Carry Incident help please

[rellascout]

well, as i was alking back to my car, i was basically tackled. i have had some previous training, plus all the years of physical sports first thing I do as I fall to the ground is roll the shoulder. It happened so fast. But basically someone from behind grabbed me with force and pushing me forward, got me off balance going forward, as I secured the firearm on my strongside. then fell to the ground, was able to draw.

as for did i hear foot steps, oh u should have had eyes behind your head. well, u tell me, can u see everyone behind you 100% of the time as you walk to your car from the grocery store, walmart, etc. Did I hear anyone, no. Did I hear people yelling saying stop, no.

Here for the first time you describe in detail the extent of the force used against you. Thanks for the clarification.

To answer your question I do look behind me when I enter and exit vehicle & buildings especailly at night. Parking lots are a scary place where one can be killed by lots of things like on comming cars to muggers. No one said you have to have eyes in the back of your head. What people are saying is that if you carry you must be aware of your surroundings at all times. You claim to have a lot of training but you seem to have missed this part of the lesson.

actually, even if on private property if they detain you, it can be unlawful especially if they did not find anything on you (i.e. stolen property).

should I wait in line, maybe....but I do not see a written agreement to stop there as I enter the building. Is it their property ? Maybe, but a parking lot in a shopping center is public for most regards.

You broke to story policy and there were unforeseen consequences to your actions. Your actions started this chain of events and you now are looking to blame someone else for what went down. As you walked out with not following the proper procedure it never once dawned on you that they might do something. It never crossed your mind to look back and see if your actions had been noticed? At that point it seems reasonable that you might have glanced back behind you to see if anyone cared that you had left the store. Just a thought.

If you use the reasonable person standard if you left the store with merchandise in hand and did not have your receipt checked it is reasonable to believe that you are circumventing the policy for a reason. The most likely reason is because you have stolen something.

At that point the store has reasonable suspension and therefore the right to detain you on their property. The parking lot is not public property. It is not maintained by the state. Look around if you look closely you will see the signs. Private property, No state maintenance. Etc....This may vary by state.

and lastly, whats the difference between being tackled and raped. If you are a female would you have drawn if you had been basically thrown to the ground ?

I cannot even address this because it is such weak straw man argument.

As others have ask what state are you in? Different states have different laws. You seem really testy about this. You are getting all worked up by posts on the internet. I would hate to see your reactions in person. You posted here on this board I can only assume looking for validation of your righteous actions and instead have been meet with some common sense questions and doubts. I am sorry that some have not provided you what you were looking for.

My last piece of advice for you is too replay the innocent and think about what you could have done to avoid the situation all together and at the very least learn from the innocent so that you do not repeat it because next time the results might not be so positive for you or the other guy.

 

[New_Master]

attorney advice

Actually, my attorney just contacted the store and the employee. He is in the process of filing a civil suit against the store and employee, and is urgining me to file criminal action as well.

I'll keep the board updated as to the events.

 

[spacemanspiff]

1. was the person who tackled you the actual reciept checker? or a store security guard? plainclothes or uniformed?
these kinds of stores typically do not allow their employees to do this, even undercover store theft detectives cannot detain without having actual proof of a theft. suspicious is not enough. they can lie and say they saw you pocket something, and then justify it by saying you tossed whatever it was.

2. with that last part in mind, it is NOT unlawful for you to be detained, its the store detectives word against yours, as its been said in this thread already, you are fortunate that the responding police accepted your version.

3. your response was to immediately go to deadly force, before you could even evaluate the threat you were drawing down. before you could identify the persons uniform you were ready to fire. at that point, was your life endangered? was there a weapon leveled against your? was there a disparity of force? it might have been an old friend playing a prank on you. maybe a relative coming up to give you a bear hug. you drew down very prematurely, in my humble opinion.

and dont get your feathers all riled up over this type of criticism. it isnt meant as a flame, but to help you out for the next time you have this kind of thing happen.

again, you dont have to have eyes in the back of your head, a simple glance around every now and then suffices.

 

[bedula32]

I suppose the first time you go into a store and find you are expected to wait in line to exit you have every right to just walk out with your (now your) paid for property. Thing is once you know that is their policy a social contract to abide by it or accept some measure of negative consequences is created. You had every right not to shop there or did you not know that? I am a pretty hardcore libertarian and yet I cannot see how it is reasonable for you to pull your gun knowing full well someone might follow you out because of your refusal to do what you already knew was expected of you. Regardless of whether the guy snuck up and tackled you or not you need to accept that you at least played a role in instigating the situation. Don't like those policies don't shop there. This is why I had not set foot in a Fry's Electronics for years before I moved too far to even have the choice.

Walking out without waiting in line probably is not reasonable suspicion to warrant any type of detainment by the merchant. State laws vary but the standard for detainment is always pretty high and just thinking you might have something is not even close to being good enough. There needs to be some tangible, articulatable evidence you tried to steal something. Had you not drawn your gun you might have a decent lawsuit for battery and false arrest. Personally, I'd not pursue it before the DA gets wind of it and re-evaluates the possibility of criminal charges. You knew or should have known that was store security grabbing you. Right or wrong on their part (I say WRONG) you also crossed a big line yourself by drawing when you should have known some reaction might be forthcoming by store security for your conscious decision not to follow their store policies. I'm sure it is fine for most people to pull a gun just about any time someone tackles them without legal authority (or being understandably ignorant of legal authority) - that is so long as you did not instigate the situation in the first place. Sounds like the store security ridiculously overreacted and then you ridiculously overreacted even more. I'd cut my losses and be glad things went as well as they did.

 

[spacemanspiff]

criminal charges? for what? what law did they break?
civil suit? why? did that incident leave you emotionally scarred? has it left you so stressed out you are seeking punitive damages?

 

[High Planes Drifter]

I am going to go against the grain here and agree with New Master on the whole checking the reciept thing. EVERY SINGLE time I have been to wally world, Home Depot, Best Buy, or any other major chain store, the only people having thier reciepts checked are those who have a buggy and have either one very large item in it, or many small items in it. Never have I been checked when walking out with a cd or other small item in a store bag. I have no problem believing that New Master couldnt have known he was supposed to stop. The only people I've seen waiting in those lines are people pushing buggies with like I said, large purchases. And there are no signs near the exits indicating that all customers need to do so. Im happy for you that the situation did not get any nastier than it did New Master. To me it really sounded like a moment for pepper spray; let his cocky a$$ get led by a co-worker to the bathroom for a 40 minute face rinsing.

 

[XavierBreath]

Actually, my attorney just contacted the store and the employee. He is in the process of filing a civil suit against the store and employee, and is urgining me to file criminal action as well.

Hopefully your attorney will not advise you to stop posting about this incident on internet forums.

Expect criminal and civil charges to be filed against you for your own actions in response to this civil suit.

Sometimes it's best just to shake hands and go about your business after a scuffle. Who will benefit from all your indignation? Your attorney.

I'm looking forward to the updates.................

 

[brufener]

New Master:

I think you did all right. Anytime you fall to the ground you are in a vulnerable position. There is a great disparity of force between someone laying on the ground, and someone standing. That is probably why you felt your life is in danger. A standing person kicking a person laying on th ground in the head could be lethal. Waiting to see what happens next could be too long.

I think your situational awareness could be improved, but, no one is completely aware of all situations 100% of the time. Failing to be aware of a situation does not mean you give up your right to self-defense.

bedula32:

Thing is once you know that is their policy a social contract to abide by it or accept some measure of negative consequences is created.

I'm not sure what a "social contract" is. How is it different from a contract? Even assuming there was a contract to wait in line for your receipt to be checked, does the breach mean the store has the right to tackle you? Does breaching the contract mean you give up your right to self-defense? Does breaching the contract mean the store can detain you unlawfully? What is the logical remedy for the breach of this contract?

Had you not drawn your gun you might have a decent lawsuit for battery and false arrest.

If someone defends themselves, does that mean they give up all legal claims? I fail to see how drawing his gun, or even shooting the guy, would mean he has no claim for battery.

rellascout:

As you walked out with not following the proper procedure it never once dawned on you that they might do something.

When did the customers agree to the procedure? If the customer does not follow the procedure, does that give the store the right to tackle the customer? What is the logical remedy for breaching this procedure?

If you use the reasonable person standard if you left the store with merchandise in hand and did not have your receipt checked it is reasonable to believe that you are circumventing the policy for a reason. The most likely reason is because you have stolen something. At that point the store has reasonable suspension and therefore the right to detain you on their property.

I'd be interested in some case law and/or statutes showing that failing to stop for a receipt checker gives the store reasonble suspicion to stop a person for theft. As I understand it, most states require the employee to witness the theft. Failing to stop for a receipt checker =/= theft.

therefore the right to detain you on their property. The parking lot is not public property. It is not maintained by the state. Look around if you look closely you will see the signs. Private property, No state maintenance. Etc....This may vary by state.

As I understand it, if the store detains someone they do so under the "citizen's arrest" power. I'd be interested in a statute that makes the citizen's arrest power stronger on private property. I've never heard of one.

spacemanspiff:

criminal charges? for what? what law did they break?
civil suit? why? did that incident leave you emotionally scarred? has it left you so stressed out you are seeking punitive damages?

Criminal charge = battery. It is illegal to tackle someone (at least in every state I've seen).

Civil suit = battery. Possibly assault, more details are needed.
Damages = most states have statutory/punitive damages for intentional torts. No stress/emotional scarring required, but if you have it you get more $$.

 

[zamboxl]

it is a sad sad day when people are monday morning quaterbacking on the side of the store and excusing their behavior, he dint brake any laws the store did however, assault and battery. It's about time people start realising their self worth and stop excusing this kind of vehavior, from a corporate/businness entity. i guess everyone forgot about the customer is always wright, which is not always the case, but it's a hell of a lot better way to do business if u ask me. Man i wasnt even born in this country, and i still think his wrights as an american where violated, the wright to be safe in his person, and safe from unreasonable search and seisure.

 

[mordis]

Hi. im a avid computer nerd when not looking for my perfect carry rig. I spend alot of time in places like best buy. Ill use best buy for example, I was just there y estorday, and bought a comp game(eq2 for those that must know LOL). And nowhere did i see any signs or notices saying that i had to stop and let the person at the door see my recipt. It is just not posted. if its not posted, HOW IN the heck am i gonna know to stop there and let them look. That is what a reasonable person would say, its not posted, im not stoping. If its not posted, i have no obligation to stop and say hi to this door guard.

Now given that i frequent best buy alot, i know that i can expect on a busy to to get stoped, so before i leave i give a nodd at the guy, who usually has already seen me get checked out and just nods back and lets me leave. BUt this in my case is a special circumstance, i would have no excuse n ot to stop at the checkpoint, he does, becuase a. he isnt as familar with the place, and the biggest reason that can not be refuted in my opinion(which is just that a opinion) is the fact its not Posted anywere, and there is no big sign saying, "That by walking in this door you sign a social contract that allows us to search your bags at our leasiure at any time." That sign is simply not there. Ill state again it is not posted saying you must stop, i frequent it all the time, it is not there.

 

[spacemanspiff]

feel the need to point out, as it seems to have slipped by a few who have contributed to this thread, that the OP did indeed know the store he was in checks reciepts on the way out. he simply chose not to be bothered by it and blazed past the line that was '15 deep'.



new master, when did this happen?
you said it happened in MN, and you are now in TX. is TX your state of residence?

 

[rellascout]

it is a sad sad day when people are monday morning quaterbacking on the side of the store and excusing their behavior, he dint brake any laws the store did however, assault and battery. It's about time people start realising their self worth and stop excusing this kind of vehavior, from a corporate/businness entity. i guess everyone forgot about the customer is always wright, which is not always the case, but it's a hell of a lot better way to do business if u ask me. Man i wasnt even born in this country, and i still think his wrights as an american where violated, the wright to be safe in his person, and safe from unreasonable search and seisure.

I think it is sad when someone sets in motion a chain of events that could have ended up in the death of a person becuase they could not wait in line for a few minutes. Is it frustrating yes. Worth shooting someone over no. If you don't like a stores policies shop at antother store. Let your consumer $$$$ speak for you. Where is the personal responsiblity from New Master.

I am not saying that the store was completely right. In fact I think that they were wrong in many ways. What I have attempted to illustrate is the line of reasoning and the questions New Master will face when he persues this case in the legal world. If he continues down this path he will see civil and criminal charges comming his way. And the points I and others have raised will come up again.

I find the cavalier way in which this CCW holder used his weapon in this situation disturbing. I do not think that the actions of the store were 100% in the right but this guy was not 100% in the right either. Look at what Spiff was saying. Look how many mistakes were made by the CCW holder as he drew his weapon. I for one will not give those a pass or give New Master the pat on the back he is looking for. He brought up the subject and he put it out there for all to scrutinize and now he doesn't like some of the results. :barf:

I also have to ask if the store was busy enough that the line of paying customers was 15 deep to get out of the store how much danger was he really in as he left this crowded store.

You can disagree with me that is your right but in the end this individual could have avoided the entire incident had he used better judgement from the get go. When you strap on a gun and walk out into the world you take on a whole new set of responsibilities. None of them should be taken lightly. It should change your actions how you handle yourself and how you interact with others that you encounter. With great freedom comes great responsibility. To ignore that responsibility can result in someones death.

 

[Edward429451]

Sounds like you got a free dry run. I'd walk away from it happy to be alive, wiser and knowing how you'd react under (assault) pressure.

your response was to immediately go to deadly force, before you could even evaluate the threat you were drawing down.

That's how one survives an assault! If it had been a real deadly assault against him...He would have lived. He was on top of it and restrained his trigger finger at the right time.

before you could identify the persons uniform you were ready to fire. at that point, was your life endangered?

Sure was. He was on his way down with no warning. Who asks intent and probable cause when their on their way to the ground?

was there a weapon leveled against your? was there a disparity of force? it might have been an old friend playing a prank on you. maybe a relative coming up to give you a bear hug. you drew down very prematurely, in my humble opinion.

No way to tell when you're in motion being tackled. Friends & relatives should know better. No offense, spiffy, but I think he did good and was right on time. Absolutely it was scary because as it turned out, the clerk wasn't a criminal and had no malicious intent but stopping to ask questions will get one killed in the wrong situation.

My advice to the participant, is to shake it off and let it go without pressing charges. God shined his light on you that day and you got to walk away without even charges being pressed against you. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. If it were me, I'd go apologize to the guy for the misunderstanding. He was just doing his job albeit possibly overzealously which was good I guess. You did good too, albeit (arguably) over zealously.

Wow! Good story.

 

[zamboxl]

ok Rell u got a good point there, but if someone tackled u in the middle of the night what would u have done? Sure he could have done things differently, and acted with more tact, but that in no way makes it ok for the store to act like their policy is law and subject to detainment if one brakes their policy, which by the way is nothing more than policy. That kid running after him was rectles and stupid. If he was order to do so by the manager then he is just as stupid. I'll give u this u are rigth he could have handle it differently, for now lets agree to disagree. He might have drawn prematurely, but the store clerck/guard had no business running after him.

I work in banking and we have the policy that once the perp is out of the bank we dont chase them, not even the armed security guard chases him, he is sopose to secure the branch, and that bad guy is walking out with a hell of alot more than our fellow member could have stolen from the store.

I'll give u a senario a few years back there was a bank roberie, the teller yelled out stop that guy, the manager thinking the guy had left his wallet or something ran after him and the bad guy shot him dead, so what am i trying to say? that kid was plain stupid for running after someone like that, but like i said i'll agree with u in that our fellow member could have done things diferently.

 

[brufener]

Rellascout:

Good response. I think you are monday-morning quarterbacking this too much.

If I understand, you are saying that by not stopping for the receipt checker a reasonable person should expect to be tackled in the parking lot. I feel that a reasonable person who did not stop for a receipt checker could expect a tap on the shoulder or maybe a firm hand on the arm. Nothing more.

Because the OP did not receive (what I consider to be) a reasonable response from store personnel, how was he to know it was store personnel?

You are analyzing the incident knowing that tackler was a store employee. At the time of the incident, the OP did not know that. A reasonable person would not expect to be tackled by a store employee. Thus the same reasonable person (when tackled) would assume it was something else.

I fail to understand how so many on this board justify the store's action (tackling a customer) by pointing out that the OP violated a store policy. It is just a store policy! It is not the law! Violating a store policy should not lead to more than a request to not return.

 

[rellascout]

zamboxl

I agree with you to an extend. I have worked in Bars and retail and I would never follow outside the building. Too many variables to deal with once your outside.

The thing I think that many people are missing is that this was not a deserted parking lot in the middle of the night. It was 9:00. The store was busy. 15 people waiting in line to get out and I can only assume countless others coming an going. New Master situational awareness was poor at best.

New Master knew what the store policy was and ignored it. Has he simply waited none of this would have every happened. I cannot stress that enough.

brufener

I have already stated that I think that the security officer over reacted. I have also pointed out that the majority of my posts have been to illustrate the line of questioning he will face as he further pursues this matter. If he was in a crowed store I can only assume that he was also in a crowded parking lot. His situational awareness and the use of logic should have alerted him to the fact that his life was not in danger. Not many people are killed in a busy parking lot full of cars and customers.

 

[zamboxl]

brufener thank u i knew i wasn't the only one on here that believes store policy is not law

 

[bedula32]

brufener.....

A social contract is what is expected of people in a civilized society. Believe it or not it is an often used term, especially when talking about gray areas of law. People get charged with criminal offenses like disorderly conduct and criminal mischief all the time for things they thought were not illegal because it violates "social contracts". Lots of things are only illegal when done in the wrong place at the wrong time and with the intention of being disruptive. I have actually seen judges explain to beligerant defendants and litigants why what they did violated the law (either civil and criminal) because it failed a "social contract". It is a social contract to act in an orderly way and respect the store's policies when you have either been fully notified of those policies ahead of time or you have been there before and know the drill. Don't like it then don't shop there. You don't get to have it both ways and just ignore those policies when it suits you. Again, first time in the store and you get a pass because unless they made it clear ahead of time you have not 'agreed' to stop and show any receipt and you got all the right in the world to say "BS, I'm not doing that and I'm walking out of here with MY stuff." You still better not pull a gun though on any security guard but at least the very first time you would be entirely morally justified to scoff at the store policies, assuming the policies are not normal and customary that is, which as of yet being stopped and being expected to show a reciept upon exit is not. After that when you enter that store you are literally 'agreeing' (contracting) to abide by their policies. At that point either wait in line or don't shop there - your choice.

I am not saying it was reasonable to be tackled either. In fact, I very seriously doubt that circumventing the line would even begin to be considered justifiable reason to stop the person just to ask why you didn't stop in the line. 'Assuming' that the person stole something because they avoided the line probably will not fly in terms of it being justifiable suspicion for detainment but nonetheless that person who avoided the line still has to accept that right or wrong a misguided security guard might stop them nonetheless and using the trheat of deadly force is not reasonable even when the other party is being a flaming ass. This is a matter of both parties grossly overreacting, both probably criminally, and one to a much more serious degree than the other. If I know I just did something that might get me stopped, wrong, illegal, and ridiculous as it may be for them to stop me, I certainly am not going to pull a gun on "somebody" who just tackled me because I no longer can assume that if I am stopped/tackled i will have a legitimate reason to use deadly force. In the absence of evidence to the contrary a reasonable person is going to assume it is the store security stopping/tackling them after they just circumvented the security point - right or wrong as that store security may be, and using deadly force against store security even when they are acting outside their legal authority is not going to fly unless you had a real good reason to actually fear for your life that went well beyond the situation you just helped to instigate. Personally, I don't fear for my life too much when I get stopped by a security guard, even if he is a moron with a bad attitude who is ignorant of what his real legal authority is.

As to suing for battery........ Yes you retain your rights to seek damages for torts committed against you but your damages will always be mitigated by your own actions to bring about the situation and how you responded to it. If you tell someone his wife is a fat pig and he knocks some of your teeth out don't expect to be getting wealthy off your battery lawsuit. I think bringing an action for the tort of either battery or wrongul arrest (afterall they did impede his going about his business) would be a huge mistake. Can he do it - yes. He can sue for battery and will almost certainly win at that and then that will be offset by the countersuit. Problem is when people get sued they tend to counter-sue and things tend to get nasty. Then when he gets countersued for assault (with a deadly weapon, unjustified threat of imminent physical harm - unjustified because he knew or should have known it was store security acting like goons), because frankly no one except his mother is going to believe he did not know (or should have known) it was store security tackling him after he just intentionally bypassed their checkpoint (which is still wrong for the store security to have done BTW), he will lose all he won in his battery suit and lot more. Then, when the store or store employee decides this guy is being a real pain in the butt they can call their local DA's office and ask for a review of the facts and charges to be brought. Maybe the DA will even bring charges against the store employee for battery too which likely will be a whopping low-level misdemeanor resulting in time served and a probation. But the charges against the guy who drew his gun when he to some extent instigated the confrontation will be a lot more than what will happen to the security guard.

I personally watched as a friend of mine get framed for shoplifting when I was a teenager. I am no big fan of security guards having all that much power at all. But to take it to the extreme level of thinking you can do whatever you want with indifference to potential consequences is very dangerous. Don't shop where they expect you to wait in line before you exit if this bothers you. Don't draw a gun on someone unless you are in reasonable fear for your life. This means not pushing people's buttons as well. People do not always act within the law, or even within basic decency, but you need to assume some of things you do, even when well within your rights to do them, may result in confrontation and thus when going armed you need to avoid the confrontation altogether or be willing to not react to it in the same manner as one would a truly unprovoked confrontation.

 

[spacemanspiff]

i still think the story is lacking some details. if i may, i'd like to use some creative articulation to fictiously fill in the blanks, as i would imagine it went down:

New Master sees a line, is impatient, does not want to wait. he blazes past everyone and the reciept checker says "Excuse me! you need to step back in line for your purchases to be verified."
New Master says "thank you i'm alright" and keeps walking.
Reciept checker yells "Sir! Please stop!"
New Master continues out the door.
Reciept checker abandons his post and pursues, all the while saying "Sir! I need you to come back here!"
New Master chuckles to himself, and thinks "Yeah what are you gonna do about it?"
Reciept checker charges and grabs New Master from behind. New Master is put off balance and falls, all the while he is drawing his concealed weapon from holster and plants the front sights on Reciept Checkers head.
Reciept checker is taken aback by this and backs off. New Master keeps weapon leveled at him. Reciept checkers supervisor has by now walked outside and seeing the situation, calls 911, tells dispatcher his employee is being held at gunpoint by a possible shoplifter.



in any case, no matter what the actual details were, the reciept checker or whomever tackled new master should be fired. stores like this typically employ loss prevention plainclothes detectives, whose sole job is to make sure people do not shoplift. they are the only ones authorized to pursue and detain suspected shoplifters. there must be hard evidence of shoplifting for them to make a move however. as in, videotaped evidence, detectives eyewitness account, that sort of thing. the suspect must also exit the premises or make a move as if they are attempting to bypass a checkout in order to pay for the merchendise.
suppose the reciept checker injured himself while tackling New Master. workers comp would likely deny the claim, it was not one of the checkers duties to pursue and detain a customer. he should have informed his supervisor of the situation and let him decide what to do.

the details of the story New Master have provided are leaving something out.

 

[Eghad]

if theft is suspected.

you must have probable cause....i.e. someone had to personally observe you stealing the item. The proper thing would have been to say "Sir, may I please see your reciept". If he says no the store could legally ban him from shopping there again if he said no.

If they lay a hand on you that is assualt if they had no probable cause. Which means a criminal charge against the employee and possibly civil action against the store for improperly training the employee.

If the guy is just checking reciepts and chose to tackle him...thats illegal use of force. Suppose it had been an 80 year old guy and he broke a hip?