I would be surprised if this is true for the majority of situations. I'm sure there are situations where you have very little time, but also many situations where the additional time it would take to chamber a round is negligible.
After watching thousands of violent encounters on John Correia's "Active Self Protection" channel, I agree that round-in-the-chamber is absolutely necessary if you're carrying for self protection.
So you either draw and fire and call the police and tell them what happened, or you don't and just... deal with the consequences of whatever happened instead.
If someone is going to attack me with a knife, but then I draw a gun and they run away, surely that's not illegal because I didn't shoot them.
It seems like then it would be legal to draw a gun without firing if it was in self defense? I have a hard time believing that there are any cases where shooting someone in self defense would be legal, but scaring them away wouldn't.
Source: https://www.dischleylaw.com/blog/2024/june/understanding-the...
And this is the crucial bit, quoting the article: “The court decided the principle also applies to people who merely use the threat of force — meaning one cannot pull a weapon in self-defense if there are other means to escape, even if the person is threatening them with death or bodily harm.”
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/minnesota/news/minnesota-supreme...
The whole point of "stand your ground" is that you do not have the responsibility to escape.
1. Could you have reasonably escaped?
2. Could you have reasonably de-escalated (or were you the one who escalated to get here)?
3. Can you convince a jury (and the cops) that your life was in danger? If there are no witnesses, this is tough. Typically you're allowed to use deadly force only if you fear loss of life/limb. Yes, yes, plenty of cases where juries ruled in favor of the shooter when there was clearly no risk of loss of life/limb.
4. Do you have the relevant insurance to cover your legal defense costs? If not, you'll likely make a plea deal with the prosecutor even if you were clearly in the right.
I would say if the guy lunged at you with a knife and you drew your gun and he ran away, you'll be fine if there are witnesses.
I'm not sure how many other states work this way, but in Florida, brandishing is considered non-deadly force as a matter of law[0]. So the standard for self-defense is different between brandishing and firing: deadly force like firing requires a higher degree of threat to be considered justified self-defense[1].
[0] https://reason.com/volokh/2023/05/24/loading-and-openly-carr...
[1] http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Displ...
I would take almost any criminal charge over being forced to kill somebody.
If I hadn’t been willing to brandish at least once, I would have had to shoot to kill, and that sucks bad. Being in a gunfight is the last thing that I want besides being dead or severely injured.
That's like saying "I only wear seat belts on the freeway" or something equivalently vapid.
Tangential: if you enjoy watching that kind of content, I highly recommend the YouTube channel "Active Self Protection"