You want a cookie cutter cut and dry answer to a complicated equation.
This is a discussion on Robbery: shooting in the back within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; You want a cookie cutter cut and dry answer to a complicated equation....
You want a cookie cutter cut and dry answer to a complicated equation.
"The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."
Shoot!! When a bad guy points a gun at inocent people, it's not a joke, it's a threat to mine and others lives. I also would always believe that any weapon used in a crime is real/loaded/dangerous. I wouldn't draw my firearm unless I was sure that only the BG was in my line of fire. I will also yell in a loud commanding voice to "stop" or "drop the gun".
Personally, I would recommend against any commands. By doing so you have just given away the element of surprise. If you believe that you have a shot and it is justified, shoot, don't talk or command.
"I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".
While shooting in the back without verbal warning is legal in this state in these circumstances, I would only do so if I had a clear backstop and truly felt that he was about to pull the trigger. Many times the gun is for intimidation and compliance. Sometimes it's for killing, no doubt. I'm not here to catch a bg or stop a robbery. If I can keep people from dying, that's different.
But once you draw, everything changes. A bystander might call attention to you before you fire. The bg may pull the trigger when you shoot him and still kill the clerk.
It's a decision that can only be made by my overall 'feel' for the situation.
Fortune favors the bold.
Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.
The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)
It does happen but I would not expect a person to bet their life on the fact that a robber is just kidding about his intent to do them harm.I seem to remember threads with bank robbers with a toy gun and burglars with an empty gun, just saying.
Hit my limit for speculation, the sky is falling, and gun owners fighting amongst themselves.
UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL!
I'd definitely check my six, to make sure that the BG doesn't have a buddy backing him up...then, if I thought he was going to shoot the clerk, I'd probably draw and shoot...
"Bad spellers of the world - untie!"
DAV Life member, NRA Life member
Springfield XD 9mm Sub-Compact
Taurus PT111 Millennium Pro 9mm
It doesn't matter if the gun is fake or unloaded. If a reasonable person would believe that the gun poses a lethal threat, then they are justified in using lethal force to protect themselves or others. In Texas at least. This was actually one of the examples in my CHL class, and we were told it was justifiable to shoot, given the correct position with nothing beyond the target. If the guy has a giant yellow and orange supersoaker, different story. If I felt the robber was actually going to shoot, I'd fire, but until that point I'd rather he just take the $12 in the register and save me lawyer fees.
I agree with Sflav.
The gun could after the fact be found to be an Airsoft or CO2 powered BB gun...If it's wielded as in a threatening manner by a person acting in a threatening manner making threats then well open and shut.
Exclusions being the gun is _clearly_ a toy in build/construction from the distance as seen by the person thinking to make contact (i.e. Nerf guns)...But then as such there is no question and thus no hypothetical scenario.
Also I very much agree with retsupt99.
How many times through the years have we seen video of liquor store, ATM, bank, grocery store, gas station, convenience mart and pharmacy stores in specific here the robber runs in himself FOCUSED on the cashier leaving people around him in the immediate including on his six to do what they will...Which is most often to stand there frozen, take real time cell phone pics (!),or to on rare occasion attempt to intervene by hitting the guy with found objects at hand (Recall summer 2010 the man that tried to clock a guy in the head with a wine bottle only to have no net effect and himself stand there looking stunned like huh this works in the movies!).
How many times in those threads have people said; SHOOT HIM...As in the back or back of the head.
Personally Ii have no problem at all with shooting, stabbing or punching a person in the back.
I long ago lost that sense of street fight 'fairness' the hard way, upon being jumped at a buss stop and fighting my through it with two friends (5 on 3) so as to _survive_...Only to succeed in fighting them back and beating one to the ground, but I made a fatal mistake I'd been told not to ever do and turned my back to him. That ba***** had no issue in retaliating by pulling a #2 pencil and stabbing me in the lower back with it on the sneak. A life lesson learned, the hard and painful way.
If some threat is attacking me and is stupid enough to turn his back to me; I'd think to take advantage of this tactical error.
If he or she is being a threat to another by way of _lethal force_ AND is within J.A.M./A.O.I. (this is key!) then to my mind within allowance of state laws, there is no question.
I would not though act to save or stop taking of property, including but not exclusive to printed paper or pressed/shaped metals...Because I personally believe that all human life, even that of a crook, are more valuable than that of an Ipod or XBox.
IMHO the better question, as touched on by another here, is not so much whether to shoot or not but rather where to shoot as when 'center of mass' is a persons back and or back of the skull.
I have never once seen any trainer, aside from myself with my own students, discuss or feature this among their training....And yet it is a very real possibility for police and civilians alike.
Image source - http://www.human-body-facts.com/huma...e-diagram.html
Image source - http://www.kappamedical.com/wall.htm...uman_Skeleton_
Image source - http://www.genetherapyreview.com/gen...uman-body.html
In my world a 'threat' has a three dimensional body with a 360 degree view; Front, back, sides, top (head and shoulders) and bottom (feet and groin).
We are made of muscle, bone and organs covered in a one piece organ sheath of very easy to damage skin.
To defend against a threat that defense is not exclusively dependent on directionality of the threat nor positional view of the threatened.
See the recent FL school board shooting for an absolutely perfect example of how this real world does occur.
People who get burned for shooting folk in the back, and front too!, are those who shoot _past_ threats who in the immediate of a trigger pull were no longer an active imminent threat to past tense threatened/aggrieved persons.
For a notable and recent example of this see the pharmacist Jerome Ersland unlawful and immoral shooting of in the immediate unconscious and thus neutralized no longer a threat Atwone Parker.
Folks need to know and understand that this is not simple math of 1+1=2.
But rather geometry.
If pressed to shoot; I would shoot an _imminent threat_, anywhere that might be functional to cause the threat to STOP...Regardless of his direction of presentation to my view.
"A branch of mathematics that deals with the measurement, properties, and relationships of points, lines, angles, surfaces, and solids; broadly. : The study of properties of given elements that remain invariant under specified transformations." - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/geometry
I voted shoot based on the assumption that I feel he's definitely a threat to that clerks life and my shot is clear.
WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.
Hes threatening someone with a deadly weapon and could pull the trigger at any time.I will shoot.
Pretty vague scenario. I choose not to shoot. Yet...
Chances of the clerk not complying are slim. Chances of robber committing murder for a till's worth of cash are slim. Threat to my life at this point is slim. Chances of a threat to my life and several others dramatically increase if I draw. Chances of a variety of unsavory legal repercussions of shooting a man in the back are substantial.
I'm sorry that the clerk seems unable to defend himself but I am not his sworn defender.
"Obviously you're not a golfer." -The Dude
Depending on the totality of circumstances and events, I'd lean towards taking the shot...if the BG suddenly decides to leave, then no...
Magazine <> clip - know the difference
martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know
Perhaps we’ve seen too many western movies. If eminent danger to life is present then I would ‘shoot to stop’ the threat. Yes, even if I’m wearing a yellow striped shirt. Of course, the choice to shoot is highly subjective but that’s an entirely different matter.
More on point to this thread, I don't know if I would choose to shoot in an attempt to save the day. Logic tells me 'NO' but my instinct could override my safe judgment. Unfortunately, our morality is overshadowed by society rules. Much like our judicial system, nobody really cares about right and wrong, as it’s really more about who wins or looses.
Last edited by Saber; December 29th, 2010 at 10:16 AM.
“Monsters are real and so are ghosts. They live inside of us, and sometimes they win.”
~ Stephen King