Why and when would you pull the trigger?

[David Armstrong]

I'll disagree with your statement

That is fine. One can disagree all they want, but one should also find out what the facts are.

Don't ever count on that.

True, don't count on it. Again, though, that doesn't change the facts, which are as stated.

That small chance may be your own death sentence.

Just as starting the shooting may be your own death sentence. There are variables either way to be considered.

Anytime someone uses a threat of violence there are 3 things to remember;

There is also a 4th thing:
If you haven't been shot/stabbed/beaten/etc right off the bat there is a very small chance of being shot/stabbed/beaten/etc later on.
Feel free to make a choice, but let's make choices based on accurate information whenever possible. My $.02.

 

[David Armstrong]

I, too, don't agree with the opinion that

As mentioned, feel free to disagree, but recognize the facts. What I said is not an opinion, it is a fact.

I'm aware of numerous instances where aggressive thieves, 'needed' to experience an overwhelming sense of control over their victims and freely chose to use their guns or knives immediately before leaving the scene of a crime.

Such instances are quite rare in comparison with those where that does not occur.

Like I said, for many of these people, I don't think it's just about sex or money. You CAN count on them to use their weapons!

I'm aware of what you said, but I'm also awqre of what the research into this sort of stuff reveals. I'll deal with facts anytime they are available as opposed to what someone says or thinks.

 

[45Marlin carbine]

lots of points to consider, if the BG had the 'drop' on me you better beleive I'm telling him 'Be cool here's wallet' then backing away looking for any moment he may be distracted enough for me to get my weapon out, while still withdrawing.
this doesn't seem to be a 'home invasion' sort of scenario but rather a street surprise type of situ. an ambush sort of thing. probably the worst situation.

 

[Night Watch]

Originally posted by David Armstrong
As mentioned, feel free to disagree, but recognize the facts. What I said is not an opinion, it is a fact.

Me too! Source? My own family.

(idem)
Such instances are quite rare in comparison with those where that does not occur.

Actually, no they’re not! I get reminded of how these sociopaths really think every time I walk into my favorite gun shop and look at the proprietor’s head. No (sane) reason in the world for him to have been savagely butt-stroked just before the robbers left the store!

He was outnumbered 3 to 1. They were armed with pistols and an AK-47. He did exactly as he was told and offered no resistance. He lay down on the floor and let them take whatever they wanted. All he asked was that they not hurt him. Their response? Just before leaving, they hit him hard enough to almost kill him! It didn't have to go down like that.

On the other hand, my wife refused to comply when two, 'bangers' tried to hijack her new car. She was able to escape and got to keep her car, too. What do you think would have happened to her if she complied and allowed them to get into that car with her? (She's an attractive woman!)

Well, feel free to sight your sources. Something from big corporate America or the liberal left, perhaps? Maybe you should get some real world experience by working the night shift at your local, 'Stop & Rob' for awhile. We, all, know how well compliance and non-aggression have worked for these people!

THE PICTURE OF COMPLIANCE -

Well ... Now that I've got that off my chest: To be perfectly fair, some degree of (initial) compliance might be necessary. For instance: I DID tell my wife that she should have immediately surrendered the car key by tossing it on the ground in front of her and, then, made a fast break for the front of the building while screaming into her cell phone for help!

Her reply? She said; 'We just bought that car!' Then, she asked me to give her one of my guns which she, now, frequently carries. (Great lady!)

Here, it's very interesting reading:

Jewelry Store Robberies

As you'll note: Some store owners made it; and others did not. (1) At M&M Jewelers, compliance did no good at all. (2) A complete lack of weapon training and gross unfamiliarity with his gun were prime failure factors at DFC Jewelers. (3) A gun once saved the merchandise - and the day - at Newton Jewelry; but, the owner has said that, because of, 'insurance reasons', he'd never do it again. (May he live so long!) (4) At Beverly Hills Jewelers, a gun(s) again saved the day; and (5) at Paradise Jewelers, a nice old lady lucked out by immediately cooperating and just got tied up.

So, yes, I suppose if you're a nice old lady compliance might, very well, be the only way to go! I'll say this: I would never have given a gun to my very own mother because no amount of training would have prevented that woman from promptly finding a way to shoot, either, herself or one of the neighbors with that fascinating device!

 

[David Armstrong]

Me too! Source? My own family.

That's nice, but almost by definition anecdotal information is fairly irrelevant in small doses when one wants learn something about general behaviors.

Actually, no they’re not!

Nice claim, but contradicted by the facts. In violent crimes if one is not injured right away and barring other variables the chance of getting hurt seriously is a very small percentage. If you have some data other than a few personal stories I'd be glad to examine it.

Well, feel free to sight your sources. Something from big corporate America or the liberal left, perhaps?

Yes, that bastion of liberalism known as the FBI has such a record of distorting the data. Strange that it is used by virtually everybody.

Maybe you should get some real world experience by working the night shift at your local, 'Stop & Rob' for awhile.

In my younger days I worked quite a bit in just such a situation, and also continued to do so P/T after becoming a LEO, so I'd suggest you might want to find out what you are talking about before you accuse people of needing or lacking in any certain experience.

Here, it's very interesting reading:

Nah, I find general anecdotal stories to be fairly useless. When you get numbers up into the sefveral hundred, or preferably thousands, then you can accurately determine trends, probabilities, etc. You might try reading something like the UCRs to see how your perceptions differ from reality.

 

[mikejonestkd]

Night watch,

I suggesting using google and typing in David Armstrong McNeese. There should be enough for you to read about for a while on the topic and David's qualifications.

The facts are out there and David knows them.

 

[Night Watch]

What are ya, ganging up on me?

Night watch,

I suggesting using Google and typing in David Armstrong McNeese. There should be enough for you to read about for a while on the topic and David's qualifications.

The facts are out there and David knows them.

Other than the curious coincidence that he looks like my twin brother and writes fairly well, I’m not overly impressed. I, also, come from a family that is famous in, both, state law-enforcement AND education; but, so what, that’s to my ancestor’s credit more than it is to mine.

I, still, don’t agree with much of what he has to say; and, I’ve decided to ignore the little, ‘hissy fit’ he’s thrown above. You can be wowed if you want to; that’s your business. I’ve got better things to do; and, I’m going to drop this, now.

 

[David Armstrong]

I, still, don’t agree with much of what he has to say;

As mentioned, whetehr one agrees with what is said has no bearing on what the facts are. One can deal with facts or with what they think. I know which I think will give the best result.

I’ve decided to ignore the little, ‘hissy fit’ he’s thrown above.

The facts are out there and David knows them.

Thanks, Mike. The problem is that the more facts I learn the more I realize how many more facts there are to learn!

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Gee, Dave - I was teaching research design in Intro and railing against making decisions based on a vivid instance as compared to collecting enough data to make a reasonable analysis.

Not everyone can get that principle.

I have an theory (haha) - folks imagine how they, dipped in gun theory and fighting, will act in an incident. They see themselves as heroes and winners in combat - they don't think about the total outcome. Thus, being successful by acquiesence in the typical stop and rob or bank robbery is a threat to this word view of themselves.

The correct world view (IMHO ) is that one has a realistic view of the options and abilities. One acts for a goal which is to survive using a path that has the best possibility of such. If the goal is to make a statement - then of course start the fight. If the goal is to save one's skin - then choose a path that maximizes that outcome. One can deal with hurt feelings later.

Now, of course, do I follow my own advice - at the NTI I started one gun fight and a disarm that judges thought I should have let go down. Then I blabbed and got killed when they thought I should have fought harder. Whatever - the point is that there are no dichotomous rules guaranteed of success. One shouldn't futter around but one should think.

If you read victimology studies in the CJ literature - you know there are no guarantees about outcomes - there are just odds.

 

[threegun]

The problem with probabilities as it relates to life and death scenarios is that you DIE if wrong.

Action on the other hand may reduce your chances of survival statistically but it allows you a fighting chance in every scenario.

If my life is at risk, I'm going down fighting. Even though dead is dead I would rather my death hinge on my skill and luck than some bad guys decision.

 

[David Armstrong]

Not everyone can get that principle.

True, and more problematic, I feel is as you further state---some don't even want to get the principle.

If you read victimology studies in the CJ literature - you know there are no guarantees about outcomes - there are just odds.

That's about it. And what I always find so curious in instances like this is why people would intentionally handicap themselves by knowing as little as possible about what the odds really are. You can live or die as the result of various actions and choices, it would seem that one would want to decide on the action or choice with the best information available to maximize the live chances and minimize the die chances.

 

[threegun]

Most criminal events that involve deadly force start out that way. If you haven't been shot/stabbed/beaten/etc right off the bat there is a very small chance of being shot/stabbed/beaten/etc later on. Criminals tend to threaten in order to gain compliance, and as long as that compliance is there the event rarely escalates

Probabilities and percentages are a must for Texas Holdem or the stock market. If your wrong you lose money. In a criminal scenario its death. That raises the odds in my book well beyond anything that the FBI's uniformed crime report stats indicate. That might be hard for some internet forensic gunfight analyst to understand but it is the real world.

 

[Justme]

I get it, only play the odds in poker or the stock market, if your life is at risk do whatever you feel like and ignore the odds.

 

[threegun]

I get it, only play the odds in poker or the stock market, if your life is at risk do whatever you feel like and ignore the odds.

No you don't do whatever you feel like....come on man. Why do you even carry? Odds are that the use of your gun will escalate the situation and increase the likelihood that you die.

Odds when they relate to life and death aren't the same.

If 10 armed men in a room were told that one might die if no action is taken or two might die if action is taken what do you do? Since death is final I believe I have to act despite the increase in danger doing so. Precisely the reason I carry. So that I can determine my fate not some scumbag.

 

[Justme]

You are well within your rights to act in an illogical and counterproductive way. I know people who will drive 30minutes out of the way because they want to avoid a 15 minute traffic jam. It's the same thing. To some people control is more important than life itself.

 

[threegun]

To some people control is more important than life itself.

You post as if acting equals death and not acting equals life.

Both are wrong. My training guarantees a fighting chance and being in control. Playing the odds guarantees nothing.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The odds are just information as to likely outcome. The point is that one should know that some situations are better not escalated. You have to make the final call but it is better to know what happens and when then not.

Simple point.

 

[Justme]

You post as if acting equals death and not acting equals life.

Sometimes that is true. Sometimes the inverse(or is it converse?) is true. This is what you should base your decision on, not on which will give you the most control over the situation.

 

[Lurper]

The odds are just information as to likely outcome. The point is that one should know that some situations are better not escalated.

The problem with that Glenn, is there is no way to know which ones should and which ones shouldn't. IMO, it is much more desireable for me to make that decision than the BG if at all possible. Sure most incidents probably don't result in the BG killing or injuring the victim, but I am not willing to leave that decision to chance. No one can tell me which criminal is more or less likely to kill, therefore I assume every one of them is a killer. I think it is rather disigenuous to condemn those who would choose to act as the default choice. Maybe it has nothing to do with " . . . dipped in gun theory and fighting, will act in an incident. They see themselves as heroes and winners in combat . . . " and more to do with seeing one's self as surviving an incident.

 

[Groundhog]

Maybe all you guys just over-analyze stuff. I seriously doubt very many people think along these lines when confronted with a possibly lethal situation. At that time, either training or instinct rules.