Carjacking in Georgia stopped by CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Double Naught Spy

New member
http://www.cnn.com/videos/justice/2015/04/04/pkg-woman-jumps-on-car-hood-attempted-carjacking.wsb

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/police-investigating-carjacking-shooting-smyrna/nkmcY/

Happened at a carwash in Smyrna, GA. A teenager carjacked a woman who was vacuuming her car and tried to drive off. The woman jumped on the hood, screaming. They drove by a city worker who was carrying. He went after them and shot the driver in the shoulder. Police credit him with saving the woman's life.

Another CCW supposedly went after the other suspects, but gave up when he he said he saw a gun.

Don't know that I would have intervened in this case. The woman put herself in mortal danger by jumping on the hood of her own car and far too many things could have gone wrong. The first CCW apparently knew nothing of the van with 3 other probably youths who were armed.
 
I can't say whether I would have or would have not intervened. it depends on how clear my shot is, can I KNOW 100% that I am not going to inadvertently hit the woman on the hood. he had to have seen her at least get "jacked" or he couldn't have known who the real culprit was. if all the stars were aligned just right, then yes I would not have just stood there watching like the rest of everyone there, as long as I had a clear picture of what was happening. as for the other teens in the van, not sure if that would of made a difference. how can you ever know in any situation there isn't a hidden group of people somewhere, deal with that when/if it comes. goes to show that 99% of criminals are going to run when presented with defiance. good job Samaritan. I work in that area everyday, I have been out of town since Friday morn, haven't heard about this yet.
 
The hijacker didn't deserve to get shot, but he deserved to get stopped? How else was he going to get stopped before the owner of the car was further endangered?

I'm not going to blame the woman for jumping on her car's hood. That car may well be one of her biggest assets, if not the biggest. Not a wise move, but emotionally understandable.

The good Samaritan was under no legal obligation to intervene, but he may have felt morally obliged to do so. In taking a shot through glass he risked the bullet's path being deflected and endangering the owner, but I bet she's not complaining.

As to the shooter sizing up the situation, he likely noticed the owner vacuuming her car nearby, and the owner was dressed nicely, not like a gangster gal. It was probably easy for him to accurately assess the situation quickly, which he obviously did. Excellent situational awareness on his part.
 
hmmmm wow... Pretty sure I would not jump on the car. Unless my kid was in it. Other than that. The car can be replaced. Not worth dying or killing to keep it.
As for shooting... ?????? ummmmm I know I take responsibility for the safety of others when I choose to carry. And I am willing to do it.
But does that include people who are having a Darwin event???

I suspect it would have remained holstered if I were there. But I dont really know. But I may have just been caught :eek:
 
My opinion?

This was a classic case of the benefit of an armed Citizenry. As OP notes, this was an event
involving not just a "misunderstood teenager". This was armed thugs. Not acting would have
almost certainly resulted in grievous bodily injury to the woman.

No. the lady wasn't thinking "rationally," but then that decison was made in a split second.
The Citizen did exactly the right thing -- in his decision of a split second.
 
As the laws stand today, I would probably lean toward not using a gun on the attacker (unless this involved me and my car). However, I would like to see laws changed to provide a CCW holder similar sovereign immunity to a citizen trying to thwart an armed attack as that which is afforded to the police.

I am glad things worked out and that the guy with the CCW was skilled enough to change the outcome of this attack for the better.
 
Last edited:
Since my insurance company will pay me for a car one year newer in the event of a loss, I think I might just let the carjacker have it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When people act in a way in which they are going out of their way willfully to endanger the lives of their neighbors using force, they probably need to be forcibly restrained.

The woman on the hood was trying and failing. The carrier did.
You might disagree with the tactics used in this case; local law enforcement might agree with you, but if you don't agree with the premise of armed defense up to and including shooting someone who is using force to harm their innocent fellow citizens, you should probably stop carrying.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You might disagree with the tactics used in this case; local law enforcement might agree with you, but if you don't agree with the premise of armed defense up to and including shooting someone who is using force to harm their innocent fellow citizens, you should probably stop carrying.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree. My definition of armed defense extends only to the defense of me and my family, and I support the right of others to make that choice too. If they don't, or for some reason can't I don't think that it's up to me to save them when they need help. I don't carry so that I can protect people who have made different choices than I have.
 
I hope the shooter was being careful and knew the shoot was of in the clear status, AKA green light to red light the tango.

The woman could easily have been killed if ejected from the vehicle and/or ran over my the perp.
 
Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree. My definition of armed defense extends only to the defense of me and my family, and I support the right of others to make that choice too. If they don't, or for some reason can't I don't think that it's up to me to save them when they need help. I don't carry so that I can protect people who have made different choices than I have.
Click to expand...

If it was your family being attacked (and you were not around) and another legally armed citizen stood by and did nothing because it did not affect their family, what would your stance on the subject be then?? What if one of your family members died because a "good" person chose to do nothing?

I could never stand by and do nothing, its just not in my blood
 
If it was your family being attacked (and you were not around) and another legally armed citizen stood by and did nothing because it did not affect their family, what would your stance on the subject be then?? What if one of your family members died because a "good" person chose to do nothing?
Click to expand...

I'd be upset. But I still think that I can choose to carry and also choose to be very selective about brandishing and firing. I was responding to the statement that not be willing to do so made me less qualified to carry somehow. I have made the mistake of getting involved in random and violent street confrontations in the past, fortunately never when I carried because it never ended well.

In any case I was glad to see that when this story was reported on a network Sunday morning news story yesterday the cc carrier who did respond was described as a hero. I wouldn't have done the same thing, I think you can be comfortable with cc with the knowledge that you would or not.
 
I agree with Mainah. Although I am not saying the person who did act did anything wrong.

Personally I believe that after I pull. my life will never be the same.
Even if I win the gun fight.
Georgia may be different. But here if I pull even with the laws on my side [I'm in big trouble]. Every detail of my actions and my life in general are going to be strung out for all to thumb through. Looking for the slightest mistake.

Thats allot to ask of a man because your too stupid to let go of the hood.

This guy got lucky because he got a good cop. if he gotten one [who disliked] gun owners. Story might be totally different.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If it was your family being attacked (and you were not around) and another legally armed citizen stood by and did nothing because it did not affect their family, what would your stance on the subject be then?? What if one of your family members died because a "good" person chose to do nothing?
Click to expand...

Guilt and shame tactics? Really?

While I may not like it, the truth it that it is not anybody's responsibility to take care of me or my family but us. By the same token, it is not my responsibility to take care of anyone else. If someone chooses to do so, then I will be grateful and if I choose to do so, then that is fine. It is a choice, an option, not an obligation. I have provided aid during emergencies in the past and may do it again in the future and if it comes up, it will be my choice. I do have an obligation and it is to my family first and being dead will cause me to fail in that obligation.

You might disagree with the tactics used in this case; local law enforcement might agree with you, but if you don't agree with the premise of armed defense up to and including shooting someone who is using force to harm their innocent fellow citizens, you should probably stop carrying.
Click to expand...

No innocent was being harmed at the time of the shooting. The pink sweater victim was unharmed.
 
I do have an obligation and it is to my family first and being dead <<or profoundly handicapped by an injury received, or imprisoned, or bankrupted in civil court>> will cause me to fail in that obligation.
Click to expand...
Good point. It's always interesting to me that so many people seem to take it as a given that everything's going to work out the best possible way for all involved. Life's not always that way.
 
I admit up front that circumstances define the moment.
But I would not want my epitaph after a long life to read:

......."....He didn't want to get involved"


.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top