Attempted Car Jacking/Robbery - Could You Respond - Page 2

Attempted Car Jacking/Robbery - Could You Respond

This is a discussion on Attempted Car Jacking/Robbery - Could You Respond within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I pocket carry a snubby and I have another snubby in my center console, which can come out pretty quick. One choice in both scenarios, ...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 66
Like Tree51Likes

Thread: Attempted Car Jacking/Robbery - Could You Respond

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,651
    I pocket carry a snubby and I have another snubby in my center console, which can come out pretty quick. One choice in both scenarios, is just let him take the car. Frustrating as it is, this may be the safest option. It really depends on your read of the BG. I don't think too many car jacking victims who do not resist get hurt, but maybe I'm wrong. But let's say you have the opportunity to take this guy out and you feel that is the best course of action and I can see a lot of good reasons for that.

    Scenario #1: I act very cooperative. I reach for the door latch with my left hand and I reach to unbuckle my seat belt with my right, which is what he should expect if I am cooperating. This puts my right hand just next to that center console. I surprise the guy by pushing open the door violently with my shoulder behind it. I don't know how many people here have ever been hit accidentally hit by an opening car door, but it can pack a wallop if it catches you full on. Simultaneously, I get the snubby out of the center console and immediate open fire, even if it has to be through the glass. There might be flaws in this plan, but I have mentally rehearsed it and I think it could work...depending on a lot of detailed factors.

    Scenario #2: I cooperate, and give him my keys and say "take it." Then as he gets behind the wheel, I pull out my pocket snubby and I car jack him right back, although I am ready for any counter he might make. Now, some might say I couldn't shoot him over taking my property, but my retort would be he still had a gun and therefore he was still an active threat to me. Any move of his arm in my car could be taken as him bringing that gun up to eliminate the witness.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  2. #17
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    12,647
    They can have the vehicle but only until I get my own handgun operational. I'm not predisposed to be armed and allowing people to take my "stuff" in an armed robbery.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,033
    Totally depends on the compete circumstances but as a 56 yr old woman, I can try some things that a man may not. One possibility, if purse carrying, take my purse from the seat next to me, acting like I'm panicking, and pretending to fumble with it, offering it to them screaming, here take it, take it!(still with door locked and windows up of course. Door always locked)

    Then draw and fire or even fire from within purse (yes I've practiced this dry firing). Altho I am big on retreating whenever possible if they have me trapped in the car at gunpoint, there's a strong chance they would a) take me with them as a hostage or b) shoot me anyway.
    PhaedrusIV likes this.
    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)

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #19
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    22,689
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    They can have the vehicle but only until I get my own handgun operational. I'm not predisposed to be armed and allowing people to take my "stuff" in an armed robbery.
    I have to agree. Bad guys don't think like us. They don't adhere to the same value systems, ethics, morals or priorities that we do. They can, and often do decide to terminate the interaction with their victims through lethal means, regardless of compliance or lack thereof by those victims. Better, in my estimation to terminate that interaction ourselves if at all possible, whenever that possibility presents itself.
    PhaedrusIV likes this.
    "Ideals are peaceful. History is violent."

    Don Collier, Fury

  6. #20
    Member Array Imnobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by DanBarnes View Post
    That's exactly what I'm saying. I may not be able to claim him as a dependent on my income tax, but I would no sooner allow him to be kidnapped without resisting than most folks here would allow their child or significant other to be kidnapped without resisting.
    You best review the laws in SC concerning the use of deadly force because if it plays out as you wrote, you would be charged with a crime (perhaps even up to murder). You can't shoot someone just because they are committing a crime, and regardless of your feelings towards your dog the court isn't going to allow you to use deadly force because your dog was in danger. Heck, there is a thread on the forum today about a store clerk that is being charged because he shot and killed a masked person that was stealing from the store he was working at.

    Of course there are plenty of scenarios where using deadly force would be justified, but if you go into a scenario with a predetermined response, you could find yourself in deep legal trouble.

  7. #21
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    22,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Hodad View Post
    Let me get this straight, the primary reason you would shoot a potential carjacker is not because your life is threatened, but because they are going to steal your car with your dog inside?

    Is that what you are saying?
    We may be splitting hairs here. Armed carjackers are there to carjack, dog or no dog. I wouldn't want to be the guy trying to get in my car if my dog is also there.
    9MMare and PhaedrusIV like this.
    "Ideals are peaceful. History is violent."

    Don Collier, Fury

  8. #22
    Sponsor
    Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    12,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    We may be splitting hairs here. Armed carjackers are there to carjack, dog or no dog. I wouldn't want to be the guy trying to get in my car if my dog is also there.
    The reality we're facing is this:

    Being jacked at gun point is an imminent threat of grave bodily harm or death, and a deadly force response is lawful. That he's now seated in MY car, doesn't mean the imminent threat is no longer present. In fact, I'd articulate through my atty, to the court, that until MY vehicle has moved some distance away from me, I'm still in imminent threat of grave bodily harm or death. The perp is armed and has threatened deadly force to force me to relinquish that's which is mine unlawfully.

    So if I were to get out, and he got in, and while he was getting in or seated I opened up on him, the 3 prongs of deadly force use and the imminent threat has NOT been diminished.
    Mike1956, PhaedrusIV and graydude like this.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    Quick Kill Rifle and Pistol Instructor

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array Hodad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Roswell, GA
    Posts
    3,471
    Quote Originally Posted by DanBarnes View Post
    That's exactly what I'm saying. I may not be able to claim him as a dependent on my income tax, but I would no sooner allow him to be kidnapped without resisting than most folks here would allow their child or significant other to be kidnapped without resisting.
    I understand that many people love their pets very much and I respect that. However, the fact that you are willing or even claim to be willing to shoot another human being, no matter how despicable or evil, for kidnapping your dog is disturbing.

    I think a jury of your peers would also look on that (dognapping) as a reason for using deadly force with a significant degree of disapproval.

    I can hear it now "Mr.Barnes, could you please repeat for the court the reason that you shot Mr. Smith?"

    "Well he was stealing my car and my doggy was inside and I just couldn't allow that to happen!"

    Not to be to snide but "I don't think that dog is going to hunt!!"
    "Life is tough but it's really tough if you are stupid"

  10. #24
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    22,689
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    The reality we're facing is this:

    Being jacked at gun point is an imminent threat of grave bodily harm or death, and a deadly force response is lawful. That he's now seated in MY car, doesn't mean the imminent threat is no longer present. In fact, I'd articulate through my atty, to the court, that until MY vehicle has moved some distance away from me, I'm still in imminent threat of grave bodily harm or death. The perp is armed and has threatened deadly force to force me to relinquish that's which is mine unlawfully.

    So if I were to get out, and he got in, and while he was getting in or seated I opened up on him, the 3 prongs of deadly force use and the imminent threat has NOT been diminished.
    There is the bottom line. Dan Barnes' problem is one of articulation, not motivation. Better to let a lawyer explain the three prongs than to have the first words uttered be "he tried to kidnap my dog, so I shot him!".
    AzQkr likes this.
    "Ideals are peaceful. History is violent."

    Don Collier, Fury

  11. #25
    VIP Member Array ghost tracker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ky Backwoods
    Posts
    10,541
    Quote Originally Posted by DanBarnes View Post
    ..but I would no sooner allow him to be kidnapped without resisting than most folks here would allow their child or significant other to be kidnapped without resisting.
    Sorry Dan, but the legality of that position would mean an extended stay at the Graybar Hotel (and - no pets allowed). Critters are, regardless of our emotions, property...not people.
    There are only TWO kinds of people in this world; those who describe the world as filled with two kinds of people...and those who don't.

  12. #26
    Member Array bill35738's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    western Pa.
    Posts
    271
    Hell!! Just shoot him in the knee, he drops, gun goes flying!NOW let the DOG OUT and and he can play with his new chew toy!!!!

  13. #27
    Member Array DanBarnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by Imnobody View Post
    You best review the laws in SC concerning the use of deadly force because if it plays out as you wrote, you would be charged with a crime (perhaps even up to murder). You can't shoot someone just because they are committing a crime, and regardless of your feelings towards your dog the court isn't going to allow you to use deadly force because your dog was in danger. Heck, there is a thread on the forum today about a store clerk that is being charged because he shot and killed a masked person that was stealing from the store he was working at.

    Of course there are plenty of scenarios where using deadly force would be justified, but if you go into a scenario with a predetermined response, you could find yourself in deep legal trouble.
    You folks need to keep in mind that the OP's scenarios were as follows...

    Scenario#1: I've just pulled in the parking spot, and am behind the wheel buckled in, when the criminal knocks on my window and has a gun pointed at me.

    Scenario#2: Ditto except I have unbuckled, and popped my door open, and have just started standing up when the criminal approaches with a gun.
    ...and that I was responding specifically to Scenario #2. The carjacker is armed with a gun. While I've shared my feelings with you, I'm not a total idiot. "He had a gun and I was in fear for my life" is the one and only reason I would give when questioned by the police. I'm confident that, given my age and physical condition, that wouldn't be a hard sell and it's a gamble I'd be willing to take. As with most things in life YMMV.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hodad View Post
    I understand that many people love their pets very much and I respect that. However, the fact that you are willing or even claim to be willing to shoot another human being, no matter how despicable or evil, for kidnapping your dog is disturbing.

    I think a jury of your peers would also look on that (dognapping) as a reason for using deadly force with a significant degree of disapproval.

    I can hear it now "Mr.Barnes, could you please repeat for the court the reason that you shot Mr. Smith?"

    "Well he was stealing my car and my doggy was inside and I just couldn't allow that to happen!"

    Not to be to snide but "I don't think that dog is going to hunt!!"
    Sorry if my views disturb you, but there are only a handful of human beings who I would consider worthy of living. As for the rest, see my response above.

    Quote Originally Posted by ghost tracker View Post
    Sorry Dan, but the legality of that position would mean an extended stay at the Graybar Hotel (and - no pets allowed). Critters are, regardless of our emotions, property...not people.
    Your critters may be property, my dog is my family. As for the rest, see above.

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array Hodad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Roswell, GA
    Posts
    3,471
    Quote Originally Posted by DanBarnes View Post
    You folks need to keep in mind that the OP's scenarios were as follows...



    ...and that I was responding specifically to Scenario #2. The carjacker is armed with a gun. While I've shared my feelings with you, I'm not a total idiot. "He had a gun and I was in fear for my life" is the one and only reason I would give when questioned by the police. I'm confident that, given my age and physical condition, that wouldn't be a hard sell and it's a gamble I'd be willing to take. As with most things in life YMMV.



    Sorry if my views disturb you, but there are only a handful of human beings who I would consider worthy of living. As for the rest, see my response above.



    Your critters may be property, my dog is my family. As for the rest, see above.
    You stated above "that there are only a handful of human beings I would consider worthy of living?"

    Seriously?

    Now I am really disturbed about your very disturbed state of mind!!
    "Life is tough but it's really tough if you are stupid"

  15. #29
    Ex Member Array bubbatime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    748
    If someone already has the drop on you, you need to do something to crash their OODA loop.

    Example - "You are robbing me? I can't believe you would rob me with a police officer 100 ft behind you." When the suspect looks for the "officer", shoot him in the head.

    A simple distraction like this will buy you 2-3 precious seconds.

  16. #30
    VIP Member Array PhaedrusIV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    I have to agree. Bad guys don't think like us. They don't adhere to the same value systems, ethics, morals or priorities that we do. They can, and often do decide to terminate the interaction with their victims through lethal means, regardless of compliance or lack thereof by those victims. Better, in my estimation to terminate that interaction ourselves if at all possible, whenever that possibility presents itself.
    This principle seems under-appreciated by most amicable, law-abiding people.

    For anyone who is willing to stick a gun in your face, for any reason, or no reason at all, it is only a very short step (for them) to not only take your property, which they probably intended to do anyway, but to also take the lives of you and your companions/loved-ones. The lives of others aren't worth a plug nickel to them.
    They are not robbing/assaulting you so they can be your new pal. They are deserving of extreme prejudice, and should be treated accordingly, in the most calculated and brutal ways, that is.

    If that sounds harsh, well, it IS harsh, or at least it should be.
    AzQkr, Mike1956 and graydude like this.
    - testing was halted after a brief kinetic episode -

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •