Frequently Asked Questions of Attorney Branca

I’ve been around guns nearly my whole life, but in the early 1990s I started competitive pistol shooting, IPSC at first, then much more seriously in IDPA.  In the New England winter months there’s not much opportunity for outdoor shooting, so I spend much of that time going to gun shows in my area.

Both at the range and at gun shows I occasionally overhear fellow gun owners discussing the use of force in self defense, and giving each other advice and suggestions on what is and isn’t legal and appropriate. Almost all of that advice is based on anecdote and rumor–stuff learned from a friend of a friend who knew someone who was a cop, that kind of thing.

Unfortunately, as a lawyer I know much of what these well intentioned people are telling each other is horribly wrong.  Indeed, much of it is almost certain to end up in a long prison sentence.

Most people assume that they have an absolute right to tell their story to a jury, and that any reasonable jury would understand why they had to defend themselves against a violent attacker with a long criminal history. Unfortunately, that’s not always the case.

First of all, that violent attacker with a long criminal history is going to be described as the “victim” of the encounter–you will be the “defendant”.

Second, the attacker’s criminal history will almost certainly be inadmissible in court, especially if it wasn’t personally known by you prior to the attack, so the jury won’t ever know about the attacker’s criminal background.

Third, nobody has an absolute right to argue self defense to a jury. Indeed, the burden is on you to provide evidence that the use of force was necessary–and if that burden’s not met, the jury will never hear the words “self defense” in court.

Think about that scenario for a moment. You believe what you did was necessary, so you’ve already admitted to doing it, and the jury knows you’ve admitted to it.  But they have no idea that the attacker was a violent criminal with a long record, and neither you nor your lawyer are permitted to even mention the words “self defense” in front of the jury. If you were on that jury, what verdict would you come to?

It’s these types of situations that too often end with well intentioned armed citizens serving long jail sentences for doing what they honestly believed was both necessary and lawful.  And it could have been totally avoided if the defendant had just known a little more about what the law requires.

First, the Law of Self Defense is based on the actual law–the statutes relevant to the use of force, and even more importantly the court cases that interpret and apply those statutes.  The plain language of a statue may have little relation to how it is actually applied by the courts and the armed citizen needs to be aware of that difference.  In addition, the court cases in the book are based on real-world events, so the reader can use those actual events and outcomes to think about how they might react in similar situations, and how the courts might interpret their actions. Accordingly, the Law of Self Defense is thoroughly referenced with citations to court cases and statutes.  This is the law as it’s actually applied, and not merely how your buddies at the gun match tell you it’s applied.

Second, the Law of Self Defense is priced and structured to be easily accessible to the typical gun owner. Now you don’t need to spend $600 to $1,000 and 2 to 3 days of vacation time to attend a seminar to learn what’s legal and not in defending yourself and you family. Instead, you can order the book and begin educating yourself at your own pace, and is completely FREE!  Just pay shipping & handling at https://lawofselfdefense.com/freebook