Bank Shooting On Tape

what i want to know is that most criminals use a glock. why did the BG use a .45LC revolver in this case?? that's a unique gun for a BG.
 
ISA, how or why would that make a difference? Don't you think a criminal would just use whatever gun he can get his hands on? Do you think criminals come on this forum and ask which round would be better for robbing motels with? Although with some of the questions on here, who knows....... :D
 
Last edited:
It amazes me how some people are surprised that other's can't just dispassionately shoot and kill someone, even in a life or death situation. From behind the keyboard you can take on the whole world, but one on one in a real shooting situation, you just never really know.:confused:
 
The Mall guy screwed up as his evaluation of the tactical situation was flawed. However, his screw up doesn't necessarily imply that all situations are the same and are shoot situations.

Surface level cliches are the bane of the gun world. My analysis, again grasshoppers, is that you are quite able to use lethal force and you do if it gives you the best outcome. Mall guy was incorrect in his analysis.
 
Everything happened so quick. The shots did look AWFULLY close to that lady and her child. But that was from an angle. From the good guy with the gun's angle it might have been in fact a little different. Not too sure what the bad guy was doing out of view to cause himself to be fired at.

In short, too little information from a loud music (?) video of a short video shot at an angle
 
Glenn, According to info on another forum the bad guy was a disgruntled hotel guest that threatened to kill the manager before being kicked out. This might explain why the manager acted despite the risks. It would change everything for me.
 
I've looked at this video for a month or so now and to me it looks like the BG gets off the first shot towards the camera at the Motel 6 or whichever chain it was. The clerk was asked about the mom and baby being so close and from what the clerk said it was about 6ft between him and them when the shooting started. But all 3 of his shots scored a hit and the BG was arrested.
 
What does it really influence? I see two issues.

1. I ignore my odds of shooting a baby because the man threatened me previously. That lowers my responsibility to shoot in a manner threatening to others? No, I don't think so.

2. He may not just be fleeing for good and unlikely to return. He may be likely to regroup and continue the fight as we have information of that threat. Thus, I need to remove the threat as he may come back. The fight is still on. That might have some validity. He is still in your presence and armed. While in your presence, my opinion (worth what you paid for it) is that it is justified to shoot at him. If I thought the fight wouldn't be over as he is heading for the sun set - then I have no problem shooting at him (with all other caveats not preventing a shot - like baby in the possible range of fire).

Thus, if he is in the room and armed shooting at him is justified, given that you think the risk continues. Once he is outside, one assumes a defensive posture. Chasing him would seem foolish as already discussed. The legality of such would also be debatable.
 
TCman

When looking at it again and again, I did see a puff of smoke in the ceiling area.
Maybe a ricochet from going thru the guy and to the ceiling. I could not really make it out clearly.
But clearly there was a puff or cloud of debris just as the person behind the counter started firing.

Accidental discharge by bad guy??

I saw what looked like a dim flash light on the wall a couple of times.
I am going to go back and look again. Anyone else see it. Just as the shooting starts watch at 12 oclock above the bg.

Good observation.

HQ
 
Last edited:
Pickpocket - an internet commando never lets a good shoot 'em scenario die. It is only till the moderator gets frustrated that a scenario is put down.

They are like religious wars. :D
 
I ignore my odds of shooting a baby because the man threatened me previously. That lowers my responsibility to shoot in a manner threatening to others? No, I don't think so.
Click to expand...

The odds of your shot hitting the baby are zilch. Your starting a shoot out, that MIGHT have ended with just money taken, that the opponents rounds harm the baby has better odds. The alternative though is to wait until the bad guy decides to shoot you, then its to late. This is why the threats to kill the clerk might have influenced his decision. Do I shoot or not? Most robberies end non violently.....right. But wait bad guy threatened to kill me earlier. This changes everything to me.
 
As mentioned many times here, due to the angle, it's hard to tell how far he was from the woman and child. I'm purely guessing that it was not as close as it appeared. I don't know the nature or credibility of the threats the BG made to the clerk before the shooting. If the threats were credible, I think the clerk did good.

What I did see was a good surreptitious draw, maintaining the element of surprise. After the BG went outside, the shooter came from behind the counter and covered down on the BG and put himself between the woman and child as they went to "cover" behind the counter. The shooter's reflection is visible in the window as he continues to cover down. From a purely tactical point of view, it looked pretty good to me.

Denny
 
I would not cry if that dumb broad had been plugged anyway. Some guy comes in with a gun and a ski mask and she just stands there with her kid like an idiot??? Maybe the clerk could have said "ma'am could you take three giant steps to your right" before blasting away but I think he did everything he could have to move to the side to avoid her.

The music and portrait of himself at the end were naturally over the top but the guy ain't a rocket scientist anyway. He is a good shot though and handled what looked to be a .45 very well IMHO. I'd have him on my team any day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top