imported post
danbus wrote:
I remember a post awhile back about drawing on a drawn gun and how it's almost a guarantee that you get shot.
In this case he wasn't exactly "drawing on a drawn gun". His draw was out of the view of the BG, so the BG didn't even see the LEO's weapon until it was pointed at him. At that point, the BG was in a bad spot. His gun was pointed at the clerk when the LEO's gun came around the shelves, pointed straight at him. Not only that, it looks to me like most of the LEO's body was behind the shelves. Of course, the shelves wouldn't provide much real cover, but from the BG's point of view he was completely exposed with his gun off-target while the cop had the drop on him, and was behind cover.
The thing that made the most difference, IMO, was attitude. The would-be robber came in expecting the clerk and patron to cower in fear and was completely flummoxed when he was suddenly faced with an aggressive response. He wasn't mentally prepared for a fight, so his first reaction upon seeing the cop's gun was to duck and hide, not shoot. That reflexive reaction dropped his gun further out of position at which point resistance was hopeless, because the cop's point of aim never wavered.
Even if he'd come in fully prepared to kill someone, I think he'd still probably have lost the fight because the cop could've shot if he'd tried to shift his point of aim. He'd probably have gotten the shot off, but he'd have taken one to center mass first.
Tactically, it might have been better for the cop to back away, opening the distance from the clerk who was the BG's point of aim. The BG would have continued to approach the clerk, since that was his goal, and then when the cop challenged him his gun would have been 90 degrees out of position. On the other hand, that might have put the clerk in greater risk, giving the robber more time to shoot him.
