• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Open carrier not shot first. stops mass killing

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
Conyers, Georgia, video and pictures at link

http://www.gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/06/ga-open-carrier-stops-mass-killing.html


In Conyers, Georgia, a citizen, openly carrying a holstered pistol, returned fire at a man who had already killed two people. The attack appears to be a planned mass shooting. The attacker was armed with a semiautomatic pistol, which he is seen firing in the video.

When the open carrier, Todd Scott, returned fire, the active shooter stopped the attack, and fled the store. He returned to the home where he lived with his parents, and shot and wounded them both. At this point the police arrived at the parents home.

The attacker allegedly pointed an AR-15 type rifle, with a double drum magazine, at the police. They shot and killed him. From wsmv.com:

CONYERS, GA (CBS46) -
A customer of a Rockdale County liquor store said he opened fire on a gunman who shot and killed a store owner and another customer.

(snip)

Police said Pitts left the liquor store, but later returned and opened fire on the owner and customers.

“I assume that this man was not going to stop, so I came up,” said Scott.

Scott was carrying a weapon and fired a shot at Pitts. He said he is not sure whether Pitts was struck.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
I'm missing where Mr. Todd Scott was in the liquor store at the time the gunman entered and began shooting, as well as when he returned fire. Maybe it's just not captured from the video camera angel shown?

I'm not a tactical expert but it does appear that the shooter was not just randomly coming around the corner. It also appears to me that the shots at the already-fleeing customers may have been to convince them to stay out of the way. The person behind the counter does seem to be the primary target.

If nothing else the video shows how quickly things happen and how little time one has to assess, decide to act, formulate a plan, and then carry it out.

stay safe.
 

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
I think that you are correct, the open carrier, Todd Scott, is not in the video shown

I'm missing where Mr. Todd Scott was in the liquor store at the time the gunman entered and began shooting, as well as when he returned fire. Maybe it's just not captured from the video camera angel shown?

I'm not a tactical expert but it does appear that the shooter was not just randomly coming around the corner. It also appears to me that the shots at the already-fleeing customers may have been to convince them to stay out of the way. The person behind the counter does seem to be the primary target.

If nothing else the video shows how quickly things happen and how little time one has to assess, decide to act, formulate a plan, and then carry it out.

stay safe.

He probably is outside of the video angle. The video seems to stop before the active shooter is shot at.
 

decklin

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
758
Location
Pacific, WA
I found this bit to be funny. How many times have we heard the MDA say things like, "this is a family oriented business. You shouldn't have a gun in there."
And here we have a person using those words family oriented. This situation is a perfect counter to their statement.

http://http://valdostatoday.com/2015/06/atlanta-shooting-rampage-at-liquor-store-home-kills-5/


“They’re nice. Its family oriented. You hate to see stuff like this go on. That’s it,” a customer said in the report.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla

I'll just repeat what has been thrown at me more times that I care to remember: Constantly repeating something does not make it so. Dig up a police report that places him in the store when the shooting began. Find some other video that shows him in the store when the shooting started.

Or better yet, explain why the shooter does not duck or otherwise react to someone inside the store shooting at him.

If Todd Scott was not there it's pretty sure that firing at the shooter as he flees the store is not a defensible use of deadly force in most jurisdictions. It does not appear to be defensible in GA given the circumstances as were are presently presuming them to be. https://chiefweems.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/useofforce/

stay safe.
 

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
Another video with an interview with Todd Scott

I'll just repeat what has been thrown at me more times that I care to remember: Constantly repeating something does not make it so. Dig up a police report that places him in the store when the shooting began. Find some other video that shows him in the store when the shooting started.

Or better yet, explain why the shooter does not duck or otherwise react to someone inside the store shooting at him.

If Todd Scott was not there it's pretty sure that firing at the shooter as he flees the store is not a defensible use of deadly force in most jurisdictions. It does not appear to be defensible in GA given the circumstances as were are presently presuming them to be. https://chiefweems.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/useofforce/


stay safe.

In this interview, Todd Scott says that he fired 5-6 shots. The police say that the active shooter was wearing body armor.

http://www.11alive.com/story/news/l...s-shooting-todd-scott-jeffrey-pitts/28375071/
 
Last edited:

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
919
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
Sherrif calls Todd Scott a Hero

I'll just repeat what has been thrown at me more times that I care to remember: Constantly repeating something does not make it so. Dig up a police report that places him in the store when the shooting began. Find some other video that shows him in the store when the shooting started.

Or better yet, explain why the shooter does not duck or otherwise react to someone inside the store shooting at him.

If Todd Scott was not there it's pretty sure that firing at the shooter as he flees the store is not a defensible use of deadly force in most jurisdictions. It does not appear to be defensible in GA given the circumstances as were are presently presuming them to be. https://chiefweems.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/useofforce/

stay safe.

"I consider him to be a hero," said Levett about the 44-year-old Covington resident. "Although we did have a fatality at that location, he did save some other lives that were inside that business."

Levett wouldn't say how many times each victim was shot or if Scott, who has a Georgia license to carry weapons, made contact with Pitts.

It was reportedly the first time the Porterdale restaurant owner had had to fire his handgun.

"I'm not a hero. I just did what I thought should be done," Scott later told WSB-TV. "I definitely wasn't going to lie on the floor and take it."

http://www.rockdalenews.com/section/1/article/22290/
 

Bernymac

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
415
Location
Las Vegas
But the video shows him exiting the store without reacting to being shot at.

stay safe.

Speaking only from what I have experienced, there are quite a lot of new kids whose first time in a combat zone that do not react to shots being fired until explicitly screamed at to take cover. Most say that they did not know they were being fired upon and trying to distinguish between friendly and enemy fire. Their first instinct was not to duck and cover but to look around and see what's going on or just keep shooting at what they think is the target.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
I'll just repeat what has been thrown at me more times that I care to remember: Constantly repeating something does not make it so. Dig up a police report that places him in the store when the shooting began. Find some other video that shows him in the store when the shooting started.

Or better yet, explain why the shooter does not duck or otherwise react to someone inside the store shooting at him.

If Todd Scott was not there it's pretty sure that firing at the shooter as he flees the store is not a defensible use of deadly force in most jurisdictions. It does not appear to be defensible in GA given the circumstances as were are presently presuming them to be. https://chiefweems.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/useofforce/

stay safe.

Not sure about Va law, but in NC, and probably most of the country he was justified to shoot a armed felon after that felon revealed that he was a danger to society. And in fact was because he killed again. The supreme court has ruled that in those circumstances using lethal force is justified.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Not sure about Va law, but in NC, and probably most of the country he was justified to shoot a armed felon after that felon revealed that he was a danger to society. And in fact was because he killed again. The supreme court has ruled that in those circumstances using lethal force is justified.

As I understood the situation at the time I posted that, the shooter had stopped shooting and was not pointing at other potential victims/walking the aisles looking for potential additional victims. That means the imminent threat no longer existed (based on information I was working with at the time).

How would you or anybody else know he was going to go from the scene of the first shooting to another place and there shoot others? Pretty much speculation on your part, isn't it?

If you are making reference to the case I think you may be, SCOTUS ruled that cops were justified in shooting at a fleeing felon who they had reasonable belief was posing a direct and immediate threat to others. That decision has not, to my knowledge, been expanded to LACs under the self defense/defense of innocent others doctrines. We poor schmucks are still stuck with that pesky "imminent threat" thing and needing to wonder what definition of "imminent" will be chosen to judge us by. It also is not an absolute shield for cops due to questions of directness and immediateness being Monday morning quarterbacked to death.

If you know of a case that applied Greenwood (? - my memory for names sucks and I'm not going to go look it up) to LACs I'd appreciate if you would cite it.

stay safe.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
The reason for the ruling is that a violent felon fleeing is an imminent threat to the public. Which in NC makes it a justified shooting. I don't think SCOTUS specified "cops", just the circumstances when deadly force could be used on a fleeing felon, that was a threat to others.

The ruling does specify LE, but several cases of LAC here have not been charged. Either the felon is a threat to the public at large or they are not. If they just murdered two people they are a threat. To think that a person should be charged, or scrutinized because the felon ran after killing is ridicules. Now if he had surrendered that would have been a different story.
 
Last edited:

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
Unless there is some ruling against a LAC shooting at someone running that had just shot someone it is still a matter of speculation I think.
There is certainly many instances IIRC of the same happening without charges.
In any case, if someone just killed or tried to kill someone I would certainly feel it is prudent to keep firing at them unless they obviously were no threat any longer. Someone running away still carrying their bangstick is still a threat IMHO. They certainly may fire more shots behind them or kill anyone that gets in their way.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Unless there is some ruling against a LAC shooting at someone running that had just shot someone it is still a matter of speculation I think.
There is certainly many instances IIRC of the same happening without charges.
In any case, if someone just killed or tried to kill someone I would certainly feel it is prudent to keep firing at them unless they obviously were no threat any longer. Someone running away still carrying their bangstick is still a threat IMHO. They certainly may fire more shots behind them or kill anyone that gets in their way.

Exactly my point, and at any time they can turn around, and re engage.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
Exactly my point, and at any time they can turn around, and re engage.

I agree, but I also think that one needs to be careful to not carry this farther than having witnessed something so clear cut. The obvious error would be for LAC#1 to shoot the (disengaged) bad guy and then LAC#2 only sees the shooting of someone who wasn't an active shooter so he shoots LAC#1. This is a reasonable concern if/when those less thoughtful decide to carry. It could be hard to know who is who as the players move away from the initial events.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
I agree, but I also think that one needs to be careful to not carry this farther than having witnessed something so clear cut. The obvious error would be for LAC#1 to shoot the (disengaged) bad guy and then LAC#2 only sees the shooting of someone who wasn't an active shooter so he shoots LAC#1. This is a reasonable concern if/when those less thoughtful decide to carry. It could be hard to know who is who as the players move away from the initial events.

My philosophy has always been do not stick my nose in. But those were extreme circumstances that faced the LAC, and there was absolutely no doubt that the threat was still a threat as it exited the store. The threat just shot two people without provocation. In his situation I would have felt compelled to act, even though I have said over, and over again that I carry to protect my family, and myself. Someone that dangerous could, and would be a threat to my family or others if he escaped.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Not sure about Va law, but in NC, and probably most of the country he was justified to shoot a armed felon after that felon revealed that he was a danger to society. And in fact was because he killed again. The supreme court has ruled that in those circumstances using lethal force is justified.
For Missouri:
Section 563.051.1 - Beginning January 1, 2017--Private person's use of force in making an arrest.
... 3. A private person in effecting an arrest or in preventing escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only: (1) When deadly force is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he or she reasonably believes deadly force is authorized under the circumstances and he or she is directed or authorized by a law enforcement officer to use deadly force; or
(3) When he or she reasonably believes such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to arrest a person who at that time and in his or her presence:
(a) Committed or attempted to commit a class A felony or murder; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon.


http://moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/56300000511.html
This statute places me in a conundrum.
 
Top