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.
Scenario #1
- Thread starter Hansen
- Start date
ohioleadslinger
New member
BillCA has it right. I have some slight modifications to that excellent reaction.a) Tell the clerk - "call 911! I think those guys are gonna kill us!"
b) Look for a secondary exit and use it.
c) If no easy exit, find the door to the back room and use it to funnel the attackers and prevent them from flanking you.
d) Draw your weapon and prepare to defend yourself.
e) Keep an eye on the counter clerk as he may need your help at some point too.
Emphasis on the word us you would be be surprised how when a person thinks they are also the intended victim they will take part in the effort to stop it or at least make a call. Same as saying FIRE instead of help rape or I'm being robbed.
Look for that means of exit, but I would add don't turn your back on the threat.
Making the most of your bad situation if no exit , making "The Fatal Funnel".
My weapon would have been drawn when they went for the bat's.
I'm keeping an eye on the counter not just to help, but I don't know how that clerk is going to react to the situation. He may also be carrying or he may just freak out and panic.
I don't understand the mentality of just "leaving" when you see people in a parking lot who look menacing. I'm not saying you should go into a biker bar with a sweater around your neck and start fights, but what real reason should I have to leave a place I intend to do business with just because some people in the parking lot look really mean??
I think most will agree with the concept of using your weapon effectively. I can't see a reason why deadly defensive force wouldn't be allowable here. I wouldn't use any warning shots here, just draw and announce your intentions to defend yourself. Let them make the choice on meeting their maker. This is the best way of keeping your weapon from being use back on you... Throwing your weapon away should never be an option!
+1 to telling the store clerk to call 911 when you see these thugs approaching.
I think most will agree with the concept of using your weapon effectively. I can't see a reason why deadly defensive force wouldn't be allowable here. I wouldn't use any warning shots here, just draw and announce your intentions to defend yourself. Let them make the choice on meeting their maker. This is the best way of keeping your weapon from being use back on you... Throwing your weapon away should never be an option!
+1 to telling the store clerk to call 911 when you see these thugs approaching.
1. What if anything would you have done differently?
Engage without engaging.
Meaning I would have left.
If followed, I would headed for the first Police Station/ Sub station/ Squad car I spotted and laid on the horn.
Fire Station works too.
2. Was deadly force justified in this incident?
Yes.
3. Could this have been prevented?
While situational awareness may have, one cannot be in a constant state of Yellow.
Folks get surprised. Life happens.
20-20 hindsight is always clearer.
If one is older, or suspects they are "in danger" (jury duty for instance) they could have groceries, prescriptions, dry cleaning or whatever delivered from whatever store for instance.
Ask another accompany them...
Engage without engaging.
Meaning I would have left.
If followed, I would headed for the first Police Station/ Sub station/ Squad car I spotted and laid on the horn.
Fire Station works too.
2. Was deadly force justified in this incident?
Yes.
3. Could this have been prevented?
While situational awareness may have, one cannot be in a constant state of Yellow.
Folks get surprised. Life happens.
20-20 hindsight is always clearer.
If one is older, or suspects they are "in danger" (jury duty for instance) they could have groceries, prescriptions, dry cleaning or whatever delivered from whatever store for instance.
Ask another accompany them...
Samurai said:Step 2: Retrieve ball bat. Check dead bodies for weapons. Take weapons, if any.
Step 3: Run like the dickens.
At this stage, you went from self-defense to murder/robbery.
If you were defending yourself, you wouldn't flee the scene after having shook down the bodies and taking their weapons. Though if they had other weapons than bats, why wouldn't they use them in the first place?
Oh, we know what you mean, but look at it from an anti-CCW DA's point-of-view.
Think he gives a flying F about the truth, when he's got a case he can grandstand in about how dangerous maniacs with guns (like you) go gunning down three innocent youths back from baseball practice at the park (them) because they are so piss-scared they can't leave the house without a piece?
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I don't understand the mentality of just "leaving" when you see people in a parking lot who look menacing.
You are outnumbered and may get hurt. Or you can make the moral, macho Internet commando last stand. It's easy.
You are outnumbered and may get hurt. Or you can make the moral, macho Internet commando last stand. It's easy.
Thing 1: It's not "robbery" if you're only securing weapons. If a guy attacks you, and you take his weapon away, that's not "robbery." Now, if you check his pockets for loose change, then THAT'S robbery.
Thing 2: It's not "fleeing the scene" if you're running from the fear of imminent death or severe bodily injury. It's called "retreat to the wall," and in many jurisdictions, you're only allowed to use deadly force up to the point of clearing your way to run from the situation. Plus, it's good evidence of actual fear. The DA will ask, "If you were so afraid, why did you stick around and wait for the cops to show up? You shot them all; they weren't going to follow you. So why didn't you run away, if you were so afraid?"
Thing 2: It's not "fleeing the scene" if you're running from the fear of imminent death or severe bodily injury. It's called "retreat to the wall," and in many jurisdictions, you're only allowed to use deadly force up to the point of clearing your way to run from the situation. Plus, it's good evidence of actual fear. The DA will ask, "If you were so afraid, why did you stick around and wait for the cops to show up? You shot them all; they weren't going to follow you. So why didn't you run away, if you were so afraid?"
Thing 2 - You would be safer inside the store in a semi-ensconsed position, waiting for the cops. The doors could be locked until they arrived. If you're running around outside with a gun, you could be mistaken for a BG and get holed.
Running doesn't look good to the cops or a jury.
Biker
Running doesn't look good to the cops or a jury.
Biker
God and the State doesn't allow me to do 2 legged varmint control but faced with baseball bats, and their intent, I'd kill 'em all and let God and the State sort it all out. For Court testimony following I would have shouted for the clerk to call 911 prior to shooting is there was time.
Samurai,
I have no problem with securing the weapon(s) that would have been used against me. Or simply moving them out of reach of the downed suspects until PD arrival.
You can't have this both ways. Either you are in fear for your life because the BGs have the opportunity to hurt you (they're still vertical) OR all three BG's are down and incapacitated so they no longer pose a threat.
This makes absolutely NO sense at all. When 3 men approach with bats and stated intent and you shoot them all, there is no longer a reason to flee the scene. In fact, if you did, the DA would be more likely to ask you why you fled when there was no longer a danger from them.
From your post it seems as if you would take any weapons they may have had (knives, guns, bats) and fled with them. This is called tampering with evidence and fleeing the scene. All you've done is to make life difficult for your attorney and your defense much more expensive.
As a counter point, in the immediate aftermath of this case, I'd kick the bats away from each suspect's reach and then tell the clerk to secure the doors until the PD arrived. Next step would be to have clerk notify 911 (if not already done) and request ambulances and PD. This secures the scene and prevents 3rd parties from destroying/altering evidence, keeps unseen BGs outside and will probably make the investigation much neater. While waiting, I might ask the clerk if there is a video survelliance system and if so, don't touch it until the PD arrives.
Thing 1: It's not "robbery" if you're only securing weapons. If a guy attacks you, and you take his weapon away, that's not "robbery." Now, if you check his pockets for loose change, then THAT'S robbery.
I have no problem with securing the weapon(s) that would have been used against me. Or simply moving them out of reach of the downed suspects until PD arrival.
Thing 2: It's not "fleeing the scene" if you're running from the fear of imminent death or severe bodily injury. It's called "retreat to the wall," and in many jurisdictions, you're only allowed to use deadly force up to the point of clearing your way to run from the situation. Plus, it's good evidence of actual fear. The DA will ask, "If you were so afraid, why did you stick around and wait for the cops to show up? You shot them all; they weren't going to follow you. So why didn't you run away, if you were so afraid?"
You can't have this both ways. Either you are in fear for your life because the BGs have the opportunity to hurt you (they're still vertical) OR all three BG's are down and incapacitated so they no longer pose a threat.
The DA will ask, "If you were so afraid, why did you stick around and wait for the cops to show up? You shot them all; they weren't going to follow you. So why didn't you run away, if you were so afraid?"
This makes absolutely NO sense at all. When 3 men approach with bats and stated intent and you shoot them all, there is no longer a reason to flee the scene. In fact, if you did, the DA would be more likely to ask you why you fled when there was no longer a danger from them.
From your post it seems as if you would take any weapons they may have had (knives, guns, bats) and fled with them. This is called tampering with evidence and fleeing the scene. All you've done is to make life difficult for your attorney and your defense much more expensive.
As a counter point, in the immediate aftermath of this case, I'd kick the bats away from each suspect's reach and then tell the clerk to secure the doors until the PD arrived. Next step would be to have clerk notify 911 (if not already done) and request ambulances and PD. This secures the scene and prevents 3rd parties from destroying/altering evidence, keeps unseen BGs outside and will probably make the investigation much neater. While waiting, I might ask the clerk if there is a video survelliance system and if so, don't touch it until the PD arrives.
Donovan655
New member
as at least one other person has stated, scenarios like this one helped justify concealed carry.
deadly force justification is different from state to state. however, in this scenario, no DA in their right mind in the country would even think of bringing any charges if the guy gunned down the bat-holders. They'd be fried publicly and their case would go nowhere.
a bat is a very deadly instrument in the right hands. an averaged sized man swinging a bat can kill with a blow to the head. it could also cause internal organ injury. it doesn't matter if you're Shaq, if some dude is gonna come at you with a bat (or golf club, pry bar, hockey stick, etc)...you're only hope is to run and hopefully find a shield. it is too much for the law to ask that people calculate a proportional response like finding a chair and blocking the attacker(s).
That is with one guy swinging a bat. add one or more to the party and you're only hope of survival is a pistol.
now, if some old lady is swinging a bat at you, and you shoot her, you're probably gonna be asked a few questions.
so...if I was carrying i'd open fire. But I'd shout at least a warning first.
if i wasn't carrying, i'd break into a run and hope my weekly jogging routine saves my arse.
deadly force justification is different from state to state. however, in this scenario, no DA in their right mind in the country would even think of bringing any charges if the guy gunned down the bat-holders. They'd be fried publicly and their case would go nowhere.
a bat is a very deadly instrument in the right hands. an averaged sized man swinging a bat can kill with a blow to the head. it could also cause internal organ injury. it doesn't matter if you're Shaq, if some dude is gonna come at you with a bat (or golf club, pry bar, hockey stick, etc)...you're only hope is to run and hopefully find a shield. it is too much for the law to ask that people calculate a proportional response like finding a chair and blocking the attacker(s).
That is with one guy swinging a bat. add one or more to the party and you're only hope of survival is a pistol.
now, if some old lady is swinging a bat at you, and you shoot her, you're probably gonna be asked a few questions.
so...if I was carrying i'd open fire. But I'd shout at least a warning first.
if i wasn't carrying, i'd break into a run and hope my weekly jogging routine saves my arse.
Last edited:
...and he carries why?The man, fearing that his own weapon would be taken from him and used against him fired off shots into a adjacent wall and threw his weapon under a rack of potato chips. The man then fought back using his hands & feet until he was knocked unconscious.
The man is an idiot!
'nuff said.
Are you, poster, and anti? "They will take it away from you and kill you with it"
Last edited:
This is clearly a deadly force situation.
Of course, this was also a completely AVOIDABLE deadly force situation. The "victim" should have found a different place to shop once he was confronted.
However, once the "die was cast" he should have used his pistol for it's intended purpose, and defended himself rather than allow himself to be beaten and surrendering his weapon to felons...
Just my opinion, and worth exactly what you paid for it.
Regards,
Kevin
Of course, this was also a completely AVOIDABLE deadly force situation. The "victim" should have found a different place to shop once he was confronted.
However, once the "die was cast" he should have used his pistol for it's intended purpose, and defended himself rather than allow himself to be beaten and surrendering his weapon to felons...
Just my opinion, and worth exactly what you paid for it.
Regards,
Kevin