I was on a jury for a self defense case where the whole reason it even went to trial was because the accused was in his front yard. Typical anti-gun prosecutor trying to punish a law abiding citizen for defending himself and family. We deliberated for all of 2 minutes and unanimously found him not guilty. I think about that and cringe every time I hear someone brag about getting out of jury duty. Had it not been for a jury of levelheaded citizens, an innocent man would have went to jail.
We too said not guilty!! In 2 minutes.. I even asked the prosecutor afterwards, why did you even try this case. He was mumbling something and the judge called him away. I left thinking how glad I was to make sure this 8 vet and pistol training officer was not charged with 25 minimum for that bs
@@drew2fast489 read again. He said it was a self-defense case. In other words he was either attacked or felt threatened to the point where deadly force was necessary.
Also don’t forget in a lot of states it comes down to pointing the weapon at someone. I was 22 in Georgia and had an incident where these two individuals (father and teenage son) loved pulling to the stop sign in front of my house and doing burnouts. I finally had enough and yelled at them when they did it while I was outside. The two decided to get out of the truck and start walking intently toward me on my property. I kept my home defense AR by the front door whenever I went out so I reached in and grabbed it. I stepped back out with my AR in the lowered ready state and advised to the two if they make one step further I will shoot. They ran back to the truck and called the police which my wife had already done. Once they had ran back to the truck I stepped back inside sat my AR down, removed the magazine and waited for the police. Once the cops arrived I came outside without my weapon and with both hands in the air to show I was not a threat. The cops got my statement and the guys statement who had to admit that he sent his son home and I did not point the gun at him. The officers determined that since I had not directly pointed the gun at the two that I was not the aggressor and indeed was simply ready to defend myself. This infuriated the guy whom I heard screaming at the cops about how I was allowed to just have an AR15 outside without consequences and the officers basically said “yes, you aggressed on his property and he did not point the rifle at you”. Had I lost my cool and waved my AR at the two then I would have been in trouble; however, since I kept it at a lowered ready state, had two aggressors coming towards me and also presented myself once the cops arrived in a non threatening and non aggressive manor that I was not at fault in any way shape or forum. The guy was furious and was warned by the officers to not go on my property again. I never heard them do another burnout in front of my house after that.
Lol that's awesome .they sound like some ignorant jerks ..why not go to a racetrack for things like that 🤷♂️..people have no respect anymore SMH . I also keep my AR-15 for home defense but I hope I never need it for that
The only thing that could have been better would be a video camera of some sort, upholding your statement of being in a low ready position should the other guy have decided to be a royal a$$.
You had excellent presence of mind to keep the weapon at low ready. I think as long as any armed citizen can keep their cool and only point a gun at someone when they are in “imminent danger of death of serious bodily harm” then they can stay on the right side of the law in most situations. It’s easier said than done but lawfully carrying a weapon requires a higher level of responsibility.
BUT you are missing the point that they could LIE and even if you PROVE later by camera or witness you STILL may have been locked up and that is a nightmare for so many long-term reasons. So I would be careful on that type of interaction because different jurisdictions MIGHT view that as "brandishing" EVEN if you never aimed it at them too ❗ I totally agree with you that you SHOULD be able to do what you did -- but in todays SICK leftist world it is a HIGH RISK that a scumbag left wing prosecutor will use you to get votes from scum.... Costing you a fortune in legal fees at a minimum.
@@TheMrMused The incident occurred way back in the early 2000's before home security cameras and ring doorbells became popular. I agree footage would have been nice to sure up my statement but fortunately for me the guy was so sure just having the AR was a crime that he didn't think to lie and say i pointed it at them.
I shot an attacker, in my front yard and was arrested, charged with attempted homocide, released on RoR and "sweated" by the cops for 2 weeks as they scrambled to find any shred of blame to pin on me. Charges were dropped and record expunged when they realized it was 100% THEIR fault for refusing to stop the attacker after multiple requests, and hearing recorded phone threats, over a 12 hour period. NEVER DEPEND ON COPS OR GOVERNMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING OR TELL THE TRUTH
Funny how the right pretends to love the police, but when things don’t go your way, the right wing is so quick to slam “the cops”, as if they are suddenly BLM. You cant have it both ways, right wingers.
Very interesting to hear that interpretation... The country I live in has far stricter gun laws than the US, but over here the considerations are different when it comes to the "castle" definition: If your property is enclosed by a fence, that property still is considered part of your home. And anybody overcoming the obstacle of the fence, be that by breaking it, or climbing over it, is already considered to be breaking into your home.
I like that more to be honest, a fence is no different than a wall of a city, or the gates of an actual castle. They didn't consider a kings throne rooms or bedroom as his castle they called the whole damn thing the castle and that included the outer walls.
In the USA you should post no trespassing signs, that makes all the difference, it’s been determined that your property shall be marked to identify clear markers, we have specific special signs that must be used, therefore you cannot use a cardboard crayon sign, etc.
I feel like I am sitting in a classroom, listening to a very knowledgeable “professor “ telling us the right and wrong things in life ! Thanks Massad and WC !
I agree, and disagree. Massad IS a knowledge person, with more experience than most of us can imagine. However, "classroom" examples and "real world" don't often overlap well, if at all.
Here's an idea don't shoot them in your front yard after you chase them out of your back. Everybody knows what happened that night Nobody cared though because he didn't belong to anybody over here
As a former urban LEO and former prosecutor Massad continues to elegantly educate us all. "Pulling it all together" in a sage precise comprehensible manner. Massad you are a "gift" to our world 💪🇺🇸✝ Thank you kind Sir❗
@@gangoffour6690 IMO you are a fool ❗ His wisdom is prolific... I have been an officer and a prosecutor and can assure you he is one of the BEST sources of lawful advice on the internet. 💪 Your UN-hinged comment reveals your ignorance, and that you have "other issues."
@@LJ-jq8og : yeah, really. Kind of a weird statement "people like you are why I need a lawyer before I even think of defending myself" No idea what the person is trying to communicate with that statement. No idea. Perhaps being a criminal defense attorney for 34 years has turned my brain into channeling everything into a question.
@@horacesawyer2487 Agree. I can only hope for the writer of that "bizarre" comment, that they hastily mis-read something ? Perhaps inebriated ? IF not, then they have significant issues. I am sure you have seen your "share" of this in your travels too. 😊 I just did not "statistically" expect to run into someone with that type of impairment on this channel. 🤔
Mr. Ayoob is a fantastic man. I remember as a young kid reading my dad's firearm magazines. Countless articles by him that I read and took to heart. I'm glad I did. He taught me so much about responsible ownership and usable tactics at a young age that either backed or supplemented what I learned from my dad. Most of it, if not all, still stands to this day. I still use his techniques to teach my friends and others as they learn how to be responsible and proficient with firearms. So cool to see he is still instructing people and being a damn good example of what it is to be a responsible firearm owner.
“He speaks better than any college professor I ever had.” He does so because he’s been teaching self defence and about the laws governing this topic for literally four or five decades, if not longer. I started reading his articles published in ‘Guns and Ammo’ magazine 4 decades ago, and he was already a nationally recognized expert on the topics even then.
They break into your cars, steal $4000 of family property and cops do nothing. They steal your copper powerlines six times and cops do nothing. You find 15 stolen bicycles hidden in your bushes and cops do nothing. Two days later the thieves came and got them. You catch a crackhead in your car with 5 of your neighbor's car radios on the ground outside and a cop takes them and doesn't turn them im. And doesn't do a report. If Granny Clampett opened the front door with the barrel of a shotgun in Indiana, she would be subject to a two year minimum felony, PLUS an 8 year felony for a minimum of TEN YEARS IN PRISON, FIRST OFFENSE.
@@citizenschmitizen I blame the weak justice system and the bleeding heart liberals for that. I’ve noticed a lot of crap going on in my area right in front of cops and nothing is done because a lot are told, and this is all over, if it’s not a $1000+ issue or a certain level of misdemeanor or a felony, don’t bother wasting the man hours. I think small things lead to larger things later and it’ll never stop. It’s like teaching kids the small things when you get so it doesn’t lead to bigger issues when they get older
I try to watch Ayoob once a week. Thinking though situational self-defense *regularly* and then hearing related case law presented cogently is incredibly helpful. Thanks for all you do here.
@horace sheffield After months of violent riots, don't you think that the destruction needed to stop? You bet your ass that they needed to be told to STOP.
I am glad to hear this as I had three boys (found out later they were boys) come up to my garage under my camera and was trying to get into the house. We sounded our alarm and they fled. I went outside to see what they were doing with my AR inhand. Deputies caught them rather quickly afterwards. Next time I will stay inside after hearing this video…. THANKS FOR THE INFO!!!
Watch out. You could be cited for brandishing, on the one hand, and also should they see you have that AR, you've now given them huge reason to come in and rob your home while you're away.
@@markcole8436 I recall an incident in 2020 where a residential neighborhood home was being assaulted by BLM/ANTIFA rioters. The homeowner remained inside but displayed his shotgun at the window. The homeowner was charged with aggravated assault. I don’t recall what city this was in.
Civil lawsuits are almost never mentioned. Just when you think a criminal court case is settled, you can almost always expect a civil lawsuit to follow. Remember to learn from other's experience and hope you, yourself, can avoid going through the same situation. Great points based on past situations.
Yes. Another excellent reason to maintain a calm and disciplined attitude as much as circumstances permit. I can't think of any situation where it's better to go off half-cocked than to respond in a measured, level-headed way to perceived threats. Again, as much as possible. I know that some things do happen fast and, in that case, we can be deprived of that precious few seconds to respond coolly.
I have been a follower of Mr. Ayoob teachings since the early '80s and I hold my thoughts of Mr. Ayoob with the upmost reverence. The definition of a wise man and most compassionate for those behind the trigger and those in front of the muzzle and from him will you only get the truth.
I am so grateful to Massaf Ayoob and others for educating those willing to learn so we don't make the same foolish mistakes as others have. It is never a good idea to voluntarily remove any barriers that stand between you and an "aggressor". You expose yourself unnecessarily into a situation you may not fully understand. When an intruder breaks in, he/she is the aggressor and coming into a situation, they may not understand giving you, the defender, the element of surprise, if you are prepared. Had Reeise just kept his door closed he never would have felt compelled to shoot, or he could have retreated and closed the door to see if the "drugged out" guy dressed in his Saturday Night Fever costume tried to kick the door in rather than standing their waiting for the "right moment" to blast that kid in the chest.
This should be played in any Permit to Carry classroom as well. Some things I had no idea about, but am glad to know now. Extremely effective 'storytelling' as well.
Having read all of Massads books I could get my hands on, now getting to listen to the professor is awesome. He has really educated me and influence my way of thinking since I was a kid. Thank you for putting him in a public forum.
Check out some other guys like Pat Mac, Mike Pannone, Kyle Lamb, Larry Vickers, Jerry Miculek, Travis Haley. Massad is of an older doctrine and some of his stuff will get you killed. Judged by 12 or carried by 6. Choice is yours.
Massad, you explain these matters more eloquently than anyone I’ve ever had the pleasure to watch. It’s no wonder at all why your services are in such high demand, Well Done Sir, Again!
It's bonkers to me that I used to read his articles in gun magazines in drug stores when I was a snot nosed teenager. (You can't forget that odd name!) Now I'm in my mid 50s and he's still around. He's living proof you can be old but not a Fudd.
@David Meyer I swear I thought the same thing. Sounds very similar. Every once in awhile, Massad teaches a class at Top Gun range here in Memphis. I'd like to take the class, but it's like $1,800 or something.
When I bought my first firearm for home defense about 41 years ago, the first thing I did was read "In The Gravest Extreme" on the advice of my boss. It was the best education a new gunowner could give themself at the time. Turns out even now Massad Ayoob is still the best. Thank you for a lifetime of solid firearms advice.
I always recommend that book to anyone interested in getting a gun for self defense, I even have an extra copy just for a loaner. This may sound strange coming from a lifelong pro 2A guy, but I'm proud of the two times potential gun owners, after reading it, decided NOT to buy a gun.
@@faryldaryl3975 So you are proud you talked someone out of try and learn how to defend one's family and themselves? will you be just as proud if they are attacked or possibly murdered by taking your advice?
Mr Ayoob, thank you for taking the time to go over these very important issues. You're always giving things to ponder that I had taken for granted. Like you said, better to find out here, than later. Thanks again.
I used to watch Massad all the time. One thing he said that I remember is that a staircase is the perfect killing zone. Wait at the top of the staircase and the bad boys will come to you. No cover for bad boys on the staircase.
Depends on the staircase boyo. Some wouldn't provide you any cover or concealment either, against an unknown force multiplier. But I get your point using choke points to engage. I totally agree. Maybe I'm just in a bad mood, but is there anything else super obvious you want to state?? I mean, you didn't mention the OODA loop at all...I figure staring with your face against the wall might be the best way to surprise everyone lol
This Man brings back many childhood memories, I used to read handgunner magazines, as well as Soldier of Fortune. Always a good read, and I learned a lot. I want to take this moment to thank Mr. Ayoob for his teaching, guidance, and frankly, candor , in matters such as these.
@JamesRockon though, maybe now with RUclips, he seems a tad less "mythical" or "mysterious ". Lol. But , it did just strike me that I'm 50+ and he's been doing this since before I was born..
Yes, 💯 : as a teen I read a few Harris publications Combat Handguns, Guns & Ammo, SoF(by Robert K Brown USAR ret). Ayoob wrote about many use of force events, guns, holsters.
Thank you SO much for this. It's those little details that hang people every day; and this has gone a long way in clearing them up as relates to this subject.
Great video as always. Force trouble to come to you, don't go to trouble. Staying inside with your doors locked leaves no question who the aggressor was. In most of the U.S. at least you'll have the protection of the castle doctrine too.
I learned not only from this vid. but also, from the comments. That speaks to the quality of the instructor IMO. For more than 25 years of learning from your entertaining wisdom, thank you Mr. Ayoob.
Great episode. One thing I would suggest, is that you remind people of a previous show you did. And (I am paraphrasing) you made a great point that leaving your home to confront folks was tactically not a very good decision. I live in a rural area. We have people trespass on the farm, and I always am reminded of your good advice. I am inside, my door is locked, I am armed and in control of my situation, once i go outside all of that goes out the proverbial door. Great show
Not everyone trespassing on your property has criminal intent. Especially in broad daylight! Lots of people are just uninformed or stupid. I am not afraid to talk to anyone. And I sure as hell am not going to bring a goddamned gun with me to tell someone to get lost.
@@jstravelers4094 Well, a couple points. Our property is clearly marked with locks on the access points. That answers intent. Two, I do have a gun with me, because most often they (when I run across them) have guns illegally hunting. Three, 99%of the time the conversations are not adversarial, just a warning. Four, trespassers who get hurt still can sue the land owner, so we are fairly firm in our warning. Five, you know nothing of what you are speaking of or my situation or area. Six, when we know of trespassers we call the sheriff, but sometimes surprises happen. I’d rather be armed 2 miles in the woods than unarmed when I meet someone who clearly intended to trespass on our land and is armed.
I just wanted to thank you for all of these informative vids that you are putting out. With each successive one, I feel more and more knowledgeable. Whether it’s examples given, the laws of the land, or safety practices, I feel better prepared than before. I really enjoy the explanation and breakdown of laws concerning the individual events that show why things went the way they did and how to prevent it. A calmer, more knowledgeable mind is much better off than one operating strictly on emotion. In the heat of the moment, I’m sure everyone experiences emotions, but I feel the more a person understands and tries to implement these teachings, the less likely the innocent will be liable/subjected to possible criminal prosecution, injury, or even death. Sir, Thank you again for what you are doing.
This is really good advice. From a safety standpoint, you don't want to be standing in your front yard in the open with no cover or concealment in a dangerous situation. The interesting thing about the St. Louis incident was I never saw any video of the people who were destroying property and trespassing in the neighborhood. Stay in your home hidden behind locked doors with your tools and engage only if someone is breaking in or you are in imminent danger.
That couple are both idiots. If I actually felt uncomfortable about a group of people marching down the public street past my house.....I might have my rifle laying across my lap as I sat on my front steps watching them walk by. But there is no way I would point my weapon at anyone on the public street. No matter what they said.
Absolutely. It's also hard to convince a jury that you were thinking about your family and defending them when you decided to leave them to defend themselves while you went outside to further engage a perp. Not only is it more dangerous to you, it's more dangerous to your family if a gunman takes you out of the fight. If you're chasing somebody down, it's no longer self-defense. That's a clear case of your emotions getting you into jail. Being a gun-owner requires restraint. Heading outside to pick a 2nd fight in a more dangerous arena is the opposite of restraint.
@@Skank_and_Gutterboy" If you're chasing somebody down, it's no longer self-defense." Well that is the way it is supposed to be, But a few days ago a homeless guy tracked someone down long after he said he was attacked and the DA said it is Self defense.
It's my understanding that during the McCluskey trial the mother claimed that she had heard someone yell let's burn the house to the ground. One has to wonder what it would feel like if a crowd of people were outside your house with the possibility of someone throwing a Molotov cocktail inside. Question is do you wait inside or do you go out and nip it at the bud?
personally I feel that one ought to be allowed to walk around on their own land carrying their own guns, especially when a threat is obvious. That being said, maybe it's a decent middle ground to walk out with a pistol in your pocket, not visible, unless someone really lights up a bottle with some hanky tied on it?
Exactly my thought. Imagine a growing crowd entering your property with force (like in the McCloskey case), you retreat to the house and then start to defend yourself and in response they start to set fire on your home (while you are inside). You may be on the safe side regarding the law, but you loose in every other aspect.
There were incidents of private citizen's homes being burned down by Molotov cocktails? Pardon my question, I'm totally ignorant on this topic and am just curious.
New York Times: “He was a Princeton-educated corporate lawyer. She provided legal services for the poor. Now they are accused in a Molotov cocktail attack on a police car.” Portland Police Bureau “On Thursday, December 31, 2020 at about 7:45p.m., Central Precinct officers became aware of a gathering in the area of Southwest 3rd Avenue and Southwest Main Street. As the crowd grew to an estimated 80-100 people, some individuals in the crowd began to engage in violence. At least two Molotov cocktail-style firebombs were thrown, and large, commercial grade aerial fireworks were launched at the Federal Courthouse and the Justice Center. “ If those that riot will attack police, I believe they will attack your home.
This calls for intelligent threat assessment. Is that what the McCloskeys did? Were Molotov cocktails or bombs of any sort in evidence during that incident?
Great video! I love listening to Mas explain situations with actual case studies and scenarios to illustrate his points. I can't tell you how many times I've referenced his videos during conversations.
Absolutely right! I keep seeing these news reports about people going out in their front yard to deal with angry callers. People come to the door looking for trouble, and out the door goes the family. Make sure your doors are locked, including the back and side ones, and make sure they will hold against an attack. They should be able to stop a break-in anyway!
You sir are the epitomy of excellence. Ive read your articles for over 40 years. I read many of your first works in ShotgunNews,G&A?,ShootngTimes? in the 1980s.I hope and pray you have minimum 25/30 more to give us.Thank you for all that you have done,doing now and all the many firearms subjects you have left to tell us.lve admired you from 19yrs on...lm now 60.
My biggest fear is that defending yourself makes you guilty. I’m armed, trained and practice constantly at a range. But even then, I always take the non aggressive attitude if (and I pray it doesn’t) that should arise. Stay secure inside, communicate immediately with law enforcement, position yourself in a defensive posture, know where your rounds will travel. Then and only then will I respond discharging my firearm, keeping in mind, I’m not “shooting to kill” because those words will make me out to be the aggressive one. Thank you for everything you do sir. This type of educational information is here the asking. Be safe.
@Ying Li if you're discharging your firearm that means the other person is threatening your life in which case you always shoot to kill... anybody with basic firearms training knows this
@@DCsGladiator Oh my! IMO If you're a firearms owner and you do NOT know who Ayoob is - you need to get caught-up IMMEDIATELY! Massad Ayoob is one of the more notable firearms and self-defense experts of the last 50 years! His book "In The Gravest Extreme" which deals with what happens in the aftermath of a self-defense shooting, is one of two books which I feel EVERYONE who owns a gun for self-defense needs to read! (The other one being Col. Jeff Cooper's seminal work "Principles of Personal Defense")! I often give copies of both books to friends who are new shooters, or who are not familiar with these two men. Ayoob is admittedly kind of "an acquired taste" for some folks, because he has his own way of thinking, and is not afraid to puncture platitudes or egos, and he has what some people consider to be a rather high and mighty way of speaking. But I really like him, and I do not believe he's a egoist, unlike some of the self-agrandizing "Experts in their own minds" who are out there pushing THEIR way of shooting, or selling Time-shares and Condos on their property in the desert to their students during breaks in training. Please do yourself a GREAT favor and pick up the works of Ayoob (and Col. Cooper) at your earliest convenience and familiarize yourself with them..
For many decades many have benefited from Massad Ayoob, thank you. I do agree with his opinion here, but I want to think in broader terms than this. I’m glad he mentioned the curtilage doctrine, but for me I view our woods as curtilage. Yes, his advice to remain inside in most cases certainly makes sense for a residential track home in the city. That’s because their properties are very small, easier to tactically manage, and there might be innocent bystanders in that neighborhood. But for those of us that live in the woods or rural country, like me. It takes some foot patrol to do a thorough threat assessment. Some would even use an UTV. And so, I’d rather leave my house to do that myself, rather than wait for the police, and/or allow the suspect to flee. That is IF I call for law enforcements assistance, Nonetheless, this is good advice. But the bottom line is what will the court say.
It was suggested that if your property is fenced/walled, the entire property is considered to be part of the house. Which makes sense to me. A "no trespassing" sign tacked to a tree is far less of a deterrence than "no trespassing" signs placed at 5-foot to 6-foot intervals on a fence that must be breached to enter the posted property.
In most situations where trouble lingers outside the house, you should indeed remain inside and be prepared to defend yourself and family. However, the circumstances of what was taking place in 2020 involved violent rioters who demonstrated a propensity for setting fire to buildings and vehicles. While a man likes to think of his home as his castle, it is still different than a literal castle with a large moat, a drawbridge, and heavily fortified walls. The modern house is far less resistant to attack by fire(the flaming kind.) There may be some of us who would prefer the option to potentially die fighting rather than wait for our home to be burned down with us inside as the unscathed rioters laughs are the last thing we ever hear.
@@WALTERBROADDUS WRONG! No one was rioting? Then why does video news footage show the crowd broke down the McCloskey's front gate and were threatening to kill them when the McCloskeys came out with their weapons? But you were right in that the rioters weren't even going to the McCloskey's house. That's because the Mayor's house was in the same neighborhood, and they were threatening to burn down HER house. I admire Massad Ayoob, but he's wrong on this one. He cites castle doctrine but assumes the castle starts at the front door. He doesn't mention that the McCloskey residence is a compound with high stone walls and an iron front gate and a lawn BEFORE the front door. News footage shows the crowd had torn down that IRON gate and were inside on the lawn shouting threats. Therefore the castle HAD been breached, and the McCloskeys were justified in brandishing their weapons inside their own residence. Second, Ayoob fails to mention how politicized this case was, and that the law really had very little to do with it, which was why the Democrat prosecutor charged and the Republican governor pardoned the McCloskeys. Third, Ayoob should have discussed this case in context with the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict, in which Ayoob justified Rittenhouse's actions with the "doctrine of necessity" even though the castle doctrine obviously didn't apply to Rittenhouse. Or even the Florida law enforcement's justification for property owners of "you loot, we shoot" in the aftermath of the recent hurricane. And fourth, Ayoob doesn't mention that St. Louis law enforcers refused to put down the riot even when the rioters were in an exclusive gated private community, leaving homeowners like the McCloskeys to fend for themselves. Because, as cgsimons1187 pointed out, there are times when staying inside your house, per Ayoob's advice, can put you at a disadvantage or, worse, get you killed. Never mind rioters throwing Molotov cocktails at your roof, what about some people actually shooting at your house from the outside street? Even if you had a weapon, you can't shoot what you can't see, and you can't see if you're hunkered down inside your house dodging the incoming bullets. At some point you will have to exit the house in some way just to see where the threat is coming from. In the end, it is probably better to simply state that the castle doctrine applies in different ways in different states and even countries, and Ayoob's generalized advice to stay inside the house is at best applicable on a case-by-case basis. After all, it is up to the person whose life is at risk to decide whether he or she will be be judged by twelve---or carried by six.
@@WALTERBROADDUS They literally broke down a private gate to the neighborhood and ended up on their property angrily shouting that they were going to assault and burn the Mclosky's house down. An angry mob in a time where angry mobs are rioting, looting, burning, and murdering people are the very definition of overwhelming force.
@@ungratefulpeasant8085 Wikipedia, while not the most 100-percent credible source those present facts of the event differently. The gate was actually intact when they decided to exit their home. And the crowd was not threatening them. But in fact , simply going to the mayor's house.
Here in Alabama we have stand your ground law , and as a detective I’ve worked several cases where the suspect was shot outside the residence and all cases were no billed at grand jury !
Detective Thompson, in Alabama, does the Stand Ground Law work along the lines that there is a clear and present threat to one's life, *regardless* of location? I am an investigator also, and wish to hear a colleague's perspective on this.
Even so, the criminal case is only a small part of your problems. When it comes to civil cases, Stand Your Ground is only an affirmative defense and not an immunity from a lawsuit, in many states. You are much more liable to suffer in a civil suit than a criminal one. Many people discount this and if the media takes up the case against you, you are almost certainly going to have eager lawyers looking to come after you.
Yes regardless of location , I've had cases where neither party were on there own property, I've had road rage case and ,also a gas station case and several others ! As to the other comment, civil can be terrible but still not as bad as losing your freedom !
I can't get enough of these videos. Ayoob's knowledge of the law, the courts and jury attitudes is unsurpassed and invaluable. I completely agree with pretty much everything he said. The added section on curtilage was fascinating and I need to research more about that.
This is an extremely thorough, reasonable, and well-cited perspective. Love that you cover details of some of the relevant case law. Thanks for the insight!
Right about 4 minutes, he brought up a very good point. I was involved in a lethal Force encounter, and I opened my door and advanced toward the threat. I fired one shot, and the threat retreated. When I had to make a statement, the detective had the law book opened at "homicide".(Texas) People should be allowed to face the problem that threatens themselves, their family, and their property, in my opinion. Even if it takes 3 doors to get to that menacing threat. We shouldn't have to be scared of technicalities in court when it comes to defending our life, land, and family members/neighbors. Criminals should be extremely afraid of the consequences when they violate the respect of any of the aforementioned people/items' rules of conduct. Harsh and swift punishment is what truly discourages criminals from attempting to make anyone a victim. Brutally punish those that seek to inflict harm in exchange for money. This is the only way that criminals will think very carefully before they find their next victim.
Problem is, when you open the front door and head out to hunt the guy down, it stops being self-defense and now you're the assaulter, batterer, or murderer. Not only does it put you in legal jeopardy, you now have target-fixation to the point of abandoning your family. That's not a position I want to be in.
Just like the man said, the totality of the circumstances are generally weighed. In your example, you gave little context as to what the threat was or why you thought it a threat. If someone just escaped from a serial killers car and is running as fast as they can and start banging on your door at 2am, trying to open it, one could consider that a threat and fire. Not knowing the circumstances, it would be scary for any homeowner. Someone, probably not in there right mind, trying to enter a house. To me, justifiable to shoot in that split second. But then there's the consequences of knowing if you waited a bit more, maybe a tragedy could be avoided. Totality of circumstances in each case must be weighed.
In the small town where I grew up, the chief of police lived across the street. I was a teenager at the time, but I remember a conversation he had with my father. He stated "If you shoot them in a doorway or coming through a window... make sure the body is inside the house when officers arrive... no questions will be asked."
Not good advice for the modern era. Forensic science will show that you moved the body, which can get you in big trouble even if the initial shooting was justified. Massad says as much in his book Deadly Force (2nd ed, pg. 143)
Mr Ayoob your videos are always great …i love soaking up as much knowledge and wisdom that I can …and you as an elder in this community provide just that …much respect to you sir !!!
Well said, Mr. Ayoob. I taught my family if there is suspicious activity outside of our dwelling, to initiate the family plan. Stay in the home, kids get to safe place (pre-designated), wife call 911, I am in the ready behind barrier and at an oblique from either of the doors. My wife gives the dispatcher a safe word. Everyone in the home is trained how to safely operate a firearm. So far only had one scare, everyone in the home executed the plan and county sheriff arrived as predicted (5min). Person turned out to be elderly with dementia. No one was harmed. Many times protectors want to go outside and meet the threat head on, You are right, stay in the dwelling. Thank you for this great video and example, ( albeit unfortunate example).
Excellent as always. Thank you! When someone outside begins preparation for starting your house on fire while you’re inside that’s a different scenario requiring you to go outside to stop the intended assault/attack. A post addressing this scenario would be helpful. Thank you.
That is common sense, I mean.. if someone has to tell you that you can go engage someone lighting your house on fire, and that fire puts your life at imminent risk... I question how they survived thi long in the first place.... It is rather simple, If you feel that your life is absolutely at risk, or you are at risk of severe bodily injury, then take the shot. I mean, it is an obvious scenario, and you know when it happens.... or just ask yourself, could I convince a jury that my life was at risk, and the answer is yeah or most likely, then go for it.
Even in New York state, which is a notoriously anti gun state, it is explicitly stated in the law that you have the right to shoot anyone in the act of committing arson on your dwelling.
@@100percentSNAFU Love seeing it in writing. The prosecutors look for ways to falsely prosecute law abiding citizens in order to keep the criminal’s family and friends from rioting with no regard for the law abiding citizen protecting himself.
GREAT Video as always Sir!! - When I saw the videos of this incident one other thing jumped out at me about their actions. From a tactical/operational standpoint... The moment they exited the home they gave up a significant source of cover/concealment. From the angle of the street, they were very exposed to anyone in the crowd who wanted to let a round or two fly. When we discuss this situation in my classes I point out how easily a shot could have run out from the crowd and made the incident far more tragic thank it was.
Like always excellent presentation. Been following MAS since the late nineties early 2000s. Always had great articles in gun magazines back then and still do today(you tube).
We Appreciate You explaining all this! Actually am familiar with all 3 cases but didn't know all the outcomes. You're very informed. Thanks bunches for sharing. God Bless You! 💛💜
* * The McCloskeys were STILL ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY while they were ATTACKED by a HOSTILE MOB that was threatening them AND ENTERING their property ! ! ! ! ! WTF ??? * *
this actually just happened in New Mexico I think. Police were serving a warrant late at night, went to the wrong house… and right when they realized it was the wrong house, the husband stepped out and was carrying a gun. They hit him with a flashlight and the guy raises his hands and gets mag dumped. The wife screams picks up the gun and fires back, believing that the cops were robbers that just killed her husband. She wasn’t charged, but neither were the officers because the husband stepped out of his front door carrying a pistol.
You’re wrong about the reason why that shooting by the police was justified. The flaw in your logic is that the police are involved. The police are always justified in stopping a perceived deadly threat to themselves or others, except when committing illegal acts. Going to the wrong house to serve a warrant is not illegal. That case falls under the “awful, but lawful” scenario. That being said, if the husband managed to injure the police and survive the encounter, self defense may have been an effective defense, but maybe not, given the police announced themselves and he left his castle. I also would not take the fact the wife was not charged as equivalent to being innocent of crimes. Charges are often political, and this could easily have been a political choice not to charge her in order to avoid drawing more negative media attention, as this case is not a good look for the police.
@@akovar50 So in other words, the police are completely and totally above the law. If I went to the "wrong" door, and shot the guy inside, I would go to prison for second degree murder, and so would you, and so would anyone without a badge. Twenty-first century policing has completely gone off the rails. Who would've thought that agencies first birthed as "Prohibition Enforcement," staffed with literal gangsters, would turn out to be the worst criminals. Really is true what they say about fruit born of poisoned trees.
That’s not true. If the police are at the wrong house they carry the liability simply because they are now breaking a constitutional amendment (fourth amendment). Shooting at the cops would NOT be justified in that specific situation BUT the police department including those participating would be unjustified in what they did because as you stated, the police would be committing an illegal act (warrantless search). With your logic the police would not be liable even if they made clear physical entry into the wrong home which isn't at all true. There is actually multiple precedents of police making warrantless entries into wrong homes and ending up in firefights and almost always the police were found liable in both criminal and civil court. Liability doesn’t change because of a communication mistake @@akovar50
OMG! I am an XParalegal 201 court cases, holder of 13 CCW Permits 13 states, 1996 NRA instructor and watched over 100+ Gun Case videos! THIS lesson on "be the defender" inside your "CASTLE" is sooooo important.... Thank you!!!
Yes, 1000 reasons to leave this dumpster fire of a state of Commie-fornia. No .1, grusome. No.2 Nancy. No.3 Paul Pelosi’s hammer. I guess it runs in the family
Just throwing it out there but your typing doesn't look like that of an ex paralegal. All of the habits you had while working just fallen out of you or something?
You probably just saved me from prison. I needed to hear this. I live in a similar situation. High violent crime and shootings every night. I can hear the gun shots. Sometimes they wake me up. Yes, I grab my gun and go look out the window to check my street and if they crossed my house I would be fully prepared to engage and open the door. I'm sick of this crime. After watching this, I will definitely be far less likely to open the door.
I appreciate the sobriety of the content presented here. The advice is so sensible and there is intelligent description of context. Neither defensiveness or promotion. Just really well done, thoughtful talks.
I'm not suggesting others to agree with me and my decision not to follow you anymore, because you show with your body language that you are pleased that those lawyers who wanted some free television publicity and sabotaging gun owners rights buy acting ignorant, should have been used as examples for what you don't do if you own guns. They staged the whole thing and the cops wasn't called till they were gone. If you waste your time giving them any, I'm taking a break from you. Take care my friend.
Thank you very much for the wise words and the sound advice. It is indeed far better to hear this ahead of time than to hear it from a (possibly activist) judge later.
Question; Suppose for example you see an individual or a mob pouring gasoline around the house, about to burn it down? Surely you cannot be expected to stay in your house and can you use deadly force to stop the arson attack? As always thank you Mr. Ayoob for the excellent video lesson.
Stopping an arson is actually specifically reffered to in the defense of others section of the self defense code in my state. It's one of the few exceptions to the immediate part it thevthreat of great bodily harm.
I was on a jury for a self defense case where the whole reason it even went to trial was because the accused was in his front yard. Typical anti-gun prosecutor trying to punish a law abiding citizen for defending himself and family. We deliberated for all of 2 minutes and unanimously found him not guilty. I think about that and cringe every time I hear someone brag about getting out of jury duty. Had it not been for a jury of levelheaded citizens, an innocent man would have went to jail.
Well Said!!! Well Said!
We too said not guilty!! In 2 minutes.. I even asked the prosecutor afterwards, why did you even try this case. He was mumbling something and the judge called him away. I left thinking how glad I was to make sure this 8 vet and pistol training officer was not charged with 25 minimum for that bs
He should've stayed in his house. Comply. Follow the law. Right?
@@drew2fast489 read again. He said it was a self-defense case. In other words he was either attacked or felt threatened to the point where deadly force was necessary.
@drew2 fast It's about time for patriots from sea to sea, come together, and clean out the trash!
Also don’t forget in a lot of states it comes down to pointing the weapon at someone. I was 22 in Georgia and had an incident where these two individuals (father and teenage son) loved pulling to the stop sign in front of my house and doing burnouts. I finally had enough and yelled at them when they did it while I was outside. The two decided to get out of the truck and start walking intently toward me on my property. I kept my home defense AR by the front door whenever I went out so I reached in and grabbed it. I stepped back out with my AR in the lowered ready state and advised to the two if they make one step further I will shoot. They ran back to the truck and called the police which my wife had already done. Once they had ran back to the truck I stepped back inside sat my AR down, removed the magazine and waited for the police. Once the cops arrived I came outside without my weapon and with both hands in the air to show I was not a threat. The cops got my statement and the guys statement who had to admit that he sent his son home and I did not point the gun at him. The officers determined that since I had not directly pointed the gun at the two that I was not the aggressor and indeed was simply ready to defend myself. This infuriated the guy whom I heard screaming at the cops about how I was allowed to just have an AR15 outside without consequences and the officers basically said “yes, you aggressed on his property and he did not point the rifle at you”. Had I lost my cool and waved my AR at the two then I would have been in trouble; however, since I kept it at a lowered ready state, had two aggressors coming towards me and also presented myself once the cops arrived in a non threatening and non aggressive manor that I was not at fault in any way shape or forum. The guy was furious and was warned by the officers to not go on my property again. I never heard them do another burnout in front of my house after that.
Lol that's awesome .they sound like some ignorant jerks ..why not go to a racetrack for things like that 🤷♂️..people have no respect anymore SMH . I also keep my AR-15 for home defense but I hope I never need it for that
The only thing that could have been better would be a video camera of some sort, upholding your statement of being in a low ready position should the other guy have decided to be a royal a$$.
You had excellent presence of mind to keep the weapon at low ready. I think as long as any armed citizen can keep their cool and only point a gun at someone when they are in “imminent danger of death of serious bodily harm” then they can stay on the right side of the law in most situations. It’s easier said than done but lawfully carrying a weapon requires a higher level of responsibility.
BUT you are missing the point that they could LIE and even if you PROVE later by camera or witness you STILL may have been locked up and that is a nightmare for so many long-term reasons. So I would be careful on that type of interaction because different jurisdictions MIGHT view that as "brandishing" EVEN if you never aimed it at them too ❗ I totally agree with you that you SHOULD be able to do what you did -- but in todays SICK leftist world it is a HIGH RISK that a scumbag left wing prosecutor will use you to get votes from scum.... Costing you a fortune in legal fees at a minimum.
@@TheMrMused The incident occurred way back in the early 2000's before home security cameras and ring doorbells became popular. I agree footage would have been nice to sure up my statement but fortunately for me the guy was so sure just having the AR was a crime that he didn't think to lie and say i pointed it at them.
I shot an attacker, in my front yard and was arrested, charged with attempted homocide, released on RoR and "sweated" by the cops for 2 weeks as they scrambled to find any shred of blame to pin on me.
Charges were dropped and record expunged when they realized it was 100% THEIR fault for refusing to stop the attacker after multiple requests, and hearing recorded phone threats, over a 12 hour period.
NEVER DEPEND ON COPS OR GOVERNMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING OR TELL THE TRUTH
An outdoor workbench area, such as I have, with a weatherproof locking safe and cabinet puts a dfferent spin on being outside my home and "armed"
When seconds count the police are just minutes away
Funny how the right pretends to love the police, but when things don’t go your way, the right wing is so quick to slam “the cops”, as if they are suddenly BLM.
You cant have it both ways, right wingers.
Yup its the cops job to find a reason to arrest you simple as that. They will even lie on there reports and in court.
@@ZapheteropedWhat state do you reside in?
Very interesting to hear that interpretation... The country I live in has far stricter gun laws than the US, but over here the considerations are different when it comes to the "castle" definition: If your property is enclosed by a fence, that property still is considered part of your home. And anybody overcoming the obstacle of the fence, be that by breaking it, or climbing over it, is already considered to be breaking into your home.
I like that more to be honest, a fence is no different than a wall of a city, or the gates of an actual castle. They didn't consider a kings throne rooms or bedroom as his castle they called the whole damn thing the castle and that included the outer walls.
That's how it should be.
It varies from state to state. Some states do include some or all surrounding property in the castle doctrine.
In the USA you should post no trespassing signs, that makes all the difference, it’s been determined that your property shall be marked to identify clear markers, we have specific special signs that must be used, therefore you cannot use a cardboard crayon sign, etc.
In the state of Texas a person can proect their family and property with deadly force. Castle Doctrine also applies to your motel room.
I feel like I am sitting in a classroom, listening to a very knowledgeable “professor “ telling us the right and wrong things in life !
Thanks Massad and WC !
Yes, really am grateful for the care you show for us citizens. Humble thanks.
I agree, and disagree.
Massad IS a knowledge person, with more experience than most of us can imagine. However, "classroom" examples and "real world" don't often overlap well, if at all.
Take a class from him!
basically you are!!
And his voice doesn't put me to sleep, I hang on every word! These videos are great!
This was a video that really needed to be made. Thank you for educating the masses.
Mass educating the masses!
Here's an idea don't shoot them in your front yard after you chase them out of your back. Everybody knows what happened that night
Nobody cared though because he didn't belong to anybody over here
@@beelathewheela8560 and he did not look like people over here either.
@@benjammin7993
🤣🤣🤣🤣 Good one!
As a former urban LEO and former prosecutor Massad continues to elegantly educate us all. "Pulling it all together" in a sage precise comprehensible manner. Massad you are a "gift" to our world 💪🇺🇸✝ Thank you kind Sir❗
Ayoob: “Thanks Mom!”
@@ericsmith6677 What are you trying to say ?
@@gangoffour6690 IMO you are a fool ❗ His wisdom is prolific... I have been an officer and a prosecutor and can assure you he is one of the BEST sources of lawful advice on the internet. 💪 Your UN-hinged comment reveals your ignorance, and that you have "other issues."
@@LJ-jq8og : yeah, really. Kind of a weird statement "people like you are why I need a lawyer before I even think of defending myself"
No idea what the person is trying to communicate with that statement. No idea.
Perhaps being a criminal defense attorney for 34 years has turned my brain into channeling everything into a question.
@@horacesawyer2487 Agree. I can only hope for the writer of that "bizarre" comment, that they hastily mis-read something ? Perhaps inebriated ? IF not, then they have significant issues. I am sure you have seen your "share" of this in your travels too. 😊
I just did not "statistically" expect to run into someone with that type of impairment on this channel. 🤔
Ayoob's book taught me about using narrow spaces to keyhole multiple attackers. That probably saved my life in 1992.
If you’re comfortable telling it, that sounds like a valuable and interesting story to share.
Just watch 300, they did the same.
Terrific advice
@@jafo4u508lmao, you aren't wrong
Is this an LA riots story?
He speaks better than any college professor I ever had. What a brilliant man!
Without leftism, like most college professors
He speaks well because he knows his material.
Mr. Ayoob is a fantastic man. I remember as a young kid reading my dad's firearm magazines. Countless articles by him that I read and took to heart. I'm glad I did. He taught me so much about responsible ownership and usable tactics at a young age that either backed or supplemented what I learned from my dad. Most of it, if not all, still stands to this day. I still use his techniques to teach my friends and others as they learn how to be responsible and proficient with firearms. So cool to see he is still instructing people and being a damn good example of what it is to be a responsible firearm owner.
“He speaks better than any college professor I ever had.”
He does so because he’s been teaching self defence and about the laws governing this topic for literally four or five decades, if not longer. I started reading his articles published in ‘Guns and Ammo’ magazine 4 decades ago, and he was already a nationally recognized expert on the topics even then.
He teaches in-person classes. Totally worth attending one.
That was an incredibly fast 14 minutes! Held my attention from start to finish as well!
A Masster class from the Masster! Thanks!
That's what she said.
They break into your cars, steal $4000 of family property and cops do nothing. They steal your copper powerlines six times and cops do nothing. You find 15 stolen bicycles hidden in your bushes and cops do nothing. Two days later the thieves came and got them. You catch a crackhead in your car with 5 of your neighbor's car radios on the ground outside and a cop takes them and doesn't turn them im. And doesn't do a report.
If Granny Clampett opened the front door with the barrel of a shotgun in Indiana, she would be subject to a two year minimum felony, PLUS an 8 year felony for a minimum of TEN YEARS IN PRISON, FIRST OFFENSE.
@@citizenschmitizen I blame the weak justice system and the bleeding heart liberals for that. I’ve noticed a lot of crap going on in my area right in front of cops and nothing is done because a lot are told, and this is all over, if it’s not a $1000+ issue or a certain level of misdemeanor or a felony, don’t bother wasting the man hours. I think small things lead to larger things later and it’ll never stop. It’s like teaching kids the small things when you get so it doesn’t lead to bigger issues when they get older
I'm a first time pistol owner at 64 and I appreciate the knowledgeable and measured presentation of the various issues. Thank you.
I wish we had this still in England 😞.. we used to have a saying "an Englishmans home is his castle 🏰" no longer
Your ancestors didn't much care for our ancestors having the right to defend themselves and their families.
@we are the remnants,
We haven't cared what the british thought since 1776
You don't want to live around a bunch of scared little piss-ants with gun courage.
you will defend yourself with a cricket bat or frying pan
Damn feel bad for you guys, so you have no rights on defending yourself?
Another awesome service to the community. Thanks Mass.
I try to watch Ayoob once a week. Thinking though situational self-defense *regularly* and then hearing related case law presented cogently is incredibly helpful. Thanks for all you do here.
Along with owning a firearm comes a lot of responsibility. Massad brings a lot of wisdom here.
@horace sheffield same can be said about left wing fear and stupidity to “teach them a lesson. Don’t you agree?
@@shaggydogg630 don't feed the trolls.
@@investigativeoutcomes9343 yeah , point taken.
@horace sheffield After months of violent riots, don't you think that the destruction needed to stop? You bet your ass that they needed to be told to STOP.
Horace Shefield😂 smh @ your stupidity!
I am glad to hear this as I had three boys (found out later they were boys) come up to my garage under my camera and was trying to get into the house. We sounded our alarm and they fled. I went outside to see what they were doing with my AR inhand. Deputies caught them rather quickly afterwards. Next time I will stay inside after hearing this video…. THANKS FOR THE INFO!!!
Watch out. You could be cited for brandishing, on the one hand, and also should they see you have that AR, you've now given them huge reason to come in and rob your home while you're away.
Just stick the barrel through the drapes and tap on the glass. They'll see it and get the message.
@@markcole8436 That's brandishing a weapon.
@@markcole8436 I recall an incident in 2020 where a residential neighborhood home was being assaulted by BLM/ANTIFA rioters. The homeowner remained inside but displayed his shotgun at the window. The homeowner was charged with aggravated assault. I don’t recall what city this was in.
@@Blueknight1960q
Civil lawsuits are almost never mentioned. Just when you think a criminal court case is settled, you can almost always expect a civil lawsuit to follow. Remember to learn from other's experience and hope you, yourself, can avoid going through the same situation. Great points based on past situations.
Yes. Another excellent reason to maintain a calm and disciplined attitude as much as circumstances permit.
I can't think of any situation where it's better to go off half-cocked than to respond in a measured, level-headed way to perceived threats.
Again, as much as possible. I know that some things do happen fast and, in that case, we can be deprived of that precious few seconds to respond coolly.
I have been a follower of Mr. Ayoob teachings since the early '80s and I hold my thoughts of Mr. Ayoob with the upmost reverence. The definition of a wise man and most compassionate for those behind the trigger and those in front of the muzzle and from him will you only get the truth.
Absolutely!
Lol
He's a creepy fascist but wise and has good information.
I am so grateful to Massaf Ayoob and others for educating those willing to learn so we don't make the same foolish mistakes as others have. It is never a good idea to voluntarily remove any barriers that stand between you and an "aggressor". You expose yourself unnecessarily into a situation you may not fully understand. When an intruder breaks in, he/she is the aggressor and coming into a situation, they may not understand giving you, the defender, the element of surprise, if you are prepared. Had Reeise just kept his door closed he never would have felt compelled to shoot, or he could have retreated and closed the door to see if the "drugged out" guy dressed in his Saturday Night Fever costume tried to kick the door in rather than standing their waiting for the "right moment" to blast that kid in the chest.
We all love you Mr. Ayoob. Your teachings are extremely valuable.
Leaving the ego when picking up a firearm is imperative. Great video!
Well that's pretty much the entire population of the United States that shouldn't be owning a gun then, isn't it?
Don't listen to cockeyed jews
This man’s command of language and faultless delivery, appropriate to his subject, make of him a mesmerizing, convincing speaker.
He's one of the good guys for dang sure!
What a privilege to have this guy bringing so many important lessons!
I can listen to this man all day.
Until I get sleepy from the sound of his stentorian voice...
This should be played in any Permit to Carry classroom as well. Some things I had no idea about, but am glad to know now. Extremely effective 'storytelling' as well.
There should be no " permit to carry classrooms" you don't need to be permitted to exercise your rights..........." permit to carry " hahaha
@@kurtrussell5228 nothing wrong with responsibly exercising your right, whether "permitted" or not.
@@stinct1776 it's not a right anymore if you have to be " permitted "
@@kurtrussell5228 safe handling and knowledge of legal framework is key for all gun owners - I don't care for the "permit" part.
This needs be standard with firearms safety
Having read all of Massads books I could get my hands on, now getting to listen to the professor is awesome. He has really educated me and influence my way of thinking since I was a kid. Thank you for putting him in a public forum.
Check out some other guys like Pat Mac, Mike Pannone, Kyle Lamb, Larry Vickers, Jerry Miculek, Travis Haley. Massad is of an older doctrine and some of his stuff will get you killed. Judged by 12 or carried by 6. Choice is yours.
Excellent as always. Nearly 50 years of reading and now watching Ayoob and of all the people out there this guy gives it to you straight.
Massad, you explain these matters more eloquently than anyone I’ve ever had the pleasure to watch. It’s no wonder at all why your services are in such high demand, Well Done Sir, Again!
I like Massad Ayoob’s voice, he sounds like he’d be good in an old west movie or something! 🤠
It reminds me of Robert Mitchum's narration in the beginning of Tombstone.
It's bonkers to me that I used to read his articles in gun magazines in drug stores when I was a snot nosed teenager. (You can't forget that odd name!) Now I'm in my mid 50s and he's still around. He's living proof you can be old but not a Fudd.
I'm 54 and I've been reading Ayoob's articles and learning from him since I was 17.
@David Meyer I swear I thought the same thing. Sounds very similar. Every once in awhile, Massad teaches a class at Top Gun range here in Memphis. I'd like to take the class, but it's like $1,800 or something.
@@MeCanik79 Worth it.
When I bought my first firearm for home defense about 41 years ago, the first thing I did was read "In The Gravest Extreme" on the advice of my boss. It was the best education a new gunowner could give themself at the time. Turns out even now Massad Ayoob is still the best. Thank you for a lifetime of solid firearms advice.
I always recommend that book to anyone interested in getting a gun for self defense, I even have an extra copy just for a loaner. This may sound strange coming from a lifelong pro 2A guy, but I'm proud of the two times potential gun owners, after reading it, decided NOT to buy a gun.
@@faryldaryl3975 So you are proud you talked someone out of try and learn how to defend one's family and themselves? will you be just as proud if they are attacked or possibly murdered by taking your advice?
I also bought, "in the Gravest Extreme" and still consider it a "bible" of sorts for anybody who owns a self defense weapon.
Guns and gun fighting has come light years since then. Get up to date on tactics and shooting.
@@beenschmokin My guns, tactics and skills are up-to-date. But thank you for "expert" advice. LOL
Mr Ayoob, thank you for taking the time to go over these very important issues. You're always giving things to ponder that I had taken for granted. Like you said, better to find out here, than later. Thanks again.
I used to watch Massad all the time. One thing he said that I remember is that a staircase is the perfect killing zone. Wait at the top of the staircase and the bad boys will come to you. No cover for bad boys on the staircase.
Depends on the staircase boyo. Some wouldn't provide you any cover or concealment either, against an unknown force multiplier. But I get your point using choke points to engage. I totally agree. Maybe I'm just in a bad mood, but is there anything else super obvious you want to state?? I mean, you didn't mention the OODA loop at all...I figure staring with your face against the wall might be the best way to surprise everyone lol
100% !
Not to mention it helps with a self defense claim when the intruder was going up the stairs towards you.
@@triGRIMM I'm going to say "yep" you are, or were rather, quite grumpy. ;-)
That's what I tell my wife for defense
This Man brings back many childhood memories, I used to read handgunner magazines, as well as Soldier of Fortune. Always a good read, and I learned a lot. I want to take this moment to thank Mr. Ayoob for his teaching, guidance, and frankly, candor , in matters such as these.
Same here. I think its so cool we can now watch and listen to him on RUclips.
@JamesRockon though, maybe now with RUclips, he seems a tad less "mythical" or "mysterious ". Lol. But , it did just strike me that I'm 50+ and he's been doing this since before I was born..
Yes, 💯 : as a teen I read a few Harris publications Combat Handguns, Guns & Ammo, SoF(by Robert K Brown USAR ret). Ayoob wrote about many use of force events, guns, holsters.
Me too !!!!
He used to write for the magazines.
Could listen to this gentlemans POV all day, every day....blessings Mas..
Thank you SO much for this. It's those little details that hang people every day; and this has gone a long way in clearing them up as relates to this subject.
Great video as always. Force trouble to come to you, don't go to trouble. Staying inside with your doors locked leaves no question who the aggressor was. In most of the U.S. at least you'll have the protection of the castle doctrine too.
I appreciate your explanation on real world problems. And what the lawful approach is to deal with them.
I learned not only from this vid. but also, from the comments. That speaks to the quality of the instructor IMO. For more than 25 years of learning from your entertaining wisdom, thank you Mr. Ayoob.
Thank you Massad for the advice. It is always best to have all of legal information on your side.
Great episode. One thing I would suggest, is that you remind people of a previous show you did. And (I am paraphrasing) you made a great point that leaving your home to confront folks was tactically not a very good decision. I live in a rural area. We have people trespass on the farm, and I always am reminded of your good advice. I am inside, my door is locked, I am armed and in control of my situation, once i go outside all of that goes out the proverbial door. Great show
Hello 👋
Not everyone trespassing on your property has criminal intent.
Especially in broad daylight!
Lots of people are just uninformed or stupid.
I am not afraid to talk to anyone.
And I sure as hell am not going to bring a goddamned gun with me to tell someone to get lost.
@@jstravelers4094 Well, a couple points. Our property is clearly marked with locks on the access points. That answers intent. Two, I do have a gun with me, because most often they (when I run across them) have guns illegally hunting. Three, 99%of the time the conversations are not adversarial, just a warning. Four, trespassers who get hurt still can sue the land owner, so we are fairly firm in our warning. Five, you know nothing of what you are speaking of or my situation or area. Six, when we know of trespassers we call the sheriff, but sometimes surprises happen. I’d rather be armed 2 miles in the woods than unarmed when I meet someone who clearly intended to trespass on our land and is armed.
@@AnnaWinter-ie5fg hi 👋
@@jstravelers4094 What if they come at you with a weapon while you are "telling them to get lost"??
These videos are far and away the best thing on the web in regards to youtube and firearms channels.
I just wanted to thank you for all of these informative vids that you are putting out. With each successive one, I feel more and more knowledgeable. Whether it’s examples given, the laws of the land, or safety practices, I feel better prepared than before. I really enjoy the explanation and breakdown of laws concerning the individual events that show why things went the way they did and how to prevent it. A calmer, more knowledgeable mind is much better off than one operating strictly on emotion. In the heat of the moment, I’m sure everyone experiences emotions, but I feel the more a person understands and tries to implement these teachings, the less likely the innocent will be liable/subjected to possible criminal prosecution, injury, or even death. Sir, Thank you again for what you are doing.
Excellent and comprehensive presentation on an important subject. The storylines were exceptional and clear. Thank you Massad.
This is really good advice. From a safety standpoint, you don't want to be standing in your front yard in the open with no cover or concealment in a dangerous situation. The interesting thing about the St. Louis incident was I never saw any video of the people who were destroying property and trespassing in the neighborhood. Stay in your home hidden behind locked doors with your tools and engage only if someone is breaking in or you are in imminent danger.
That couple are both idiots.
If I actually felt uncomfortable about a group of people marching down the public street past my house.....I might have my rifle laying across my lap as I sat on my front steps watching them walk by.
But there is no way I would point my weapon at anyone on the public street. No matter what they said.
Maybe it was the sight of the firearms that caused no damage....
The St. Louis couple was nuts … outside , pointing their weapons at folks and bogger finger on trigger 😬😬😬
Absolutely. It's also hard to convince a jury that you were thinking about your family and defending them when you decided to leave them to defend themselves while you went outside to further engage a perp. Not only is it more dangerous to you, it's more dangerous to your family if a gunman takes you out of the fight. If you're chasing somebody down, it's no longer self-defense. That's a clear case of your emotions getting you into jail. Being a gun-owner requires restraint. Heading outside to pick a 2nd fight in a more dangerous arena is the opposite of restraint.
@@Skank_and_Gutterboy" If you're chasing somebody down, it's no longer self-defense."
Well that is the way it is supposed to be, But a few days ago a homeless guy tracked someone down long after he said he was attacked and the DA said it is Self defense.
It's my understanding that during the McCluskey trial the mother claimed that she had heard someone yell let's burn the house to the ground. One has to wonder what it would feel like if a crowd of people were outside your house with the possibility of someone throwing a Molotov cocktail inside. Question is do you wait inside or do you go out and nip it at the bud?
personally I feel that one ought to be allowed to walk around on their own land carrying their own guns, especially when a threat is obvious.
That being said, maybe it's a decent middle ground to walk out with a pistol in your pocket, not visible, unless someone really lights up a bottle with some hanky tied on it?
That's true
@@todorkolev7565 In Florida you can! :D
@@todorkolev7565They didn’t get in trouble for carrying, but for pointing with trigger on finger. Big difference. All the difference.
Protect your family at all cost. Property? Depends!
During the “summer of love”, Molotov cocktails seemed common. You can’t always protect your home from inside…. Thanks Mas.
Exactly my thought. Imagine a growing crowd entering your property with force (like in the McCloskey case), you retreat to the house and then start to defend yourself and in response they start to set fire on your home (while you are inside).
You may be on the safe side regarding the law, but you loose in every other aspect.
There were incidents of private citizen's homes being burned down by Molotov cocktails? Pardon my question, I'm totally ignorant on this topic and am just curious.
New York Times:
“He was a Princeton-educated corporate lawyer. She provided legal services for the poor. Now they are accused in a Molotov cocktail attack on a police car.”
Portland Police Bureau
“On Thursday, December 31, 2020 at about 7:45p.m., Central Precinct officers became aware of a gathering in the area of Southwest 3rd Avenue and Southwest Main Street. As the crowd grew to an estimated 80-100 people, some individuals in the crowd began to engage in violence. At least two Molotov cocktail-style firebombs were thrown, and large, commercial grade aerial fireworks were launched at the Federal Courthouse and the Justice Center. “
If those that riot will attack police, I believe they will attack your home.
@@_Xentropy_ no. he's scared of his own shadow
This calls for intelligent threat assessment.
Is that what the McCloskeys did? Were Molotov cocktails or bombs of any sort in evidence during that incident?
As always Mas, words of wisdom and sensibility. Thanks and Blessings!
Much appreciated
Great video! I love listening to Mas explain situations with actual case studies and scenarios to illustrate his points. I can't tell you how many times I've referenced his videos during conversations.
My absolute favorite firearms instructor.
Absolutely right! I keep seeing these news reports about people going out in their front yard to deal with angry callers. People come to the door looking for trouble, and out the door goes the family. Make sure your doors are locked, including the back and side ones, and make sure they will hold against an attack. They should be able to stop a break-in anyway!
Thank you Massad and the Wilson Combat Channel for some very sound advice!
You sir are the epitomy of excellence.
Ive read your articles for over 40 years.
I read many of your first works in ShotgunNews,G&A?,ShootngTimes? in the 1980s.I hope and pray you have minimum 25/30 more to give us.Thank you for all that you have done,doing now and all the many firearms subjects you have left to tell us.lve admired you from 19yrs on...lm now 60.
DITTO here too...!
Same here. 44 now. Read his articles since my teens
Your service to us is greatly appreciated. Such great advice. I will continue to watch your videos and please keep them coming. Thank you!!
Appreciate all your videos. Your explanation is as always great advice. Thank you
My biggest fear is that defending yourself makes you guilty. I’m armed, trained and practice constantly at a range. But even then, I always take the non aggressive attitude if (and I pray it doesn’t) that should arise. Stay secure inside, communicate immediately with law enforcement, position yourself in a defensive posture, know where your rounds will travel. Then and only then will I respond discharging my firearm, keeping in mind, I’m not “shooting to kill” because those words will make me out to be the aggressive one. Thank you for everything you do sir. This type of educational information is here the asking.
Be safe.
Goodonya and best reasoning YL. Mas would agree 100%.
Better to be judged by 12 than buried by 6
Do you prefer death, instead of facing a stupid judge?
@@tomasnokechtesledger1786 no of course not. Hopefully if I use deadly force, it will be a considered a good shoot.
@Ying Li if you're discharging your firearm that means the other person is threatening your life in which case you always shoot to kill... anybody with basic firearms training knows this
"I'm Massad Ayoob, one of the many content providers here" That's called class, ladies and gentlemen.
Can you explain? I'm new to him.
...and a very humble intro by such a man.
@@DCsGladiator Oh my! IMO If you're a firearms owner and you do NOT know who Ayoob is - you need to get caught-up IMMEDIATELY! Massad Ayoob is one of the more notable firearms and self-defense experts of the last 50 years! His book "In The Gravest Extreme" which deals with what happens in the aftermath of a self-defense shooting, is one of two books which I feel EVERYONE who owns a gun for self-defense needs to read! (The other one being Col. Jeff Cooper's seminal work "Principles of Personal Defense")! I often give copies of both books to friends who are new shooters, or who are not familiar with these two men. Ayoob is admittedly kind of "an acquired taste" for some folks, because he has his own way of thinking, and is not afraid to puncture platitudes or egos, and he has what some people consider to be a rather high and mighty way of speaking. But I really like him, and I do not believe he's a egoist, unlike some of the self-agrandizing "Experts in their own minds" who are out there pushing THEIR way of shooting, or selling Time-shares and Condos on their property in the desert to their students during breaks in training. Please do yourself a GREAT favor and pick up the works of Ayoob (and Col. Cooper) at your earliest convenience and familiarize yourself with them..
it's called an introduction.
@@captainnemo6222 LOL
I've been loving hearing Massad Ayoob speak. He's such a wise and thoughtful man. I'd love to see him on JRE.
He would be a great voice actor
For many decades many have benefited from Massad Ayoob, thank you. I do agree with his opinion here, but I want to think in broader terms than this. I’m glad he mentioned the curtilage doctrine, but for me I view our woods as curtilage. Yes, his advice to remain inside in most cases certainly makes sense for a residential track home in the city. That’s because their properties are very small, easier to tactically manage, and there might be innocent bystanders in that neighborhood. But for those of us that live in the woods or rural country, like me. It takes some foot patrol to do a thorough threat assessment. Some would even use an UTV. And so, I’d rather leave my house to do that myself, rather than wait for the police, and/or allow the suspect to flee. That is IF I call for law enforcements assistance, Nonetheless, this is good advice. But the bottom line is what will the court say.
It was suggested that if your property is fenced/walled, the entire property is considered to be part of the house. Which makes sense to me. A "no trespassing" sign tacked to a tree is far less of a deterrence than "no trespassing" signs placed at 5-foot to 6-foot intervals on a fence that must be breached to enter the posted property.
In most situations where trouble lingers outside the house, you should indeed remain inside and be prepared to defend yourself and family. However, the circumstances of what was taking place in 2020 involved violent rioters who demonstrated a propensity for setting fire to buildings and vehicles. While a man likes to think of his home as his castle, it is still different than a literal castle with a large moat, a drawbridge, and heavily fortified walls. The modern house is far less resistant to attack by fire(the flaming kind.) There may be some of us who would prefer the option to potentially die fighting rather than wait for our home to be burned down with us inside as the unscathed rioters laughs are the last thing we ever hear.
No one was rioting. And the people were not even going to their house.
@@WALTERBROADDUS WRONG! No one was rioting? Then why does video news footage show the crowd broke down the McCloskey's front gate and were threatening to kill them when the McCloskeys came out with their weapons? But you were right in that the rioters weren't even going to the McCloskey's house. That's because the Mayor's house was in the same neighborhood, and they were threatening to burn down HER house.
I admire Massad Ayoob, but he's wrong on this one. He cites castle doctrine but assumes the castle starts at the front door. He doesn't mention that the McCloskey residence is a compound with high stone walls and an iron front gate and a lawn BEFORE the front door. News footage shows the crowd had torn down that IRON gate and were inside on the lawn shouting threats. Therefore the castle HAD been breached, and the McCloskeys were justified in brandishing their weapons inside their own residence.
Second, Ayoob fails to mention how politicized this case was, and that the law really had very little to do with it, which was why the Democrat prosecutor charged and the Republican governor pardoned the McCloskeys. Third, Ayoob should have discussed this case in context with the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict, in which Ayoob justified Rittenhouse's actions with the "doctrine of necessity" even though the castle doctrine obviously didn't apply to Rittenhouse. Or even the Florida law enforcement's justification for property owners of "you loot, we shoot" in the aftermath of the recent hurricane. And fourth, Ayoob doesn't mention that St. Louis law enforcers refused to put down the riot even when the rioters were in an exclusive gated private community, leaving homeowners like the McCloskeys to fend for themselves.
Because, as cgsimons1187 pointed out, there are times when staying inside your house, per Ayoob's advice, can put you at a disadvantage or, worse, get you killed. Never mind rioters throwing Molotov cocktails at your roof, what about some people actually shooting at your house from the outside street? Even if you had a weapon, you can't shoot what you can't see, and you can't see if you're hunkered down inside your house dodging the incoming bullets. At some point you will have to exit the house in some way just to see where the threat is coming from.
In the end, it is probably better to simply state that the castle doctrine applies in different ways in different states and even countries, and Ayoob's generalized advice to stay inside the house is at best applicable on a case-by-case basis. After all, it is up to the person whose life is at risk to decide whether he or she will be be judged by twelve---or carried by six.
@@WALTERBROADDUS They literally broke down a private gate to the neighborhood and ended up on their property angrily shouting that they were going to assault and burn the Mclosky's house down. An angry mob in a time where angry mobs are rioting, looting, burning, and murdering people are the very definition of overwhelming force.
@@ungratefulpeasant8085 on the contrary, their display of force inflamed the situation.
@@ungratefulpeasant8085 Wikipedia, while not the most 100-percent credible source those present facts of the event differently. The gate was actually intact when they decided to exit their home. And the crowd was not threatening them. But in fact , simply going to the mayor's house.
Here in Alabama we have stand your ground law , and as a detective I’ve worked several cases where the suspect was shot outside the residence and all cases were no billed at grand jury !
Detective Thompson, in Alabama, does the Stand Ground Law work along the lines that there is a clear and present threat to one's life, *regardless* of location?
I am an investigator also, and wish to hear a colleague's perspective on this.
What does no billed mean?
@@joewoodchuck3824 Means the grand jury did not return a bill of indictment, so no charges.
Even so, the criminal case is only a small part of your problems. When it comes to civil cases, Stand Your Ground is only an affirmative defense and not an immunity from a lawsuit, in many states. You are much more liable to suffer in a civil suit than a criminal one. Many people discount this and if the media takes up the case against you, you are almost certainly going to have eager lawyers looking to come after you.
Yes regardless of location , I've had cases where neither party were on there own property, I've had road rage case and ,also a gas station case and several others ! As to the other comment, civil can be terrible but still not as bad as losing your freedom !
I can't get enough of these videos. Ayoob's knowledge of the law, the courts and jury attitudes is unsurpassed and invaluable.
I completely agree with pretty much everything he said. The added section on curtilage was fascinating and I need to research more about that.
This is an extremely thorough, reasonable, and well-cited perspective. Love that you cover details of some of the relevant case law. Thanks for the insight!
A fabulous presentation, Mas. Thanks !
Many thanks!
Right about 4 minutes, he brought up a very good point.
I was involved in a lethal Force encounter, and I opened my door and advanced toward the threat.
I fired one shot, and the threat retreated.
When I had to make a statement, the detective had the law book opened at "homicide".(Texas)
People should be allowed to face the problem that threatens themselves, their family, and their property, in my opinion.
Even if it takes 3 doors to get to that menacing threat. We shouldn't have to be scared of technicalities in court when it comes to defending our life, land, and family members/neighbors.
Criminals should be extremely afraid of the consequences when they violate the respect of any of the aforementioned people/items' rules of conduct.
Harsh and swift punishment is what truly discourages criminals from attempting to make anyone a victim.
Brutally punish those that seek to inflict harm in exchange for money. This is the only way that criminals will think very carefully before they find their next victim.
Problem is, when you open the front door and head out to hunt the guy down, it stops being self-defense and now you're the assaulter, batterer, or murderer. Not only does it put you in legal jeopardy, you now have target-fixation to the point of abandoning your family. That's not a position I want to be in.
There is no good reason to advance towards someone who poses an imminent threat to your life.
@@Skank_and_Gutterboy this is a flat-out false statement. As many recent legal cases demonstrate
@@arconreef that's like your opinion man
Just like the man said, the totality of the circumstances are generally weighed. In your example, you gave little context as to what the threat was or why you thought it a threat. If someone just escaped from a serial killers car and is running as fast as they can and start banging on your door at 2am, trying to open it, one could consider that a threat and fire. Not knowing the circumstances, it would be scary for any homeowner. Someone, probably not in there right mind, trying to enter a house. To me, justifiable to shoot in that split second. But then there's the consequences of knowing if you waited a bit more, maybe a tragedy could be avoided. Totality of circumstances in each case must be weighed.
In the small town where I grew up, the chief of police lived across the street. I was a teenager at the time, but I remember a conversation he had with my father. He stated "If you shoot them in a doorway or coming through a window... make sure the body is inside the house when officers arrive... no questions will be asked."
Not good advice for the modern era. Forensic science will show that you moved the body, which can get you in big trouble even if the initial shooting was justified. Massad says as much in his book Deadly Force (2nd ed, pg. 143)
Sure , try that and let me how it works out
If you do that you’ll end up with a murder charge plus obstruction of justice
Mr Ayoob your videos are always great …i love soaking up as much knowledge and wisdom that I can …and you as an elder in this community provide just that …much respect to you sir !!!
Thank you for your well detailed and thoughtful explanation of this case and how it relates to a homeowner.
Thank you, for sharing your knowledge, Massad !!!
Well said, Mr. Ayoob. I taught my family if there is suspicious activity outside of our dwelling, to initiate the family plan. Stay in the home, kids get to safe place (pre-designated), wife call 911, I am in the ready behind barrier and at an oblique from either of the doors. My wife gives the dispatcher a safe word. Everyone in the home is trained how to safely operate a firearm. So far only had one scare, everyone in the home executed the plan and county sheriff arrived as predicted (5min). Person turned out to be elderly with dementia. No one was harmed. Many times protectors want to go outside and meet the threat head on, You are right, stay in the dwelling. Thank you for this great video and example, ( albeit unfortunate example).
Massad Ayoob: national treasure.
Always love hearing Mas's take on things.
Excellent as always. Thank you!
When someone outside begins preparation for starting your house on fire while you’re inside that’s a different scenario requiring you to go outside to stop the intended assault/attack. A post addressing this scenario would be helpful. Thank you.
Excellent point.
That is common sense, I mean.. if someone has to tell you that you can go engage someone lighting your house on fire, and that fire puts your life at imminent risk... I question how they survived thi long in the first place.... It is rather simple, If you feel that your life is absolutely at risk, or you are at risk of severe bodily injury, then take the shot. I mean, it is an obvious scenario, and you know when it happens.... or just ask yourself, could I convince a jury that my life was at risk, and the answer is yeah or most likely, then go for it.
Even in New York state, which is a notoriously anti gun state, it is explicitly stated in the law that you have the right to shoot anyone in the act of committing arson on your dwelling.
@@100percentSNAFU Love seeing it in writing. The prosecutors look for ways to falsely prosecute law abiding citizens in order to keep the criminal’s family and friends from rioting with no regard for the law abiding citizen protecting himself.
GREAT Video as always Sir!! - When I saw the videos of this incident one other thing jumped out at me about their actions. From a tactical/operational standpoint... The moment they exited the home they gave up a significant source of cover/concealment. From the angle of the street, they were very exposed to anyone in the crowd who wanted to let a round or two fly. When we discuss this situation in my classes I point out how easily a shot could have run out from the crowd and made the incident far more tragic thank it was.
Thanks mass for always taking the time to help folks to stay safe we appreciate it
Always
As usual your knowledge and wisdom speaks volumes. Thank you for presenting an important message.
Like always excellent presentation.
Been following MAS since the late nineties early 2000s. Always had great articles in gun magazines back then and still do today(you tube).
We Appreciate You explaining all this! Actually am familiar with all 3 cases but didn't know all the outcomes. You're very informed. Thanks bunches for sharing. God Bless You! 💛💜
* * The McCloskeys were STILL ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY while they were ATTACKED by a HOSTILE MOB that was threatening them AND ENTERING their property ! ! ! ! ! WTF ??? * *
Absolutely so true. Remain in the house. Don’t go outside.
Sage advice, brilliantly presented. Thank you, sir, for your invaluable contributions.
"... it's better for you to find out here and now from us than to find out from the judge later..." So true. Subscribed!
this actually just happened in New Mexico I think. Police were serving a warrant late at night, went to the wrong house… and right when they realized it was the wrong house, the husband stepped out and was carrying a gun. They hit him with a flashlight and the guy raises his hands and gets mag dumped. The wife screams picks up the gun and fires back, believing that the cops were robbers that just killed her husband. She wasn’t charged, but neither were the officers because the husband stepped out of his front door carrying a pistol.
You’re wrong about the reason why that shooting by the police was justified. The flaw in your logic is that the police are involved. The police are always justified in stopping a perceived deadly threat to themselves or others, except when committing illegal acts. Going to the wrong house to serve a warrant is not illegal. That case falls under the “awful, but lawful” scenario. That being said, if the husband managed to injure the police and survive the encounter, self defense may have been an effective defense, but maybe not, given the police announced themselves and he left his castle. I also would not take the fact the wife was not charged as equivalent to being innocent of crimes. Charges are often political, and this could easily have been a political choice not to charge her in order to avoid drawing more negative media attention, as this case is not a good look for the police.
@@akovar50
So in other words, the police are completely and totally above the law. If I went to the "wrong" door, and shot the guy inside, I would go to prison for second degree murder, and so would you, and so would anyone without a badge.
Twenty-first century policing has completely gone off the rails. Who would've thought that agencies first birthed as "Prohibition Enforcement," staffed with literal gangsters, would turn out to be the worst criminals. Really is true what they say about fruit born of poisoned trees.
That’s not true. If the police are at the wrong house they carry the liability simply because they are now breaking a constitutional amendment (fourth amendment). Shooting at the cops would NOT be justified in that specific situation BUT the police department including those participating would be unjustified in what they did because as you stated, the police would be committing an illegal act (warrantless search). With your logic the police would not be liable even if they made clear physical entry into the wrong home which isn't at all true. There is actually multiple precedents of police making warrantless entries into wrong homes and ending up in firefights and almost always the police were found liable in both criminal and civil court. Liability doesn’t change because of a communication mistake @@akovar50
Also walking outside open you up to ambush and if you have a light on you really stand out and it's an easy shot to take you out.
OMG! I am an XParalegal 201 court cases, holder of 13 CCW Permits 13 states, 1996 NRA instructor and watched over 100+ Gun Case videos!
THIS lesson on "be the defender" inside your "CASTLE" is sooooo important.... Thank you!!!
Yes, 1000 reasons to leave this dumpster fire of a state of Commie-fornia. No .1, grusome. No.2 Nancy. No.3 Paul Pelosi’s hammer. I guess it runs in the family
Aloha John.
Mat in the Philippines 😃
Just throwing it out there but your typing doesn't look like that of an ex paralegal. All of the habits you had while working just fallen out of you or something?
Everyone wear your tall boots around this person ☝️
@@jimmydesouza4375
Hey Jimmy jealous alittle...?
Newsflash = folks can write anyway they want:
it's called the 1st Amendment ~ read it sometime...!
Great Advice! Makes Sense & Helps Keep Possible Situations in Perspective! ThankYou Sir!👍🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
The best advice is to listen to Massad Ayoob.
Thanks for the, as usual, great advice. You, Bill, and Ken are the best!
I did not know this. I absolutely intend to stay inside now if I ever encounter a situation like this. Hopefully I wont
You probably just saved me from prison. I needed to hear this.
I live in a similar situation. High violent crime and shootings every night. I can hear the gun shots. Sometimes they wake me up. Yes, I grab my gun and go look out the window to check my street and if they crossed my house I would be fully prepared to engage and open the door. I'm sick of this crime. After watching this, I will definitely be far less likely to open the door.
Glad we could help.
I lived in an area like that to man. Absolute combat zone. I moved and you really should too.
I appreciate the sobriety of the content presented here. The advice is so sensible and there is intelligent description of context. Neither defensiveness or promotion. Just really well done, thoughtful talks.
Amazing tip! I've just discover your channel and it became my favorite one. Good job!
I'm not suggesting others to agree with me and my decision not to follow you anymore, because you show with your body language that you are pleased that those lawyers who wanted some free television publicity and sabotaging gun owners rights buy acting ignorant, should have been used as examples for what you don't do if you own guns. They staged the whole thing and the cops wasn't called till they were gone. If you waste your time giving them any, I'm taking a break from you. Take care my friend.
Thank you for sharing your insight and wisdom! We need to listen carefully to this as our culture continues to change.
Thanks for giving us the benefit of your knowledge here, Mas. Valuable info, for sure. The devil is indeed in the details.
Glad it was helpful!
I can say enough how great and informative this video is.
Thank you very much for the wise words and the sound advice. It is indeed far better to hear this ahead of time than to hear it from a (possibly activist) judge later.
*This is an excellent video, and you sir are now probably gonna be responsible for saving many people from going to prison, Ty..* 😎
So well said. Thank you Mr. Ayoob. I'm really enjoying this channel.
Excellent talk for an absolute legend in the business. Thank you for sharing!
Glad you enjoyed it!
What if a mob was throwing flaming cocktails at your house to burn it down while in the house????
Commence firing, 50 cal is desired but you can use a 22lr too.
@Nomen Clature So a flame thrower is not out of the question against flaming cocktails?? Lol
In my jurisdiction, arson of a dwelling is specific justification for lethal force.
Question; Suppose for example you see an individual or a mob pouring gasoline around the house, about to burn it down? Surely you cannot be expected to stay in your house and can you use deadly force to stop the arson attack? As always thank you Mr. Ayoob for the excellent video lesson.
Pray for a reasonable judge?
I would imagine the gasoline on the home would be considered evidence of an impending fatal threat.
That's exactly what I was thinking, rioters were known to do this. Can't allow your house to be set on fire with family inside.
Of course...common sense....an immanent threat of death or great bodily harm.... having gas for around your house certainly fits that description!
Stopping an arson is actually specifically reffered to in the defense of others section of the self defense code in my state. It's one of the few exceptions to the immediate part it thevthreat of great bodily harm.