You're seated on this train car as either a single person or a married person with or without children, when 50-60 juveniles enter and start robbing/beating people. You are armed with your regular CCW (its not necessarily California, for the purposes of the scenario). Please list the scenario as it applies to you.
Part of developing strategies and tactics is placing oneself in a scenario and making the decision in advance. Please play out some alternative scenarios, and discuss the best options.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/BART-takeover-robbery-50-to-60-teens-swarm-11094745.php
For me: I typically carry a .357 magnum revolver with 12 extra rounds for reloads. I am married with no children, and my wife does not carry.
Option A: comply and hope that we don't get hurt.
Option B: draw and start shooting.
Option C: attempt hand to hand
Option D: run and hope my wife can keep up
Option E: run, and try to cover my wife's retreat
Option F: brandish and see if they will run, if not, start firing at my attackers.
I don't think there is a good option here. What are other alternatives and what would you do?
Option G: Tell my wife to "Make Ready," and when she is ready, pick a target. Depending upon the legal situation, I may be carrying under the provisions of 46.15 of the Texas Penal Code, or the federal LEOSA, in a place where she cannot carry on her Texas LTC, so making ready might mean giving her one of my weapons. What I/We do next depends upon the deadliness of the attack, and the "reasonableness" factor.
I did not choose "F," because the word "brandish" is there. That word implies a lack reasonableness. There are better choices of words.
Regarding A, well, compliance while armed means my weapon may be found, and used against me and/or others.
Option B may be applicable and reasonable. It depends upon the imminence and deadliness of the threat to any individual person. "Beating" is not precise/specific enough. Disparity of force, due to the number of attackers, is not precise/specific enough.
Option C is may be a reckless choice, if armed, and facing multiple determined attackers. At contact distance, no party in the fight is unarmed, as everyone can reach the weapon. If one of the attackers gains access to the weapon, well, guess what can happen next. The linear environment of a train MIGHT mean that less-lethal resistance is an option, for SOME well-prepared individuals.
Option D/E could reasonably apply, if running to a position of better tactical dominance, or if helping others escape. Sometimes it is better to save some portion of a group, if one cannot protect the whole group. Perhaps I can get to a dominant position, on a slope above the train tracks, able to engage the attackers from outside the train? Keep thinking!
My son is grown, lives in another metro area, and can carry under the provisions of LEOSA, so my above words did not take him into account. I recently became a grandfather, with one infant grandson, and another grandchild on the way. If the scenario were to include small grandchildren, the equation could change; if I could reasonably evacuate my small grandson/grandchildren to safety, without placing them in danger of being trampled in a stampede, I just might leave a train-load of strangers to their fate. (Sometimes, stampedes kill more folks than the armed attackers.) On the other hand, protecting my grandchildren might mean I would shoot more readily, and press the attack all the more fiercely. One cannot be expected to out-run multiple youthful attackers, while toting infants/toddlers.