• 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.

Wal-Mart robbery: Criminal mind v. armed citizen's viewpoint

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

Once again, good article Dave. It will be interesting to see where this case goes, and what effects it will have on the view of LAC who carry for protection of self and others.

Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.

There is a good reason crimes like these have a tendency to be "hit and run" as it were. Not so much for fear that the cops might show up to "foil the plot" but with knowledge that we as Americans are known to be armed, and you never know who in the crowd will shoot back given half the chance.

Its been said before, but I will say it again. By and large, criminals are cowards at their core, and this case proves it yet once again.

We carry not just for the dozens of scenarios we can think of, but for the hundreds of scenarios we cannot.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

FMCDH wrote:
Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.

Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

HankT wrote:
FMCDH wrote:
Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.

Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.

The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police. Corrilation? I believe so.

In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.

"An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..." would likely take out RoboCop.

The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.
 

arentol

New member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
383
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
FMCDH wrote:
Although it has been pointed out that this crime happened so fast that no LAC could possibly have reacted in time to prevent it, let it not be forgotten that this could have turned into a much worse situation should the assailants have decided to open fire on any "witnesses" or decided that the bag of money they had murdered an innocent man for, just wasn't enough.

Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
The methodology might work to defeat an OC'er, but it would also work against 99.99999% of the people in this world (only exceptions are heavily guarded individuals like the president). So making it an OC thing is just stupid. You are not made MORE vulnerable to this kind of attack because you OC, and at WORST being openly armed will make it far less likely on average you will be attacked.

Also, if you know anything about the case you would know that this robbery only took place AFTER an insider learned how much money there was to make and figured out the best time to attack. So there was motive and a specific plan.

So your argument is only relevant if their is a motive and plan for doing this to an OC'er, which is not horribly likely unless there is a personal motive. It is not like OC'ers are typically carrying 10's of thousands of dollars on them.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

FMCDH wrote:
HankT wrote:
Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.


Calvin Finley is not a coward, then? Or is he a psychopath?

I agree that Finley would not have any significant gain by shooting a surprised LAC OCer (or CCer) at the time of the robberty. But I wasn't suggesting that in any way. I was suggesting that, ingeneral,Finley's methodology would be very effective against any OCer (or CCer)--independent of the armored car robbery setting.



FMCDH wrote:
The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police. Corrilation? I believe so.
I don't think this is plausible. Though I'm willing to be persuaded by data or citation. Citizens are attacked physically A LOT more frequently than cops are in this country.




FMCDH wrote:
In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.

As said above, I wasn't thinking about the OCer at the scene of a robbery,e.g., an armored car guard robbery. I was trying to tease out what the Finley methodology could mean in other situations. Frankly, I was thinking of the perennial question of just exactly how vulnerableis an OCer to a potential threat from somewhere, out there, in the public space environment?

After thinking about it some more, I've come to the conclusion that the truth is probably that the Findley method should be of more concern to OCers (eventually) than to, say, cops. Or CCers. But probably not armed armored car guards...



FMCDH wrote:

"An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..." would likely take out RoboCop.

The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.
No. That's not true. I'm kind of uninterested in the armored car guard attack example. It's pretty simple and assimilable.

But the Finley method, now proven to happen,is replicable to other criminal attacks. Including against an OCer who is not prepared for it....

Of course, other questions come up in the line of thought I'm suggesting. Such as, "Why would a perp Finley an OCer?" Or"A perp would be more likely to Finley a CCer, woudn't he?" Etcetera, etcetera. That's much moreinteresting.
 

bugly

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
310
Location
Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
FMCDH wrote:
HankT wrote:
Another thing to tease out of this brutal killing by Calvin Finley is that his methodology for killing the guard would also work for any other visibly armed person, such as a LACOCer out in public.

An unhesitating, surprising, direct and vicious attack atface to face rangelike Finley used will take out an OCer. (Or a CCer for that matter.)
As I pointed out before, criminals are by and large, cowards. Short of the attacker being a psychopath, there would be no significant gain for the increased risk in attacking a LAC OCer (or CCer) unless they were in the way of, or carrying something specific that the criminal wanted.


Calvin Finley is not a coward, then? Or is he a psychopath?

I agree that Finley would not have any significant gain by shooting a surprised LAC OCer (or CCer) at the time of the robberty. But I wasn't suggesting that in any way. I was suggesting that, ingeneral,Finley's methodology would be very effective against any OCer (or CCer)--independent of the armored car robbery setting.



FMCDH wrote:
The mass majority of these types of robberies in America are smash and grab (in and out as quick as possible) or they overwhelm by numbers and force. Criminals themselves have stated almost unanimously that they fear a citizen carrying a gun far more than they fear the police. Corrilation? I believe so.
I don't think this is plausible. Though I'm willing to be persuaded by data or citation. Citizens are attacked physically A LOT more frequently than cops are in this country.




FMCDH wrote:
In the event that an OCer was on scene and the unlikly event that a criminal even noticed he had a gun (as opposed to the criminal identifing it as a cell phone, multi tool, PDA, ect., at a glance) unless the OCer was infact the target itself, he most likely would not be put in the position of being attacked in such a manner.

As said above, I wasn't thinking about the OCer at the scene of a robbery,e.g., an armored car guard robbery. I was trying to tease out what the Finley methodology could mean in other situations. Frankly, I was thinking of the perennial question of just exactly how vulnerableis an OCer to a potential threat from somewhere, out there, in the public space environment?

After thinking about it some more, I've come to the conclusion that the truth is probably that the Findley method should be of more concern to OCers (eventually) than to, say, cops. Or CCers. But probably not armed armored car guards...



FMCDH wrote:

"An unhesitating, suprising, direct and vicious attack at face to face range like Finley used..." would likely take out RoboCop.

The point here is not to examine the effectivness of the attack, but given all circumstances and motives, who the target of such an attack would be. The bystandard that the criminal is not even really focused on? OR the COP/GUARD/EMPLOYEE standing in the way of the prize.
No. That's not true. I'm kind of uninterested in the armored car guard attack example. It's pretty simple and assimilable.

But the Finley method, now proven to happen,is replicable to other criminal attacks. Including against an OCer who is not prepared for it....

Of course, other questions come up in the line of thought I'm suggesting. Such as, "Why would a perp Finley an OCer?" Or"A perp would be more likely to Finley a CCer, woudn't he?" Etcetera, etcetera. That's much moreinteresting.
Let's not make that pile of excrement famous by even entertaining the thought of naming a vicious assault after him. His name should be forgotten as he should be after his execution. There is no rehabilitation for someone like this, he should be put down like a rabid dog.
 

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
imported post

bugly wrote:
Let's not make that pile of excrement famous by even entertaining the thought of naming a vicious assault after him. His name should be forgotten as he should be after his execution. There is no rehabilitation for someone like this, he should be put down like a rabid dog.
Yea...I was gonna ask why he kept using that term, but figured it best not to encourage him.

He (who shall not be named) deserves no such recognition or remembrance. He and his accomplice should be executed and forgotten as the murdering cowards they are.

Yes, they were cowards.
 

bugly

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
310
Location
Taco-Ma, Washington, USA
imported post

FMCDH wrote:
bugly wrote:
Let's not make that pile of excrement famous by even entertaining the thought of naming a vicious assault after him. His name should be forgotten as he should be after his execution. There is no rehabilitation for someone like this, he should be put down like a rabid dog.
Yea...I was gonna ask why he kept using that term, but figured it best not to encourage him.

He (who shall not be named) deserves no such recognition or remembrance. He and his accomplice should be executed and forgotten as the murdering cowards they are.

Yes, they were cowards.
To invoke a term I rarely use; amen.
 
Top