Bad Decision!
- Thread starter BfloBill
- Start date
OldMarksman
Staff
Double Naught Spy
New member
Which is still interesting given that it was uploaded a year before that. It was uploaded in 2006 and comments in the old thread indicate is is an older video.
guitars and guns
New member
Yes, this is what I was wondering too. Shooting someone in the back will probably hurt your case, unless he is fleeing and shooting at you at the same time (which seems to be the case here). IDK
I remember this video from 5 years ago.
I encountered it in a thread on a different forum.
I think I remember one poster who claimed to be the shooter/clerk posting in that thread. He said that the video distorted the actual distance that the little girls was from his line of fire. He also claimed to be a concealed weapons permit instructor. He practiced defensive shooting regularly.
His skill seems to be demonstrated by the fact that he fired three times with all three hitting his target.
The aftermath of the shooting was that the robber went to the hospital, was charged and convicted of a felony. The clerk was not charged. Justified shooting, the bad guy was shooting as he went for the door.
I encountered it in a thread on a different forum.
I think I remember one poster who claimed to be the shooter/clerk posting in that thread. He said that the video distorted the actual distance that the little girls was from his line of fire. He also claimed to be a concealed weapons permit instructor. He practiced defensive shooting regularly.
His skill seems to be demonstrated by the fact that he fired three times with all three hitting his target.
The aftermath of the shooting was that the robber went to the hospital, was charged and convicted of a felony. The clerk was not charged. Justified shooting, the bad guy was shooting as he went for the door.
I thought the Clerk reacted well. I believe that the camera angle makes it look like his shooting was closer to the woman and girl than it really was.
In real life, you are not always going to have people 1) behind the line of fire; 2) people no closer than 2 shooting lanes to your left or right; 3) or a range officer to tell you when you aren't following the rules.
I thought the Clerk's gun handling showed that he was pretty well trained and capable of handling the situation in the manner that he did.
In real life, you are not always going to have people 1) behind the line of fire; 2) people no closer than 2 shooting lanes to your left or right; 3) or a range officer to tell you when you aren't following the rules.
I thought the Clerk's gun handling showed that he was pretty well trained and capable of handling the situation in the manner that he did.
TylerD45ACP
New member
I thought he handled it well as also. How he pretended he was helping with cash while using the body to hide his CCW that he was about to present. He did shoot close to the others, but like other posters said real life scenario's aren't the IDEAL setup usually. This guy felt his life and those around him was threatened and acted appropriatley, I say good job.
(I am not a lawyer and this is only a opinion not legal advice)
IMHO is the BG still maintained the firearm in his hand even if he was retreating then he was still a threat to life and limb because all he had to do was to life his hand and fire and he had already proven his lack of regard for life at that moment due to his action in the prior few seconds.
I think this guy did what he had to do as well as it could be done and I think he stopped firing at exactly the right moment... when the threat to life and limb stopped.
Last edited:
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
The clerk in that video comments in this thread (his screen name is RooftopVoter): http://www.gunsnet.net/forums/showthread.php?t=274058&page=1&pp=30
Based on the comments, he gave a verbal command and the robber responded by raising his pistol, causing the clerk to shoot. He fired 3 shots in less than a second.
I'm not familiar with Ohio laws; and a lot depends on how the state law is written and the specific facts of the case. In the rare event a prosecutor wanted to commit career suicide to prosecute this particular shooting, I would think that a key element would be how fast a reasonable person could recognize that the robber was fleeing and stop shooting. We know the whole shooting part of the incident took place in less than a second. Try this reaction time test. When you start considering normal human reaction times and the short time frame, the clerk appears to have stopped shooting as soon as you could reasonably expect someone to recognize the threat was gone.
And of course, the clerk isn't psychic. Is the robber fleeing or going for cover? Is he running out the door or planning to take the Mom hostage?
Based on the comments, he gave a verbal command and the robber responded by raising his pistol, causing the clerk to shoot. He fired 3 shots in less than a second.
I'm not familiar with Ohio laws; and a lot depends on how the state law is written and the specific facts of the case. In the rare event a prosecutor wanted to commit career suicide to prosecute this particular shooting, I would think that a key element would be how fast a reasonable person could recognize that the robber was fleeing and stop shooting. We know the whole shooting part of the incident took place in less than a second. Try this reaction time test. When you start considering normal human reaction times and the short time frame, the clerk appears to have stopped shooting as soon as you could reasonably expect someone to recognize the threat was gone.
And of course, the clerk isn't psychic. Is the robber fleeing or going for cover? Is he running out the door or planning to take the Mom hostage?
Stressfire
New member
I'd have to say..
Good shoot based on video as seen, but way too close to the kid for my comfort zone were I in his position.
However, I would say that he made a good choice. No psychic here, but who's to say that one the BG got what he wanted that lil girl wouldn't become his getaway insurance.
Good that he had his weapon, better than he knew how to use it, best that scenario ended best for all involved, 'cept the BG, of course
Good shoot based on video as seen, but way too close to the kid for my comfort zone were I in his position.
However, I would say that he made a good choice. No psychic here, but who's to say that one the BG got what he wanted that lil girl wouldn't become his getaway insurance.
Good that he had his weapon, better than he knew how to use it, best that scenario ended best for all involved, 'cept the BG, of course
This is an old video that goes back several years.
Before you get mad and "vent", perhaps you should look more closely.
The individual CLEARLY pushed the female clerk to the side with his left elbow as he stepped far enough to his right to get a good shooting angle on the bad guy. Yes from our video angle it looked like the mother and daughter were close to his line of fire, but I think the only one in danger was Bubba at that point, as Skans points out.
No, the money on the premises was not worth the little girls life, however an armed robber with a gun making demands put everyone's life in danger.
My compliments to the young man for recognizing the danger to everyone present and the quick action he took.
You apparently feel he should have surrendered and put everyone at risk of hearing those horrible words. "OK, everybody in the back room." Or maybe, "do as I say and you won't be harmed. Now get down on the floor."
Sorry for the rant, but I had to vent.
OK, B. Bill. Tell us how you might of handled it. I understand that surrender might have been your response, but it you'd decided to handle it from a tactical perspective, how would you have done it?
NOTE: I think it was masterful how the good guy very carefully used his somewhat chubby co-worker to hide his movements until he sprung into action by elbowing her out of the way, got clear, and took care of the problem without dithering.
No offense, but passing judgement from our safe and lofty perch, after an unlimited amount of time to second guess the actors who had mere seconds, often goes too far.
Last edited:
MikeNice81
New member
It is a matter of reaction time. A bad guy can turn and run faster than your brain can process the information. It looks like he stopped when his brain processed that the fight was ending.
I don't think it would cause much issue.
I agree. And the threat, IMO, wasn't ended as the gunmen fled, since he was easily capable, at any time, of firing towards his intended victims with the handgun he'd just threatened them with. Incoming gunfire nutralized that threat. The good guy stopped shooting when the robber went down.
Just my thoughts on the matter.
myshoulderissore
New member
I was going to say this, but he beat me to it... I believe the endangerment by a rational man obeying the law and stopping a threat is better than the endangerment of someone not in their right mind, not thinking rationally, and obviously already making bad choices. I would rather not wait to see if shooting happens in a situation like that, if the problem already exists, I will work to correct it in a manner favorable to the innocents.
Nnobby45- We all know the decision to fire is an individual one, and I never said I could have handled it better. After reading all the responses I rewatched the video multiple times pausing it at certain points. We don't see much of the BG and there is no audio and I'm sure the clerk took the BG's actions and statements into consideration when he made his decision. There have been alot of good points made about his compitance in handling his weapon that I agree with and I am very glad with the way it ended. I am not going to sit here and give a blow by blow account of how I would have reacted because that would be foolish. The 2 things I know for sure are:
1) I was too hard on the clerk.
2) I still don't like how close the kid is to the line of fire.
1) I was too hard on the clerk.
2) I still don't like how close the kid is to the line of fire.
Inherent Danger.
Hello all,
I think this video speaks very well to the fact that handling firearms for defensive purposes carries a certain amount of inherent danger. People in the line of fire, limited space, and limited time are all factors when involved in a shoot/ don't shoot scenario.
That inherent danger is sometimes taken for granted by shooters who haven't been involved in a defensive situation. As was previously stated, we sometimes take for granted the presence of an RO or range safeties with dedicated lanes and targets.
Yes, the child and mother were close. But too close or not was the shooter's decision, not ours. It was based on situational awareness, training, and instinctive response. Based on small arms contact experiences in Iraq, I can vouch for the fact that those are the three things you fall back on the most (combined of course with shock and partial panic).
I don't know how I would have handled that situation, but if the shooter was within his capabilities and confident with his decision, then I don't see the wrong from a tactical standpoint.
Regards,
Johnnie T.
Hello all,
I think this video speaks very well to the fact that handling firearms for defensive purposes carries a certain amount of inherent danger. People in the line of fire, limited space, and limited time are all factors when involved in a shoot/ don't shoot scenario.
That inherent danger is sometimes taken for granted by shooters who haven't been involved in a defensive situation. As was previously stated, we sometimes take for granted the presence of an RO or range safeties with dedicated lanes and targets.
Yes, the child and mother were close. But too close or not was the shooter's decision, not ours. It was based on situational awareness, training, and instinctive response. Based on small arms contact experiences in Iraq, I can vouch for the fact that those are the three things you fall back on the most (combined of course with shock and partial panic).
I don't know how I would have handled that situation, but if the shooter was within his capabilities and confident with his decision, then I don't see the wrong from a tactical standpoint.
Regards,
Johnnie T.
Last edited: