A CCW in action.

[DSF Training]

OK I started not to comment on this one and then I started to just comment on the BS replies I read. Then I started to pick out quotes form some of the BS replies but it was to much to sort out so I'm just going to state my opinion!

As long as the BG's have a weapon in their hand they are a threat! May it be a gun, knife, baseball bat or even a shovel! Even with the BG on the ground outside the store front he was still a threat! The clerk did everything right starting by standing up! And the mother and child were not "in the line of fire"! Any one that watches that video and thinks that they would have done things different doesn't need to have a CCDW or even use a firearm for protection for that matter! If someone has the time to second guess them selfs during a event like that then they don't have the ability to gain control over it! And the end result would have been very different!

Now! With all that said I could have done without the plumbers crack from the lady behind the counter after she stood up! they could have blurred that part out.

 

[Dst]

The blanket statement that imagining handling the situation differently disqualifies you for a CCW seems pretty extreme! I'm sure there are lots of other different ways that the situation could have been handled, but I'm glad no 'innocents' got hurt! What we need here is more exclamation points! I'm serious!

Enough of that...

I think that shooting that close to a child like he did is risky for someone who's not completely sure where his or her shots are going to land. My hunch is that this fella didn't have much of a doubt as to whether or not his shots would land where he was aiming them, though.

That said, safety is important. I do agree that if you aren't *sure* that something is safe with regard to firearms, by all means don't fire the weapon. The ability to "second guess" or, as I see it, constantly reevaluate the situation is by no means a lack of ability to control that situation. The kind of person that can keep thinking through a situation like this and not shoot someone wrongfully or accidentally is absolutely the kind of person that need to be carrying a firearm.

I'm personally glad to hear that the man acting in self defense was not charged for any crime related to his self-defense. I have to wonder, though, what 'activist' groups would be pushing to see him in court were it not for this video?

 

[3rdRcn]

What we need here is more exclamation points! I'm serious!

 

[NittanyLion]

OK I started not to comment on this one and then I started to just comment on the BS replies I read. Then I started to pick out quotes form some of the BS replies but it was to much to sort out so I'm just going to state my opinion!

As long as the BG's have a weapon in their hand they are a threat! May it be a gun, knife, baseball bat or even a shovel! Even with the BG on the ground outside the store front he was still a threat! The clerk did everything right starting by standing up! And the mother and child were not "in the line of fire"! Any one that watches that video and thinks that they would have done things different doesn't need to have a CCDW or even use a firearm for protection for that matter! If someone has the time to second guess them selfs during a event like that then they don't have the ability to gain control over it! And the end result would have been very different!

Now! With all that said I could have done without the plumbers crack from the lady behind the counter after she stood up! they could have blurred that part out.

+1

But I missed the crack part!

If a guy comes into my house and is threatening me with a gun, I'm shooting him until he goes down. I'm not going to stop after the first shot and go oh, he's running away now, I should stop firing, only to have him turn an instant later and start shooting back. I could wind up dead or my family hurt. No, I shoot until he drops period. The best thing he was able to do there was to shield the right side of his body from the perp's field of view with the woman behind the register as he drew his weapon, which allowed him to get the shot off in the first place. And I definitely would have fired. How do you know that after he robs the place he isn't going to shoot everybody anyways. I don't think most small time robbers going after hotels also want murder chargers, but how do you know? You don't.

Anyways I think he did everything right. And the woman with the child wasn't jumping out of the way and to the floor, so I think there was far more room than the angle leads you to believe.

 

[novus collectus]

+1

But I missed the crack part!

If a guy comes into my house and is threatening me with a gun, I'm shooting him until he goes down. I'm not going to stop after the first shot and go oh, he's running away now, I should stop firing, only to have him turn an instant later and start shooting back. I could wind up dead or my family hurt. No, I shoot until he drops period. The best thing he was able to do there was to shield the right side of his body from the perp's field of view with the woman behind the register as he drew his weapon, which allowed him to get the shot off in the first place. And I definitely would have fired. How do you know that after he robs the place he isn't going to shoot everybody anyways. I don't think most small time robbers going after hotels also want murder chargers, but how do you know? You don't.

Anyways I think he did everything right. And the woman with the child wasn't jumping out of the way and to the floor, so I think there was far more room than the angle leads you to believe.

Georgetown, Washington DC at a Starbucks, 1997:

Cooper admitted, in substance, the following:

Cooper had planned to rob the Starbucks in Georgetown for about a month prior to the triple murder. He chose Sunday, July 6, 1997 as the date to commit the robbery with the expectation that the proceeds from the weekend's business would be on hand. That morning, he visited Starbucks in order to case it out and make sure that it was doing a brisk business. That evening, Cooper drove by himself to the rear of the Starbucks coffee shop and parked his car. Armed with a .380 caliber handgun and a .38 caliber snubnose revolver, Cooper walked into the shop and announced the robbery to the three employees who were present - a white female, a white male and a black male. He then forced the three employees into a rear office at gunpoint.

Cooper ordered the white female employee, who identified herself as the manager, to open the safe that was inside that office. When she refused to comply, he fired a warning shot from the .38 caliber revolver into the ceiling. At that point, the female employee ran out of the office. Cooper caught her in the hallway and started wrestling to gain control of the keys to the safe. When she resisted, he shot her with the .380. Cooper then shot her several more times with both guns.

After shooting the female manager, Cooper turned to the male employees who were still inside the office and shot both of them. He specifically recalls shooting the black male employee three times. The first gunshot dropped the black male employee to the ground, but did not kill him. When he continued to move and moan, Cooper shot him twice more in the head to put him out of his pain. Once the shooting stopped, Cooper ran out of the store without stopping to take any money. He fled back to his home, where he disposed of the guns and washed the blood out of his clothes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/march99/affidavit18.htm

 

[DSF Training]

I'm sure there are lots of other different ways that the situation could have been handled

Maybe your right now that I think about it. They could have just joined hands and song koombyya, a nice little group huge at the end and every body would have just walked way with a little smile.

NOT!!

 

[trickg]

It's hard to say what I would do in a similar situation. It's always been my belief that the only time a gun needs to be fired at another human being is when it is done as a last resort and the lives of myself or others are in jeopardy. I know the guy was brandishing a weapon, but it appeared that his goal was to get money and not to harm anyone else. That said, it's easy for me to make that assessment after the fact when watching it on a video.

If I was the one standing there with the pistol on my hip, I may have done the exact same thing - by pointing a gun at those people, the crook threatened their lives and in my opinion, whether action had been taken or not, the justification was there and Mr. Criminal got what was coming to him. Yeah, it makes me a bit uncomfortable how close the guy fired to the mom and child, but it was also clear that he was well practiced and knew where his shots were going to go and while there wasn't a lot of clearance, there was enough. It was good shooting - all three shots hit the intended target and the situation was far from ideal.

Interesting vid - thanks for posting it.

 

[smores]

Guy did good. I would have done the same thing.

 

[smokey]

wow, not deserving a ccw because you may second guess yourself in retrospect? i'm pretty sure what counts here is good guys 1 bad guys 0. did he shoot very close to the woman and child? yes. was he under control? yes. could the child now have permanent hearing damage? yes. but ultimately the immediate threat and the threat to society was taken down by one of the good guys. i'm sure everyone on this thread benefits whenever a gun is used to protect innocent life and squabbling and such is counterproductive. one of those times we should be coming together to promote our argument on the issue, not bicker about other people not knowing what they're talking about.

 

[trickg]

Something else to point out here that I think many are missing - and this is directly related to Smokey's comment about good guys 1, bad guys 0 - is that had the guy chosen to not fire, this crook would without a doubt have done this sort of thing again, and again, and again. In doing so, who knows - he may have been hopped up on drugs and actually pulled the trigger on someone, killing an innocent person. All of that was prevented when this guy decided to use his gun to take down that crook. He's now behind bars where he should be with the bullet wounds that will hopefully make him think twice about his actions when he gets out of the clink.

 

[alucard0822]

OK I started not to comment on this one and then I started to just comment on the BS replies I read. Then I started to pick out quotes form some of the BS replies but it was to much to sort out so I'm just going to state my opinion!

As long as the BG's have a weapon in their hand they are a threat! May it be a gun, knife, baseball bat or even a shovel! Even with the BG on the ground outside the store front he was still a threat! The clerk did everything right starting by standing up! And the mother and child were not "in the line of fire"! Any one that watches that video and thinks that they would have done things different doesn't need to have a CCDW or even use a firearm for protection for that matter! If someone has the time to second guess them selfs during a event like that then they don't have the ability to gain control over it! And the end result would have been very different!

Now! With all that said I could have done without the plumbers crack from the lady behind the counter after she stood up! they could have blurred that part out.

At no point is the guy not a threat, that is clear, and judging by what can be seen, at no point is anyone saying he was not justified in firing, or that he should be charged, What I am trying to contribute to the discussion is my viewpoint of the level of threat vs the level of risk in taking the shot. If you think discussing this from a different viewpoint than your own means that some of us have no buisness carrying or owning a weapon, then I think someone like you has no buisness being an instructor. But thats just my opinion, hopefully as adults we can move past the BS squabbling and both contribute and learn from this without throwing flames.

 

[trickg]

At no point is the guy not a threat, that is clear, and judging by what can be seen, at no point is anyone saying he was not justified in firing, or that he should be charged, What I am trying to contribute to the discussion is my viewpoint of the level of threat vs the level of risk in taking the shot. If you think discussing this from a different viewpoint than your own means that some of us have no buisness carrying or owning a weapon, then I think someone like you has no buisness being an instructor. But thats just my opinion, hopefully as adults we can move past the BS squabbling and both contribute and learn from this without throwing flames.

My thought is that the risk was justified. The guy behind the counter was well trained and practiced, and did a good job when the time came for action. Common crooks like this guy generally don't spend time at the range learning how to shoot cleanly and accurately and while any number of things "could" have happened, it turned out just the way it was supposed to with the good guys winning and the bad guys losing - that's my opinion though. Opinions vary and each has a certain degree of validity.

 

[eapmai]

My thought is that the risk was justified. The guy behind the counter was well trained and practiced, and did a good job when the time came for action. Common crooks like this guy generally don't spend time at the range learning how to shoot cleanly and accurately and while any number of things "could" have happened, it turned out just the way it was supposed to with the good guys winning and the bad guys losing - that's my opinion though. Opinions vary and each has a certain degree of validity.

+1, IMHO. The guy did as he obviously has been taught in circumstances like this. He prevent anyone getting injured and sent the BG off with hopefully fatl wounds.

 

[simplegreen]

anyone notice at the 32 second mark the good guy ducks drastically? Any report that the bad guy returned fire?

 

[NittanyLion]

Georgetown, Washington DC at a Starbucks, 1997:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/march99/affidavit18.htm

Yeah. Or maybe they won't even get around to the robbing after they get sidetracked on killing everybody. Maybe the woman with the little girl panics and starts running, the BG guns them down, then comes back for the two employees, and then panics himself and takes off without robbing anything either.

 

[DSF Training]

If you think discussing this from a different viewpoint than your own means that some of us have no buisness carrying or owning a weapon,

That's not what I said. See how things get twisted around.
What I said was:

Any one that watches that video and thinks that they would have done things different doesn't need to have a CCDW or even use a firearm for protection for that matter!

One can own as many firearms as they like, and can carry any instrument that they care to for personal protection firearm, knife, pepper spray whatever. But if they are not willing to use that instrument to defend themselves or need time to think if the situation could be handled differently then they don't need to be put into a situation where something like that could happen.

Have I used my training on the streets? Yes! Have I used my training to keep myself from being harmed? Yes! Have I had to draw my weapon? NO! Why? Because I immediately gain control the over situation. Would I hesitate in useing my weapon to protect my life? With out a second thought.How could this event not taken place at all? Maybe a sign on the door saying something like "Hotel Clerks Are Armed" and the BG would have thought twice before entering with a gun.

I think someone like you has no buisness being an instructor.

Does that mean you won't be signing up for my advance CCDW course in the fall? I'm devastated, you won't be missed!

 

[bmdmc]

what i dont get is why does the lady with the child just stand there whilst the bad guy robs the place armed. If that were my kid i think i would try to at least get to the other end of the room to protect my child, but it looks as if she does not believe the guy is really armed and robbing the place..It also looks close to the kid to me to be firing but it may be a bad angle...JD

You would be amazed at how people react in the face of armed robbery, some will freeze, the fight or flight response doesn't kick in immediatley, and she was holding a small child.

I've been held up at gunpoint before, the guy had a jump on 2 of us, robbed us with the 12 guage. Sorry, but I'm going to give him what he want's, he only took the about $5k from the register. Idiot didn't even ask about the safe which had about $70K in it. And the guy working with me was the owners son, he didn't know the combo, I did.

The robber was later killed by the police a few months later, his MO was the same every time. Motorcycle behind the gas station. Watch for a slow time, usually on a Friday evening, when the gas stations are very busy.

Now for the rest of the story, this happened to me in Australia in '79, and we didn't take CC's, most places in Australia didn't at the time it was an all cash or check business. And the petrol station, I was working at was the busiest and most expensive in the actual territory (ACT if your interested), and only about 10 miles to another state.

Well to conclude, shoot first, ask questions later, if someone is threatening you with any kind of weapon. And hopefully the other guy won't be able to respond, its your word against his (and he ain't talkin).

 

[DSF Training]

You would be amazed at how people react in the face of armed robbery, some will freeze, the fight or flight response doesn't kick in immediatley,

And you are 100% right.
I like this post. Fits right in with what I tell every student. If you are not properly trained your chances of surviving are slim.

Anyone that carries a firearm for personal protection should read:
On Killing by: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
http://www.killology.com/bio.htm

 

[pauln]

Maybe a sign on the door saying something like "Hotel Clerks Are Armed" and the BG would have thought twice before entering with a gun.

Or he may have entered and just started shooting.

 

[bmdmc]

And you are 100% right.
I like this post. Fits right in with what I tell every student. If you are not properly trained your chances of surviving are slim.

Anyone that carries a firearm for personal protection should read:
On Killing by: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
http://www.killology.com/bio.htm

Thank you for the compliment. And your are absolutly right about the proper training, even for in home defense use.

What bullets are you going to use, where will they go if you miss, and chances are you will miss. Because your the one that was suprised by the brazen criminal who entered your house in the first place. What if there is more than one, how to you handle that. TRAINING, TRAINING, TRAINING, thats how you do it. Your put into likely situations, you will make mistakes, at first, but with more and more TRAINING, you will be able to handle any situation.

Now here's the real point, training is not like going to the range and seeing if you can hit a target, anyone can do that. Not saying that practice isn't required, it is. But in practice, your not in that situation, where training can help you, your loved ones, and your property rights.

And I'm not even talking about CCDW training, just basic training, to make your mind just go into a specific mode for a little while, while you take in the situation, determine what your going to do, again the fight or flight response. It really does take being put into those situations where you must make a decision, shoot, threaten, take control, or run.

Well enough of my pontificating, I have nothing better to do at the moment.