Like Tree5Likes
  • 1 Post By BikerRN
  • 1 Post By Hcim101
  • 1 Post By gunslinger71973
  • 2 Post By curt mini14
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-12-2011, 16:04   #1
Banned
Points: 1,625, Level: 23 Points: 1,625, Level: 23 Points: 1,625, Level: 23
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: STATE OF DISCOMBOBULATION
Posts: 258
Question To Ponder

Howdy all.

I was discussing a scenario with a friend the other day and wanted to get the varied opinions this forum is sure to produce. I will thank you all in advance, so please consider yourself so thanked if you contribute to this thread.

You're eating in a fast food restaurant when three armed robbers come in and proceed to do a take-down robbery. They are demanding wallets and cell phones from the customers and the cash from the register. One robber is by the door, so that he can act as a lookout and assist the other two as needed. One is at the cash register and the third proceeds into the dining area voicing his demands.

You have on your person, besides your gun, something you are unwilling to part with, as it is a medical device. Said medical device often gets mistaken for a cell phone, and is in fact carried in a cell phone holder. The baloon has gone up and you fire and score a solid hit on the one demanding the wallets and cell phones from the paying customers.

To get to some semblance of cover you have to close distance and also engage the "lookout" by the door. To do so you have to step over the body of the one you just shot, thus having an armed combatant behind you.

All three are actively engaged in the commision of an armed robbery, which is a crime that you can use deadly force to stop in the jurisdiction that this takes place in. By closing the distance you have gained some cover from the one acting as a lookout and eliminated the one at the cash register from being able to fire at you effectively until he moves to a better position, thus buying you some precious time.

Here's the $50,000 Question:

Eventhough the first one is down, you cannot guarantee he is out of the fight. Do you put a bullet in his head as you step over him to get to that precious cover that you so desperately need?

Think of things with an eye to tactics and legalities, as the legalities will play a big part if your tactics are right.

Biker
BikerRN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 07:03   #2
NS2
Simple is Good
Points: 870, Level: 15 Points: 870, Level: 15 Points: 870, Level: 15
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
NS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern, NH
Posts: 18
Kobayashi Maru...Time to break the rules.

Getting out maneuvered is one thing. Out maneuvering yourself and allowing an attacker behind you is another. In this case I see no option but to apply the final tap to the downed attacker since he may still pose a threat.

I'm not certain I'd be able to survive it in court, but at least I would be able to present an argument. There would most likely be a number of reasons for that final shot and if articulated well to the right jury, I might be able to explain why I did what I did so as to create reasonable doubt. I would have a 1:12 opportunity to convince them of the necessity of my actions. All I would need is one.

I'm not advocating summary executions or dramatic self sacrificing misplaced heroism. I'm saying that in this particular situation I would feel that neutralizing that threat could be necessary and justifiable to ensure my own safety and the safety of those innocent persons around me.
NS2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 07:11   #3
Banned
Points: 1,625, Level: 23 Points: 1,625, Level: 23 Points: 1,625, Level: 23
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: STATE OF DISCOMBOBULATION
Posts: 258
Being that you are still actively involved in the fight when you pass by the downed attacker, I see it as a valid possibility.

That is not to say that one wouldn't have legal complications afterwards however. It's not as if you went around after the fight and executed living combatants. There in lies the difference I think.

Great to see you here.

Biker
BikerRN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2011, 12:54   #4
NS2
Simple is Good
Points: 870, Level: 15 Points: 870, Level: 15 Points: 870, Level: 15
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
NS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern, NH
Posts: 18
No matter what happens, there will be legal complications in this one.

The second guessing by all the, "experts," would be huge.
NS2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2011, 16:12   #5
Full Member
Points: 5,040, Level: 45 Points: 5,040, Level: 45 Points: 5,040, Level: 45
Activity: 6.6% Activity: 6.6% Activity: 6.6%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hudson, NH
Posts: 462
Since you're passing over or moving immediately around the downed robber, you're "safest" bet legally speaking would probably be to kick the robber's weapon away. In the scenario, it sounds like you would be able to keep a visual on the downed robber while positioning yourself either defensively or offensively....even if it's peripheral vision. If you kick the weapon far enough away, then you would be able to pick up the gross movement should the downed robber make a move.

Just my opinion though.
moonie42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 20:36   #6
Sniper 173D Abn Brigade
Points: 1,996, Level: 26 Points: 1,996, Level: 26 Points: 1,996, Level: 26
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
Herd Sniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 58
The courts have ruled that YOU determine when a person is no longer a threat to you. Look it up. Once the shooting starts, you don't stop shooting an armed or dangerous suspect until, in your mind, he's not a threat. If I go to shoot Johnny Dirtbag and, if I think he's a threat, I will not hesitate to put one in his head, step over him and do whatever I need to do. Keep in mind, not all head shots are fatal but most of them are incapacitating. There are numerous reports of felons being shot in the head only to have the bullets go under the skin and slide around the outer bone of the skull. Most people who get shot in the head and don't die from the penetration of the bullet end up out of action with a very serious concussion. More than likely you're probably going to kill the suspect but not every time. So a head shot has too many variables in it but your survival doesn't: Take out the bad guys as effectively as you can.
Herd Sniper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 22:16   #7
Banned
Points: 1,625, Level: 23 Points: 1,625, Level: 23 Points: 1,625, Level: 23
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: STATE OF DISCOMBOBULATION
Posts: 258
It is nice to see people taking the legalities of the situation in to account, but not letting themselves be so consumed by those legalities that they are impotent of thought and hopefully, action.

Biker
JRedHorse likes this.
BikerRN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2011, 07:54   #8
CantRe Member
Points: 3,331, Level: 35 Points: 3,331, Level: 35 Points: 3,331, Level: 35
Activity: 27.5% Activity: 27.5% Activity: 27.5%
Last Achievements
 
ManyFeathers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 568
Gosh, I can think of an old analogy that fits this one!

I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

The Grand Jury will deliberate with the 1st shot not the 2nd

Which one of the bad guys get shot 1st, 2nd or 3rd is all situation dependent

If the "double tap" is needed....take it!

Did the bad guys have weapons? I'd certainly shoot the guy with the gun pointed at me first!
ManyFeathers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2011, 10:05   #9
NS2
Simple is Good
Points: 870, Level: 15 Points: 870, Level: 15 Points: 870, Level: 15
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
NS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern, NH
Posts: 18
The jury will deliberate based on the police reports and RO's testimony, as well as what the prosecution, coroner and defense tell them. The 1st shot is far less important than the shot which actually ends the subject's life. Unless they are one in the same.

SD shooting is about shooting to stop the BG from doing the bad thing. It is not about killing. Killing is a by product associated with the use of deadly force, but it is not a certainty. If a person applying deadly force has been known to spout bravado filled statements or has a history of aggressive or violent behavior they could face a more difficult time in court. Something the jury will certainly be made aware of by over-zealous, ignorant or unscrupulous prosecutors.

Surviving the deadly force encounter is certainly the primary goal. However, it can be done in such a manner as to be able to survive the criminal and civil liabilities as well. I'm not advocating a compromise of either tactics or the aggressiveness of one's actions. What I am saying is that it is important to balance what we do before and after the DF encounter with what we do during the encounter.

Things like finely tuned or specialized trigger mechanisms, excessive use of force or braggadocio will certainly come back to haunt a person should they find themselves in an untenable courtroom situation. My question here is why compound the situation? Why talk smack? Why do things to your weapon that would be difficult for a layman to understand?

i.e., A person changes the grips on their sidearm to make it more controllable...Easy for the layman to understand.

Alternatively; A person installed a trigger mechanism which give the shooter better feel for the reset and reduced the amount of pressure required to activate the mechanism...What the layman may hear with help from the prosecutor, is that the the trigger was altered to make it lighter and thus more dangerous. They could even go so far as to say the end user did so with malicious intent.


Why make things more difficult for yourself when you could do many things to mitigate your risks while still being able to effectively defend yourself?

Certainly a person should exercise their best judgement while in the moment. That person should also be ready to justify every round discharged from their weapon(s). The police, the lawyers and the media will demand that you articulate why you pressed every shot. If a shooter fails to do so, no matter how well justified in the criminal courts, they may still pay a dear price in the civil courts.

Be ready to use as much force as you deem necessary while in the moment, but be prepared to answer to all the Monday morning quarterback's questions.

One last point: The old time bravado filled statements may have been acceptable in the time when they were coined, but contemporary society is far less willing to accept them as anything but "gun-nut," rhetoric. We can thank the "evolution" of our society as a whole and the media for that one.

FWIW: Use such statements at your own risk and peril.

I'm more fond of..."it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." Information which is not provided cannot be used against you.

Last edited by NS2; 04-17-2011 at 10:07. Reason: Spelling...again
NS2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2011, 06:22   #10
Full Member
Points: 951, Level: 16 Points: 951, Level: 16 Points: 951, Level: 16
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
Devereaux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 77
Heads: If you train well, practice, learn to function under stress, you will have a much better chance of surviving any lethal force encounter. This is no exception.

Tails: If you train well, practice, learn to funtion under stress, the DA, if he's a jerk (and what DA isn't) will try to paint this activity as "extreme, gun-nut, desire to fight, practicing at killing".

I would say that the courts are one thing, and real life is another. You have to survive each in its own way. To do that, you need to apply appropriate "weapons & tactics" to each. In the latter, this scenario, leaving a potential lethal opponent behind you isn't really smart. If you attempt to kick the weapon away, you must spend a significant amount of real (gunfight) time co-ordinating such an action, and make sure that you kicked the weapon far enough away so that the BG can't readily get to it. THAT takes your attention away from the rest of the fight, and that can be lethal - from one of the other guys. How well you might be able to "pick up gross movement" - from behind you, especially with bullets flying at you, - is open to lots of serious question.

In the former situation, it means being very careful about what you say when, and finding a really quality lawyer.
Devereaux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-13-2012, 23:33   #11
Registered Member
Points: 48, Level: 1 Points: 48, Level: 1 Points: 48, Level: 1
Activity: 20.0% Activity: 20.0% Activity: 20.0%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3
Wow

I didnt know what to expect as a LEO joining this forum. What a great scenario you have posted.

Personally, in lieu of giving the subject a "coup de gras" as you step over him, make sure you in fact put at least two in him from the get go. Preferably in the head to insure he is no longer a threat...or citizen for that matter. As with everything we do, shot placement is key. Front sight, smooth trigger.

Now, if you only got one shot off and are unsure of his demise, then yes, hit him again after he's on the deck. Is he still a potential threat? Kick the gun as you go by as well. If you can remember all this with a 200 bpm pulse and adrenalin, good on you.

In the end remember the old saying, "its better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6."
survivalcordman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2012, 12:12   #12
Full Member
Points: 1,514, Level: 22 Points: 1,514, Level: 22 Points: 1,514, Level: 22
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 37
I remember a story of a pharmacist who shot 1 of 2 armed robbers a year or so ago. He hit one (who was down) and proceeded to chase the second out of the store. Upon returning, he shot the first again. His legalities were hellish.

I'm not saying that situation is the same as this, nor are the legalities identical. However, coup de gras shots are definitely a hotbed of debate in the legal community.

For me, assuming my initial hits were enough to *really* put him down, I would kick the gun away and move on to the next threat. It does leave somewhat of a tactical liability, more so if the first perp has a backup, but it would be FAR safer for me in the aftermath, especially as there would be security cameras and multiple witnesses.

Simply put: disarm him, move on. Initial shot placement is the critical thing, just like it is for #2, and #3
Custom II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 15:54   #13
Full Member
Points: 3,725, Level: 38 Points: 3,725, Level: 38 Points: 3,725, Level: 38
Activity: 1.9% Activity: 1.9% Activity: 1.9%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: McLeansville, NC by way of WV
Posts: 231
I would think that two bad guys would be looking for you immediately and your need to pursue them would be moot. As said, if I had presence of mind, I would skip a couple more rounds into the downed bad guy while looking for cover.

To really second guess you, I would not have acted unless the robbery went south. If one of the BGs had started spraying the place after hearing your shot, you would have caused death and injury. Shooting one of three BGs in a crowded restaurant would not have been my free chioce. They would have to force my decision.

As a banker, I have been robbed. Put down on my face. Like your scenario, there were three. One stops at the door with his sawed off pump. The second vaults the teller line and the third comes for me in my office. I could have taken him but I would have got killled by the guy at the front door and/or the guy behind the teller line. And I would have endangered my employees. The two were not in my line of sight.
__________________
Life is too short to drink cheap booze and argue with stupid people.
Strangers are friends ready to happen. SASS29170L
Red Cent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2013, 18:45   #14
Mike
Points: 81, Level: 1 Points: 81, Level: 1 Points: 81, Level: 1
Activity: 15.4% Activity: 15.4% Activity: 15.4%
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: NE Florida
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by moonie42 View Post
Since you're passing over or moving immediately around the downed robber, you're "safest" bet legally speaking would probably be to kick the robber's weapon away. In the scenario, it sounds like you would be able to keep a visual on the downed robber while positioning yourself either defensively or offensively....even if it's peripheral vision. If you kick the weapon far enough away, then you would be able to pick up the gross movement should the downed robber make a move.

Just my opinion though.
I agree. In the military we are taught(unfortunately) that unless they are still actively engaging you while wounded on the ground, they are no longer to be considered a combatant. Most likely this is how responding law enforcement would view it when they saw a body with a justifiable shot to the chest, but an execution-style shot to the head while laying on the ground. If you were the only one in the restaurant, then it would be your word vs. dead guys, but if there are people around to witness, that could end up not so good for you. Very good question though, I can see how one could argue each side, especially with the adrenaline of that situation.
Gizmo92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 09:34   #15
Full Member
Points: 724, Level: 14 Points: 724, Level: 14 Points: 724, Level: 14
Activity: 17.9% Activity: 17.9% Activity: 17.9%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 61
Dispatching armed assailants is not hard, doing so without getting innocents hurt is very difficult. You want to go far to near when shooting in a crowd or around innocents, that way your most accurate first shot to the hardest target and go from there. If you shoot a robber, and he's down, do not shoot him again unless he re imposes a threat, can't even count how many people are serving time because if over use if force. Plus you won't have time, after the first shot, it's game on, training takes over, if your not trained you will end up dead or you will get others killed, so take some courses if you really want to be prepared.
JRedHorse likes this.
Hcim101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2013, 18:50   #16
Draw, Varmint!
Points: 4,899, Level: 44 Points: 4,899, Level: 44 Points: 4,899, Level: 44
Activity: 18.9% Activity: 18.9% Activity: 18.9%
Last Achievements
 
Lone Gunman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 309
Originally Posted by BikerRN View Post
Howdy all.

I was discussing a scenario with a friend the other day and wanted to get the varied opinions this forum is sure to produce. I will thank you all in advance, so please consider yourself so thanked if you contribute to this thread.

You're eating in a fast food restaurant when three armed robbers come in and proceed to do a take-down robbery. They are demanding wallets and cell phones from the customers and the cash from the register. One robber is by the door, so that he can act as a lookout and assist the other two as needed. One is at the cash register and the third proceeds into the dining area voicing his demands.

You have on your person, besides your gun, something you are unwilling to part with, as it is a medical device. Said medical device often gets mistaken for a cell phone, and is in fact carried in a cell phone holder. The balloon has gone up and you fire and score a solid hit on the one demanding the wallets and cell phones from the paying customers.

To get to some semblance of cover you have to close distance and also engage the "lookout" by the door. To do so you have to step over the body of the one you just shot, thus having an armed combatant behind you.

All three are actively engaged in the commission of an armed robbery, which is a crime that you can use deadly force to stop in the jurisdiction that this takes place in. By closing the distance you have gained some cover from the one acting as a lookout and eliminated the one at the cash register from being able to fire at you effectively until he moves to a better position, thus buying you some precious time.

Here's the $50,000 Question: Even though the first one is down, you cannot guarantee he is out of the fight. Do you put a bullet in his head as you step over him to get to that precious cover that you so desperately need?

Think of things with an eye to tactics and legalities, as the legalities will play a big part if your tactics are right.

Biker
The basic assumption is incorrect. You assume that you have a choice when, in fact, you do not. ‘Why?’ Because you’re already carrying a gun and associated equipment. In a situation like this, the moment the thugs discover that you’re armed, they will take your gun and other equipment; and, then, simply shoot or knife you for daring to pose a threat to them. (It’s an insane criminal ego thing that’s not too different from the rationale behind your final question about whether or not you should ever leave a living opponent behind you!)

Perhaps you’ve never heard this before; but, the first rule of military infiltration (especially covert military infiltration) is to never leave a living enemy behind you - Never! What would I do? I don’t know; but I’d, probably, surrender and take my chances. The real question is, ‘What would a Navy SEAL do?’ Given the circumstances and his covert martial training I suspect that he’d wait until the, ‘wallet collector’ was close to him; then, rush the guy and shoot him as he closed. The moment he achieved body contact with the first opponent he’d grab the guy, and prop him up for use as a body shield.

Next, our Navy SEAL would engage whichever remaining target possessed, both, the greatest threat AND the greatest opportunity for success. (Forget about shooting back-to-front.) As for the third guy? If he has, ‘half a brain’ he’ll immediately cut and run. Whether or not our Navy SEAL gets all three desperadoes is impossible to tell. He may, or he may not.

What I’ve just told you is tactically correct. What I don’t know; and what, perhaps, should be determined is, ‘What would a Philadelphia lawyer do under exactly the same circumstances?’ (Which is, probably, the best reason I can think of for carrying your EDC and extra magazine in a quick-detach belt rig that you can easily remove and stow!)

Great question!
__________________
Life is karma. It reflects both past and present circumstance. Our time here is short; so choose carefully and behave well; for, all of your tomorrows are presently being decided.
Lone Gunman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2013, 11:20   #17
Full Member
Points: 3,160, Level: 34 Points: 3,160, Level: 34 Points: 3,160, Level: 34
Activity: 18.2% Activity: 18.2% Activity: 18.2%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 264
If I still feel he is a threat, I'm putting one in his head. Nothing illegal about that. I'm trying to stop the threat. Since my center of mass hits did not do the trick, I need to move on to a more effective kill zone. How do I know he ain't wearing body armor? I constantly hear, "shoot to stop the threat." Well sometimes that means shoot to kill. As the one in the fight, you have to determine if you feel threatened. If you do, and you can articulate that, then take care of business. In the what if above, I would probably take the shot. Bottom line, I was scared for my life, and I was actively defending myself against superior numbers. I knew he had been shot, and he had fell to the ground. But, I also knew he was still alive, was not waiving a white flag, and he still had reasonable access to a gun. It's a hard truth, that sometimes a head shot is proper conflict resolution.
JRedHorse likes this.
gunslinger71973 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2014, 09:51   #18
Full Member
Points: 5,797, Level: 49 Points: 5,797, Level: 49 Points: 5,797, Level: 49
Activity: 10.6% Activity: 10.6% Activity: 10.6%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: camp verde az
Posts: 345
2 to the head 1 to the chest new rules to live by.
grumpy_old_man and JRedHorse like this.
curt mini14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2014, 14:01   #19
Full Member
Last Achievements
 
JRedHorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Classified
Posts: 860
Thumbs up I like it!

Originally Posted by curt mini14 View Post
2 to the head 1 to the chest new rules to live by.
Yup, that should take the fight out of him!
__________________
Resistance is Mandatory !!!
It's 12 gage or no gage!
JRedHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2014, 21:42   #20
Full Member
Points: 37,959, Level: 100 Points: 37,959, Level: 100 Points: 37,959, Level: 100
Activity: 81.1% Activity: 81.1% Activity: 81.1%
Last Achievements
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: The South
Posts: 3,301
Originally Posted by curt mini14 View Post
2 to the head 1 to the chest new rules to live by.
AKA The "Mozambique" drill: Jeff Cooper's Mozambique Drill

Endorsed by Jeff Cooper himself. Hard to go wrong taking advice on pistolcraft from him.

Best,
Grumpy
grumpy_old_man is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 16:51.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
All information is copyright by Perfectunion.com unless already under copyright.

This site is Gunny Approved