63yo Man Bodyslams and Disarms Armed Robber - video

I saw a video recently about a robbery that occurred at a Wal-Mart. A man and a woman walk into the store and immediately split up. The man pulled out a gun and was spotted by a customer who was carrying, who then started following him. Just when the customer thought he had the bad guy in his sights, the robber's girlfriend walked up behind him and shot him dead. He was the only person shot during the robbery.

That video confirmed for me the belief that, just because I carry a gun doesn't mean it's my place to intervene when something bad happens. I am not the police, not trained how police are trained, and have no interest in being regarded as anyone's hero other than in the eyes of my children (and not because of shooting down a bad guy committing a robbery).

I carry my gun for direct imminent threat when no other option is available to me, including retreat. It isn't to convince myself that I'm tougher than I am. It isn't to use in playing the hero by confronting would be robbers. It isn't to protect the public in general. It's to protect me or my family.
 
Once the gun is introduced into such a situation by a bad guy, the issue of "other people's property" is not longer relevant in my playbook, not even a consideration.[/QUOTEWell, it is true that armed robbery is not a property crime in the eyes of the law,, but the man who intervened had not been and was not threatened, and his action might well have brought harm to someone in a situation that might otherwise have involved only the loss of someone else's property.
Click to expand...
 
They refer to him more as a vigilante than a good samaritan, that bothers me...
Click to expand...
He was neither.

A good Samaritan renders aid and comfort, attempts to heal, provides transportation. He does not intervene in ongoing encounters.

A vigilante punishes and engages in retribution, unlawfully.
 
Once the gun is introduced into such a situation by a bad guy, the issue of "other people's property" is not longer relevant in my playbook, not even a consideration. It all becomes an issue of dealing with the threat...not why the threat is there.
Click to expand...

Bingo.

I saw a video recently about a robbery that occurred at a Wal-Mart. A man and a woman walk into the store and immediately split up. The man pulled out a gun and was spotted by a customer who was carrying, who then started following him. Just when the customer thought he had the bad guy in his sights, the robber's girlfriend walked up behind him and shot him dead. He was the only person shot during the robbery.
Click to expand...

That was not a robbery. They had just killed two cops in cold blood across the street. Then got into a shootout with cops in wall-mart. Total 5 dead.

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2014/jun/08/two-officers-shot-cicis-nellis-suspects-run-wal-ma/
 
The point is that he tried to play the hero and it cost him his life, Nanuk. If you, or anyone else for that matter, wants to be the hero in a robbery, mass shooting, terrorist attack, or any other scenario, it's your choice to make. I still think intervening when I'm not directly being attacked is not wise and can easily lead to the escalation of an already bad situation. It's not worth the risk.
 
First, nice take down. Looked like a wrestling move.

Second, I wish we could find out what prompted him to make the decision to act. As it is, we can only guess at his reasoning. But maybe he saw/heard something that made him feel that he had no choice but to act. It would be interesting to know, anyway.

Third, he got at least a little lucky. The one thing I know for certain from sparring or even playing a game of pick-up basketball at my age (48), is that most men 20 or more years younger than me are quicker, faster, and in many cases stronger than I am. And wrestling is very physically intense. If the person you're wrestling is even just a little stronger than you, you can become completely exhausted in just a couple minutes.
 
I wonder what would have happened had the good Samaritan had been armed?
Click to expand...

Well, it depends. Given that the Good Samaritan was not under immediate threat for his life, and depending on the particular statutes in Pennsylvania, how the police interpret them, how the Lackawanna county prosecutor administers the statute and prior case law in the state, the guy might have shot the robber and walked away Scot free or he might have been facing felony charges.

The law in most jurisdictions narrowly defines the justification defense for shooting someone else. This is why we so often repeat, the criteria is NOT when CAN I SHOOT, but when do I have no alternative but to shoot.
 
The point is that he tried to play the hero and it cost him his life, Nanuk.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct in the wal-mart situation. He had no idea what was going on and who was involved and no business getting involved.

If you, or anyone else for that matter, wants to be the hero in a robbery, mass shooting, terrorist attack, or any other scenario, it's your choice to make.
Click to expand...

That is a pretty broad statement. Every situation is different and you listed an infinite number of scenarios. I will make it simple for you, it is not about being a hero. It is about responding to an immediate or imminent threat. How I choose to respond is based upon several factors.

I still think intervening when I'm not directly being attacked is not wise and can easily lead to the escalation of an already bad situation.
Click to expand...

Generally that is sound logic. Though if watching a murder I do not see how you can escalate that. There are situations where that may change and each person must make their own decision.

It's not worth the risk.
Click to expand...

A man has got to know his limitations.
 
You are correct that the situation itself would definitely determine the actions one would take. There was another situation in the news recently about a police officer by the side of the road who was being attacked, and a passing motorist stopped to help him and ended up shooting the perp. That officer would have most likely died, had the motorist not done what he did. Whether or not I would have done the same thing is something I don't know.
 
Once the gun is introduced into such a situation by a bad guy, the issue of "other people's property" is not longer relevant in my playbook, not even a consideration
Click to expand...

The situation is more nuanced. One has to evaluate action of whether one thinks lethal force is likely as the gun as in play. Perhaps, fleeing or acquiescence is the best tactic.

However, we constantly see folks post that it is the property that needs protecting as well as the lives. I could search for folks who posted that if someone steals that is reason enough to shoot.

Thus, we get some folks who think the property is consideration. They are the ones who would follow the guy out the door and blaze away at his back or fleeing car.

To me the decision to engage is based on the lethal threat. Tackling a guy to stop the robbery is silly. Tackling him to stop harm is reasonable. The decision, I grant you, can be difficult.

So if the guy says: I ain't letting him steal - I don't buy it.

If he says: I thought he was going to hurt folks - that's reasonable for an action decision.

Now was this action reasonable - debatable. For the civilian - a good FOF is some similar incidents is a good thing. I was in one being the crook. The clerk knocked me down - then I unloaded 5 rounds into his inner thigh (not real bullets). The SO said to the clerk - well, that didn't work out well?

Another one - I was in back of the crook who shot the clerk. Well, that was an action decision and I took him to the ground. Then his backup (unknown to me) said: Get off him - I shot him and another good guy shot him for a general gunfight started. He missed me. Now, given the crook shot the clerk, should I have taken him down or just shot him? Interesting after action discussion. If I had, would the other CHLs in the class, who didn't know who we were, shoot me in the uproar?

Another one - I was a bystander - just ran out the door at speed (haha). Hint, keep running. In another run by a different group, a bystander ran out the door. The crook ran out the door and saw him - said: Oh, Hello. Then he shot him.

Lesson - keep running.
 
Glenn said:
I couldn't live with myself if I ....

a. didn't do something.
b. were dead.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you're looking for an either-or answer, or it it's implied "both of the above". For me, I'd have to answer A.

If you don't (or can't) do something in this situation, you are relying on the kindness of a felon with a gun to allow you and those around you to live a little longer. I don't like the sound of that. Does anyone?

My personal situation: I'm 61 years old, in reasonably good physical condition, but I'm no "tough guy". My kids are grown. My wife can't work, but the 401k is healthy. I stake my future on the blood of Jesus. Your situations may vary.

We are all going to die some day. If you or I are making decisions on whether we'll die, we've got it wrong. I ask you, how do you want to die? Malignant cells eating away your flesh? Brain disintegrating until it no longer even signals life sustaining basic processes?

A better question: how do you want to live? The guy in the video lives well. Very well.
 
Last edited:
One has to evaluate action of whether one thinks lethal force is likely as the gun as in play.
Click to expand...

No, you have to be 'in fear of your life'. No 'likely' is required. They don't ask you if you thought there was a 51 percent chance the gun would be used. The mere presence of the gun by the robber is enough for most people to be in fear of their life.

Deaf
 
Everyone's world view and decision processes are individualistic.

If your mental model is dichotomous, that's your brain. If one takes into account the probabilities of an outcome for a continuum of risk, that's your brain.

So if you in the store and a gun is drawn, you evaluate that you are in fear of your life.

If you are in the street and see a gun is in play as they enter the store, you might easily avoid. The guys might come out of the store and run after you. So do you want to enter the store and tackle them? Got to police society as a good guy!

If you are willing to die because your personal supernatural entity will take care of you, that's another part of your discriminant analysis regression equation. Perhaps it is the case that your family will be delighted with you moving off this mortal goal and getting your insurance and retirement funds. That's your business.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top