When I see someone wrongly convicted for a genuine self-defense shooting, it’s often because they had a lawyer who simply didn’t know how to handle that type of case.  Over on the Wilson Combat channel at YouTube, I recently addressed how to pick an attorney for that type of case.

Or watch video here.


  1. I’d like to ask for some clarification on a point. Long, long ago, your advice was to consult your attorney, work out a statement on the incident and then make said statement on the record. Here, you’re saying go in and answer questions. Or are we covering the same ground with slightly different wording? The questions maybe being supplemental to the statement.

    • You got it, Bill; prepared statement would accompany the Q&A session with the prosecutor, recorded, with your attorney present.

      • Thank you again, Mas, for lighting our path. Seldom can anyone find help like you provide. With resources like you, TN_MAN, and God, we can weather any storm and steer our ship safely to harbor. Let us hang peacefully together, and we will not be the ones separately hanged for high crimes and misdemeanors. Our Constitution is the guiding star.

  2. Excellent video, Mas. I pray to God that I never need to pick an attorney to handle a self-defense shooting for me. However, as they say, “Hope is not a plan”.

    Therefore, based upon some of your previous advice, I am a member of ACLDN. In the event that i am caught up in a self-defense shooting, I plan to us an attorney recommended by ACLDN.

    In fact, I have the contact telephone numbers of both ACLDN and one of their recommended local attorneys, pre-programmed into my cell phone. Just in case!

  3. Thanks Mas. I often look at possible situations I may find myself in now from the view of my defence in court before any defence on the street presents itself.

  4. I knew your commentary would be excellent, but both the audio and video in this presentation were excellent as well.

    What you said near the end, that criminal defense lawyers lean left, didn’t shock me. But, when you said they don’t like gun owners, that was really SCARY!! If that is true, they might as well be prosecutors in a self-defense case.

    • What’s worse, is that the socialist left has infiltrated the law schools, and is turning out lawyers who are pre-biased, far to the left. These graduates are going to be working as prosecutors, and judges, and will be creating and enforcing those laws that attack gun owners.

      This is no surprise, because the same kind of leftist takeover has spread to the entirety of the educational system, the media, the entertainment industry, and even large corporations.

      We really are at a severe disadvantage.

      • Mongo,

        Thanks for that info.

        If city governments let criminals roam free, then they are the friends of the criminals. If prosecutors try to convict victims who acting correctly in self-defense situations, then those prosecutors are the friends of the criminal attackers. Remember, citizens pay for government services. If government is on the side of the criminals, then government is the enemy of the people.

  5. …tend toward the left. Many of them see themselves as the courageous rebel fighting against the system.
    Silly me. I thought today the left was the system. But yeah, I’ve heard a lot of demonstrators claiming they are “Speaking truth to power,” when they’re echoing what “power” wants them to say.

    The best suggestion is the one you started with. Join one of the organizations which will provide an experienced attorney.

  6. Thank you again Mas for providing us with these golden nuggets of excellent information. The Wilson Combat channel videos you do are a very effective way to share this on a large platform. They are usually good reminders of things you teach, and generally inspire me to take some specific action (purchase new fire extinguishers, check in with my ACLDN attorney in my area, purchase a special holster, etc).

  7. Speaking of hiring criminal defense attorneys, will Alec Baldwin need one soon?

    The slow wheels of Justice continue to turn and more data related to the Rust Shooting continues to come into play. Consider this recent development for example:


    As we all suspected, Baldwin’s claim that his SAA revolver “just went off” all on its own is now undercut.

    Will this be enough for New Mexico authorities to bring criminal charges against Baldwin directly? I rather doubt it myself. In our modern “Two-Tiered” Justice system, no one ever brings charges against an important Leftist. All Leftists, like Baldwin, seem to carry a “Get out of Jail Free” card in their wallet (No Leftist will leave home without it! 🙂 ).

    Still, I might be wrong. Occasionally, a “Leftist Sacrifice” is performed. However, they are only performed for the “Greater Good” of the Left. Would that apply to Baldwin? Who knows?

    The only thing giving me hope is that the Rust Shooting is still in the news. It has not totally faded out and gone away. If it had, Baldwin would be safe. Since it has not, the Leftist powers-that-be might conclude that Baldwin must be sacrificed in order to finally seal off this story. That is about the only reason that Baldwin would ever face criminal charges, IMHO.

    Still, the Left might try to save Baldwin by sacrificing one or two other people who were on the set. Make them the scapegoats so as to protect Baldwin. I have no idea as to how it will go. I guess that time will tell.

    • As this story first broke, I followed it pretty closely. Some experts, some known, others not yet, chimed in, I read some ana lisis of New Mexico lw. It seemed pretty certain that whoever actually had the gun in his hand when someone was killed by a round from that gun, was the responsible party and could face charges for the death. Certain “mitigating factors” (none of whicih seemed to be present in the instant case) could exonerate.
      Yes, protocols on film sets are in place, and yes they appear to not have been followed. BUT nothing relieves the man with the gun in HIS hand from legal responsibiblity under NM law. And I don’t think FBI can step in and change that. State prosecutors can only decline to prosecute, but that could go hard on them later. Politics can certainly mess up daily life, eh?
      WE all know Baldwin violated at least three, and most likely all four “gun safety rules”, any variant of the list I’ve ever seen. Some think I am crazy, but even if I’m in a gun store, and want to see “that one”, when the counter guy takes it out, he will safe and clear it, place it on the counter muzzle safe direction. When I pick it up I will safe and clear it AGAIN.
      If Baldwin had been that “fussy” the film may well be nearing completion by now.

    • I’m sure the famed, Rolls Royce driving Johnny Cochran will gladly represent Alec Baldwin for free, or ‘pro bono’ in legal babble.

      Now before you remind me the rhyming shyster had croaked awhile back, all should know that just because one is dead, that doesn’t mean they cannot vote or provide legal services, among other things.

  8. Very good advice Mas, thanks! (By the way, I don’t precisely remember which episode it was, but Perry Mason lost one case. But…that does even make your case better!)

  9. While it would be nice to think that the lengthy “investigation” of the Rust shooting is intended to cut the ground out from under a defense of Baldwin’s conduct, I have the troubling feeling that it’s so that an eventual dismissal won’t make a ripple in the news cycle.

    Returning to the original subject, don’t be all in a rush to make your statement. That might not be possible, but the major reason is that many authorities, including IACP, suggest that the statement wait 24-48 hours to improve recall. It’s a whole lot better to make one coherent statement than to do a rush job and then have to ammend it, possibly several times.

    Something for the lawyer to ponder: access to any/all video of the event that might exist prior to making the statement. Memory isn’t perfect.

  10. Just ran across an AP report in the Washington Times: “ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — The fatal film-set shooting of a cinematographer by actor Alec Baldwin last year was an accident, according to a determination made by New Mexico’s Office of the Medical Investigator following the completion of an autopsy and a review of law enforcement reports.
    Prosecutors have not yet decided if any charges will be filed in the case, saying they would review the latest reports and were awaiting cell phone data from Baldwin‘s attorneys.”

    Still leaves a manslaughter charge possible-if the DA has a shred of sense of Justice. I do have to wonder why-from a legal standpoint- they’re waiting for the opposition lawyers to turn over cell phone data. Would have thought a subpoena closer to the event to be appropriate.

    • # WR Moore – “I do have to wonder why-from a legal standpoint- they’re waiting for the opposition lawyers to turn over cell phone data.”

      You gave the answer to this in your first comment above. You gave it when you observed “…the lengthy ‘investigation’ of the Rust shooting is intended…so that an eventual dismissal won’t make a ripple in the news cycle.”

      Correct! This lengthy, drawn-out investigation is designed to allow the Rust Shooting to fade out of the minds of the public. Then, when the NM Prosecutor allows Alec Baldwin to walk free, with an apology from the State for wasting his time, there won’t be widespread outrage.

      Using subpoena power to rapidly access the cell phone data does not fit into this strategy of drawn-out delay. Going though the opposition lawyers gives all kinds of opportunities for delay. No one can delay and waste time like an attorney.

      Quote of the Day:

      “A lawyer is a person who writes a 10,000-word document and calls it a ‘brief’.”

      Franz Kafka

      • IMHO, kind of makes one expect Alec Baldwin to sue the victim for damages for forgetting to duck? Where is the old justice based on disinterest (sense of fairness that applies equally to all us)? Good thing for Baldwin that the victim was not who? Fill in the blanks: ________ ________.

  11. I am subscribed to US Law Shield, a legal defense law group.
    Ostensibly, they will provide a knowledgeable attorney in the state where I reside.
    Do you see any negatives with this. I used to belong to USCCA but quit them as they offered no coverage if on a church security team, which I am.

Comments are closed.