Carjacking in Georgia stopped by CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it was a good call--risky--but a good call.

Here's why--the carrier saw a developing situation in which another person's life was clearly in imminent danger of serious injury or death. Regardless of the countless "what-if" scenarios of presumed innocence or guilt--the driver of the vehicle was showing a deliberate willingness to injure or kill the person on the hood. Even if somehow the woman "was guilty" and the driver was maybe escaping--it would still be a justified shoot IMO based on the evidence at hand. My guess is the carrier saw enough of the evolving situation to know who was right and wrong to help in his decision-making. That right to make that decision--it's what the second amendment is all about IMO.
 
I think it was a good call--risky--but a good call.
Click to expand...

I would change it too. "I think it was a good call--Lucky--but a good call. "

There so many ways that this could have gone bad.

After hearing more of what went down. pretty sure he felt the woman's life was endanger and the risk he took was less than what he felt was hers if he did not.
So I am not gona Judge him.

Especially when my personal trip wire is allot looser than most.
My personal choice is to not take another life ( even a scum bag) unless I have too.
I understand that does place me at greater risk. And trip wire tightens when my family is near.
Although willing too. I would rather not deal with the moral issue of having taken another human life unless I had no other option.
Not judging any one else for what they decide. But I am not killing any one if I dont have too.
 
By recasting a discussion about prudent courses of action into a character attack
Click to expand...
Not hardly.

As others have noted after me, "not getting involved" has become pandemic in segments of our culture. My statement that I didn't want my epitaph to read "...he didn't want to get involved..." was directed as a reminder to myself of what I hold dear: responsibility to others no less than responsibility to myself as a duty in return for the privilege of existing. It was pounded into me since my earliest memories by parents who felt no less -- especially my father. That attitude was then indelibly stamped by the Kitty Genovese incident when I was 17 -- and only 50 miles away.

That others might see such an outlook -- especially when prefaced by "context is everything" -- as a personal insult leaves me only with the thought "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

.
 
Last edited:
I think that there are plenty of ways to "get involved" in most situations without brandishing and shooting.
 
Not in this case.
The lady would likely have been thrown into the high speed traffic stream of Cobb Drive.
As before, it's all about context.
 
The lady would likely have been thrown into the high speed traffic stream of Cobb Drive.
Click to expand...

Because she made the choice to jump on the hood of her car. The shooter did a great job under tough circumstances, and I'm glad he isn't facing criminal charges. But keep in mind that he may not be out of the woods yet, he could still be facing a lawsuit.
 
It's her car--she could set up a stripping pole on the hood and start doing twirls on it if she wanted to. The moment the guy breached into the vehicle's interior it was all bets are off--not much different from a home invasion.

If it were my car--I'd probably just let it go as I don't think much of most material objects. If I was carrier in that situation; I don't think I could have reacted quickly or accurately enough to confidently make that decision and shot.
 
...she made the choice to jump on the hood of her car.
Click to expand...
So she should die... ?
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around that... from any angle.

...could still be facing a lawsuit.
Click to expand...
And there we come to the crux of that matter in these modern
times of the criminal thug being the 'real' victim... fear of
spurious lawsuit now weighs heavily against responsible action.

Now never let it be said that such actions are easy decisions.
But decisions they are -- and even no decison until too late
is still a decision. And one lives with that.

Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time.
It is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable.
 
Several thoughts cross my mind.

For all the forum talk, nobody really knows what they would do unless confronted with the situation.

No matter how the incident is reported, you can be pretty certain that each of the people involved probably have a significantly differing version from their own perspective.

My guess is the woman's knee jerk response was quickly recognized by her as an error, and regretted doing it, but at that point hanging on probably seemed like better option than bailing off of a moving vehicle. The perp's reaction of driving off with her on teh hood was probably not what she was expecting.

My guess is the CCW believed the woman was going to be purposely dislodged from the vehicle by the hijacker using the accelerator pedal, and felt that shooting the driver was the only option for getting the car stopped so the woman could safely let go.

Every time you pull your weapon, and especially when you fire it, there will be great risk involved, and you have a split second to evaluate those risks. If you want to be risk free from consequences of using your weapon, you'd best leave it at home. I would hope I would have the ability to maintain a calm presence of mind under such a situation, that I would make the right decision, and that the outcome would be a good one. Regardless of what the law says, I'd have great trouble living with myself had I witnessed someone die or be seriously injured knowing that I might have changed the outcome but was unwilling to take on the personal risk.

I'm reminded of of an old friend who drowned last year saving a teenage girl in Lake Erie. He was praised and heralded as an unselfish hero by his family, who spoke so proudly of him. None of them said "his first obligation was to us, and he never should have jumped in".
 
So she should die... ?
Click to expand...

Of course not. However it is not an unlikely outcome based on her choice.

Every time you pull your weapon, and especially when you fire it, there will be great risk involved, and you have a split second to evaluate those risks. If you want to be risk free from consequences of using your weapon, you'd best leave it at home.
Click to expand...

I think there's value in discussion/debate regarding minimizing those risks.

I'm reminded of of an old friend who drowned last year saving a teenage girl in Lake Erie. He was praised and heralded as an unselfish hero by his family, who spoke so proudly of him. None of them said "his first obligation was to us, and he never should have jumped in".
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges.
 
For all the forum talk, nobody really knows what they would do unless
confronted with the situation.

No matter how the incident is reported, you can be pretty certain that each
of the people involved probably have a significantly differing version from
their own perspective.
Click to expand...
I totally agree. It's come into the modern venacular as the Rashomon effect
 
A reasonable person could assume that the owner of the car was in imminent peril of serious injury or death--all the other factors aside. I think that is the only level the situation needs to rise to in order to make this a justified shoot.

All the other peripheral risks and what ifs are still factors to consider--but in terms of the actual decision to take the shot at the driver not factors in whether the decision was justified or not IMO.
 
Once again a discussion on this subject has deteriorated into bickering about what one wants to do or should do -- rather than what would be wise under the circumstances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top