Run Away!

"Bad guy; I would like your groin to meet the heel of my shoe; your face to meet a straight punch, hook and uppercut, a pair of knees to your nose, and an arm bar."

Running is always the first option, but due to his close proximity, I would let him have a preview of some Krav Maga; leaving him crippled/incapaciated long enough for me to keep him down and call the COPs, as well as get my sidearm ready-in the event it's not on my person.
 
Daugherty16...

... and a few others, who figure since it all turned out well, it was obviously perfect...

... and with all due respect to B. Lahey, who was able to walk away (drive away, really), and who handled things pretty well...

It's possible to constructively criticize the OP without 1) attacking him or his performance, or 2) being particularly bloodthirsty.

The decision made in this instance worked out well for the OP; his ability to provide a good description to the police after the event was a huge plus, and deserves specific praise.

However, it's possible to say he did well, and to be happy for him, yet still think he could have created some vulnerabilities had the BG really turned out to have been armed.

I'm not sure how much time it took the OP to actually get into his car, get the engine running, and get the car moving to safety. My guess is it took longer than it would have taken to draw a weapon, and by a substantial margin.

If the BG really had a weapon, and had decided to use it, the time the OP needed to do all the things he did could have subjected him to gunfire, at close range, while he was in a confined but not bulletproof space.

Without meaning to armchair quarterback or pick on the OP, I do feel that this is something that should actually be considered by the "retreat is best" side. I'm all for retreat, if I feel I can do it in relative safety.

But I, personally, would not get into a car, especially one that wasn't already running, if a BG were threatening me with what might be a firearm. (In fact, what training I've received in that area would lead me to exit a vehicle if it weren't capable of immediate departure.)
 
I agree with MLeake(and others)

I stated my opinion earlier in the thread. Also, the only bashing I have seen has been from the side that has been defensive about any kind of constructive criticism. Please correct me if I am wrong here. One example is a post that seems to state that anyone who doesn't see his side is an idiot. At least that's how I read it the one time I did.

I would like to point out also to Daugherty, I do not think the OP made it clear in his post he let the BG know he was "made" if I am reading this correctly. He never used his box as a barrier; he was just loading up the vehicle, but I guess you were saying he could have. There are times when it is acceptable to draw a weapon, and this is certianly one of them in my opinion. It doesn't mean that a weapon had to be drawn, as the OP has proven. This situation probably would've escalated if the OP hadn't left or if he had engaged the BG with any kind of conversation or action good or bad. This is speculation, but he definately meant business - his record and later actions have shown this to be true.

Also, not talking about anyone in this thread but TFL in general - there are people on the forum from all kinds of life, backrounds, age, careers, etc. I think it is just sometimes easier for certain individuals to react to these situations differently. I mean, some people do not want to pull a gun no matter what. Others this scenario would be like second nature to draw on the perp. I just, in my opinion, don't think some people realize how close to serious danger the OP was. It is very possible the BG was armed, but he was going to make a move if he got a chance either way. This BG seems like he had already 'graduated' and moved up in his life of crime. He was probably in his 2nd personality needing attention half drunk or on drugs but who the heck knows and who should have to care when I am just trying to go about my business?

Many of these BG's just don't think right. You might do him a favor, and then he gets mad at you when you won't do a second one. A good example is this exact scenario: the BG got mad at the OP because he wouldn't give up any change and/or didn't seem interested in his plight. "Well maybe I'll just rob you instead". Huh? Maybe your %^$ just ran into someone who has absolutely no problem standing his ground on you justifiably and in a calm and cool manner as well as with total confidence in the boys down at the station to boot. I'm not going to do anything I do not feel is right. I will face any aftermath with honesty and integrity as well. I know if I am doing something that is sending me down the river. That is one of the reasons why some people do not carry. They do not want to get in an emotional situation that backfires or do something stupid when they're trying to do the right thing. I am not worried about this. Perhaps I haven't seen enough in my life and there still is time to change my mind on that subject. I did serve four yrs active duty, and I did see a lot and learn some things but that is a different matter plus neither here nor there in this thread. Bottom line - if and when I ever use my weapon it will be for the right reason. If not, then I deserve whatever I get and yes, I know it might have to work its way thru the maze either way. Thats life. I do not think a prosecutor is going to try and ruin my life and family for doing the right thing and/or trying to do the right thing. Again, I know it isn't always that cut and dry but I am willing to stand up for myself. sorry for the rambling after the fact. I just figured since I hadn't said much I midas well stand my ground.

I wouldn't have shot this man, but I wouldn't have just gotten in my car and left unless I felt in my mind he wasn't a threat to do so(a good,early post mentioned this and this is very possible). The reason wouldn't be because I was scared to draw my weapon or if I wasn't sure what to do either. To the OP, I am not saying either of these last two sentences were your reasons. I would not have shot this man until more had happened after drawing, as I originally stated. Hopefully this wouldn't be the case. Seaman, yes check with the PD. You were given some advice and conversation. I recommend doing more research. There are other examples of having a firearm not shot yet while you hold it, and I wouldn't want to shoot off an ATTACK of a college drunk trying to get in a fistfight as even a further, totally seperate example I just eluded to. That scenario was going thru my head with some of your posts. The ordering of the perp without the weapon can lead to escalation and not de-escalation. The BG might not know what is coming without you showing the firearm. That in my mind would be wrong in numerous instances. It is common sense and a basic duty(duty might be a stretch but you're covering all the bases) to give the perp a chance to stand down. Obviously sometimes he/she isn't that lucky and Many people Die because they are too nice, flexible, and give a BG too many chances.
 
Last edited:
I didn't draw because I didn't see a weapon, and I didn't want to instigate an episode of gutter bravado ("Aw, you got a gun? You better shoot me! Go on and shoot me you *insert explitive of your choice*!"). The read I got on this character was that he had little regard for his own life, and was as likely as anyone to pull a suicidal toughguy stunt like that.

Also, my gut told me he did not have a gun. It seemed more likely to be a screwdriver or knife or something, and he was just far enough away for me to gamble on the move to the driver's seat. I agree that it was risky, but it appeared to be somewhat less risky than other options at the time. I have practiced drawing from concealment while seated in a car, and am relatively confident I could have done so should it have been required.

I made a number of judgement calls and took a number of calculated risks in this incident, which is why I started this thread. It worked out, but I encourage some degree of monday morning quarterbacking.:)
 
The original post really shows that all situations are different and the correct answer is: "It depends."

What worked this time, evading, may not work next time, but we won't know until that situation presents itself. For this scenario the correct response was to flee. In another scenario it may very well be the wrong approach.

I have had the displeasure of drawing my gun on another person three times with the full intent of stopping their actions by force that would most likely result in death. Thankfully the actions I was attempting to stop did in fact stop with my producing a weapon. It was all very fast, but as I'm sure some of you know, time slowed down to a crawl.

Would I have been correct in discharging my weapon? That's for the courts to determine. I'm just thankful I didn't have to find out. In my humble opinion B. Lahey acted correctly in this scenario. One can only judge this scenario based on what B. Lahey knew at the time and how he perceived the actions of the criminal actor. The fact that he was able to drive away without being harmed proves to me that he acted correctly.

While it would be charitable to consider the future victims of the criminal actor, it is not realistic, practical, or even ethical. I say ethical because one's responsibility is to themselves and their loved ones. "Justice" is reserved for the courts, and we are not empowered with a code of vigilantism. We should only be concerned with the here and now.

Now being that a future victim was afforded the same opportunity to provide for their own personal protection, but made the decision not to, as the original poster says to me that it's their choice and they will have to live with that choice, good or bad.

Biker
 
No Verbal Warning...

i stand corrected - the OP did not issue the verbal command. After 4 pages of BS and bravado, i guess i misremembered. I probably would have made it clear that further advance was going to come at great peril to the BG. And probably would have escalated, rather than de-escalated the situation, I recognize to my chagrin.

Could he have stood his ground? Sure. Could he have drawn or at least put a hand on the butt of his pistol? Of course. I might have. That's why i say, i'd like to have done as well as he did. Who knows if my comand to stop and a hand on the butt of my pistol might not have enraged the BG and precipitated a physical attack, or worse? Mr. Lahey didn't even have to find out.

In the situation Mr. Lahey found himself, he used his intellect and instincts and drove off unscathed, and didn't even have to explain to a local cop why he had drawn a gun on a poor homeless man. He CERTAINLY didn't reaction-shoot what was probably an unarmed man who hadn't even laid a hand on him yet but was closing the distance rapidly. That's a win/win/win and was unquestionably the correct decision. This isn't a what-if scenario - this is historic fact. I feel pretty confident saying thay Lahey would have reacted very differently if his radar gave him a different "read" of the BG.

So QB all you want; we weren't there, weren't the one taken by surprise, weren't able to make our own firsthand assessment or size the guy up, didn't have to make Mr. Lahey's decision. Unless the BG actually displayed or threatened a weapon, Lahey would have had to actually be getting assaulted before the AOJP loop would be satisfied. Instead, he just went on his way.

I think Mr. Lahey is fully prepared to shoot if necessary and justified. I for one, am glad he isn't aching to prove it.
 
You made a wise decision and did not have to defend shooting an "unarmed man" and saved yourself many 1000's of dollars in legal fees, grief, bull****, and stress.
 
Well done, you avoided being lawfully guilty on murder charges. It's not a lawful homicide unless the killing was the only way to prevent an active, capable threat from otherwise inflicting immediate harm on a person. And take that antiguns who think that we get guns and permits so that we can kill people whenever we have the slightest opportunity!
 
It's not a lawful homicide unless the killing was the only way to prevent an active, capable threat from otherwise inflicting immediate harm on a person.
Click to expand...
Please tell me where is that the law. That will be one state I try to avoid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top