Armed Robber Killed by permit holder

[emschris]

robinsre: Someone elsewhere brought up the "have your friend point a squirtgun at you and try and knock it out of his hands" idea. Anyone who wants to try some ninja moves on a BG should try that first

I've done this in martial arts training, we used dyed water and t-shirts. After 30 years of martial arts training, it still isn't easy. If your gonna move on a shooter this way, your only gonna get one shot at it.

[The Knight Of Light]

Originally Posted by saltysquid

Yes, most military people are trained to shoot in a situation like that. The train of thought is that there's a big chance the "hostage" will get shot anyway and with a clear shot to the head the BG is not going to have time to pull the trigger anyway. Reaction time is slower than a bullet.

If someone has a gun up against me in a situation like that I hope like hell shoots him. People can monday morning quarterback all they want, but he woman is alive and if the ccw guy hadn't shot she may not be, period.

No disagreement there. I was just thinking maybe he was just a regular joe that wanted to make sure if he was going to use the tool, that he might want to get some training for that tool. Granted paper doesn't shoot back but how many of us have been in a gunfight?? Very few I hope. I would think anyone on this forum that says they carry has the training to be able to do what this guy did. I think anyone that carries should be required to prove proficiency with their firearm before they are allowed to carry concealed.

[Boma]

Originally Posted by emschris

I've done this in martial arts training, we used dyed water and t-shirts. After 30 years of martial arts training, it still isn't easy. If your gonna move on a shooter this way, your only gonna get one shot at it.

What kind of martial arts are you in?

I think the guy reacted as best as he could. Atleast he reacted fast. That's probably more important than how he reacted.

[saltysquid]

Originally Posted by The Knight Of Light

No disagreement there. I was just thinking maybe he was just a regular joe that wanted to make sure if he was going to use the tool, that he might want to get some training for that tool. Granted paper doesn't shoot back but how many of us have been in a gunfight?? Very few I hope. I would think anyone on this forum that says they carry has the training to be able to do what this guy did. I think anyone that carries should be required to prove proficiency with their firearm before they are allowed to carry concealed.

I Can't disagree with that training being good, but most states require a shooting class. They don't do any type of "situations" but there are so many that could be possible, it would be hard to do all of them. You are right though in the average Joe not actually being trained. In the case of this guy though it's hard to second guess him because it doesn't say what happened. He very well could be a highly trained person and/or he may have had something happen (like the robber hearing a sound and looking away) that was an opening for him to act. It's just as easy to speculate that happening as the guy acting wrong in the situation. My point is that he got the bg so it's actually safer to assume he did it the right way. I swear some people (not picking on you) are as quick as the anti-gun media to start trying to find fault against the legal gunner even when everything goes right.

Nobody really knows how they will actually react in this situation until it happens, but if one has the weapon and DOES NOT take advantage of an opening to react and take out the threat then why have a concealed carry in the first place? I consider myself to be a sheepdog and firmly believe I would react if/when an opening presented itself and for someone to say they just flat out would do nothing actually makes them a sheep with a gun, not a sheepdog. I will say again the ccw guy MUST have reacted correctly with an opening because the BG is gone and his girlfriend is not. It's hard to second guess him (except by some I guess) when everything worked as it should, the good guys are alive and the BG is taking a dirt nap. To anyone that says they flat out would not have reacted at all in the similar situatuon then there's no point in getting a ccw if you don't already have one, if you do then might as well leave it at home as you must be carryng just to be able to say you have a CCW and it will do you no good.

I believe that ccw holders are actually smarter than the average bear. Some may disagree with me, but I don't think there's any doubt the media would focus on ccw holders that actually cause problems with reacting at the wrong time in the situation. There are actually very few cases of ccw holders screwing up compared to the amount of people that have teh permits. I have seen where ccw's have stopped a crime, but I don't remember seeing where one where the ccw reacted without an opening and got people shot. My point? CCW holders are not the average joe to begin with and bumbling idiots putting in for a ccw is pretty rare.

The guy obviously did a great job in reacting when he should and the proof is in the fact that it worked. We should be congratulating him and using him as an example of doing it right rather than trying to come up with lame reasons why he should not have reacted in a situation where it worked.

[The Knight Of Light]

Originally Posted by saltysquid

I I swear some people (not picking on you) are as quick as the anti-gun media to start trying to find fault against the legal gunner even when everything goes right.

Well said. And part of that is the point I was hoping someone woud pick up on. I am not really badmouthing the guy for protecting his girl. I was really hoping at least one person would see it that way and respond to it. So many people are quick to judge a situation and make it seem that something else could have been done. Some "non-lethal" alternative. Sometimes it does not happen that way and we as firearms owners have to be prepared for that. We will one day have to use deadly force and it will have severe consequenses if not applied properly.

Originally Posted by saltysquid

Nobody really knows how they will actually react in this situation until it happens, but if one has the weapon and DOES NOT take advantage of an opening to react and take out the threat then why have a concealed carry in the first place? I consider myself to be a sheepdog and firmly believe I would react if/when an opening presented itself and for someone to say they just flat out would do nothing actually makes them a sheep with a gun, not a sheepdog. I will say again the ccw guy MUST have reacted correctly with an opening because the BG is gone and his girlfriend is not. It's hard to second guess him (except by some I guess) when everything worked as it should, the good guys are alive and the BG is taking a dirt nap. To anyone that says they flat out would not have reacted at all in the similar situatuon then there's no point in getting a ccw if you don't already have one, if you do then might as well leave it at home as you must be carryng just to be able to say you have a CCW and it will do you no good.

I believe that ccw holders are actually smarter than the average bear. Some may disagree with me, but I don't think there's any doubt the media would focus on ccw holders that actually cause problems with reacting at the wrong time in the situation. There are actually very few cases of ccw holders screwing up compared to the amount of people that have teh permits. I have seen where ccw's have stopped a crime, but I don't remember seeing where one where the ccw reacted without an opening and got people shot. My point? CCW holders are not the average joe to begin with and bumbling idiots putting in for a ccw is pretty rare.

The guy obviously did a great job in reacting when he should and the proof is in the fact that it worked. We should be congratulating him and using him as an example of doing it right rather than trying to come up with lame reasons why he should not have reacted in a situation where it worked.

Again this is really what I was hoping for, a reaction that tells us that what he did was the result of a decision making process that we all need to be ready to make. An interesting drill that took place durring one of my training courses was the instructor told us to move left or right when he said the word "Left!" or "Right!". Then he goes into this long, rambling speech about how we need to be ready to make the decision to shoot based on what the situation dictates. The entire time everyone is listening to the speech and just standing there waiting for the comand. We never cued into the fact he was using the words Left and Right about 1-2 times per sentence. That was a decision making excersise. It was pretty good too. He ended up asking us why we were not shooting and someone said, "You never said Left or Right." In reality he said it about 6 times each we were just too trapped by the lecture to realize we were suposed to be shooting when he said it. Good excercise.

[saltysquid]

That's why I said I was not picking on you because I know you are not doing that.

Taking a look at these situations after it happens and discussing them, thinking about what we would do are all good things. Attending classes with further training is also a good thing...especially for someone that doesn't have much gun experience. Probably wouldn't hurt all of us as you never know so much that you can't still learn. It just bothers me that there are those that try to second guess someone that seems to have done everything right, I expect it from the gun grabbers but when it comes from us then something is askew.

The exercise you are talking about does sound like a good one and it would show the importance of paying attention to everything and not focusing on one aspect. Like focusing on the entire speech and missing on what you were supposed to hear. I like that, good instructor.

In reality though I firmly believe the majority of those that react in these situations do so based more on instinct. One of the first things we were told in the service after training is that when the S*&% hits the fan the books go out the window. The training is a good thing, creates dicipline and of course in plenty of operations the things learned in trainig are used and needed. In split second life or death situations though it usually falls back to instincts. Medal of honor winners will say "I really don't know what happen, I just did it". No thinking, just reaction.

I say again though that training is a good thing, I'm not trying to come accross as saying it is not. Hell, I still have "3 round bursts" drilled into my head and if I were to actually have to shoot a bg I'm sure it would be a 3 round burt.

[Apdl]

Originally Posted by Neomet

I'm agreeing with KOL here with the limited info available. Do me a favor, if someone has a gun stuffed in my back, do not draw on him unless he is stupid enough to let you out of his line of his vision and you can be 100% certain that you are going to put the first round directly in his medula oblongata. I personally would probably be pissed off if I was left paralyzed, ****ting into a bag due a bullet to the spinal cord because my buddy thought he could outdraw a BG who already has a gun stuffed in my back with his finger on the trigger. Ya gotta realize when drawing your weapon is a good idea vs a bad idea. One answer does not fit all situations.

Nice end of the story, but I'm not so sure I would have drawn on him when it sounds like he did. Its possible they are just very, very lucky. I wasn't there so I'm not sure.

i agree completly

[Glenn]

You know guys...... you can say what ever you want about this guy like he should have done this or that or what ever it takes to be politically correct but in my opinion he is a hero. file it under DSAF did society a favor. one scumbag off the street. and if anybody EVER points a gun at a member of my family... shots WILL be fired no questions asked and you all can take that to the bank

[oklawall]

With the little information that is given I'm not going to be a Monday quarterback.

On another forum there was a study done with a trained LEO with gun out and at low ready, the BG could pull his weapon and shoot the LEO before the LEO could act. The main point of it was that the mind could not catch up with the actions of the other person with all that is going on in the mind.

I'm think that SWAT act the same way when they go into take a BG down with moving in fast the BG mind just can't catch up and when it engages they are on the ground or have a gun in their face.

[saltysquid]

Originally Posted by Glenn

You know guys...... you can say what ever you want about this guy like he should have done this or that or what ever it takes to be politically correct but in my opinion he is a hero. file it under DSAF did society a favor. one scumbag off the street. and if anybody EVER points a gun at a member of my family... shots WILL be fired no questions asked and you all can take that to the bank

+1
Hehe, exactly what I was trying to say except mine was in a MUCH longer winded way.