A lot of shooting in this one

[RRomig]

They typically put them on the top of the door on the lock side. The door itself has a a rectangular metal plate and the lock is on the jamb https://www.sdcsecurity.com/magnetic-locks.htm

It is easy to see what went wrong after the fact. There are no firearms that are 100% effective. Luck always plays a role in every situation. Good planning tends to minimize the role of luck, but it certainly will never eliminate it.

In this case it’s very easy to see why their plan was screwed long before it was put into action. I’ve pointed out all the problems but if you think their plan was reasonable that’s certainly your option.

 

[Rickman]

The final outcome was outstanding.

 

[trickg]

I didn't realize this was 4.5 years ago. The robber is lucky to still be alive. So are the mom and daughter for that matter.

 

[Worsley]

These two ladies are awesome!

 

[JohnnyE]

These two ladies are awesome!

I'd like to see if and how the ladies upgraded their infrastructure, arms and training since the incident.

 

[Worsley]

I'd like to see if and how the ladies upgraded their infrastructure, arms and training since the incident.

I bet they took their training serious after realizing that in a gunfight you want it to be over as fast as possible and in your favor.

 

[Ecestu]

I'm not Esectu , nor read his mind , but here goes :

If you're going to carry , then CARRY , under the counter is problematic .

Once you've survived Round One of a gunfight , and BG is beating feet in opposite direction , don't restart the gunfight unless you have a strong reason you need to .

Good enough for me! As for being anti-gun, that's laughable. I'm more of an anti-stupid kind of guy. As someone else posted, is a few dollars worth your life? The ladies, for whatever reason, wanted to play hero. They certainly lucked out, but shit could have went sideways on multiple occasions in that scenario.

 

[jcutonilli]

In this case it’s very easy to see why their plan was screwed long before it was put into action. I’ve pointed out all the problems but if you think their plan was reasonable that’s certainly your option.

It is easy for you to see problems after the fact. They certainly did not see the flaws in their plan beforehand. I am not trying to argue that their plan was reasonable for those circumstances. I am trying to point out that circumstances like this occur because you cannot envision every possible situation. Once you get into that situation the handgun that you use is unlikely to matter because you are not very likely to accurately shoot. I believe that you only have a 25% chance or less of being killed if you do get shot in situations like this.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Once you get into that situation the handgun that you use is unlikely to matter because you are not very likely to accurately shoot. I believe that you only have a 25% chance or less of being killed if you do get shot in situations like this.

Prior to quoted part :

Indeed , every possible eventuality can not be prepared for , or even imagined . A thoughtful approach would factor in likely probabilities , and costs of implementing , directly and indirectly .

And an imperfect plan is ( usually ) better than No Plan at all . Now back to the quoted ;

1. Exact choice of firearm(s) usually not critical , IF a cpl of basic minimal criteria are met
Ie , the gun is at least somewhat suitable for intended purposes , and user(s) are at least somewhat not totally sucky in using it .

From the video and the flash signature , I'm going with a small frame .38 . That falls within being at least somewhat suitable for intended purpose , albeit for something stashed under counter , a 4 inch medium frame .38spl could as readily been substituted with same manual of arms , and better hit potential .

2. Yes , absolutely , general public Self Defense is different from LE . But LE statistics are the primary source of semi- comprehensive numbers of rounds/ hits in shooting confrontations .

Numbers vary widely . But for overall departments , mostly fall into 15% to 35% range . ( The statistical variants of analysis parameters are great , but that's the simplist of total rounds fired vs total number of hits .

But this is a call to improve , not a sign that it's hopeless , and don't bother , since you'll miss anyway . Another interesting statistic is that the greater the confrontation distance , the more the odds favor LE over the BG . I'll place reasonably competent general public carriers as being reasonably similar in this context .

3 . 25% is in the right ballpark for actual Death from single handgun wound . But even when not outright dead , lots of serious , often perment health problems from getting shot .

 

[cmb]

Sad,, but that is what I was thinking, Sad how our thought is conditioned living in MD.

The two gals are talking WAY to much in the interviews, way to much.
Assuming this did not happen on "Shut the f$ck up Friday"

Yes, they're talking way TOO much.

 

[RRomig]

It is easy for you to see problems after the fact. They certainly did not see the flaws in their plan beforehand. I am not trying to argue that their plan was reasonable for those circumstances. I am trying to point out that circumstances like this occur because you cannot envision every possible situation. Once you get into that situation the handgun that you use is unlikely to matter because you are not very likely to accurately shoot. I believe that you only have a 25% chance or less of being killed if you do get shot in situations like this.

I guess it might be easier if I just ask you what was good about their plan. The foundation of the plan, the root of all to follow was to lock a armed man in their store with only a glass door separating them.

 

[Ecestu]

Prior to quoted part :

Indeed , every possible eventuality can not be prepared for , or even imagined . A thoughtful approach would factor in likely probabilities , and costs of implementing , directly and indirectly .

And an imperfect plan is ( usually ) better than No Plan at all . Now back to the quoted ;

1. Exact choice of firearm(s) usually not critical , IF a cpl of basic minimal criteria are met
Ie , the gun is at least somewhat suitable for intended purposes , and user(s) are at least somewhat not totally sucky in using it .

From the video and the flash signature , I'm going with a small frame .38 . That falls within being at least somewhat suitable for intended purpose , albeit for something stashed under counter , a 4 inch medium frame .38spl could as readily been substituted with same manual of arms , and better hit potential .

2. Yes , absolutely , general public Self Defense is different from LE . But LE statistics are the primary source of semi- comprehensive numbers of rounds/ hits in shooting confrontations .

Numbers vary widely . But for overall departments , mostly fall into 15% to 35% range . ( The statistical variants of analysis parameters are great , but that's the simplist of total rounds fired vs total number of hits .

But this is a call to improve , not a sign that it's hopeless , and don't bother , since you'll miss anyway . Another interesting statistic is that the greater the confrontation distance , the more the odds favor LE over the BG . I'll place reasonably competent general public carriers as being reasonably similar in this context .

3 . 25% is in the right ballpark for actual Death from single handgun wound . But even when not outright dead , lots of serious , often perment health problems from getting shot .

Your analysis is all well and dandy when you take into account that the perp's shotgun wasn't used AT ALL. I'm curious what the ladies' reaction would have been if he returned fire. He was certainly a bold man because he advanced on the armed ladies' position, but he didn't really have a choice, either. Sit in the kill box or be proactive.

 

[4g64loser]

Your analysis is all well and dandy when you take into account that the perp's shotgun wasn't used AT ALL. I'm curious what the ladies' reaction would have been if he returned fire. He was certainly a bold man because he advanced on the armed ladies' position, but he didn't really have a choice, either. Sit in the kill box or be proactive.

To reiterate my position, these ladies didn't do a whole lot correctly in setting up their defense. That said, they did not pick this fight.

The scumbag did USE the shotgun. The fact that he did not discharge it might suggest that it was either unloaded or unserviceable. Both are beyond any consideration in the immediate situation. Once a subject with a weapon or a weapon analog (think spray painted squirt gun) decides to play, no reasonable person is going to ask if the weapon is real/loaded/has been inspected for function by a competent gunsmith.

I would also posit that the scumbag had a choice. He could have decided not to commit armed robbery. Realizing that he screwed up and retreating to a position of advantage is a common thing for anyone who finds themselves faced with superior firepower. If he threw down his weapon, put his hands up, and stayed still I would have an issue with either lady shooting him after that point but that is not what he chose to do.

 

[RRomig]

He was leaving without harming them.
They didn’t choose for him to rob the store but they definitely chose to have a gun fight.
I’d have no problem Had they engaged as soon as they saw the firearm because they didn’t know his intentions. He chose to not hurt them and Then they chose to fight.

 

[babalou]

I didn't realize this was 4.5 years ago. The robber is lucky to still be alive. So are the mom and daughter for that matter.

This topic and vid i remember seeing here a while ago- when it originally happened. Not the final outcome though iirc

 

[4g64loser]

When armed persons are present, every fight is a gunfight in potentia. The person initiating the encounter by displaying the threat or actual use of force is the aggressor. I stand by my statement that the only situation (which did not occur) where I would fault the decision of the ladies to shoot would have been the scumbag relinquishing his weapon, STAYING STILL, and indicating surrender. Absent his capitulation, he remains an armed scumbag who MAY be leaving to go rob a different store but MAY be retreating to a position of advantage.

I may not think all their decisions were sound but I wasn't there. I do not dispute that, in MD, this would have gone very badly for the two ladies. I hope they seek out training and are better prepared in the future.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Your analysis is all well and dandy when you take into account that the perp's shotgun wasn't used AT ALL. I'm curious what the ladies' reaction would have been if he returned fire. He was certainly a bold man because he advanced on the armed ladies' position, but he didn't really have a choice, either. Sit in the kill box or be proactive.

Didn't say there plan was a *good* plan . Said then generally an imperfect plan is better than no plan at all .

 

[jcutonilli]

I guess it might be easier if I just ask you what was good about their plan. The foundation of the plan, the root of all to follow was to lock a armed man in their store with only a glass door separating them.

We actually do not know their plan. It is entirely possible that the intention was never to lock someone in. The intention may have simply been to prevent both doors from opening at the same time to prevent HVAC losses. The guy got locked in because the inner door did not close before he tried to exit. Had the inner door closed, he would have been free to leave. What happened is that he pushed the inner door extra hard so that it did not close before he tried to exit leading to the situation.

 

[Biggfoot44]

They did follow Step One : Have a gun .

 

[Name Taken]

They need some training. That is awful to watch.

Guns are great for defense in these situations, but you have to know how to use them.