His future now in the hands of a grand jury, a 21-year-old Houston man had just left a downtown restaurant Sunday evening when he noticed a man following him. The man doing the following had an ice pick in his hand and reportedly approached the 21-year-old in an aggressive manner. Feeling threatened, the would-be victim told police, he drew a handgun and shot his alleged attacker.

Details of the incident in several local news accounts all seemed hazy, but two things are clear: people armed with ice picks should never attempt to challenge a person with a gun or it’s simply not wise to walk up to people in the dark with an ice pick in your hand. If you need ice, ask for it from a distance.

Police received a 911 call about the shooting, they believe from the shooter, who did apparently make the call. The ice-pick toting individual was taken to the hospital with multiple gunshot wounds and succumbed to his injuries. Meanwhile, news reports only say a gun was found that was used in the shooting, not whether it was on the armed citizen at the time police approached him or if it had been handed over by the man.

All indications are that the man who fired in self-defense has cooperated with authorities. We’ll wait to see what plays out in the grand jury, but with the details of the case not more clear—at least as it has been relayed by the media—hopefully this guy has some sort of self-defense insurance or at the very least the money for a good lawyer. Right or wrong, grand juries and overzealous district attorneys can provide for a scary legal ride.

And yes gang, in full disclosure, TTAG is owned by a company affiliated with U.S. LawShield. (Sorry to steal your “ah-ha gotcha” moment Mr. My Posts Are Always So Clever commentor.) But, whether you get their coverage or pay for a similar company’s services, it’s still a great idea to have someone you can call on for legal guidance to help you should things ever go sideways. And as all of us who read TTAG and other gun news websites know, it is very easy for situations where crimes are being committed, adrenaline is rushing and guns are present to go sideways in a hurry.)

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

53 COMMENTS

  1. No insurance or advice protects you fully from millions in lawsuits after a shooting even if you are not charged in the shooting as many surprised shooters found out the hard way.

    The George Zimmerman case was a classic case in which racism played a big part on George being indicted because he shot a Black Man who was portrayed on the News as a very young , small, helpless teenager when in reality he was over 6 foot tall and a vicious street thug who towered over Zimmerman. It does matter “who you shoot” as to if you will be indicted and it can cost you thousands and thousands in legal fees to defend yourself even if you were never charged with a crime.

    I could give you many other real life examples of people who got bankrupted in legal fees after a shooting.

    Of course Zimmerman bore a great deal of criticism by trying to play “Cop” when he was not a cop and did not obey the police dispatcher to stay in his care “unnoticed” until the police arrived.

    This latest ice pick incident may not go down well with a jury especially if race is involved.

    There has been more than one robbery where the victim has said “It would have been thousands cheaper if I had just given him my wallet as opposed to blowing him away trying to save a few pennies that were in my wallet.

    • “No insurance or advice protects you fully from millions in lawsuits after a shooting even if you are not charged in the shooting as many surprised shooters found out the hard way.”

      Evidently you do not understand how these types of insurances work, nor anything about this subject, and stop being so deceptively disingenuous.

      Some states, if your case is adjudicated ‘justified’ (AKA valid legal defense), you have immunity from being sued. And it you do not live in one of those states, and you lose your case in the lawsuit the insurances with liability coverage is going to cover it.

      And of course there is going to be a case sometimes where circumstances may not work out that way, or publicly it may not seem to be working out that way but behind the scenes in reality it works out and the public never hears of the outcome. For example, the below;

      The Kayla Giles case and USCCA: Its been claimed, and there was a law suit over it, that USCCA dropped Giles. That’s true, USCCA (the insurance) did drop Giles but not like its been (falsely) claimed and in fact USCCA (the insurance) did pay for her lawyer until her fraud was discovered. Basically… Giles lied about it being self-defense, in reality it was a pre-planned (pre-meditated) killing. She had been planning to kill her victim for a while and was intending to set up a situation where she could do it in such a manner as to claim it was self-defense. She intentionally became a USCCA member so she could claim self-defense for a premeditated killing and have USCCA (the insurance) cover her legal bills if she was criminally charged/prosecuted. In other word’s she was, basically, defrauding USCCA (the insurance). But USCCA (the insurance) had already paid out ~$50,000.00 for her defense by the time this defraud attempt was discovered then when it was found out they dropped her, and yes she did end up being convicted because she actually pre-meditated the killing and there was no valid legal self-defense involved. Overall, she was defrauding the (USCCA) insurance and acts of fraud are not covered by the insurance nor can it be legally nor can the person committing the fraud continue to be covered by the policy so they get ‘dropped’ and USCCA will terminate the membership if a person can not be covered by the policy due to act of fraud. This would have happened with any CCW ‘insurance’ backed company no matter what they say and it is not specific to just USCCA, it would also happen with U.S. Law Shield and any ‘insurance’ – its a law thing, the law does not allow an act of fraud to be covered by an ‘insurance’ so the ‘insurance’ has no choice but to terminate their coverage and ‘drop’ the client.

      But also, in context with the Giles case, a reputable and ethical ‘self defense retainer type legal service’ would have done the same thing, drop her, when they found out it was fraud, because by law they can not knowingly perpetrate or facilitate a fraud upon the court and they would not expend funds or resources upon continuing representation. So the claims by some youtube content creators (and some lawyers), for the Giles case, that USCCA just decided to drop her because she was criminally charged and prosecuted and a certain (or some) ‘reputable self defense retainer type legal service’ (via her being a ‘member’) would not have done so – those claims are false.

      Then there is the Alan Colie case: It was falsely claimed by a self defense retainer type legal service’ and some youtube content creators that Alan Colie was dropped by USCCA because he was charged and prosecuted criminally and thus had to use a public defender. That is 100% false, he was never dropped by USCCA and the use of public defender was his choice.

      USCCA lets members choose any lawyer they want and USCCA (the insurance backing them) pays the lawyer. A member of USCCA is not obligated to choose a lawyer that is associated with USCCA. Alan Colie chose that the public defender defend him, he informed USCCA of this choice – that’s how Colie ended up with a public defender, it was his choice. Never at any time was Alan Colie dropped by USCCA (or the insurance backing them).

      A person is never required by law to actually use what ever defense insurance they have, it is not a consideration in a court decision to assign a public defender and does not figure into being a financial asset (without claiming the benefit) to determine if a person can or can not qualify for a public defender. A court can not force or require a person to claim the benefit of their CCW insurance for an attorney. This is why Colie could qualify for a public defender, without him claiming the insurance benefit he qualified in a financial aspect to not be able to afford an attorney. Why he did that, that’s up to him – If it had been me I would have claimed the insurance benefit, I know for a fact in using mine they cover and pay 100%, but a USCCA member is able to make the choice they want and Colie did and his choice was the public defender. However, since it was a public defender chosen by Colie USCCA (the insurance) could not pay that public defender because court appointed public defenders can only be paid by tax payer funds and not by outside parties.

      dacian, in other words, there is more to it than you know about and your don’t understand the subject and are being deceptively disingenuous. Your idea is that a person should just let their self be killed rather than use a firearm for defense – which is why you continue to spread your stupid and dis-information and anti-gun sentiment to dissuade people away from having a firearm or some form of legal protection in the event they need to use that firearm for defense – you literally, like all anti-gun left wing would love to dance in the blood of the innocent. Personally, I hope you drop dead – you and others like you are a danger to society and our country – but I know that its a real possibility at some point your antics are going to make you a target of either one of your own left-wing lunatics (probably your trans buddies) or a criminal so you will probably die by their hand.

      Note: “self defense retainer type legal services” (e.g. ‘Attorneys on Retainer’) are not ‘insurances’. There are a lot of differences between these legal services and ‘self defense insurances’

      ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ are law firm type entities, they are ‘attorney-client fee agreements’, they do not ‘insure’ and are not bound by law to continue to represent you (they are bound by their attorney-client agreement terms), do not have ‘liability coverage’ because they are not an insurance. They can choose at anytime to place further limits on what they will pay for and can decide this at any point in a case by a ‘board or directors’ (it can be called different things and can have different compositions so I use a generic term here). Although, not to disparage, ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ generally do what they say they will do – however – there have been cases where they did not continue coverage or during a case because they decided their ‘financial’ support would change or they simply could not cover it as an ‘insurance’ would.

      Its different for a ‘insurance’ backed CCW membership ‘company’. The insurance limits and terms are stated in the insurance policy that starts covering you when you pay for membership with that CCW ‘company’ and they (the insurance) are bound by law to provide that for valid claims so you know what you are getting and its not going to be arbitrarily changed when you need it the most for a valid defense incident. Plus, an ‘insurance’ is able to cover more than ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ – this is often a distinction over looked or ignored. It can make a big difference, for example, ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ (for example, ‘Attorneys on Retainer’) does not cover ‘liability’ because they are not an ‘insurance’ and are law firm type entities so do not cover “compensatory damages” (like from being sued) where the insurance backing USCCA covers liability also so will cover “compensatory damages” as a result of any valid “claim” to which the insurance applies.

      A real life example; Imagine being sued by the family of the criminal that attacked you slashing away with a knife forcing you to have no other choice but to defend yourself with your firearm so you shoot the bad guy who dies. You get sued by the family but you don’t have a CCW insurance and get represented by your ‘self defense retainer type legal service’ lawyer but you lose the case and the other side is asking for, say, $2,000,000.00 – guess who is on the hook for that ‘liability’, its not your ‘self defense retainer type legal service’ its you, where if you had a CCW insurance that would cover liability you are covered and the insurance will pay (at least up to the limits in their insurance, varies with the insurance backing the CCW membership company). It is not uncommon for a defender to be sued after a valid legal defense incident where they used a firearm to defend them self or another – in fact, its a common tactic for an anti-gun group to try to talk another (e.g. family members, bystanders, etc…) into suing the defender if they can and there have been such cases happen. However, if you live in a state that grants you immunity from civil law suit if your self defense case is adjudicated ‘justified’ (e.g. self defense) then you don’t need to worry about being sued in a state court but in some narrow cases you could be sued in a federal court and a ‘CCW’ insurance with liability will cover it (defense, and if you lose then the payment as well) where a ‘self defense retainer type legal service’ although they may cover the defense if you lose they are not going to cover paying the ‘liability compensation’.

      ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ (e.g. ‘Attorneys on Retainer’ etc…) are law firm type entities and not ‘insurance plans’ or ‘insurances’. Although, sometimes, touted and advertised as though ‘insurance like’ and a ‘membership’ with different ‘plans’ and ‘levels of coverage’ a person can select, trying to look similar to and market like a CCW ‘insurance backed’ companies, in reality you are not a ‘member’ of any ‘plan’ per se’. These ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ are actually attorney-client fee agreements and not actually coverage agreements. They do not actually ‘insure’ to represent you, but rather offer (to agree) by terms to represent you for a fee and those terms can be used/changed/applied arbitrarily to the benefit of the law firm. For example, under the USCCA ‘insurance’ you can select any lawyer you choose, or even change your lawyer at any time, for your representation, and the insurance will pay what ever lawyer you select, this is ‘coverage agreement’ – but – under the attorney-client fee agreement for ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ you are (usually) basically limited to either the lawyer they supply or one they will select and if you are not happy with that representation if you want to change you may need to pay for it out of your own pocket.

      These are just a few differences between ‘self defense retainer type legal services’ and a ‘CCW’ insurances. There are other differences that make an ‘insurance’ better for a person overall than a ‘self defense retainer type legal services’

      • To the paranoid Booger Brain

        Your blowing rectum gas in the room. I have seen people sued that were not charged with a crime or in other circumstances the crooked lawyers dreamed up other ways to sue the shooter such as “loss of companionship” and an anti-gun judge awarded several million to the plaintiff. In other words it was a revenge case for the plaintiff.

        So next time you go on a long rant with cherry picked cases you are just blowing smoke up the uneducated peoples asses.

        If you shoot someone it’s almost guaranteed you will be sued and could be sued under a variety of charges all of which will cost you money and you could lose in court as well because people are fed up with cowboy Zimmerman’s trying to take the law into their own hands and shooting first and asking questions later.

        If Trayvon Martin had not had such a nefarious record and had been say a star high school football player the Zimmerman trial might have ended very differently. As a matter of fact such a case did indeed actually happen when a home owner shot an intruder who turned out to be the small town high school hero football player and contrary to your paranoid rantings the homeowner spent thousands defending himself in court.

        Shooting someone also gives a person a black mark when searching for a job as the future employer is not about to hire a gunslinger at his place of business and then worry about a gun battle taking place at work. Most normal people do not carry firearms and employers do not want people working for them that do carry firearms and if your state has a concealed carry licensing law in some states its not hard to find out who is carrying weapons everyday. And even if that is not the case in your state people at work soon find out if you are a gun nut that carries a gun and the employer can find ways of getting rid of you very fast. That is when the anti-union Far Right usually end up getting egg on their faces.

        • oh stop it dacian. you started out with an insurance claim thing and completely intentionally misrepresented it with the rest of your post.

          its like all of your BS, a lie because you deliberately misrepresent it.

          I posted in reference to the insurance thing and coverages, its obvious. it showed your BS for the lie it was, and now you are trying to defend your obvious lie and further show that you are a moron.

        • “If Trayvon Martin had not had such a nefarious record and had been say a star high school football player the Zimmerman trial might have ended very differently.”

          It would have ended very differently if Martin hadn’t tried to make the back of Zimmermans’ head be ‘one with the concrete.’

          So, with that in mind, if you were on your back on the ground, with a 6′ 200lb MAN pounding your head in to the concrete MMA style, how long could you scream like a girl before losing consciousness?

          Would it be long and loud enough to get someones attention, or would you go to your demise without even a high pitched squeal?

          Inquiring minds want to know..

  2. An ice pick! Haven’t seen one in years. Last time was when I was a child. Mom and Dad used to buy block ice at the ice house. Dad would chip it up and get the ice cream churn going with some rock ice. Mom was getting the peach ice cream mix going. We had usually picked the peaches that morning. Said that to say this, as a child I remember ice picks being a popular weapon of choice for homicides. I guess they were handy in Florida during the summer.

    • Shucks…Just because you have not seen an Ice Pick in years does not mean Ice Picks have not been under your nose before…Perhaps you were distracted by phone calls from perverts like geoff?

      For years and numerous times before I noted the availability of cheap Harbor Frieght ICE PICKs and how ICE PICKS can be and have been used to quietly reek havoc on unsuspecting victims. A walk in and walk out is irritating when purchasing a self defense noisy firearm requires a NCIC…If you want to talk History an ICE PICK is a Hatpin with a large handle.

      • Attention skidmark geoff!!! I do not have to prove you are a pervert when you do that quite well yourself.

      • I know an ice pick when I see one. I also never had much trouble picking out the homicide weapon. Just never worked a homicide where the weapon of choice was an ice pick. Of course, I can understand your sensitivity to the subject. It seems I recall that particular weapon, it always seemed to suggest a certain ethnicity of the suspect.

      • Let’s see…Who was it that bashed POTUS DJT on a level lower than the worst mealy mouth democRat and supported nikki haley? If you answer is skidmark geoff give yourself a pat on the back.

        TRUMP 2024.

    • It all depends on what “is” is. I mean, what use “use” is. I.E., does possession without evidence of frequent firing for lawful purposes, especially repelling, or ending, life-threatening attacks on persons, qualify as “use”? Are “use” and “possession” commonly identified as synonyms?

      Also, seems courts are split on whether 2A protects only firearms suitable for military use, or only firearms that are not useful for military use?

      • there is a split, but it was created because of the shenanigans of anti-gun judges not applying SCOTUS decision and also creating their own definitions that are in reality not grounded in anything even the past stuff the anti-gun used for interest balancing.

    • The US Senate Republicans are “Establishment Republicans” and about as conservative as a middle of the road Democrat from about 60 or 70 years ago. Nearly worthless except as an occasional stopgap against the worst of the modern Democrat/Communists. The conservative Republicans are generally okay, most of the time. One of the things I like about Trump is that the establishment Republicans hate him almost as much as the Democrat/Communists with that Ex-Republican turn coat Liz Cheney at the top of the worthless list.

    • “Republicans CAVE On Border, Yet Agree To Send BILLIONS Overseas!“

      Interesting, the one who claims I post off-topic comments actually posts many more off-topic, than I ever thought about.

      • There is a difference between informing in relational or current events by posting even off topic in a general sense, and your mentally ill obsession rants about Trump and religion and all your other crap that you intentionally post to disrupt discussion and troll with especially when you ignore context making it look even more stupid and you more ignorant.

      • Women often choose a particular hair color because men are weak and incapable of understanding that superficial appearance is not a valid selection criteria.

        Again, how fascinating it is that male posters on a gun forum would rather discuss women’s appearance.

        • men are weak and incapable of understanding that superficial appearance is not a valid selection criteria.

          So women never worry about the appearance of men? I believe they do, although they are usually more concerned about things like status and income.

        • “Again, how fascinating it is that male posters on a gun forum would rather discuss women’s appearance.”

          How fascinating that you stupidly assume ‘rather’.

          Oh wait…I apologize to other readers, I should not have attributed any of Miner49er’s stupid as fascinating.

  9. My reply to her and those like her is wear a yellow arm band to signify their disdain for firearms. That way if I see a yellow band getting beaten and abducted I won’t risk my life and waste ammo on saving their disgusting ignorant behind.

    • “My reply to her and those like her is wear a yellow arm band to signify their disdain for firearms. That way if I see a yellow band getting beaten and abducted I won’t risk my life and waste ammo on saving their disgusting ignorant behind.”

      Thought about this for quite some time; can’t find an avenue for disagreement with Debbie.

    • “My reply to her and those like her is wear a yellow arm band“

      Openly advocating for a return to the multicolor patch system to identify undesirable elements within the citizenry.

      I believe yellow is already taken, you’ll probably need to select another color to conform with the marking regimen.

      You Trump supporters are taking this dictatorship concept all the way, what chutzpah!

      • While the senile old man in the White House actually governs as a dictator.

        I heard from the movie theatre owner that you’re the best projectionist in your town, Miner49er.

        What chutzpah!

  10. Where does one BUY and ice pick in 2024 (and WHY). Amazon of course where it: “Makes breaking apart ice easy”. Damn chicoms again.

    • Block ice is getting hard to find as well. Professional fisherman used it a lot but they have sll mostly gone to refrigeration aboard their boats. Most sport fisherman seem to prefer cubed ice because it is convenient and they don’t stay out long enough to need the long lasting quality of block ice. Full time boaters used block ice in their ice boxes too but with the advent of cheap solar panels and low-cost inverter generators plus efficient Danfoss mini refrigerator compressors most have converted their iceboxes to refrigerators. Those who didn’t convert found block ice nearly impossible to find along the water and the performance of cube ice cuts a day or twoo off of the time between needing more ice.

      • We made our own blocks for the boat coolers. 8-10 plastic jugs of different sizes, filled with water and stored in the freezer. Take out what we needed for the day, kept the walleye & perch (and sammiches) cold all day. After cleaning the fish, wash the jugs and back in the freezer for tomorrow. Of course, we were not a big production.

        That being said, block ice (and sometimes dry ice) can be had at many grocery stores.

        • We used to do the gallon milk jugs trick with our boat icebox when we still had a home with a big freezer. it works great, just swap them out and the icebox never went warm. Another advantage of bottles was there never was meltwater collecting in the bilge unlike with ice in a draining icebox

          But living on a boat full time and travelling constantly one doesn’t have a freezer, or a car to haul heavy ice from a grocery store a mile or more from shore. If the marina fuel dock and ship’s store doesn’t have block ice and the fisherman’s wharf no longer has it either then it’s practically unavailable.

          Dry ice always freaked me out a little bit inside an enclosed boat. When dry ice melts it turns into carbon dioxide which isn’t as bad as carbon monoxide but it still displaces oxygen in the air. Boat hulls are pretty sealed up so it’s not going to escape out the bottom (even worse for LP leaks since propane gas sinks to the bottom of an air pocket) and unlike LP and Carbon monoxide it isn’t a simple thing to detect Carbon Dioxide since it is always present in air anyhow. It gets more complicated and expensive to monitor oxygen levels or CO2 levels compared to LP and CO sniffers (we have both of those on our boat.)

      • “Most sport fisherman seem to prefer cubed ice because“ It fits in the highball glasses so much better.

  12. U.S. Lawshield has all kinds of qualifications in their contract that let them stiff you and leave you hanging.

Comments are closed.