Staples

Let's look at a recent local situation and analyse it.

http://www.ktvb.com/news/local/More...t-at-Staples-come-out-in-court-143393506.html

"In court Monday, Deputy Prosecutor Robert Bleazard said Clinkingbeard had gone to the Staples on Eagle Road and Chinden Boulevard Friday night to see about getting some posters for her campaign.
Bleazard says Clinkingbeard was escorted to the copy center at the back of the store and began making strange comments to three employees about religion and politics.
He says she told the employees they were going to meet God.
A short time later, Clinkingbeard and the employees made their way to the front of the store where she was waiting for a ride.
The prosecutor says that's when she pulled the gun.

"She pulled out a 9mm handgun from a shoulder holster at around that time, and as the store manager went to open the door to let in the person that was there to pick her up, she pointed the weapon at the store manager's back and activated the laser sight that is on the gun," said Bleazard. "While she did this, she told the other employees that were standing nearby that if she were anywhere else she would quote, 'Cap him.'"


I am a frequent shopper at the local Staples stores and even the one that the she was in. Had I been in the store at the time and in the vicinity to observe and overhear it would have been difficult for me to contain myself and merely observe. The combination of "meet god" and a laser being directed onto someone would have been at least enough to draw and confront. Even yelling "stop" to the person probably would have been enough to distract her away from the subject of her assault, but, probably would have caused her to turn her entire body and direct the laser toward me. Perhaps not. She may have lowered her firearm and turned her head to look.

There are lots of "what if" situations. The main thing we need to be aware of is how things can happen anywhere, even in our own neighborhoods!

This:

Clinkingbeard's attorney didn't speak directly to the allegations, other than to say his client was under a hypomanic state at the time.
He asked she be moved from jail custody to a secured mental health facility.
The judge agreed to that request and set bond at $100,000.
She was also ordered not to have contact with the three Staples' employees.
Clinkingbeard is on the faculty at College of Western Idaho and Boise State University.
Court testimony revealed that she was placed on leave from CWI two days before her arrest for erratic behavior. CWI would not provide details because it is a personnel issue.

Click to expand...

is just as, if not more important. If you have lived with or know a bi-polar person you can almost see everything that is said to have taken place, as well as the stuff that usually (but not always) leads up to that sort of trip into whatever other dimension the bi-polar go to.

While I have sympathy for folks who are bi-polar, and especially for those who were not diagnosed properly before they went off the deep end, I refuse to climb on the "It's a disease, not a crime" bandwagon. You can use the insanity defense and get sent to a mnental health treatment center where they will adjust your brain chemistry as best they can, but being found "not guilty by reasaon of insanity/mental defect" should not be applied to anyone who will ever return to free society.* IMHO carrying the weight of a criminal conviction can serve as inducement to adhere to treatment plans and remain compliant with a medication regimen.

stay safe.

*Some states have a version of "guilty but mentally defective" as an option. It sends the person to treatment, and then when/if restored to mental health to serve the criminal conviction sentence. Some allow time in treatment to count towards satisfying the sentence.

carracer said:

Even yelling "stop" to the person probably would have been enough to distract her away from the subject of her assault, but, probably would have caused her to turn her entire body and direct the laser toward me. Perhaps not. She may have lowered her firearm and turned her head to look.
!

Click to expand...

What a courteous good Samaritan you are! I really enjoy your "probably"s and "may have"s. After all, in a life and death situation, It's only polite to give someone disturbed enough to point a deadly weapon at another person as many options as possible. "Maybe", she'd be distracted.......or "maybe" she'd start pulling the trigger killing as many clerks as possible. It's nice of you to give her that option, though.

Unlike you, however, If, (and thats a really big "IF") I ever do decide to interject myself into a situation. (After all, I'm not a police officer. The only reason I carry is SELF-defense. If the people in Staples wanted help with a lunatic pointing a gun at them, they had every opportunity to arm themselves just as I did. IF I ever did choose to take action on behalf of someone else, the most horrific, irresponsible, and endangering decision I could make is to re-enact the cool stuff I saw Charles Bronson pull on HBO, and yell, "Freeze! Reach for the sky, dirtbag!" and give a lunatic the option of actually pulling the trigger ending the life of someone I tried to pull a Dudley Do-right on.

I am not going to be so courteous to any lunatic pointing a loaded firearm at another human being. The ONLY choice I will allow them to make is whether their corpse falls on its face, or its back. They will NOT get the option of killing an innocent person because I felt like playing hero and re-enacting something I saw in a Dirty Harry movie.

Superlite27 said:

What a courteous good Samaritan you are! I really enjoy your "probably"s and "may have"s. After all, in a life and death situation, It's only polite to give someone disturbed enough to point a deadly weapon at another person as many options as possible. "Maybe", she'd be distracted.......or "maybe" she'd start pulling the trigger killing as many clerks as possible. It's nice of you to give her that option, though.

Unlike you, however, If, (and thats a really big "IF") I ever do decide to interject myself into a situation. (After all, I'm not a police officer. The only reason I carry is SELF-defense. If the people in Staples wanted help with a lunatic pointing a gun at them, they had every opportunity to arm themselves just as I did. IF I ever did choose to take action on behalf of someone else, the most horrific, irresponsible, and endangering decision I could make is to re-enact the cool stuff I saw Charles Bronson pull on HBO, and yell, "Freeze! Reach for the sky, dirtbag!" and give a lunatic the option of actually pulling the trigger ending the life of someone I tried to pull a Dudley Do-right on.

I am not going to be so courteous to any lunatic pointing a loaded firearm at another human being. The ONLY choice I will allow them to make is whether their corpse falls on its face, or its back. They will NOT get the option of killing an innocent person because I felt like playing hero and re-enacting something I saw in a Dirty Harry movie.

Click to expand...

If you re-read the post you will notice I did not give my response to this. I only presented the known situation and two possibilities of what may happen during the given circumstances.

Apologies. I'm simply extremely opposed to anyone even suggesting that yelling, "Freeze!" or "Drop the gun!" as a viable option to "diffuse" or "mediate" a life or death situation. All this does, other than attempt to recreate any of 1,000,000 different "hero" situations depicted in Hollywood, is give a crazy person an opportunity to kill someone the would be hero attempted to save.

Once again, I apologize for reacting to your post as if this would be your recommended course of action.

SL27, no problem. I tend to agree with your analysis. It would be really difficult to look upon the situation of a laser on someones back as they were walking away from the perp who was talking about "capping" them.

I am also amazed at the logic of the judge ordering her "not to have contact with the three Staples employees". She should remain locked away so she would be no danger to anyone. I certainly the Staples employees take it upon themselves to aquire some defense training and exercise their rights to do so.

.

Keith Cromm said:

I do not believe *ANYONE* should try to "what-if" this specific situation.

Specifically, to try to "what if I were there" into the situation which DID in the past occur and can no longer occur.

I will state this:
I do OC for my and my family's personal safety.

What would I do if I observed others (not family, general persons) become endangered?
I will not publicly state what my actions "might" be. For in doing such, it can and will be used against me in a court of law. Period.

Though, I am confident to state (once again) that I do OC (or CC where OC is shunned) for my and my family's personal safety.

------

"What if" you were near the Arizona Congresswoman a year ago January.
Let us conclude the gunman had already walked passed you, though you did not see any firearm until after he drew it.
Then, you saw the gunman just ahead of you draw his firearm and start firing.
- "What if" you were OC'ing and the gunman did see this. Would he take you out first?
- "What if" you were CC'ing instead?
- "What if" there were CC'ing Secret Service nearby?
- "What if" you drew, aimed toward the gunman with full purpose to stop the threat (specifically, shoot until he is no longer a threat), and the Secret Service then drew, not knowing if you were WITH the gunman or not, and fired on you?

You were NOT there. You did NOT see the gunman walk past you. You did NOT know if there were Secret Service CC'ing nearby.

Prepare for the "what may happen" in the future, not the "what did" happen in the past.

This *does* include reviewing any and all actual scenarios, to think through them, to place yourself in them at different perspectives (locations, CC'ing, OC'ing, family, friends, etc.).

But don't openly speculate on the "what if's". Not on OC.org, no on your blog, not on your FB page.

Yes, do discretely discuss scenarios with persons you know well, in private conversation, in legit class/instruction settings.

Finally, with your most intense focus of all, pray that any such scenario be far from you.

Click to expand...

What if the sky falls? What if you flunk out of law school? I posed a specific scenario and asked for comments regarding that particular situation. Since we do not know what the future holds for us, the only avenue for training and discussion is history. Since I am not currently in school, law or other, this public forum is the right choice for me. A large group of educated, trained participants willing to give me advice and debate on topics not conversed by the general public.

Using your logic these and other forums should be shut down. To keep yourself safe from future litigation and references to this forum perhaps you should follow your own advise on a more broad level. Not participate here and get your firearms training from your classmates and law instructors.

Just lookin' out for you!

.

Keith Cromm said:

Thanks for accepting my "devil's advocate" position, of which isn't me.

Safe to say, the sky isn't falling. Neither am I in law school (not to imply that's safe or not safe to say!!).


While a family member of mine once had medical-based relation with the alleged perpetrator, I would not have recognized the person, though my family member would have.

I bring into scope the threat awareness meter (TAM), 5 colored circle/zones going inward (like a target). White, Yellow, Orange, Red, Black. Red = Strong hand on firearm still in holster; Black = Firearm drawn with finger on trigger. Most people are in the White Zone. A reasonable OC/CC should be in the Yellow zone, constantly, save when sleeping.

In a vast majority of situations I read about, the TAM usually goes from (White or) Yellow to Black in less than 0.2 seconds.

When I am with my family member(s) and we witness a situation (not unlike the Staples situation) and we were "outside" my already personally identified radial distance (PIRD), I would have solely protected my family member(s).

When I am solo (no family present) and outside my PIRD, I protect myself.

When I am with my family member(s) and we were within my PIRD, I would have solely protected my family member(s) and myself

When I am solo and inside my PIRD, I protect myself.

The TAM is not "scientific," in that you can not apply some formula, whip out a calculator and figure out the percentages. Black occurs too quickly.

My core competencies encompass the development of strategies to reduce the risk/threat. Note, I qualify reduce the risk/threat, not "potential risk/threat". I can't read someone's mind nor does the Minority Report team exist. Reducing a risk/threat involves a process in which the cost to mitigate is measured against savings in risk reduction.

Thx for looking out for me, as I, too, am looking out for you.

Click to expand...

Wow, I've OC'd in that location a dozen or more times in the last two years without any problems so I would have been OC'ing if I'd been there.

Since she triggered the laser I'd say it's safe to take the shot (in terms of legal defense) but it would depend on the reaction of the gun owner, employees and the manager. Clear shot and seeing the laser, I would have probably shot. If the shot wasn't clear I'd have simply gone to cover or concealment and maneuvered as the situation called for.

It's a tough call and since the outcome is that we know the job action taken by CWI and the claim of "hypnomanic" state (whatever that is) anyone will second-guess the decision to shoot. However, at the time she triggered the laser no one knew her diagnosis and anyone who just happened to be standing at the cash register would reasonably assume she was about to start shooting people.

Scary.

.