golddigger14s
Activist Member
http://www.kmbc.com/r/24836888/detail.html
After he stopped the threat he should not have shot at them.
After he stopped the threat he should not have shot at them.
-
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.
-
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.
Clerk Pulls Gun, Scares Off Would-Be Robbers
- Thread starter golddigger14s
- Start date
eye95
Well-known member
I would require more details before I would pass such judgment. If the BGs are still brandishing while fleeing the store, the threat has not ended. It has just moved.
Still, based on what we know so far, I probably would not have given chase. I am not confident in my ability to chase BGs and shoot them without making a bad situation worse.
Still, based on what we know so far, I probably would not have given chase. I am not confident in my ability to chase BGs and shoot them without making a bad situation worse.
simmonsjoe
Regular Member
My opinion from experience. (May contradict case law / code)
2. If you've ever been in a shooting incident, you would know the brain begins processing information in a completely different way. (often called flight/fight). When someone enters this 'zone' it is unreasonable to expect them to register the importance of certain actions. Information is pre-processed by a portion of the brain that bypasses the normal judgement center of the brain.(In this case, after the clerk started shooting at the BGs. Even though the clerk visually saw the BGs turn and leave, the significance may not have registered.)
Behavior in the fight/flight mode can only be modified by habitual and repetitive training, such as that Police go through. Those who are not officers can not be held to the same standards.
Because the BGs actions FORCED the clerk into the fight/flight mode, the BGs are RESPONSIBLE for, the actions of the clerk with reduced cognitive abilities.
1. I disagree that the threat was stopped just because they were leaving. As long as they are in the same area as you they are a threat. I don't believe it is possible to point to a single action (such as turning around to leave) and claim that is the point where lethal force must stop.
2. If you've ever been in a shooting incident, you would know the brain begins processing information in a completely different way. (often called flight/fight). When someone enters this 'zone' it is unreasonable to expect them to register the importance of certain actions. Information is pre-processed by a portion of the brain that bypasses the normal judgement center of the brain.(In this case, after the clerk started shooting at the BGs. Even though the clerk visually saw the BGs turn and leave, the significance may not have registered.)
Behavior in the fight/flight mode can only be modified by habitual and repetitive training, such as that Police go through. Those who are not officers can not be held to the same standards.
Because the BGs actions FORCED the clerk into the fight/flight mode, the BGs are RESPONSIBLE for, the actions of the clerk with reduced cognitive abilities.
