Wildalaska
Moderator
Im not talking tactical, I'm talking philosophical
How do your folks feel about COWERING behind a counter waiting for the cops to come?
WilddoesitoffendyourinnermanlinessAlaska ™
Armed Citizen: Oklahoma Pharmacist Defends Employees from Robbers
- Thread starter Blue Steel
- Start date
- Status
Im not talking tactical, I'm talking philosophical
How do your folks feel about COWERING behind a counter waiting for the cops to come?
WilddoesitoffendyourinnermanlinessAlaska ™
Shadi Khalil
New member
I'm a coward so the cowering comes naturally. Seriously though, I see nothing wrong with that decision, in both a tactical and philosophical sense.
you can seem very calm under duress. Ayoob even explains that in talking about stretching. You can seem in serenity while your blood is pumping buckets of adrenaline into you. Everyone is different. This guy was trained to seem calm under crazy circumstances. It doesn't mean his mentality isn't affected.
anythingshiny
New member
it was a coup de grace.
his actions in the vid are WAY different from his STATEMENT to the police. ( the correct answer here is to say NOTHING other than 'i feared for my life and the evidence is over there.')
although we cannot see whether the bg has a knife or gun to determine if he is still even possible a remote threat, the pharmacist certainly does not appear to be in any jeopardy as he walks PAST the bg to relative safety...only to return and put 5 in his belly.
1/2 me says hell yes...go home, get MORE guns to shoot him with, light him on fire and kick him in the crotch.
the other half says bad shoot and hes going to serve some serious time for a bad bad call.
his actions in the vid are WAY different from his STATEMENT to the police. ( the correct answer here is to say NOTHING other than 'i feared for my life and the evidence is over there.')
although we cannot see whether the bg has a knife or gun to determine if he is still even possible a remote threat, the pharmacist certainly does not appear to be in any jeopardy as he walks PAST the bg to relative safety...only to return and put 5 in his belly.
1/2 me says hell yes...go home, get MORE guns to shoot him with, light him on fire and kick him in the crotch.
the other half says bad shoot and hes going to serve some serious time for a bad bad call.
Playboypenguin
Moderator
I remember a quote from MASH where a young guy lying in a bed severely wounded says to Hawkeye "I'm a Marine...we're the best." To which Hawkeye quite proudly responds "Really? I'm a coward...we're the worst."
Hawkeye pretty much summed it up for me too.
Last edited:
Cowering?
I have largely been in WildAlaska's camp in this case, and perhaps I am just taking his bait (clever fellow that he is), but I disagree with his choice of words.
From dictionary.com: cower: "verb (used without object)
to crouch, as in fear or shame."
If I was behind that counter, one assailant down by my defensive fire and the other fleeing, I would see remaining behind the counter as taking a positive tactical position, from which I could continue to assess and respond to both the down robber and the still-open door. That isn't the same as cowering "in fear or shame," that would be controlling a very bad situation to the best of my ability. Letting the robbers be in charge of the situation, including whether the innocents that work for me lived or died and whether I sent home to my wife that night standing up or in a bag, is cowering.
As I and others have expressed previously, the initial shoot appears to be justified, but the pharmacist caused himself legal and tactical and, IMHO, moral problems with his subsequent actions.
So, philosophically, I am opposed to cowering but in favor of good defensive tactics.
I have largely been in WildAlaska's camp in this case, and perhaps I am just taking his bait (clever fellow that he is), but I disagree with his choice of words.
From dictionary.com: cower: "verb (used without object)
to crouch, as in fear or shame."
If I was behind that counter, one assailant down by my defensive fire and the other fleeing, I would see remaining behind the counter as taking a positive tactical position, from which I could continue to assess and respond to both the down robber and the still-open door. That isn't the same as cowering "in fear or shame," that would be controlling a very bad situation to the best of my ability. Letting the robbers be in charge of the situation, including whether the innocents that work for me lived or died and whether I sent home to my wife that night standing up or in a bag, is cowering.
As I and others have expressed previously, the initial shoot appears to be justified, but the pharmacist caused himself legal and tactical and, IMHO, moral problems with his subsequent actions.
So, philosophically, I am opposed to cowering but in favor of good defensive tactics.
Last edited:
Wildalaska
Moderator
Now y'all dont think that there are some folks here who would call it cowering?
WildnowyaknowwhyichosethatwordAlaska ™
Double Naught Spy
New member
Actually, the DA covered that in the press conference specifically and said he did not think so because it could well be argued that the gunman was a danger to others on the street and that Ersland could have been argued to be protecting them, but that isn't what happened with Parker. Parker was down and unconscious, not some guy running with a gun from a crime.
Last edited:
Someone mentioned that the dead guy was still alive when he was shot again. They can detect this by the fact that he would have hematoma and bleeding of his latter injuries, which requires a beating heart pushing blood.
I can say with my personal experience with head trauma that with anything short of a decapitation, the heart would continue to beat for several minutes (and possibly years) following a brain-lethal event. Even with severe hemorrhage, the blood pressure drops so that the primary bleeding stops, but the heart continues to pump blood at a lower pressure to areas of lower resistance.
There is a full spectrum of outcomes following a head shot ranging from a scratch to temporary loss of consciousness, to TBI and coma, to delayed or instant brain death. Again, despite the fact that he had a beating heart, he could have been brain dead on the spot. Only the pathologist or M.E. knows at this point.
I think that if the initial injury was non-survivable, the subsequent actions have zero meaning and there would be no case, that is unless there is a law against shooting corpses (whether out of frustration or for target practice). If it was a survivable injury (as many are), this dude is in deep.
I can say with my personal experience with head trauma that with anything short of a decapitation, the heart would continue to beat for several minutes (and possibly years) following a brain-lethal event. Even with severe hemorrhage, the blood pressure drops so that the primary bleeding stops, but the heart continues to pump blood at a lower pressure to areas of lower resistance.
There is a full spectrum of outcomes following a head shot ranging from a scratch to temporary loss of consciousness, to TBI and coma, to delayed or instant brain death. Again, despite the fact that he had a beating heart, he could have been brain dead on the spot. Only the pathologist or M.E. knows at this point.
I think that if the initial injury was non-survivable, the subsequent actions have zero meaning and there would be no case, that is unless there is a law against shooting corpses (whether out of frustration or for target practice). If it was a survivable injury (as many are), this dude is in deep.
Deaf Smith
New member
The Pharmacist is in deep do. I saw the video. He will get manslaughter at the minimum. Never should have reloaded and then gone back to shoot the downed robber again, FIVE TIMES. The Judge revolver only holds five, so you can guess what any jury will think.
Nope, he should have stayed with the ones in back. It is not a move of a coward but one to protect others.
His only hope is the fallen robber was already dead, and thus it could not have been murder (can't murder anyone who is dead.)
But not only will he spend time in jail, he will be pennyless.
Nope, he should have stayed with the ones in back. It is not a move of a coward but one to protect others.
His only hope is the fallen robber was already dead, and thus it could not have been murder (can't murder anyone who is dead.)
But not only will he spend time in jail, he will be pennyless.
Shadi Khalil
New member
But they can still show intent.
That's odd. Under the Oklahoma SDA (Self-Defense Act), a licensed concealed carrier may use deadly force to defend only when in imminent danger, and only to defend self, spouse, child, parent, employer, or employee.
With this being the case, Ersland could have faced additional charges had he hit the fleeing suspect, as he was neither defending himself or anyone on the "approved list."
Playboypenguin
Moderator
It would not be a huge stretch to say he shot the armed fleeing suspect in the defense of bystanders. The fleeing subject may have shot a passer by, car jacked someone to escape, etc.
DonR101395
New member
It's going to shock you Ken, but no I wouldn't have an issue if that would have been his reaction. I wasn't the one there getting a gun stuck in my face, so I'm not going to judge him guilty of cowardice or of being an executioner.
Now for the not so shocking, I will support one response over the other, but either could be a viable tactic depending on the situation.
- Status