Ccw Safe

The episode features a discussion between host Sean Vincent and guests Don West (national trial counsel for CCW Safe) and firearms instructor Steve Moses regarding the dangers of provoking a potential aggressor. Many self-defense incidents begin with sharp words. Arguments can escalate quickly, especially when pride, ego, or alcohol are involved. If someone’s behavior isn’t a direct threat, and the results of their actions aren’t your responsibility, it’s usually best to mind your own business. Armed defenders have a responsibility to avoid confrontations that could spiral into violence. If it’s not your fight, don’t pick it.”

The episode features a discussion between host Sean Vincent and guests Don West (national trial counsel for CCW Safe) and firearms instructor Steve Moses regarding the dangers of provoking a potential aggressor.

You can’t claim self-defense if you started the fight. In most jurisdictions, if you’re seen as the first aggressor, you may lose the legal protections that justify the use of force—even if you find yourself in imminent danger later. Prosecutors may frame the incident as “mutual combat,” which undermines your self-defense claim. To stay protected under the law, you must be reacting to a threat, not instigating one.

Claude Werner, The Tactical Professor, joins the podcast to discuss how armed defenders can identify potential threats before they become life-or-death matters.

Don West and Steve Moses join Shawn Vincent to talk about the importance of avoiding emotional hijacking for armed defenders.

CCW Safe President Kent Brown talks with Luke McCoy from USACarry.com about traveling with firearms.

Don West and Steve Moses join Shawn Vincent to talk about the "armed defender’s dilemma" regarding the "window of justification," specifically focusing on the danger of shooting after a threat has ended.

Don West and Steve Moses join Shawn Vincent to talk about the concept of the “window of justification” and to explore the legal perils for armed defenders who shoot before the threat of great bodily harm or death is imminent.

In self-defense law, it’s not enough that you feared an attacher—what ultimately matters is whether a jury will decide that your belief in imminent great bodily harm or death was objectively and subjectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances..

Criminal defense attorney Don West explains the core legal standard for the justifiable use of deadly force in self-defense, and firearms instructor Steve Moses provides a nuts-and-bolts tactical translation of the law to help inform armed defenders’ decision-making in a self-defense scenario.

Shawn Vincent talks with attorney Don West about the legal consequences of self-defense, including a discussion of the potential charges an armed defender could face in the wake of a self-defense shooting, and a candid exploration of the realities of enduring a criminal prosecution.

Steve Moses talks to Don West and Shawn Vincent about how proper self-defense training from qualified, credentialed instructors gives armed defenders the competence and confidence to make smart decisions in a dynamic self-defense scenario.

Lesson 1: The Goal of Self-Defense Is to Break Contact Breaking contact with an aggressor can mean using deadly force when justified, or simply walking away—with a range of actions in between, including verbal de-escalation techniques and less-lethal force options. By adopting a “break contact” self-defense mindset, armed defenders give themselves more tactical options while reducing the legal jeopardy resulting from a potential use-of-force event.

  Firearms trainer Erick Gelhaus joins the podcast to talk about the tactical and legal benefits of a low-ready defensive display when a threat justifies the potential use of deadly force.

After more than 25 years in law enforcement, Doug Deaton became a consulting and testifying expert witness for defense attorneys and armed defenders in self-defense cases. True self-defense trials are relatively rare, and sometimes the prosecutor and judge – and especially the jury – aren't aware of all the nuances of self-defense law. That’s when having a good consulting expert like Doug Deaton can make the difference.

  Retired police officer and firearms instructor Greg Ellifritz joins the podcast to talk about defensive display and brandishing incidents he responded to as a law enforcement officer. While brandishing a firearm is a crime, a justified defensive display of a firearm can be a viable alternative to using deadly force in a self-defense scenario.

  A Wisconsin man came home to his apartment late at night and was surprised to find his home had been the target of burglars. He was even more surprised when one of those burglars returned to retrieve some valuables he had left behind. The occupant of the apartment shot and killed the intruder in a justified self-defense shooting. Don West and Steve Moses join Shawn Vincent to discuss the legal protections of the Castle Doctrine and the need for an armed defender to secure their home in the immediate aftermath of a break-in. 

  An armed defender in Lapeer, Michigan was convicted of murder for shooting a man who was attacking him with a crowbar. It turns out, the shooter actually left the scene of the initial confrontation and came back. Also, evidence suggests the defender drew his pistol before the attack, making him the first aggressor. Don West and Steve Moses join Shawn Vincent to explore the lessons for concealed carriers.

Don West and Steve Moses join Shawn Vincent to explore the case of Scott Hayes, a pro-Isreal demonstrator who was violently tackled by an unarmed pro-Palistineian demonstrator. Hayes fired a single, non-fatal shot, and prosecutors charged him with assault with a deadly weapon. Is Scott Hayes being wrongfully prosecuted, or did he use disproportional force agains an unarmed threat?

Law enforcement veteran and consulting expert Doug Deaton explains that when a concealed carrier fires in self-defense, they become the subject of a legal process that will dominate their lives until it is concluded – whether that is a decision not to file charges or a trial verdict. Once the process has begun, there is no turning back.