flyboyjake
New member
"The point we should all be taking is that the man over-reacted and is likely going to pay very dearly for his actions."
I doubt it. He acted entirely within the law.
I doubt it. He acted entirely within the law.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Interesting Robbery Shootout with IPSC Grandmaster
- Thread starter Bartholomew Roberts
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
WANT A LCR 22LR
New member
Before this subject goes too far, we need to find out what the latest news reports say and any police reports if possible.
1: " Ramming " needs to be defined, it could be news speak for placing his truck in a position where the BG can't escape and causing the equivalent of a parking lot oops.
2: A better description on how the owner determined the BG were in fact BG.
While the owners actions were risky, not taking action just emboldens criminal activity. Fear of prosecution or being shot by police sure isn't keeping criminals at bay, fear of being shot by a victim at the scene would sure make them think twice.
1: " Ramming " needs to be defined, it could be news speak for placing his truck in a position where the BG can't escape and causing the equivalent of a parking lot oops.
2: A better description on how the owner determined the BG were in fact BG.
While the owners actions were risky, not taking action just emboldens criminal activity. Fear of prosecution or being shot by police sure isn't keeping criminals at bay, fear of being shot by a victim at the scene would sure make them think twice.
I'm glad Thalheimer is uninjured after that blow up.
My cop brothers have told me in the past that instead of engaging BGs who are leaving the scene, the best thing to do is to be a good witness. Be able to describe to the police the license #, automobile, perps, and actions.
My cop brothers have told me in the past that instead of engaging BGs who are leaving the scene, the best thing to do is to be a good witness. Be able to describe to the police the license #, automobile, perps, and actions.
youngunz4life
New member
yeah I'm not buying that deadly weapon car bit either. Let's be frank since the subject has been brought up. The man can technically be charged with assault with a deadly weapon for using his fists especially if he has martial arts training. Circumstances lead him to use his pistol instead.
If your wife gets in an accident, does she get assault with a deadly weapon? Really, the question doesn't even need to be asked. That charge is reserved for nimwits fleeing police who choose stupidly to ram, touch, or graze a police vehicle as well as other examples. Can the charge be used in other cases. Yes, I will concede it can but much of life is still common sense whether people believe they're going to get screwed some way or another.
The guy rammed the vehicle because he knew the assailants were the masked men. Let's please not get that twisted. In the event in the 1 in 100,000,000 chance they were pranksters then they're idiots to be driving around(speeding around I should say recklessly) with ski masks on). That is a charge in itself. At that point there was a gunfight; he basically Had to pull his pocket pistol. Meeting in the middle wasn't possible at that point.
If your wife gets in an accident, does she get assault with a deadly weapon? Really, the question doesn't even need to be asked. That charge is reserved for nimwits fleeing police who choose stupidly to ram, touch, or graze a police vehicle as well as other examples. Can the charge be used in other cases. Yes, I will concede it can but much of life is still common sense whether people believe they're going to get screwed some way or another.
The guy rammed the vehicle because he knew the assailants were the masked men. Let's please not get that twisted. In the event in the 1 in 100,000,000 chance they were pranksters then they're idiots to be driving around(speeding around I should say recklessly) with ski masks on). That is a charge in itself. At that point there was a gunfight; he basically Had to pull his pocket pistol. Meeting in the middle wasn't possible at that point.
Last edited:
youngunz4life
New member
sorry about the edit- I thought I posted it in time
If your wife gets in an accident, does she get assault with a deadly weapon? Really, the question doesn't even need to be asked. That charge is reserved for nimwits fleeing police who choose stupidly to ram, touch, or graze a police vehicle as well as other examples.
The difference is not whether it was a police vehicle or not - the difference is intent. If you intentionally run someone down and kill them, you will be charged with murder, and if they don't die, you will be charged with some sort of assault. Your intent was to commit injury. A car accident is an entirely different scenario.
I still keep coming back to this: The guy fired five rounds. I haven't seen an indication of how many rounds the BGs fired. Those rounds hit something somewhere. This was an incident that occurred in a public place and although some on this board don't seem to agree, it seems clear to me that the jewelry store owner turned a non-shooting crime into a shooting. He needlessly endangered the public. If a kid or a grandma or a pregnant woman had been killed by flying lead, how many would still defend him? What happened to the safety rule that we must be sure of our target and anything behind it? Are we allowed to ditch all our training when we are hacked off?
And all this started without him having certain knowledge that a crime was committed, beyond seeing a car speeding in his parking lot?
With apologies to those will undoubtedly disagree, but this remains indefensible to me.
therealdeal
New member
tailgator
yes, intent is definately an issue and thats obvious but a good point by you.
however, a person who UNintentionally kills an innocent person while driving can be convicted of vehicular homicide and go to prison as well. DUI's are a good example.
I think that was youngunz point: tecnically charges of this and that can be drawn on someone but wouldn't be. are you suggesting that grandmaster would be charged with assault with a deadly weapon(deadly weapon being his vehicle)? I seriously hope not.
also I will point out the other post didn't say it had to be a police vehicle. the post used the police vehicle and stated that was an example.
yes, intent is definately an issue and thats obvious but a good point by you.
however, a person who UNintentionally kills an innocent person while driving can be convicted of vehicular homicide and go to prison as well. DUI's are a good example.
I think that was youngunz point: tecnically charges of this and that can be drawn on someone but wouldn't be. are you suggesting that grandmaster would be charged with assault with a deadly weapon(deadly weapon being his vehicle)? I seriously hope not.
also I will point out the other post didn't say it had to be a police vehicle. the post used the police vehicle and stated that was an example.
Micahweeks
New member
Skoro, your brothers are right. Good observation skills and a quality CC camera system are extremely helpful in not only the investigation and apprehension but prosecution as well.
And, Ben Towe, thank you for helping better articulate my point. It doesn't help to overthink when in the heat of moment you won't be thinking much at all. You have to act, and you'll act according to the lowest level of your training. I think drilling on tactics to defend yourself or a loved one with is good, but people could definitely drill themselves on observation skills and operating under stress and be just as helpful in the event like this one.
It speaks volumes that people can jump immediately to criticize the store owner's actions but don't say a word about the complete lack of information about the criminals. Why don't our tactics include observation skills? Why does shooting at plates teach you how to keep your cool under stress? It doesn't. There is a real need to mentally condition one's self to make the most out of their position in a situation like this.
I would just personally like to see gun owners just as concerned about their ability to be a good witness as they are about marksmanship or tactics. There is more to the sheep dog than his bite.
And, Ben Towe, thank you for helping better articulate my point. It doesn't help to overthink when in the heat of moment you won't be thinking much at all. You have to act, and you'll act according to the lowest level of your training. I think drilling on tactics to defend yourself or a loved one with is good, but people could definitely drill themselves on observation skills and operating under stress and be just as helpful in the event like this one.
It speaks volumes that people can jump immediately to criticize the store owner's actions but don't say a word about the complete lack of information about the criminals. Why don't our tactics include observation skills? Why does shooting at plates teach you how to keep your cool under stress? It doesn't. There is a real need to mentally condition one's self to make the most out of their position in a situation like this.
I would just personally like to see gun owners just as concerned about their ability to be a good witness as they are about marksmanship or tactics. There is more to the sheep dog than his bite.
Coop de Ville
New member
2) The IDPA/IPSC/Whatever guy was dumb, period.
4) The IDPA/IPSC/Whatever guy was dumb.
Really?
What I will tell you is that police training IS IDPA training... with a lot less targets and a lot less movement.
When the target faces draw and fire two rounds.... When the target faces draw and fire one round standing and two rounds kneeling.... When the target faces draw and fire two rounds....etc.........
It's paper....all training is paper.
So, he's not a cop
So what's his training? More paper... except probably more dynamic than actual police training. So what's my point?
There is no tactical training except PAPER. It's all paper anyway. What training are you talking about where people engage real life targets with real weapons and really shoot people? You either practice on paper or read a book.
Except for MILO 2000 and Sims.
I admit that that Sims can be interesting and useful, but I'm a cop, we get SIMS. I'm willing to bet there aren't many forum members using Sims as a regular training tool.
So it's back to paper.
And to clarify.
I did not say that IDPA or IPSC were proper training for a gunfight. I said it is a fact that one will revert to a way of executing a task based on how they have previously performed the task... given enough repetition.
-Coop
Again, he didn't know they were violent because he didn't witness the crime nor did he know that they were felons, nor did he know that they were fleeing.
The two news stories seem to conflict. In the second article posted here: http://www.marconews.com/news/2011/feb/09/Sandy-Thalheimer-jewelers-robbery-shoot-east-coast/
Reporter Kelly Farrell makes it sound like he did witness the incident:
After witnessing Tuesday’s armed jewelry robbery, Naples jewelry store owner Sandy Thalheimer exchanged the first shot at armed suspects fleeing the scene
and
(the above statement is the police spokesman's quote.)A violent felony was being committed in (Thalheimer’s) presence and he took the steps he felt necessary,” Barkley said
It further states that he was leaving to go to the convenience store from his Jewelry store. Since the salesman was delivering jewelry to his jewelry store, and he was in the process of going to the local convenience store, I think its possible that he could have seen something going down (i.e., salesman running from the parking lot towards the store). He may not have actually seen the robbery as it was occurring but I think he appropriately put two and two together deducing that they were not out trick or treating.
There is still absolutely no way I can believe that any grand jury would find fault with his actions under these particular sets of circumstances (let's just see if he gets indicted). Yes, he was lucky they were not kids out pulling a prank but the perception abilities of the human mind, based on life experiences, training, and just basic common sense, allowed him to correctly understand the nature of what was happening up to the point he made the decision to get involved.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
Legally, it appears Chapter 776 of Florida law limits the use of deadly force to preventing the imminent commission of a certain felonies. It looks like the local police and prosecutor are taking the view that the robbery was still in progress, which is good news for Mr. Thalheimer and goes to show how the police and prosecutor viewing a single fact can be important in the post-legal aftermath.
As to gun games being training, I think gun games are useful in teaching how to use and manipulate weapons under stress; but that is just a small part of a gunfight.
As for criticizing the store owners tactics, the whole idea here is to come up with tactics that might provide a better outcome than the ones used. In this case, there are several obvious places to improve. I can't speak for everyone; but I don't mean that as criticism of Mr. Thalheimer's character or to suggest I would do any better in that scenario. Lord knows that analyzing the bad tactics I have used in FoF could keep us all busy for days.
For me, reading these stories and discussing them serves an important function in helping me set the limits of where I will get involved and preplan some actions if I do choose to get involved. So naturally, I am interested in what might be done better.
As to gun games being training, I think gun games are useful in teaching how to use and manipulate weapons under stress; but that is just a small part of a gunfight.
As for criticizing the store owners tactics, the whole idea here is to come up with tactics that might provide a better outcome than the ones used. In this case, there are several obvious places to improve. I can't speak for everyone; but I don't mean that as criticism of Mr. Thalheimer's character or to suggest I would do any better in that scenario. Lord knows that analyzing the bad tactics I have used in FoF could keep us all busy for days.
For me, reading these stories and discussing them serves an important function in helping me set the limits of where I will get involved and preplan some actions if I do choose to get involved. So naturally, I am interested in what might be done better.
Last edited:
The shooter will be interviewed on the radio tonight, on the nationally syndicated Armed American Radio, by my friend Mark Walters. There are apparently a few facts that didn't come out in the news clips or newspaper articles, so it'll be interesting to hear what Thalheimer has to say live.
Catch the show online at www.armedamericanradio.org, or (possibly) on your local radio stations.
pax
Catch the show online at www.armedamericanradio.org, or (possibly) on your local radio stations.
pax
therealdeal
And that is kind of my point. It wasn't an accident that the guy rammed the getaway car and a gunfight started. Negligence - poor planning like driving drunk or ramming someone's car or firing a gun with poor discretion - can rise to the point of criminal charges. No, I did not say that charges should be filed in this case, but if they were they would be expensive and a little iffy to fight.
I'll be interested to hear what the guy has to say, as per Pax's post.
Well, sorta yes, sorta no.
That was the only example he gave of actions for which such a charge would be "reserved," so it is kind of hard for me to see that his "other examples" don't include someone who rams a civilian vehicle.
Again, I am not saying that charges should be filed, but it seems like a close call to me. Not to flog a dead horse, but still no one is talking about where those several rounds went and what the consequences could have been if one of those stray rounds hit someone. The question that is still before us is, was this a tactically sound engagement? I maintain that taking the actions he did, based as they seem to be on suspicion and anger rather than hard knowledge and planning, is unwise. It was an avoidable action that could have resulted in casualties to innocents. Do you think that if one of those shots that he lobbed at the second car had killed someone driving by, the prosecutor might feel some pressure to file some charges? I understand that the BGs were BGs and none of this would have happened if they had not robbed the jewelry delivery. But we really need to realize that the presence of a BG does not fully indemnify us for the consequences of our actions. It is wrong to think, legally or in my opinion morally, that we can deploy firearms without regard for innocents around us just because we are the good guy and someone else nearby is a bad guy.
Would I ram my car into one of an escaping thief in an effort to recover stolen property for someone? No I would not. If you would choose to do so, I sincerely hope that no gunfight ensues, or that if one does (not an possibility that should escape one's notice) that neither you nor any bystanders are hurt. And I really, really hope that the owner of the property is grateful enough to cover your legal bills, because they could be substantial and the person you helped is under no obligation to you. It is not a situation in which I would willingly place myself.
however, a person who UNintentionally kills an innocent person while driving can be convicted of vehicular homicide and go to prison as well. DUI's are a good example.
And that is kind of my point. It wasn't an accident that the guy rammed the getaway car and a gunfight started. Negligence - poor planning like driving drunk or ramming someone's car or firing a gun with poor discretion - can rise to the point of criminal charges. No, I did not say that charges should be filed in this case, but if they were they would be expensive and a little iffy to fight.
I'll be interested to hear what the guy has to say, as per Pax's post.
also I will point out the other post didn't say it had to be a police vehicle
Well, sorta yes, sorta no.
That charge is reserved for nimwits fleeing police who choose stupidly to ram, touch, or graze a police vehicle as well as other examples.
That was the only example he gave of actions for which such a charge would be "reserved," so it is kind of hard for me to see that his "other examples" don't include someone who rams a civilian vehicle.
Again, I am not saying that charges should be filed, but it seems like a close call to me. Not to flog a dead horse, but still no one is talking about where those several rounds went and what the consequences could have been if one of those stray rounds hit someone. The question that is still before us is, was this a tactically sound engagement? I maintain that taking the actions he did, based as they seem to be on suspicion and anger rather than hard knowledge and planning, is unwise. It was an avoidable action that could have resulted in casualties to innocents. Do you think that if one of those shots that he lobbed at the second car had killed someone driving by, the prosecutor might feel some pressure to file some charges? I understand that the BGs were BGs and none of this would have happened if they had not robbed the jewelry delivery. But we really need to realize that the presence of a BG does not fully indemnify us for the consequences of our actions. It is wrong to think, legally or in my opinion morally, that we can deploy firearms without regard for innocents around us just because we are the good guy and someone else nearby is a bad guy.
Would I ram my car into one of an escaping thief in an effort to recover stolen property for someone? No I would not. If you would choose to do so, I sincerely hope that no gunfight ensues, or that if one does (not an possibility that should escape one's notice) that neither you nor any bystanders are hurt. And I really, really hope that the owner of the property is grateful enough to cover your legal bills, because they could be substantial and the person you helped is under no obligation to you. It is not a situation in which I would willingly place myself.
Last edited:
When Beating Your Friends Is More Important Than Defeating Your Enemies
http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011...re-important-than-defeating-your-enemies.html
http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011...re-important-than-defeating-your-enemies.html
And which guns are my IDPA friends using when they are not at a match? Probably NOT the gun they shot the match with.
Those who train to defeat their enemies, but also compete in the gun games at a high level know that the two are not the same.
Rufus T Firefly
Moderator
Response...
"I need to talk with my attourney and I don't consent to any search".
"I need to talk with my attourney and I don't consent to any search".
Double Naught Spy
New member
What I will tell you is that police training IS IDPA training... with a lot less targets and a lot less movement.
When the target faces draw and fire two rounds.... When the target faces draw and fire one round standing and two rounds kneeling.... When the target faces draw and fire two rounds....etc.........
It's paper....all training is paper.
There is no tactical training except PAPER. It's all paper anyway. What training are you talking about where people engage real life targets with real weapons and really shoot people? You either practice on paper or read a book.
I am not too certain that game training is the same thing as police training. What I am certain about is that not all training is paper and not all police training is paper (never mind the fact that some train against steel).
What training is there where you engage real people with real weapons and really shoot people?
Simunition Force on Force Training.
So your information about all training being on paper is about 20+ years out of date, 10+ if you consider when it started becoming more commonplace.
StrongSideArmsInc
New member
Hats off to the guy for doing something, all you people in the forum that would have done nothing, your exactly the reason why the country in the current state that it is. I can't believe people on this forum are not willing to put their lives on the line for what is right and just. Once more, most people on this sight have some sort of trainning with firearms, so thats make you the perfect asset when something like this goes down. This guy just scored big points for the pro gun crowd and your ripping him down because your a *****. What is right, is right and with what some of you people wrote, I guess if they pass a law and ban firearms, you will just give them over without a hitch. Just because the law states one thing, doesn't make it right, and when people sit on their ass, and just take it, I see you as part of the problem and a target. I am glad are fore fathers stuck their middle fingers to the king. That took guts, and that is what is going to be needed to get are country strait. MLK saw certain laws in this country unfair, he marched and made a difference. America went to fight in WW2, so you wouldn't be speaking German right now. So many examples of Americans standing on what is right, and fighting, this guy did that very thing. I am not advocating breaking the law, but if the law violates are consitution, then its not a law. I believe using all avenues to fight violations, such as lawsuits, marches, and ralleys. Your allowing thugs to run around and do whatever the hell they want to do, expecting are harsh prison system to turn them around. I'm glad are men and women in the military don't have the same mentality as some of the people that I have read in this thread. Enough is enough, people need to stand up and help one another, and incidents like this are a great place to start in changing thug's mind about doing crap like this. When I saw what happen in Arizona and in Destin, Florida, I was so disappointed that no one had a CCW to stop these horric acts on innocent people. After reading this thread, I imagine now that there were people with CCWS just sitting there saying, "well it's not my issue."
As far as the law goes, number one he didn't fire untill he was fire upon, second, in the state of Florida, he had the ability to make a lawful arrest, beacause it was a foricable felony in progress, thats why he is not in jail. He can use anything inside the force matrix to ascert an arrest, given reasonable circumstances. Also, in Florida you covered under the "good faith" act in this situation, and you do not have to make an attempt to retreat her either. Are laws are set up here so people can self-govern and protect themselves so they don't have to stand-by and do nothing.
Food for thought, if I had been the officer responding, I would have gave him a medal because he attempted to save the tax payers of Florida alot of money.
As far as the law goes, number one he didn't fire untill he was fire upon, second, in the state of Florida, he had the ability to make a lawful arrest, beacause it was a foricable felony in progress, thats why he is not in jail. He can use anything inside the force matrix to ascert an arrest, given reasonable circumstances. Also, in Florida you covered under the "good faith" act in this situation, and you do not have to make an attempt to retreat her either. Are laws are set up here so people can self-govern and protect themselves so they don't have to stand-by and do nothing.
Food for thought, if I had been the officer responding, I would have gave him a medal because he attempted to save the tax payers of Florida alot of money.
triumph666
New member
so from what i get here off this posting is a lot of people saying this guy and other people should never risk their lives to stop crime? did anyone post on the fact that maybe some of these criminals are suredly having second thoughts about their activities now? or about the fact these low lifes now have to worry about regular joes and not just police who are 5 to 15min away?
sometimes stopping crime starts with you...not the police
sometimes stopping crime starts with you...not the police
Not to throw a monkey wrench into the mixer but before WWII, most Americans rather admired the Germans.
Traditionally, Americans have only gone out to right wrongs after dark. And by the way, did he really have a Dodge Ram truck, the one with the sheep's head on the grill?
Traditionally, Americans have only gone out to right wrongs after dark. And by the way, did he really have a Dodge Ram truck, the one with the sheep's head on the grill?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.