'Hero' customer kills gunman

Status
Not open for further replies.
mehavey, there was no alternative to a reasonable person. We are not reasonable as a whole. People all over the country are already foaming at the mouth. Some of the anti-gun people would have preferred that he continue his rampage without intervention from a vigilante. Under other circumstances, there would be lots of public outrage. There are so many pacifist radicals who believe that violence is never an alternative.

Something to keep in mind, we aren't seeing any great protests in the press, but that is accountable to the press and the people. Some of the people, while talking about it privately and brooding, ranting inside, but unable or afraid to make statements.

Remember that there are animal rights activists who euthanize animals by the thousands because they would rather see it dead than be in anything but a perfect home.
 
Last edited:
The social aftermaths of a defensive shooting are pretty well known and not pretty even in the 'good' shoot. You have to decide if you want to go through it.

Altruism and pro-social behavior is complex and there are no absolute or dichotomous decision rules for actions.

One can in coldly rational, self-interested manner just flee the decision or observe from a distance. One can intervene. You have to decide on many levels.

There is no right answer.
 
Oh there is a right answer.

It just requires shouldering the responsibiliy of consequences.
... and dealing with them as well.


Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing
 
That is a very clear and true statement. So many people here agree strongly with the get out of dodge philosophy under any circumstances, I don't. Yes, I would risk my life and health to prevent that killing, and other than the unhappy ending for the people in my circle, it doesn't much matter whether I survive trying to save other lives.

I hope that if and when I am presented with this thing that God, luck, whatever one would call it, will step in and at least let me know what to do.

Oh, yes, there are a lot of circumstances in which I would throw a raspberry and run, letting that situation play itself out. Why would I care if two gangsters are shooting it out? I'm just going to make a decision and intervene if I can see a reason.

I can't swim well, the probability that I will jump into running water to save someone is very slim, but back in maybe 1988, I dove into a pool and dragged a kid out of the deep end. I'm not going to commit suicide by going down the same river that someone else is drowning in.
 
I would gently suggest that when the discussion turns into virtue signaling about oneself, we have reached the end of productive conversation.

I won't close it as good discussion should continue but I'm pointing out the risk of just proclaiming "I would" and looking virtuous.

You may not want to admit it but the factors for intervention are many and interactive.

1. What is the risk to you?
2. Do you want the acclaim afterwards or fear the public reactions?
3. Do you want a reward?
4. Are you frozen by normalcy bias or the bystander effect?
5. Is the victim worth of saving? Do you intervene in a gang gunfight?
6. Does the victim belong to a group you identify with - ethnic, racial, gender, gender orientation, age, etc.?
7. Is the crisis immediately before you?

An accessible and easy read is
The Social Psychology of Prosocial Behavior
Jun 6, 2006
by John F. Dovidio and Jane Allyn Piliavin

There is much literature on the Internet so indicate it isn't as simple as saying "I would".

I know from research studies that in the typical man attacking woman scenario observed by a gun carrier with significant training, about half of them would just observe. These are folks with ability.
 
I don't pretend to know what I would do in every scenario. My principle reason to carry a firearm is to defend myself and my family, not to be a hero. If in the course of defending the above I have to intervene in a larger situation then that's the challenge I face. If other people want to do differently then that is of course their perogative.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
I wasn't meaning to hold myself out as a virtuous man, I pointed out that there are many factors. I wouldn't consider intervention in a lot of circumstances and I would consider turning aside as a virtue in many cases. saving your own life still counts as saving a life, right? Deliberately dying to save another is not virtuous, nor is taking an enormous risk.

I said earlier that "hero" is overused. Dragging a kid out of a pool isn't heroic. I'm not any sort of hero and that's not the point. making the decision to intervene instead of letting events take their course is ambiguous. It can be truly foolish. I freely admit that I'm foolish about these things, don't always think too clearly before deciding, make mistakes, trust too far, and my wife tears me apart when I do.

There isn't any reward most of the time, nothing but grief.
 
I don't think anyone needs to apologize or clarify for doing what they think is best. There's nothing wrong with trying to help others. Understand the difficulties in doing that and the difficulties that might come after, but at some point everyone would have to make a choice in the moment.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Oh there is a right answer.
Click to expand...
This forum is called Tactics and Training, not Personal Opinions on Moral Imperatives and Societal Responsibilities. Let's see if we can keep the discussions inside the lines.
 
I don't pretend to know what I would do in every scenario. My principle reason to carry a firearm is to defend myself and my family, not to be a hero. If in the course of defending the above I have to intervene in a larger situation then that's the challenge I face. If other people want to do differently then that is of course their prerogative.
Click to expand...

It's usually said that a person will not rise to higher performance when presented with stress, instead, people tend to fall to a far lower level of competence. Loading up on adrenaline screws you up.

Decisions are the same way, any sort of decision is going to be simple in a rocker on the front porch. Just walking into a wal mart store is enough to cloud my judgment.
 
Not so in the only uber-liberal part of “gun loving Texas”. A few years ago in anti-2nd amendment Austin Texas, the District Attorney announced a new policy that all defensive gun use would go to the grand jury. And they have and many on to trial with the purpose to legally make lawful gun use financially and emotionally expensive.
Click to expand...

Last I checked the legal expenses for a potential defendant in a Grand Jury proceeding = $0.

Until an arrest is made or an indictment comes down there isn't anything for a lawyer to do except hear your story, take your money and tell you to keep quiet. He certainly won't go to the Grand Jury. You can keep quiet without spending a dime.

If the potential defendant is arrested there may be bail expenses but rare is it in defense shootings where the shooter is arrested and forced to make bond.

I do believe that the Texas Law is a tragedy that should be undone but it does not have as much impact as you might think.
 
I know from research studies that in the typical man attacking woman scenario observed by a gun carrier with significant training, about half of them would just observe.
Click to expand...

More proof that simple things are never simple.

Is it a pimp & hooker dispute?
Is she likely to turn on you if you intervene?
Is the woman mental or drugged up and need to be restrained?
Is it a con game?

Sometimes direct action will help, sometimes not. It is not always easy to tell when.

In the case under discussion it seemed to appear an obvious car jacking. Obvious enough that two separate people intervened.
 
In most cases of defense of others, I believe strongly that wait and observe is your absolutely strongest responsibility. If you have seen it and prepared to intervene, it wont' take a huge interval to draw, if you haven't already, and move directly into defensive "attack" when the danger is clearly, obviously imminent.

If you see a man of any great size being extremely violent towards another and fear that it may result in someone getting hurt, set yourself into position, clear the way to defend. Strike when it is unavoidable. If you can't quietly do a little recon and get into a good position, all you can do is wait for that moment.

I believe that if a person is considering intervening, every necessary step towards that intervention but the actual moment of intervention should be taken before the situation becomes more dire.

It's hard enough to draw, duck, aim and fire as it is. Do it from across a street or parking lot, it gets harder, and you will still be concentrating on the issues at hand, whether or not to intervene.

This is just a part of being proactive. don't passively watch and wait until it is too late. at that point, all of your time for observation is used up, you no longer have any advantage, and you are at a HUGE disadvantage because you have to start the whole thing from ground zero.

I suppose that many, maybe most, can deploy and use a cc weapon in a five second or less period from a concealed holster. If you have been attending to the scene, you would have unbuttoned the jacket over your holster, had your strap loose and hand on the butt, isn't that a good thing?

I realize that this sounds contradictory. The point is that you have two steps that should be taken. Observation of the situation before it escalates and taking steps to intervene if needed. Then intervene.
 
I tried to protect a woman in a case of domestic violence on the street once, she lit into me after I got the guy in an armlock. Fortunately a police cruiser pulled up before I had to fight both of them. I imagine I’d have been in a real mess if I’d drawn a gun.
 
There you have it. No matter what the situation is and no matter how careful you are you can't compensate for the perverse nature of humanity, or the random chaos that pervades everything that happens.
 
fastbolt wrote:
Well, this scene changing incident had to be a nasty one to sort out afterward.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Especially since the report linked to the OP recounts how the armed citizens followed the shooter out of the store and into the parking lot and waited until he shot someone before shooting the perpetrator.

Depending on where you are in the country, this "stalking" of the gunman could easily have resulted in criminal charges against the "armed citizens".

Don't draw too many conclusions favorable to yourself as an "armed citizen" unless you have a comprehensive understanding of both the state statute involved as well as how it is being in interpreted by the courts in your jurisdiction.

I know a couple of guys who are doing "20 to life" because they didn't/couldn't/wouldn't distinguish between "when can I shoot" and "when do I have no alternative but to shoot"?
 
Many of the stand your ground laws that I have read protect a person who uses lethal force in self defenseeven if the person who used force instigated the incident. To understand why, think about road rage. Honk at someone, refuse to pull over and let them in, sure, the guy can take offense and you wind up killing him. Tell a guy that his dog is ugly and it escalates? tell a dirty joke?

A person can in principle even start a physical fight, yet still be justified in saving his own life if the other guy leaps to attack him with a weapon.

personal defense is defined by defending yourself, not by fault, and that's a really good thing. "Instigation" is a moving target, if you look at another guy's wife and he targets you verbally, did he start it or did you?
 
the definitive decision is nearly always, under any circumstances, whether the person who used force truly felt that his life was in danger and that the use of force was at least in his belief the only way to remain unhurt.

In principle this can be stated as the other guy has to "draw first."
 
Answer to Mehavey

Yes there is an answer to what alternative did he have.Stand back watch and do nothing then bitch and moan that our LEO's were not doing their job,or were not Johnny on the spot to prevent this from getting to that point.I think that the gun grabbers and antigunners have gotten into our heads and given us pause to act.It proves to me that what Einstein saying was true about bad things happening when good people stand by watch and do nothing.
 
Ok, that's the end of this one.

If you want to talk about Tactics and Training, this is the subforum for that.

Rants about what is wrong with society and about people's moral responsibilities aren't relevant to either tactics or training.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top