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.