• 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.

armed robbery, would you interfere?

would you interfere in the situation presented in this video.

  • yes, as soon as it starts to go down

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • yes, when the punk strikes the cashier

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • yes, at the end, on their way out

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • no, at no point would I interfere in this

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I need more information to answer this question

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

HankT

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

xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery, in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully.The sooner, the better. Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.
 

mikestilly

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
1,869
Location
Macomb County, Michigan, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery,  in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully. The sooner, the better.  Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.

The guy starts opening fire. So I guess you would be dead.
 

HankT

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

mikestilly wrote:
HankT wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery, in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully.The sooner, the better. Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.

The guy starts opening fire. So I guess you would be dead.

No. The idea, MS, is to leave before the shooting.

Before.

After the shooting starts, you're way behind the curve. Probably get shot. Might get killed. Family would mourn.

Before, MS.
 

ghostrider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
mikestilly wrote:
HankT wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery, in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully.The sooner, the better. Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.

The guy starts opening fire. So I guess you would be dead.

No. The idea, MS, is to leave before the shooting.

Before.

After the shooting starts, you're way behind the curve. Probably get shot. Might get killed. Family would mourn.

Before, MS.
Not saying that your recommendation of fleeing is a bad idea, but did you not notice that the door was locked.

So,

Flee, only to discover the door is locked. Now what?
 

HankT

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

ghostrider wrote:

Not saying that your recommendation of fleeing is a bad idea, but did you not notice that the door was locked.

So,

Flee, only to discover the door is locked. Now what?

Yes, I noticed that. I wondered when the door actually became locked. You bring up an important point.

It doesn't make too much sense for a retail store to lock in customers, although I have seen it done. But perhaps the door locked with the tripping of an alarm. If the door locked upon some alarm tripping (after 0:35) then that's all the more reason to make the power move of fleeing--INSTANTLY.

Hanging around....pausing...being indecisive....gets you shot up on this one.

If the door is unlocked at time 0 to 0:34, then there is no problem. If the door is locked, then it has to be broken. The robbers got out, didn't they?

3 against 1. Not good odds.

Retreat. Flee. That's the smart thing to do. Call in the gendarmes.

What would you do, GR?
 

Ramius

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
11
Location
Hermansville in Da UP eh!, Michigan, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
ghostrider wrote:

Not saying that your recommendation of fleeing is a bad idea, but did you not notice that the door was locked.

So,

Flee, only to discover the door is locked. Now what?

Yes, I noticed that. I wondered when the door actually became locked. You bring up an important point.

It doesn't make too much sense for a retail store to lock in customers, although I have seen it done. But perhaps the door locked with the tripping of an alarm. If the door locked upon some alarm tripping (after 0:35) then that's all the more reason to make the power move of fleeing--INSTANTLY.

Hanging around....pausing...being indecisive....gets you shot up on this one.

If the door is unlocked at time 0 to 0:34, then there is no problem. If the door is locked, then it has to be broken. The robbers got out, didn't they?

3 against 1. Not good odds.

Retreat. Flee. That's the smart thing to do. Call in the gendarmes.

What would you do, GR?
looks like the woman hits a switch @ 0:45 or it was the woman that moved out of camera right just before that.

I only see 1 of them with a gun so the odds are pretty even.

Its impossible to know what could have happened with another person in the store.

Either way its a fight or flight response in situation's like this that lives are saved and lost. In clinch situations sometimes there's nothing you can do sometimes the right thing gets the wrong outcome and visa verse.

To say you would flee for help is fine but if you were carrying id sure hope you would stay or @ least back out while ventilating their bodies. Maybe save a life maybe get shot least if it were me if I didn't die id feel better about myself in the end.
 

ghostrider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
ghostrider wrote:

Not saying that your recommendation of fleeing is a bad idea, but did you not notice that the door was locked.

So,

Flee, only to discover the door is locked. Now what?

Yes, I noticed that. I wondered when the door actually became locked. You bring up an important point.

It doesn't make too much sense for a retail store to lock in customers, although I have seen it done. But perhaps the door locked with the tripping of an alarm. If the door locked upon some alarm tripping (after 0:35) then that's all the more reason to make the power move of fleeing--INSTANTLY.

Hanging around....pausing...being indecisive....gets you shot up on this one.

If the door is unlocked at time 0 to 0:34, then there is no problem. If the door is locked, then it has to be broken. The robbers got out, didn't they?

3 against 1. Not good odds.

Retreat. Flee. That's the smart thing to do. Call in the gendarmes.

What would you do, GR?
I believe I already stated my thoughts one the incident. But with the locked door, I'd probably turn and fight IF I felt that I could not flee. I don't rightly know that the robbers would have ignored my attempts to leave the store. They may have tried shooting at me, in which case turning and fighting would seem the best option. The way they escaped was by shooting the glass panel in the door.

I do agree that 3 to 1 is bad odds, especially with the close quarters, and no cover/concealment.

I really don't think fleeing would have been best in that situation. Granted, I've no wish to play hero, or get in a gun fight. I just think that if a gunfight is about to commence, then I should act quickly and decisively. I don't see that as a situation where I could safely flee. In that case, shoot first, shoot fast, and pray for speed and accuracy. And again, it does depend on where I am in relation to what's happening. If I sense trouble, and can leave, then I might just do that. If I were able to determine that something was about to go down in time to leave the store, then I may well have done that. I certainly don't think breaking a locked revolving door to escape would have gotten me out of there. I think it would have turned the attention onto me, and I would have still been in a gunfight. I honestly think that once that guy pulled his gun, fighting would have been the only option, as I think trying to leave would have resulted in a bullet in the back.

Here's a question for you.

After fleeing, and later learning that he killed that merchant before exiting the store, how would you have felt about it knowing that you could have done more.
 

joshuaeberly

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
165
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

I posted this topic because, as I'm sure many/most of us have, I have thought long and hard since I began carrying about when/where/why I would put my firearm and/or myself in a situation.

I have been in three situations where I would have been legally justified in ventilating some crooks (and in MI with our recent self-defense law, immune from civil liability as well), however, I WAS able to defuse the first situation by intervening verbally (although, despite the fact that I was CC at the time, they probly figgered I had a gun, body language etc...) the second by calling the police (although, it was seconds from shooting the whole 15 minutes until they showed) and by making it readily apparent that I was armed the third time.

Hank, I don't know what city/state this occurred in, I came across this video on live-leak by following a link to another, and then another etc.... until this popped up.

I posted this because it caused me to re-think my "stay out until absolutelyfreakinnecessary" philosophy. here's a situation where I would be inclined to say, that money isn't worth their or my life. assuming that I was stuck in the middle of that (CC, they don't know I'm armed), I would have avoided the use/threat of deadly force, possibly intervened when it turned violent, but the cashiers nose isn't worth my life.

this philosophy of non-intervention until absolutely necessary, would have cost at least one life in this situation.

Now I'm being a bit more critical of my pre-thought out scenarios, and attempting to isolate body language/danger signs which could/would indicate that it's going to go beyond the money. while I feel, in principle, no compunction about ending some armed thugs life, I would like to live my life without second guessing a decision. it IS all situational, but I think that my training and planning would have failed me miserably if I was in this situation. after watching the vid, and seeing it play out, it appears to me that ALL THINGS BEING AS THEY ARE IN THE VID, and myself in camera location, I should drop the BG as soon as he produces the gun, and cover his buddies quick, this would require a bit of quick movement on my part, to avoid endangering innocents in the line of fire, but...... after seeing the outcome, how could I stay out of a similar situation???
 

wally1120

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
693
Location
Jackson, Michigan, USA
imported post

I would be VERY CAREFUL on this situation. What if you do shoot the guy that was holding someone up, You shot the BG, And then the Victim of the robbery says they didnt want you to shoot, Kill the BG, Then you get sued? I was a firm believer of also protecting someone else as well, Then I thought If they are of age to have a CPL and dont have it, Well sorry that is your fault, You shouldn`t have to rely on someone else to possibly protect another person. True there are people that cant afford a CPL, They aren`t of age to obtain a CPL. Then there are other people that are Anti-Gun, And would love to have a lawsuit on someone else, For killing someone else, Even if you are trying to protect the AG from the BG. So I have come to the theory of, I WILL ONLY PROTECT FAMILY, FRIENDS, AND CHILDREN. I wont shoot someone for anybody else other then Family, Friends, OR Children. I also was thinking, You have to live with your self from killing someone else, Person that you tried to protect sues you, Have to sit in Jail/Prision, Have your guns taken away, Possibly become a Felon. It is just to much liability to protect someone that you dont know, Or are close to.
 

joshuaeberly

New member
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
165
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

wally1120 wrote:
I would be VERY CAREFUL on this situation. What if you do shoot the guy that was holding someone up, You shot the BG, And then the Victim of the robbery says they didnt want you to shoot, Kill the BG, Then you get sued? I was a firm believer of also protecting someone else as well, Then I thought If they are of age to have a CPL and dont have it, Well sorry that is your fault, You shouldn`t have to rely on someone else to possibly protect another person. True there are people that cant afford a CPL, They aren`t of age to obtain a CPL. Then there are other people that are Anti-Gun, And would love to have a lawsuit on someone else, For killing someone else, Even if you are trying to protect the AG from the BG. So I have come to the theory of, I WILL ONLY PROTECT FAMILY, FRIENDS, AND CHILDREN. I wont shoot someone for anybody else other then Family, Friends, OR Children. I also was thinking, You have to live with your self from killing someone else, Person that you tried to protect sues you, Have to sit in Jail/Prision, Have your guns taken away, Possibly become a Felon. It is just to much liability to protect someone that you dont know, Or are close to.

well, for starters we're in MI, if you're not convicted they can't sue you. so, make sure you're legally justified, and you've got immunity from civil lawsuits.

whether it's their fault or not, can I(since I can't determine anothers personal moral decisions) in good conscience stand by and allow them to be killed for being wrong.

being sued can't put you in jail, there's a difference between criminal and civil actions.
It should(not necessarily IS, but SHOULD) be a given that a "carrier" will ensure that at the very least his/her actions are legally justified. so we can rule out the criminal portion of concern. since the criminal charges are most likely not being filed, and would be beaten anyway, the civil don't matter anyway. :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
imported post

At :37 the clerk was faced with the threat of deadly force. At any point thereafter the use of deadly force to stop the threat became justified. It is lawful to use deadly force to stop the threat against yourself or another. Only a moron would argue that the jewelry wasn't worth the use of deadly force. The BG wasn't pointing the gun at a watch. He was threatening another human being with deadly force.

I can't say that I would've eliminated the threat right at :37. But since a clear shot was present I probably would've. As for the other 2 creations, they undoubtedly would've ceased their rampage as soon as their strongman was neutralized. I would've held them at gunpoint for the police.

I would have no problem engaging these guys in a gunfight. I would expect no more than one shot being necessary to eliminate the threat. I could easily place one round center of mass right in his back (230gr .45ACP +P Remington Golden Saber) without endangering the clerk who was off to the side and not in the line of fire. I am well regulated. I can see that the BG obviously is not. I further doubt that the BG does any practice or spends any time training whatsoever. I do. Often.
 
G

Guest

Guest
imported post

HankT wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery, in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully.The sooner, the better. Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.
COWARD You'd probably piss yourself before you could even get to the door.
 

wally1120

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
693
Location
Jackson, Michigan, USA
imported post

Alright, I guess I didn`t get to the point of what I was trying to say. If someone had bad intentions, And I had a feeling he was going to waste someone, I would present my gun. I wouldn`t shoot the BG until I had his attention directed at me, And presented a threat to MY LIFE, MY FAMILY, OR FRIENDS LIFE. I wouldn`t shoot somebody else unless I was close to the person that was being held up. If I was to step into a situation like this, I would want to have video cameras all around me. But I would get the BG`s eyes on me, If he was to start swing his weapon of choice over towards me, Then and only then I would send three rounds down the barrel, 2 to the chest, 1 between the eyes.
 

REX681959

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
142
Location
Wentworth, North Carolina, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery, in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully.The sooner, the better. Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.
I don't think HankT even owns a gun
 
G

Guest

Guest
imported post

REX681959 wrote:
HankT wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
...
it's a jewelry store robbery, in which some of us would have avoided interfering, watch it through, if at any point you would CHOOSE to involve your uninvolved self, put up the time stamp at which you interfere.


edited for :for purposes of the poll and responses assume that you are standing directly underneath the video camera when it begins, and for some reason, throughout the video, you are in the same position unless you decide to intervene.


no, at no point would I interfere in this doesn't quite get at the choice I think is advisable.

The best time to act decisively in this case is by 0:34.

And the best thing to do is leave--quickly and uneventfully.The sooner, the better. Go outside, get some cover, dial 9-1-1 (or ask someone to do it for you, if negligently don't have your cell) and report what you've seen.

3 against 1 is bad odds. Only a gun-first guy sticks around for that. A foolish gun guy...


The right thing to do is flee. Immediately.
I don't think HankT even owns a gun
Me thinks he's a fudd.
 

SpringerXDacp

New member
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
3,341
Location
Burton, Michigan
imported post

Not that it really matters but I don't think HankT is from Virginia. And, methinks HankT is not a he. Again, not that it really matters....just sayn'. :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:
And, methinks HankT is not a he.
#2 is even more appropriate then if she's a trolling twa*.

Kinda like ScHankT?:shock:
 

BreakingTheMold

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
298
Location
Niles & Lawton, Michigan, USA
imported post

As soon as it started the one with the gun would have 2 in the back. The other two had the salesperson behind them, and no gun was visible. But they were not armed and would have most likely not resisted after the initial gun shot(s).

The end of video shows the doors to be automatically locked. If you tried to vacate as soon as you realized there was a problem, you would likely be the one to get shot first. Of course that's just my opinion.

There was no reason to shoot the male sales person at the end of the robbery, but it does shed light on the assailants. And it goes to show that if you did wait to act, you may not have the chance.

That said, i hope no one here has to decide what they would do in the real world. And i hope that the man who was shot survives.
 
Top