Scenario: Who's Who? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Scenario: Who's Who?


CodyBoy
01-08-2010, 21:11
Ok, this BG was robbing the bank inside WM and started shooting people.

You are at the checkout right in front of the bank.

You realize whats going on, make a quick accessment of your surroundings, you see no other BG's to your knowledge.

You have already taken cover behind the end of the checkout stand.

You draw, shoot and hit twice. He goes down but not dead. (dang 9mm):supergrin:

You then call 911, and there probably are others by now that have already called and possibly the bank alarm has already sent for the police.

You are certain there are no other BG's.

Your still on the phone with 911 and trying to calm down while trying to keep everyone around you from histeria.

You're still keeping an eye on the BG and have already secured his weapon and along with store manager (probably assistant manager)(manager crapped pants and ran):upeyes: are trying to keep people away. It appears secure so you holster your weapon.

You're watching the front door for the police to arrive.

You see a man in plain clothes coming in with a weapon drawn.........
You see no badge and he's not yelling POLICE! (may not want to announce his arrival just yet, so he can possibly get an upperhand and access the situation)

He could be police or could be the guys buddy that was waiting in the getaway car.


Whats your next move?

uashooter
01-08-2010, 22:09
Get cover and yell, "Police, Stop!!!" several times using your best big boy voice.

If the guy doesn't identify himself as a cop and points his weapon in your direction, you would be justified in shooting him (*check your local laws).

I'll take my chances with an impersonating a LEO charge if it means I might not get shot by the getaway driver.

Dexters
01-08-2010, 22:23
Your still on the phone with 911 and trying to calm down while trying to keep everyone around you from histeria.



Interesting scenario. You are still on the phone with 911 - you could pass along what you see to the 911 operator and ask them what they suggest.

StarfoxHowl
01-09-2010, 05:51
If you're on the phone with the 911 operator, you should ask if they have any officers on scene. Even with a multi-department response, the 911 operator should have the information if anyone from any responding department had signaled that they were on scene.

But that's just my guess.

Sam Spade
01-09-2010, 12:39
You're still keeping an eye on the BG and have already secured his weapon and along with store manager (probably assistant manager)(manager crapped pants and ran):upeyes: are trying to keep people away. It appears secure so you holster your weapon.
First, you ought not be breaking cover as described. People are going to keep away just fine on their own.
Whats your next move?
Kick yourself repeatedly for breaking cover. Then say, "Aha! Now that I'm standing in the open, at the mercy of some guy with a gun who may be pissed that I killed his friend, or may think that I'm the robber....now I see why Sam didn't want me doing that ****."

So there's the tactics issue involved in your scenario (which is quite a good "what if", BTW.)

Now suppose that you did remain hunkered down, weapon not visible, doing your best impression of someone stuck in the "freeze" portion of fight/flight/freeze...how do you figure out who this guy is?

Simple: You watch what he does. You make use of your advantages, including that you can afford a narrow focus and the guy coming in has to evaluate the entire location. Time is more on your side, and you can use some of that time to observe (while he's still orienting, for you Boyd fans). Cops take control of scenes, get-away drivers get away, guys with CCW badges do something I'm not sure of, and sociopaths start looking for people to kill. You, behind your bullet sponge, get to respond accordingly.

1sharpedge
01-09-2010, 14:21
To start until the BG made some sort of move towards me or when i felt in danger, i would have stayed behind the checkout stand. Not my money or my loved ones at risk, not my problem.

CodyBoy
01-11-2010, 20:44
First, you ought not be breaking cover as described. People are going to keep away just fine on their own.

Kick yourself repeatedly for breaking cover. Then say, "Aha! Now that I'm standing in the open, at the mercy of some guy with a gun who may be pissed that I killed his friend, or may think that I'm the robber....now I see why Sam didn't want me doing that ****."

So there's the tactics issue involved in your scenario (which is quite a good "what if", BTW.)

Now suppose that you did remain hunkered down, weapon not visible, doing your best impression of someone stuck in the "freeze" portion of fight/flight/freeze...how do you figure out who this guy is?

Simple: You watch what he does. You make use of your advantages, including that you can afford a narrow focus and the guy coming in has to evaluate the entire location. Time is more on your side, and you can use some of that time to observe (while he's still orienting, for you Boyd fans). Cops take control of scenes, get-away drivers get away, guys with CCW badges do something I'm not sure of, and sociopaths start looking for people to kill. You, behind your bullet sponge, get to respond accordingly.

Samspade

I like your comments.

BG is down, no need to play "cop" and try and secure the scene.

Staying behind cover sounds like a good idea until the police have secured the area.

And waiting to see about this new Man With Gun is all about!


Excellent.

Thanks:wavey:

CodyBoy
01-11-2010, 20:45
To start until the BG made some sort of move towards me or when i felt in danger, i would have stayed behind the checkout stand. Not my money or my loved ones at risk, not my problem.



Uh , yea, thats real nice. :upeyes:

area727
01-12-2010, 08:54
To start until the BG made some sort of move towards me or when i felt in danger, i would have stayed behind the checkout stand. Not my money or my loved ones at risk, not my problem.

The OP stated the BG was shooting other people. Who knows if he picks you next to shoot. I know here in FL, we have the right to use deadly force to stop a forceable felony (in this case homicide/murder of others) to ourselves, or others. If you were in a position to neutralize this threat, why not act? What if you had a loved one that was shot, and someone with the means stood by and did nothing?

CodyBoy
01-12-2010, 10:42
The OP stated the BG was shooting other people. Who knows if he picks you next to shoot. I know here in FL, we have the right to use deadly force to stop a forceable felony (in this case homicide/murder of others) to ourselves, or others. If you were in a position to neutralize this threat, why not act? What if you had a loved one that was shot, and someone with the means stood by and did nothing?


Some people just don't "get it" . I agree with every word you said.

The BG could be killing a 1000 people and some that may be able to stop the madness will just standby until "they" are in danger of being shot.

I would hope someone who is able will step up to the plate if my family were being shot at and unable to defend themselves.

David Armstrong
01-12-2010, 11:04
The OP stated the BG was shooting other people. Who knows if he picks you next to shoot. I know here in FL, we have the right to use deadly force to stop a forceable felony (in this case homicide/murder of others) to ourselves, or others. If you were in a position to neutralize this threat, why not act? What if you had a loved one that was shot, and someone with the means stood by and did nothing?
The basic problem with this sort of stuff is that we tend to make assumptions that always go in our favor. Depending on a number of factors there is probably just as much a chance that you will not neutralize the threat and that he will shoot others that would not have been shot if you hadn't intervened. What if you shot at the BG, missed, and he shot back at you, missed, and hit the kid standing behind you that otherwise would have gone home with nothing but an interesting story to tell? Seems like we never consider that ending.

Dexters
01-12-2010, 11:20
The basic problem with this sort of stuff is that we tend to make assumptions that always go in our favor.
We are always the hero in our own movie.

area727
01-12-2010, 11:42
The basic problem with this sort of stuff is that we tend to make assumptions that always go in our favor. Depending on a number of factors there is probably just as much a chance that you will not neutralize the threat and that he will shoot others that would not have been shot if you hadn't intervened. What if you shot at the BG, missed, and he shot back at you, missed, and hit the kid standing behind you that otherwise would have gone home with nothing but an interesting story to tell? Seems like we never consider that ending.

This is very true. I understand these scenarios always play out the way we think they would. I guess my point is, in a situation like this, I'd like to think i would help if I thought I could, as opposed to having a "not my problem other people I dont know are getting shot". Of course, I never want to be in that situation, and really dont know how it would go down until that day comes.

CodyBoy
01-12-2010, 11:43
The basic problem with this sort of stuff is that we tend to make assumptions that always go in our favor. Depending on a number of factors there is probably just as much a chance that you will not neutralize the threat and that he will shoot others that would not have been shot if you hadn't intervened. What if you shot at the BG, missed, and he shot back at you, missed, and hit the kid standing behind you that otherwise would have gone home with nothing but an interesting story to tell? Seems like we never consider that ending.



Because:

If you do "nothing" the kid may have been shot anyhow.

If you do "something" the kid may "not" get shot.

I would rather "do" than "not do".

And no , I'm not talking about a "wild shot". I would not shoot if I believed I could not stop the threat.


DA guess your with 1sharpedge on this one.

CodyBoy
01-12-2010, 11:50
I think we should all lock our guns up in the safe and throw the key away!

No one is capable of stopping a BG and may make things worse if we try.

Better yet, lets build a big, hot fire and melt all our "good guy" guns down and sell the left overs as scrap metal!

If you do not have relevant information to contribute then please, move on to another thread, or just move on in general.

Thanks

:upeyes:

David Armstrong
01-12-2010, 12:09
I would rather "do" than "not do".
Then go join the local PD. THe point is that when one selects "do" there is no guarantee that it will work out the way one's imagination is thinking it will, and that there is a down side to it. Assuming we have a robbery in progress, if you start shooting at the BG there is a decent chance that you will extend the shooting and increase the danger to others.
And no , I'm not talking about a "wild shot". I would not shoot if I believed I could not stop the threat.
That is probably true of everyone. Again, the point is that what one believes is not necessarily the way it will work out. As I mention elsewhere, there are pretty good reasons that virtually every professional in this area recommends stay down and out of the way.
DA guess your with 1sharpedge on this one.
Can't speak for him, but yes, I'm generally supportive of the "stay out of the way, take care of you and yours" position.
If you do not have relevant information to contribute then please, move on to another thread, or just move on in general.

If you can't recognize relevant information when offered then please, move on to another thread, or just move on in general.

area727
01-12-2010, 12:43
I think the safe thing to say, and I'm sure most can agree with, there are far too many circumstances then we could ever know by these "What If" threads. These events can unfold in front of you in a matter of seconds, and only you being there witnessing it, can then make a decision to help or not. I'd like to think any person who CCW's would intervene if they thought the the circumstances were in their favor to help. If the circumstances didnt appear favorible, then no, you shouldn't try to help and make things worse. Again, it all happens so fast, and you would need to react without being able to hit a pause button to step back and go through it with a 'fine tooth comb'.

Again, I hope I never find myself in this type of situation.

CodyBoy
01-12-2010, 12:56
Then go join the local PD. THe point is that when one selects "do" there is no guarantee that it will work out the way one's imagination is thinking it will, and that there is a down side to it. Assuming we have a robbery in progress, if you start shooting at the BG there is a decent chance that you will extend the shooting and increase the danger to others.




Ah yes, let the police do it! I'm sure they are able to be at all places all the time! There is a cop in mine and everyone elses back pocket all the time.

Just pull him out and problem solved. :upeyes:

If that were true, then the libs are right! No one needs to carry a weapon.

David Armstrong
01-12-2010, 13:25
Ah yes, let the police do it! I'm sure they are able to be at all places all the time!
Interestingly, I didn't suggest anything like that. The suggestion was that if YOU would rather "do" than "not do" that perhaps you should join the PD and actually "do". You might quickly find out that the real world usually doesn't conform to this hero mythology that many seem to develop. Equally interesting, of course, is all this empty rhetoric you keep tossing around that has no bearing on what anyone has said.

CodyBoy
01-12-2010, 13:42
Then go join the local PD.


Your words not mine.


With your statement, the only way someone can "do" is to be a police officer.


If you are not a police officer then I guess you "cannot do".


Again, those were your words.


You have seen your neighbor outside a couple times and have noticed he is feeling down. So you ask about it.

He tells you there was a robbery at WM and his daughter was shot. The police later told him , there was a guy at WM that had a CCW but decided to not get involved and decided it was best to cower behind the candy at the end of the checkout stand.


Yea, he was talking about YOU but he doesn't know that.

David Armstrong
01-12-2010, 14:13
Your words not mine.
Yes, and since you seemed to have a bit of trouble understanding them I provided a bit of clarification for you.
With your statement, the only way someone can "do" is to be a police officer.
If you are not a police officer then I guess you "cannot do".
Again, those were your words.
No, those were not my words and that is/was not my statement. Please do not make things up and then claim I have said them.
You have seen your neighbor outside a couple times and have noticed he is feeling down. So you ask about it.
He tells you there was a robbery at WM and his daughter was shot. The police later told him , there was a guy at WM that had a CCW but decided to not get involved and decided it was best to cower behind the candy at the end of the checkout stand.
Yea, he was talking about YOU but he doesn't know that.
That is a wonderful imagination you have there. Don't let the fact that it is virtually impossible for it to happen get in the way of make-believe.
But hey, if we are going to play make-believe, I'll join in.
Your wife notices your neighbor is really happy. She asks about it, and he tells her that some goofy CCW holder started trading shots with a BG at Wal-Mart after the BG robbed the place. The CCW missed and hit a clerk standing there, and when the BG shot back he missed also and shot the neighbors daughter. So why is he so happy? Well, after the DA decided that his actions were reckless and unreasonable he filed charges against the CCW, and the jury found him guilty. Then, following a brief civil case, the court awarded the neighbor millions of dollars from the CCW. So the neighbor is happy that you are sitting in prison and that he is going to be able to evict your wife and kids and sell the property to meet part of the judgement against you.
Gee, isn't story-telling fun!

CodyBoy
01-12-2010, 21:58
Well I guess we all have an idea of how things will play out in a hypothetical scenario.

But I will still take my chances of stopping the bad guy rather than do nothing when innocent people are being murdered.


And I think a GJ will see that it was not reckless nor unreasonable to attempt to stop the threat.

PhoneCop
01-14-2010, 08:36
Because:

If you do "nothing" the kid may have been shot anyhow.

If you do "something" the kid may "not" get shot.

I would rather "do" than "not do".

And no , I'm not talking about a "wild shot". I would not shoot if I believed I could not stop the threat.


DA guess your with 1sharpedge on this one.

Then go join the local PD. THe point is that when one selects "do" there is no guarantee that it will work out the way one's imagination is thinking it will, and that there is a down side to it. Assuming we have a robbery in progress, if you start shooting at the BG there is a decent chance that you will extend the shooting and increase the danger to others.

That is probably true of everyone. Again, the point is that what one believes is not necessarily the way it will work out. As I mention elsewhere, there are pretty good reasons that virtually every professional in this area recommends stay down and out of the way.

Can't speak for him, but yes, I'm generally supportive of the "stay out of the way, take care of you and yours" position.

If you can't recognize relevant information when offered then please, move on to another thread, or just move on in general.

Here we see Dave Armstrong's position clearly illustrated. The only people qualified and should try to help in a bad situation are the cops. He sees the glass half empty when it comes to non-LEO involvement.

He frequently and cleverly (though not always so cleverly) crafts the argument or uses labels to establish dominance. He attempts to mount you on a gun forum. Note the use of the "virtually every professional in this area." He oft uses labels which are broad and some times open to interpreation to "win" a debate. "Virtually every" (Not 58%, no 89%, and not X, Y or Z) "professional in this area" (what area? LE? Use of Forese? Citizen involvement is policing their own communities? Who certifies these professionals and how do we seperate the politicians and those with an agenda from those with real knowledge of the science... and can I see this science Dave often alludes to but never cites?)

The most arrogant of his post was telling the OP to leave the OP's thread, and leave Glock Talk. (He'll claim he wasn't, but that's why I quoted it for posterity) Dave's not even a moderator, certainly not an administrator, but boy howdy is he superior to Cody and empowered to suggest he leave.

The most silly of his implication was that when the robber comes out shooting people you are some how going to make it worse by attempting to stop the shooting.

IT DON'T GET ANY WORSE THAN PEOPLE BEING SHOT. (except maybe that people are being killed and someone with the ability to stop the killing follows Dave's advise and lets people be killed)

It can't get worse than the OP scenario. People are being murdered. Right then, right there.

But, Dave don't get that, he never has. I'll explain to you why. Because you are a nasty civilian who is not an grand and glorious as Dave, you're not a cop. His poop don't stink, and it's not as horrible when a person gets shot by the errant round fired at the cop than when the errant round was meant for a civilian playing at being a cop.

Nor is it as bad when someone is killed by a poorly fired cops round as it is by a poorly fired civilians round.

He's also the worst hijacker on the forum. All he had to do was "go away" or answer the question.

Instead, it's another "look how well I can argue my postion" and "establish my preeminence" hijack.


Back on topic:

I'd ask him if he was a cop.

If he says yes, I'd ask for ID.

If he says no, I'd crap my pants, again, and run for cover.

Then shoot him in the back if he picks up a bag of money and runs to the door.

David Armstrong
01-14-2010, 11:17
Here we see Dave Armstrong's position clearly illustrated. The only people qualified and should try to help in a bad situation are the cops. He sees the glass half empty when it comes to non-LEO involvement.
And here we see, again, th typical phonecop response: Make something up, claim it is the position of the other person, then attack the made-up stuff. That is not my position, I have never said it was my position, anyone who claims it is my position is not telling the truth. As for the rest of the rather silly ad hominem attack, well, it is just a rather silly ad hominem attack no different than the dozens made before.
and can I see this science Dave often alludes to but never cites
Sure you can. Most anyone can. But it seems like you never want to, thus the making things up and the ad hominem arguments rather than discussing the facts. Sort of sad.

CodyBoy
01-14-2010, 20:13
Here we see Dave Armstrong's position clearly illustrated. The only people qualified and should try to help in a bad situation are the cops. He sees the glass half empty when it comes to non-LEO involvement.

He frequently and cleverly (though not always so cleverly) crafts the argument or uses labels to establish dominance. He attempts to mount you on a gun forum. Note the use of the "virtually every professional in this area." He oft uses labels which are broad and some times open to interpreation to "win" a debate. "Virtually every" (Not 58%, no 89%, and not X, Y or Z) "professional in this area" (what area? LE? Use of Forese? Citizen involvement is policing their own communities? Who certifies these professionals and how do we seperate the politicians and those with an agenda from those with real knowledge of the science... and can I see this science Dave often alludes to but never cites?)

The most arrogant of his post was telling the OP to leave the OP's thread, and leave Glock Talk. (He'll claim he wasn't, but that's why I quoted it for posterity) Dave's not even a moderator, certainly not an administrator, but boy howdy is he superior to Cody and empowered to suggest he leave.

The most silly of his implication was that when the robber comes out shooting people you are some how going to make it worse by attempting to stop the shooting.

IT DON'T GET ANY WORSE THAN PEOPLE BEING SHOT. (except maybe that people are being killed and someone with the ability to stop the killing follows Dave's advise and lets people be killed)

It can't get worse than the OP scenario. People are being murdered. Right then, right there.

But, Dave don't get that, he never has. I'll explain to you why. Because you are a nasty civilian who is not an grand and glorious as Dave, you're not a cop. His poop don't stink, and it's not as horrible when a person gets shot by the errant round fired at the cop than when the errant round was meant for a civilian playing at being a cop.

Nor is it as bad when someone is killed by a poorly fired cops round as it is by a poorly fired civilians round.

He's also the worst hijacker on the forum. All he had to do was "go away" or answer the question.

Instead, it's another "look how well I can argue my postion" and "establish my preeminence" hijack.


Yea, seeing that.


His signature pretty much sums it up:
"This ain't Hollywood, people, and things don't usually go how you *want* them to. You wanna get dead needlessly, rock on beavers, but don't down folks who know better."


Heck no it ain't Hollywod!


It's real life $#it and people are getting murdered in cold blood!

Should we:

a. Wait for police and their response time?

or

Step up to the plate and get out of that little circle over there, there's no pinch hitter in THIS game.

uashooter
01-14-2010, 21:45
It's like fantasy world in here. The sad thing is I think I agree with the "do something" crowd. Though if I wasn't 'right there' as described in the OP, I'd be very apt to sit tight and wait for the storm to blow through.

Some of you stone cold killers could probably benefit from a day getting your ass kicked in the shoot house with sim rounds to give you a better idea of how **** really works. Then again, I might be making assumptions here...

David Armstrong
01-15-2010, 10:39
Should we:
That question has been asked before by a number of different folks, and the answer has overwhelmingly been to avoid getting into a shootout with the BGs. To me, that sums it up. It is possible the FBI, virtually every LE organization in the U.S., dozens of folks who have done research on this topic for decades, most all security consultants, and so on are all wrong and somebody without any experience in the area knows better, but I think I will tend to go with the professionals here.
His signature pretty much sums it up
Yes, as does Dexters point that we are all heroes in our own movies. In your movie you have everything going right. Sorry, but it doesn't always work out that way. Often this kind of stuff makes things worse. I'll quote from a post by one of the sages here, screen name degoodman, that has some relevant stuff:
"Many of us are also all too aware that you can do everything right and still lose a gunfight. you can deliver FATAL gunfire, but the BG doesn't stop fighting for a minute or more. You can miss and start the BG shooting and get a whole bunch of people killed, or your miss may kill somebody. You can win the gunfight and lose a civil suit that costs you everything your entire family has or will ever have. You can kill the BG and still die.

These things don't go down like they go down in the movies. This is serious business, with real life or death consequences not only for you and the BG, but anyone within the range of either of your bullets. And when you make the decision to shoot, you're taking responsibility for ALL of that. Especially if you shoot first. You started a gunfight where one did not exist before. If you do not believe that to be a decision that deserves the gravest of weight, you don't understand the reality of a gunfight. "

jaybirdjtt
01-15-2010, 11:22
You know, it's good to play out these scenarios, mentally, ahead of time. Professionals in many areas do this. Navy Seals, athletes, public speakers, salesmen, whatever, rehearse and rehearse and don't rely on winging it. The time to think is BEFORE a crisis. That's just my 2 cents.

uashooter
01-15-2010, 16:21
^ Agreed, Tactics & Training has become my favorite GT forum.

CodyBoy
01-15-2010, 18:26
It's like fantasy world in here. The sad thing is I think I agree with the "do something" crowd. Though if I wasn't 'right there' as described in the OP, I'd be very apt to sit tight and wait for the storm to blow through.
.



Yea me too.

Never said to 'here gunshots from the front of the store and come running from the shoe dept. in the back of the store with guns blazin'.

No, your within 20' of some wacko going off and killing people. Your not starting a gunfight, it has already started and needs to end quicker than waiting on LE to come on scene and to try and prevent more murders.

Glad to see you and others can see that. Unfortunately others can't and want to run & hide or curl up in a little ball and wait on LE.

Heck, maybe the door greeter will save those people.

"Can I see your receipt for that ammo"

:whistling:

Tailhunter
01-15-2010, 19:24
To start until the BG made some sort of move towards me or when i felt in danger, i would have stayed behind the checkout stand. Not my money or my loved ones at risk, not my problem.

perfect answer ..... :upeyes:

Tailhunter
01-15-2010, 19:29
Here we see Dave Armstrong's position clearly illustrated. The only people qualified and should try to help in a bad situation are the cops. He sees the glass half empty when it comes to non-LEO involvement.

He frequently and cleverly (though not always so cleverly) crafts the argument or uses labels to establish dominance. He attempts to mount you on a gun forum. Note the use of the "virtually every professional in this area." He oft uses labels which are broad and some times open to interpreation to "win" a debate. "Virtually every" (Not 58%, no 89%, and not X, Y or Z) "professional in this area" (what area? LE? Use of Forese? Citizen involvement is policing their own communities? Who certifies these professionals and how do we seperate the politicians and those with an agenda from those with real knowledge of the science... and can I see this science Dave often alludes to but never cites?)

The most arrogant of his post was telling the OP to leave the OP's thread, and leave Glock Talk. (He'll claim he wasn't, but that's why I quoted it for posterity) Dave's not even a moderator, certainly not an administrator, but boy howdy is he superior to Cody and empowered to suggest he leave.

The most silly of his implication was that when the robber comes out shooting people you are some how going to make it worse by attempting to stop the shooting.

IT DON'T GET ANY WORSE THAN PEOPLE BEING SHOT. (except maybe that people are being killed and someone with the ability to stop the killing follows Dave's advise and lets people be killed)

It can't get worse than the OP scenario. People are being murdered. Right then, right there.

But, Dave don't get that, he never has. I'll explain to you why. Because you are a nasty civilian who is not an grand and glorious as Dave, you're not a cop. His poop don't stink, and it's not as horrible when a person gets shot by the errant round fired at the cop than when the errant round was meant for a civilian playing at being a cop.

Nor is it as bad when someone is killed by a poorly fired cops round as it is by a poorly fired civilians round.

He's also the worst hijacker on the forum. All he had to do was "go away" or answer the question.

Instead, it's another "look how well I can argue my postion" and "establish my preeminence" hijack.


Back on topic:

I'd ask him if he was a cop.

If he says yes, I'd ask for ID.

If he says no, I'd crap my pants, again, and run for cover.

Then shoot him in the back if he picks up a bag of money and runs to the door.

:yourock:

PhoneCop
01-15-2010, 22:26
Heck, maybe the door greeter will save those people.

"Can I see your receipt for that ammo"

:whistling:


LOL!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

OMG that was great!

BamaTrooper
01-18-2010, 12:58
This thread seems to be following the me and mine argument vs the society and others argument.

For those that would only shoot in defense of self and are trumpeting the what if you make it worse scenario, whathappens when/if YOU or YOURS ARE the object of the bad guys attention and you decide to fire and then things go bad?
The innocent person gets hit when the bad guy returns fire or you hit the school kid that, otherwise, would have had an interesting story to tell?
Is it ok if things turn bad then? The innocent is either hurt or dead whether you started shooting to defend yourself or others.

Is there a point where you would intervene?

I understand the reasoning, I just don't understand the rationale.

CodyBoy
01-18-2010, 14:51
This thread seems to be following the me and mine argument vs the society and others argument.

For those that would only shoot in defense of self and are trumpeting the what if you make it worse scenario, whathappens when/if YOU or YOURS ARE the object of the bad guys attention and you decide to fire and then things go bad?
The innocent person gets hit when the bad guy returns fire or you hit the school kid that, otherwise, would have had an interesting story to tell?
Is it ok if things turn bad then? The innocent is either hurt or dead whether you started shooting to defend yourself or others.

Is there a point where you would intervene?

I understand the reasoning, I just don't understand the rationale.


Exactly.

And how do the nay sayers know "theirs" isn't involved? Just because it wasn't in the scenario?


:dunno:

David Armstrong
01-18-2010, 15:17
Actually it is pretty simple. IMO. You don't have the right to put me and mine in danger with the possible exception of protecting you and yours.

CodyBoy
01-19-2010, 09:08
Actually it is pretty simple. IMO. You don't have the right to put me and mine in danger with the possible exception of protecting you and yours.


Well Texas law reads different.

Take a look at PC 9.31, PC 9.32, and PC 9.33(defense of 3rd person.)
(deadly force statutes)

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/ftp/forms/LS-16.pdf


Notice the word "believe" in the Penal Code.


Well "I believe" .


:wavey:

David Armstrong
01-19-2010, 12:37
Yawn. Just because you can shoot doesn't mean you should shoot. And please note that it is "reasonably believe" in the code. You might have a hard time explaining why it was reasonable to start a gunfight when there wasn't one, and the 3rd party testifies that they did not feel they were in any danger.

But heck, go ahead and do whatever you think is right. Just realize that the overwhelming weight of evidence by the professionals is against what you are suggesting.

CodyBoy
01-19-2010, 13:58
Yawn. Just because you can shoot doesn't mean you should shoot. And please note that it is "reasonably believe" in the code. You might have a hard time explaining why it was reasonable to start a gunfight when there wasn't one, and the 3rd party testifies that they did not feel they were in any danger..


From OP

Ok, this BG was robbing the bank inside WM and started shooting people.


As I said before, the fight was already started.

Do you not understand he is killing people already? :brickwall:

Then please, tell me what you would do?

Let him keep killing until slidelock and then pounce on him, beat him down with your fists, spray him with pepper spray,

What is your plan?




quote from 3rd party" No judge, I did not ever feel I was in danger. I went to WM on that day because I like seeing people getting shot and do not mind at all that bullets were wizzing passed my head, and wouldn't have minded at all if I would have been struck by a bullet. Nope not me, I aint skeered. I know I was safe because things like this never happen."
:upeyes:

David Armstrong
01-19-2010, 14:21
As I said before, the fight was already started.
So you think it is a good idea to encourage him to stick around and shoot more people?
Then please, tell me what you would do?
I suggest that folks follow the advice of virtually all professionals in the field, which is to stay down, stay out of the way, be a good witness. There is a pretty good reason they suggest that course of action for most people. I mentioned it in another thread, but Evan Marshall's commentary on the dangers of intervention are rather telling. We can also add this from Skip Gochenour: "When confronting a VCA, the first imperative is to live through the encounter. The fact is: you could well end up dead, crippled, or in jail. The decision to violently resist unlawful force carries with it all of those risks. The decision must always be balanced against doing nothing, which also carries with it great risks. There is no risk-free way out, no free lunch! Failure to recognize, consider, and confront these bona-fide hazards is evidence of an unhealthy delusion."
What is your plan?
I plan on going home to my family and taking care of them, which is my primary obligation these days. I spent 20+ years fighting BGs as my job, don't see much sense in losing everything now that it is not my job. Unlike many folks here I've been in gunfights. I don't like them.

quote from 3rd party
Obviously you also have little knowledge about evidence and what goes on in the courtroom.

TwinFourFives
01-19-2010, 15:24
I'd like to stay hidden. If i wasn't, and the armed feller came in he may be a cop or off duty cop, i'd throw my hands in the air and say "Help, this man's been shot"

PhoneCop
01-19-2010, 19:31
So you think it is a good idea to encourage him to stick around and shoot more people?


No, I think it a good idea to shoot him so that he stops....



OH COME ON!!!!! THAT WAS TOOOOOO EASY!!!!!

David Armstrong
01-20-2010, 10:56
No, I think it a good idea to shoot him so that he stops....
Yep, if only it was that easy. Again, from Skip Gochenour: "When confronting a VCA, the first imperative is to live through the encounter. The fact is: you could well end up dead, crippled, or in jail. The decision to violently resist unlawful force carries with it all of those risks. The decision must always be balanced against doing nothing, which also carries with it great risks. There is no risk-free way out, no free lunch! Failure to recognize, consider, and confront these bona-fide hazards is evidence of an unhealthy delusion."

CodyBoy
01-20-2010, 19:14
Yep, if only it was that easy. Again, from Skip Gochenour: "When confronting a VCA, the first imperative is to live through the encounter. The fact is: you could well end up dead, crippled, or in jail. The decision to violently resist unlawful force carries with it all of those risks. The decision must always be balanced against doing nothing, which also carries with it great risks. There is no risk-free way out, no free lunch! Failure to recognize, consider, and confront these bona-fide hazards is evidence of an unhealthy delusion."


When you don't act or confront you could very well end up the same.
Dead or crippled.

Doing nothing, which also carries with it great risks

And he says there is no risk free way out



Yep pretty much sums it up.

A6Gator
01-21-2010, 08:51
I'd like to stay hidden. If i wasn't, and the armed feller came in he may be a cop or off duty cop, i'd throw my hands in the air and say "Help, this man's been shot"

BG's are like bogeys. Where there's one, there's two. There is a reason this "armed feller" ran to the gunfire. Not a normal sheep-like response, even curious sheep.

David Armstrong
01-21-2010, 10:57
And he says there is no risk free way out
Yep, and the main point of his message is "Failure to recognize, consider, and confront these bona-fide hazards is evidence of an unhealthy delusion." So a smart fellow might do everything he can to minimize the risk to him, which seems to be the part of this mess that you have missed. Again, there is a reason the FBI, virtually every LE organization in the U.S., dozens of folks who have done research on this topic for decades, most all security consultants, and so on suggest a very different course of action than you do. Perhaps you could share with us what it is in your background that makes you so much more informed and knowledgeable about these things than those folks.

CodyBoy
01-21-2010, 20:50
Yep, and the main point of his message is "Failure to recognize, consider, and confront these bona-fide hazards is evidence of an unhealthy delusion." So a smart fellow might do everything he can to minimize the risk to him, which seems to be the part of this mess that you have missed. Again, there is a reason the FBI, virtually every LE organization in the U.S., dozens of folks who have done research on this topic for decades, most all security consultants, and so on suggest a very different course of action than you do. Perhaps you could share with us what it is in your background that makes you so much more informed and knowledgeable about these things than those folks.


OK.

I am a conservative and will not listen to advice of liberal democrats that probably are the ones that came up with that cockamamie BS about "don't do anything, run and hide, be a good witness.

Sounds like liberal crap to me.

You go on believing what you will.

My mind is made up and can live with my decisions. Yes my decisions.

Not someone else that persuaded me to look the other way when someone may need help.

David Armstrong
01-22-2010, 11:58
I am a conservative and will not listen to advice of liberal democrats that probably are the ones that came up with that cockamamie BS about "don't do anything, run and hide, be a good witness.
LOL!! That is a good plan, don't even listen to advice because you think it might come from someone with a different political philosophy than yours rather. Of course, since that advise has been given by many who are quite conservative, maybe someday you will listen to it and understand it.

CodyBoy
01-22-2010, 19:21
uh , yea well , I doubt it.:upeyes:

perkins3120
01-29-2010, 10:49
immediatly retake cover while still being able to see just most body cover draw weapon and yell police and aim weapon at them wait to see if they point at you but of course with logical thinking and not ten gallons of adrenaline running through my body and brain