To act in another's defense or not

[sawah]

I appreciate your view point. I think MOST people would claim that if they were armed and close by and witnessed a BG blasting away innocent people (eliminating witnesses) they would not try to sneak away but try to save these innocent people.

If you are really concerned about this kind of situation, and I realize you're mainly trying to think ahead, you should consider talking to local law enforcement, talk to a lawyer (if you are considering being a bit of a vigilante, you should have one on speed dial), get an umbrella policy addendum for your insurance (it's cheap), and talk to some store managers.

I think you'll find that the cops will tell you to leave the policing to them, the manager will tell you to let the insurance cover it, and the lawyer will tell you how every bullet you fire has legal consequences. Learn as much as you can about what the consequences are of stepping up. Sometimes you can get into trouble when the perps relatives sue you in civil court.

In reality, I think you can go a lifetime without ever having to make a decision to take a life to save lives especially if you heed the 'avoid stupid places, stupid people and doing stupid things' rule.

The truth is, a civilian who carries should always apply the 'in the Gravest Extreme' rule and never discharge their firearm unless there is absolutely no alternative. Always seek to evade and escape, because in a gunfight you never know what is going to happen. You could hit an innocent, you could cause the perp to jerk the trigger and shoot the cashier, you could be shot by mistake by a LEO who sees you with your gun drawn. Your duty is to go home to your loved ones. Make that your first priority and you shouldn't go wrong.

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

If you are really concerned about this kind of situation, and I realize you're mainly trying to think ahead, you should consider talking to local law enforcement, talk to a lawyer (if you are considering being a bit of a vigilante, you should have one on speed dial), get an umbrella policy addendum for your insurance (it's cheap), and talk to some store managers.

I think you'll find that the cops will tell you to leave the policing to them, the manager will tell you to let the insurance cover it, and the lawyer will tell you how every bullet you fire has legal consequences. Learn as much as you can about what the consequences are of stepping up. Sometimes you can get into trouble when the perps relatives sue you in civil court.

In reality, I think you can go a lifetime without ever having to make a decision to take a life to save lives especially if you heed the 'avoid stupid places, stupid people and doing stupid things' rule.

The truth is, a civilian who carries should always apply the 'in the Gravest Extreme' rule and never discharge their firearm unless there is absolutely no alternative. Always seek to evade and escape, because in a gunfight you never know what is going to happen. You could hit an innocent, you could cause the perp to jerk the trigger and shoot the cashier, you could be shot by mistake by a LEO who sees you with your gun drawn. Your duty is to go home to your loved ones. Make that your first priority and you shouldn't go wrong.

I never said anything about being a vigilante. Defending someone else, especially if it specifically covered by law, is not vigilantism.
Perhaps you should also talk to people. Ask them if their preference is for you to "fade into the background" while the BG is eliminating witnesses. I mean if the roles are reversed and YOU or someone YOU care about is one of those witnesses "being eliminated" would you want an OC to tuck tail and run?

 

[modernknight]

I never said anything about being a vigilante. Defending someone else, especially if it specifically covered by law, is not vigilantism.
Perhaps you should also talk to people. Ask them if their preference is for you to "fade into the background" while the BG is eliminating witnesses. I mean if the roles are reversed and YOU or someone YOU care about is one of those witnesses "being eliminated" would you want an OC to tuck tail and run?

In all fairness though, this portion just changes the scenario. I never saw you saying that they're "eliminiating" anyone, just merely pointing a pistol demanding the money in the cash register, and ignoring everyone else, so given the original scenario, it'd appear everyone else would be fine, and if cashier were to just give over all the money, then they'd more than likely survive, which is perhaps sawah's thinking as well?

 

[sawah]

I never said anything about being a vigilante. Defending someone else, especially if it specifically covered by law, is not vigilantism.
Perhaps you should also talk to people. Ask them if their preference is for you to "fade into the background" while the BG is eliminating witnesses. I mean if the roles are reversed and YOU or someone YOU care about is one of those witnesses "being eliminated" would you want an OC to tuck tail and run?

I hesitated before typing vigilante due to the negative connotation, but taking the law into your own hands (i.e. deciding to shoot a BG) is just that. Deciding to defend yourself really isn't a 'decision' you have no choice.

You have to be willing to let people take care of themselves. If I or someone I care about were in that situation about to be shot, I might be planning to use an unarmed gun defense to disarm the guy and moving quickly, could easily be shot by a OC-er who thought he was helping if I suddenly moved into his line of fire. This is what I mean by highly chaotic situation.

Do you know for a fact that defending someone by shooting a robber is covered by law? Are you so sure of your marksmanship that you can hit the BG and only him? We don't know what we'd do in a life-or-death situation, and you don't know if you'd freeze or be able to exercise fine motor control or not. I do applaud you for thinking about scenarios, though the best way to stay a free man is to be very sure of what you're doing. That's why I suggested you do some research.

You seem intent on goading the argument into a 'are you going to be a coward, or are you going to use that gun to shoot a bad guy', and I'm contending it's not that simple.

 

[gobbly]

Thanks to all of you for your opinions. I think they are all great.

It's interesting though to see some of your mentalities of "if all he wants is to rob innocent people of their money I would just let him go". (NOT talking about anyone specifically!)

I would never bring a firearm into a situation unless I was prepared to use it. In my state, I would have a hard time justifying shooting someone over money. Now if I felt that someone's life is in danger, that situation changes. I also am unwilling to shoot someone over material possessions, that's a personal decision I made long ago.

 

[Miss Black Rifle Disease]

Preemptive apologizes.

I know this has to have been covered before. I know it is highly subjective. I know that many people believe no-one can REALLY know what they are going to do until it happens. I know no advice given is to be taken as legal advice.
If you do feel like sharing your thoughts.... what would you do in the following scenario?


You OCing in line, perhaps 3-4 people back, to make a purchase at a store. A BG bust in the door, runs up to the cashier and points a gun in her face and demands all the cash in her drawer and a pack of smokes for the road. He never points his gun at you or gives anyone else any instructions.

What should you do?

Lot's of interesting comments on this topic..But I think really there is no way to answer the question posed by the OP. Such a situation has so many variables there is simply no way for a person to accurately predict how they would react. Posting a scenario such as this and asking how one would respond just can't garner any usable information for one's own insight because as simple as it sounds, it's actually immensely complex. No offense to the OP but this really isn't a reasonable scenario based question. The question should be narrowed down, and even then, until a person is actually facing something like this one never knows what they will actually do, again, that being due to the unforeseeable variables.

Simplify the question: Would you intervene in a crime in progress if you perceived a threat to your own or the life of others to be at risk? Even simplified the variables still keep the question check-mated into a unpredictable complexity. But in the simpler form one can at least start to make their case based merely on the ethics or moral implications of the question and leave aside bravado and egotism that tends to get expressed when people attempt to give their predictions on how they would react.

My answer to the simplified question would be yes I would intervene. I would do so provided I felt I could effectively deal with the situation without increasing the risk to myself or others any legal concerns be damned. But if I thought I would only worsen the situation I would tend to keep cool and remain passive.

 

[sawah]

Rather than answer the OP's original question, FWIW, I will talk about situations where I would attempt to eliminate the threat.

If I were in a fast food restaurant and a BG came in suddenly and started lining up people to shoot, I would attempt to eliminate him. Here, it's clear this is a deranged individual, there's no chance of him having an accomplice, he's not just threatening a clerk, he is intent on taking out innocents. I would not attempt to warn him ("stop or I'll shoot"), I would take aim and try to hit him and not anyone else and I would attempt to assure I had a good backdrop. Being seated at a table, I would hope my aim would be steady. If I felt I could not hit him at distance, I'd try to cover my firearm with a menu or newspaper and wait until he was close enough to assure the shot.

Though I would try to prevent him from taking any innocent lives, I would primarily be focused on defending myself and my loved ones.

Being that he was deranged, obviously had a working firearm, obviously shooting everyone, this is about as clear cut a case of a good shoot as I can imagine where I was not being directly threatened at the moment (but would be, soon). There would be almost no chance of getting out of the restaurant, but I would consider doing so and calling 911. If the 911 operator directed me to try and shoot the deranged person, I would do so.

 

[William Fisher]

Some Bad Guys and Gals, even after they have the money, still have the mentality to shoot someone. Maybe even murdering a couple just for kicks. No links to any but we all know it happens. Stoping a bad person often results in them being killed. I could live with stopping someone easier than I could watching someone (possibly) being murdered in a robbery because the store likely has insurance.

FOOTNOTE: Yes, I know that the clerk and (or) customers being murdered is mere assumption. So when it comes to assuming, someone pointing a weapon in someones face during a robbery, I'm assuming bad things may happen rather then a good outcome.

 

[WalkingWolf]

I would run to the nearest phone booth and change into my underdog costume to save the day...

 

[since9]

Preemptive apologizes.

I know this has to have been covered before. I know it is highly subjective. I know that many people believe no-one can REALLY know what they are going to do until it happens. I know no advice given is to be taken as legal advice.
If you do feel like sharing your thoughts.... what would you do in the following scenario?


You OCing in line, perhaps 3-4 people back, to make a purchase at a store. A BG bust in the door, runs up to the cashier and points a gun in her face and demands all the cash in her drawer and a pack of smokes for the road. He never points his gun at you or gives anyone else any instructions.

What should you do?

You didn't mention the nature of the store, but by context, it sounds like a convenience store, perhaps associated with a filling station. In that case, statistically speaking, the robber is very unlikely to shoot the clerk. I'd be the best observer I know how to be while laying low.

On the other hand, if the BG with a gun runs in ranting about how he was fired while pointing his firearm at the clerk (or worse, customers), I'd probably drill him, as the mental cases rarely end well.

 

[Bellum_Intus]

This is a VERY common shoot / no shoot scenario in POST classes, also, have you been to frontsight? ..

My answer is.. : "somtimes it's better to be a good witness" ..

There's really no 'right' answer..

--Rob

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

when it comes to assuming, someone pointing a weapon in someones face during a robbery, I'm assuming bad things may happen rather then a good outcome.

What other choice do you have? "well maybe only a small % of BGs in this situation are going to kill someone before they finish robbing the joint" The good bet is on doing nothing....

You could be in the same situation at home. Maybe a BG breaks in. Maybe he'll only steal some stuff and have a little "fun" with your women/girls but will leave without killing anyone. Best just to "fade into the background" and wait until it's over.

 

[rscottie]

Too Many Variables?

Trying to predict what you would do in these types of scenarios always lead to everyone asking more questions because in their minds they are looking for the magical key that will allow them to deal with the situation in their way and not feel guilty afterwards. A sort of justification if you will for how you hope to react.

In a real situation, things are going to happen fast and evaluating everything will be nearly impossible. Adding to that problem is that YOU or no one else KNOWS what the BG is going to do.

So, to put it very simply, could you live with yourself if you assumed the BG was not going to shoot anyone and he ended up shooting the clerk or a customer and you did nothing?

Could you live with yourself if you did shoot the BG and the hit or hits did not instantly incapacitate him and in the ensuing gun battle you hit a bystander?

Say you did shoot the BG as above, and the BG shoots and kills you before he loses consciousness, could your family live without you?

Could you live with yourself if you shot the BG and he turned out to be a teenager that was homeless and the gun turned out to be a fake or not loaded? You know how the media is, "Poor Johnny just needed some money for dinner, and a pack of smokes, but he was trying to stop smoking...."

Each person has their own comfort level in what they are willing to do.

Personally, I would hope to do the noble thing and save the clerk, myself, and perhaps other customer's.

If I am found hiding behind the chips with my firearm in my hand and a yellow puddle under me, well, guess I hoped wrong.

Not that THAT would happen.

 

[since9]

You could be in the same situation at home. Maybe a BG breaks in. Maybe he'll only steal some stuff and have a little "fun" with your women/girls but will leave without killing anyone. Best just to "fade into the background" and wait until it's over.

Sounds a little facetious...

My shoot/no-shoot scenario at home is different than in a convenience store. Put simply, if a BG is in my home and I can get the draw on him, I will. Although I'll attempt to detain him, I'm not going to risk my life trying. If they follow my instructions explicitly, they'll live. If they do anything else, particularly anything which indicates they're a threat to life or limb, I will absolutely fire to stop that threat. MY home, dag-nabbit!

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

In all fairness though, this portion just changes the scenario. I never saw you saying that they're "eliminiating" anyone, just merely pointing a pistol demanding the money in the cash register, and ignoring everyone else, so given the original scenario, it'd appear everyone else would be fine, and if cashier were to just give over all the money, then they'd more than likely survive, which is perhaps sawah's thinking as well?

I didn't bring up the "eliminating witnesses" someone else did, I was just carrying the point.

Sounds a little facetious...

My shoot/no-shoot scenario at home is different than in a convenience store. Put simply, if a BG is in my home and I can get the draw on him, I will. Although I'll attempt to detain him, I'm not going to risk my life trying. If they follow my instructions explicitly, they'll live. If they do anything else, particularly anything which indicates they're a threat to life or limb, I will absolutely fire to stop that threat. MY home, dag-nabbit!

I concede. I regret bringing up the home situation because it is completely different. Sorry. Just a little off by some of the ideas brought up.
Anyway all in all I really do appreciate all the different opinions. Even some I don't agree with (not easily said since I really don't know what I would do) are great to hear to get some perspective of how people see the issue.

 

[rscottie]

I would assume what I would GUESS to be a typical attitude by the BG. Nervous. Yelling at the cashier.
It's hard to guess if the person is in "imminent harm" but he does have a gun pointed out his/her face.

Thanks for input. And love your signature!

Your comment about it being "hard to guess if the person is in "imminent harm" is exactly why we have to have the ability to defend ourselves and people that second guess SD shootings usually make me so mad.

I do not like gambling because the odds are always that the "house" will win. In the scenario you proposed, the "house" would be the BG as he has a gun and is attempting to take control of the store.

So, your choices are simple and both involve assumptions that will be picked apart by everyone.

1. You assume the BG is not going to shoot anyone and is just waving his gun around for effect. You stand still and hope the BG does not start shooting.

2. You assume the BG is going to shoot someone and decide to try and stop him with your firearm.

Neither of these assumptions are perfect and neither will save you from having to answer for what you do.

Of course the first option will not bring legal issues to play but could wreak havoc with your psyche after the fact if the BG does shoot someone.

The second option can bring you legal trouble as well as parts of the public that will attack you personally with terms such as vigilante, etc. etc.

The bottom line for me is that it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by six...