Bank owner celebrated for "catching the bad guy" - not sure how I feel about it

This is a discussion on Bank owner celebrated for "catching the bad guy" - not sure how I feel about it within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by Fitch The bank manager as an "Actor" has not done, and is not doing, any of the things listed when he uses ...

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 164
Like Tree87Likes

Thread: Bank owner celebrated for "catching the bad guy" - not sure how I feel about it

  1. #106
    Distinguished Member Array onacoma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    1,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Fitch View Post
    The bank manager as an "Actor" has not done, and is not doing, any of the things listed when he uses deadly force to stop the robber. So while I think his actions were incredibly ill advised, they were not illegal.
    This was a two act play. Act one ended when the robber flees the bank! The act is over! No one, including the bank manager is jeopardy of deadly force or grievous bodyly harm at the end of the act! The act is OVER, there is no reason to draw a weapon!

    Act two starts when the Bank Manager confronts a "Known to him" felon in the parking lot with his pistol drawn. There is no threat of deadly force or grievous body harm to the bank manager! Had the felon drove off the the bank manager shot him, in the best case it would be Man 1!

    Lucky the drawn pistol (threat of dead force, aka brandishing a weapon) was enough to de-fuse the issue as in so many unreported cases. The Supreme Court ruling that Deadly Force may not be used to protect porperty, i.e., the money, your TVs, etc. also plays out in many cases.


    In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress. -- John Adams

    If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it's free! -- P.J. O'Rourke

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #107
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,031
    Isolated exceptions to a general theory do not in and of themselves disprove the the theory, nor do the intentions, actions and mental state of one bad guy demonstrate those of all bad guys.

    I agree, but it works both ways. Nothing says criminals target stores with gun buster signs either. Once again I will say it. All it takes is one bad guy with true intentions, actions or mental state to ruin your day. I can see this being used as a rally cry for many that is until it is brought up that a posted business was robbed then it will be an isolated incident.

    The protection of life and limb isn't the legal issue in this particular case, but rather the apprehension of a known dangerous felon.

    Again we agree, the protection of life and limb is not the legal issue simply because once the guy walked out the door the threat to life and limb to anyone in the bank was over. As someone already stated you cannot predict what he coulda/woulda/shoulda done a block from the bank.

    I am glad the guy got caught, bank manager is the hero and so on. Was it smart? Nope. As I stated in an earlier post if he had come out to apprehend the guy and walked into a shotgun blast the posts would be different "That was stupid of him", "he was playing wanna be cop", "the threat was over".

    tac, the safety is not in the sign, your safety still fall on you and what you can and will do to stay safe. Your safety rest on your shoulders not anyone else or thing.

    Bill. Could not agree more it is up to the individual to protect himself and whomever else he chooses to but he was not protecting a human being he was protecting the banks money. I realize that we do not agree on the whole property equals life thing and that is fine.

    Again glad he was caught and it turned out alright, another bozo off the streets.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  4. #108
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    3,409
    Quote Originally Posted by onacoma View Post
    Act two starts when the Bank Manager confronts a "Known to him" felon in the parking lot with his pistol drawn. There is no threat of deadly force or grievous body harm to the bank manager! Had the felon drove off the the bank manager shot him, in the best case it would be Man 1!

    Lucky the drawn pistol (threat of dead force, aka brandishing a weapon) was enough to de-fuse the issue as in so many unreported cases. The Supreme Court ruling that Deadly Force may not be used to protect porperty, i.e., the money, your TVs, etc. also plays out in many cases.
    Ignore the statutes if you want, but in MO he was justified.

    Got a cite for that SCOTUS opinion?

  5. #109
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,031
    Quote Originally Posted by onacoma View Post
    This was a two act play. Act one ended when the robber flees the bank! The act is over! No one, including the bank manager is jeopardy of deadly force or grievous bodyly harm at the end of the act! The act is OVER, there is no reason to draw a weapon!

    Act two starts when the Bank Manager confronts a "Known to him" felon in the parking lot with his pistol drawn. There is no threat of deadly force or grievous body harm to the bank manager! Had the felon drove off the the bank manager shot him, in the best case it would be Man 1!

    Lucky the drawn pistol (threat of dead force, aka brandishing a weapon) was enough to de-fuse the issue as in so many unreported cases. The Supreme Court ruling that Deadly Force may not be used to protect porperty, i.e., the money, your TVs, etc. also plays out in many cases.
    Again, the banker was not acting to protect property, but rather to apprehend a known armed felon.
    "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."
    Tuco

  6. #110
    Member Array SigHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Natural State
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by tacman605 View Post
    Ok after reading and reading again and then looking up definitions this is what I think they are saying.



    If the person, there are using the word actor, is involved in committing a felony he is not authorized to use deadly force. Ya think?



    Not sure anybody reading this different?
    Yes, the "actor" is the person who is about to use physical force, not the "bad guy." So the law says that you are allowed to use physical force to defend someone or yourself unless you yourself have just committed (or are committing) a felony.
    SigPro 2340
    Bersa Thunder Plus .380

  7. #111
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,762
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    I'm not sure many would disagree if he was protecting life and limb, but he wasn't so that's where the issue comes in.
    Yes he was.

    Though, certainly not those inside the bank. But others were certainly likely to be equally threatened with death by this violent felon, were he to get away. And that's exactly the principle underlying many states' statutes on the question of lawful use of force. It's naive to believe a violent felon who had just threatened death of those around him would, if he escaped, cease to do so in future out of mere compunction. He's only going to cease if stopped.

    Justifiable? Absolutely. Lawful in the given state? Perhaps. Seems to me that in such cases criminalizing the person stopping such a violent felon is what should cease, for all the good it does.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  8. #112
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    Yes he was.

    Though, certainly not those inside the bank. But others were certainly likely to be equally threatened with death by this violent felon, were he to get away. And that's exactly the principle underlying many states' statutes on the question of lawful use of force. It's naive to believe a violent felon who had just threatened death of those around him would, if he escaped, cease to do so in future out of mere compunction. He's only going to cease if stopped.

    Justifiable? Absolutely. Lawful in the given state? Perhaps. Seems to me that in such cases criminalizing the person stopping such a violent felon is what should cease, for all the good it does.
    He had no weapon, and once he left the bank there was no more threat to the employees so no.

    What could happen in the future doesn't matter, even SYG laws say if they break off from an attack and you shoot you're the one in trouble. He pursued after it ended and held the guy at gun point, there was no more threat to anyone at that time.

  9. #113
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,762
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    He had no weapon, and once he left the bank there was no more threat to the employees so no.

    What could happen in the future doesn't matter, even SYG laws say if they break off from an attack and you shoot you're the one in trouble. He pursued after it ended and held the guy at gun point, there was no more threat to anyone at that time.
    Suggest you read up on the use of force statutes in many states that cover fleeing violent felon situations. It exists for good reason, despite the folks in the bank no longer being under direct threat (obviously).
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #114
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    Suggest you read up on the use of force statutes in many states that cover fleeing violent felon situations. It exists for good reason, despite the folks in the bank no longer being under direct threat (obviously).
    That's already been talked about, but the guy wasn't violent. He pretended he had a gun but he didn't actually have a gun, and he left the scene and it was over once he left the bank.

    He had no weapon and no one was in danger any longer once he left, that's my point.

  11. #115
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,031
    Under MO law he is covered legally to apprehend a felon.

    The thing that still sticks in my mind is his own statements. He was mad about the way the robber treated the employees and since he was also a black belt he knew he could have taken the robber because he was frail and moving slowly.

    My question is would he have so quick to run out the door in pursuit if the guy was 6'4, and armed with a shotgun? To me it sounds like he felt he had the advantage and maybe just maybe his pride and ego came into play.

    Again glad it worked out and the bad guy was caught and no one was hurt.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  12. #116
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,762
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    That's already been talked about, but the guy wasn't violent. He pretended he had a gun but he didn't actually have a gun, and he left the scene and it was over once he left the bank.

    He had no weapon and no one was in danger any longer once he left, that's my point.
    Clearly, being threatened with deadly force is just that, irrespective of whether the gun's fake, unloaded, or kept in the pocket (non-existent) during the threatening. And that's the point of fleeing felon laws. Read up. It might help you understand.

    Am not advocating such a step by most folks. Am simply recognizing that fleeing felon laws exist for good reason.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  13. #117
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    Clearly, being threatened with deadly force is just that, irrespective of whether the gun's fake, unloaded, or kept in the pocket (non-existent) during the threatening. And that's the point of fleeing felon laws. Read up. It might help you understand.

    Am not advocating such a step by most folks. Am simply recognizing that fleeing felon laws exist for good reason.
    I don't care about the legality, I'm talking about it not being a smart idea. The way he handled it was a little over the top too, he sounded too eager to do it.

  14. #118
    Member Array Ransom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveJohnson View Post
    That's already been talked about, but the guy wasn't violent. He pretended he had a gun but he didn't actually have a gun, and he left the scene and it was over once he left the bank.

    He had no weapon and no one was in danger any longer once he left, that's my point.
    Everyone thought he had a weapon until he was apprehended. The fact that he did not actually have a weapon is irrelevant to the decisions that were made up until then.

  15. #119
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,031
    Quote Originally Posted by tacman605 View Post
    Under MO law he is covered legally to apprehend a felon.

    The thing that still sticks in my mind is his own statements. He was mad about the way the robber treated the employees and since he was also a black belt he knew he could have taken the robber because he was frail and moving slowly.

    My question is would he have so quick to run out the door in pursuit if the guy was 6'4, and armed with a shotgun? To me it sounds like he felt he had the advantage and maybe just maybe his pride and ego came into play.

    Again glad it worked out and the bad guy was caught and no one was hurt.
    His OODA loop was sound. I, too suspect his actions may have been different if it had been the North Hollywood pair leaving his bank instead of a middle-aged, confused man.
    "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."
    Tuco

  16. #120
    Ex Member Array CaveJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by Ransom View Post
    Everyone thought he had a weapon until he was apprehended. The fact that he did not actually have a weapon is irrelevant to the decisions that were made up until then.
    The fact that he left the scene is totally relevant.

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast

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
  •  

Search tags for this page

bank owner in troy confronts
,

bank robbery troy mo

,

space shuttle challenger

,
suppose the bank owners
,
troy mo bank robbery
Click on a term to search for related topics.