area....well, no reasonable person would put themselves in more danger, would they?

But what would you do then? Wait for the shooter to leave? Just curious, since the OP is somewhat ambiguous.

I don't think I would wait for him to leave while people around me would be getting shot. If I had a chance to take a shot and not shoot anyone else, I'd most likely take it. It depends on the situation though.

[GunLawyer001]

it is not.

couple things:

1. the duty to retreat applies only if you can retreat *with complete safety*. that is a pretty high standard. sitting behind some cover hoping the cover actually stops the bullets, that the guy doesn't move so you are no longer behind cover relative to him, etc. does not sound like "with complete safety" to me.

2. PA law allows you to use the same force, under the same circumstances, to protect an innocent 3rd party as you can use to protect yourself. i find it hard to imagine a mall shooting situation where everyone is going to be able to retreat with complete safety.

i highly, highly doubt you would be arrested, let alone prosectuted, double let alone convicted, for stopping a madman on a shooting spree. just don't hit any innocent bystanders yourself.

Hard to add to that correct info, but I feel obliged to try.

Having a gun doesn't make you a cop, but you are still a human being. We should save others, even strangers, if we can, even if we face additional risk if we try. Taking down a mall shooter will inevitably focus his attention on you, where you would otherwise just be one of many possible targets. But if you practice enough, he won't be able to pay attention to you for very long.

I would feel like a fraud if I carried a firearm as often as I do, arguing that my carrying protects people who don't, because thugs won't know who's carrying and who isn't, and because honest citizens have the best chance to stop crimes; and then when I had the chance to stop the slaughter I just hid behind the clearance rack while strangers died.

You have the privilege of using deadly force to protect innocent third parties. You don't have the legal obligation to do so. But maybe there's a higher standard that you could aspire to.