Why do people always think that a gun is the answer to every situation?As things stand he’s

Well, from the description I think we don't have all of the details. I would certainly have been more comfortable if I was armed in that situation and so I would have a choice of whether I thought I was safer driving off or fighting back.

It sounds like Schuster only had the option to run or hide and hiding seemed to him to be the best option at the time. Perhaps the gesture of fading back behind the pillar was submissive enough to persuade the felon to move on or perhaps it bought him some time that the felon thought it was too much time spent from his frantic run from the police.

I wasn't there and so cannot adequately second guess his decision.

Jeff White said:

The answer was almost always to drive away.

Click to expand...

THIS, a thousand times over.

Unless you're training a couple times a week, and are a certified fire-breathing Rambo, you have much more practice operating that 2000#, 150HP, mobile missile you're driving than you do the handgun your carrying. When given the choice between driving and shooting. . . driving is almost always better.

Also, if the guy being pursued by the blinkenlights stops next to you, I really didn't think you need to wait to see a gun before deciding to DRIVE.

Y’all are overlooking the obvious here. Pulling over is the right thing to do. Coming to a complete stop is not a good option IMHO. From what I have seen and experienced, if a person slows down to a crawl then they are still moving enough to outpace a walking person. A running person will be noticeable so all the driver would have to do is take their foot off the brake and even at an idle the vehicle will outpace most runners, especially over a distance, not to mention making it harder to get in the vehicle or fight for control of the vehicle in which case the accelerator can be pushed further minimizing the bad guys chances. Looking at it another way, assuming the disabled vehicle loses control and hits your vehicle, a moving vehicle takes much less damage than a hard stopped vehicle sitting in park or with brakes applied.

Short version, pull over and slow down but don’t stop.

Pedal to the metal, dudes.

I cover this concept in CCW courses.

Bad guy has to decide to shoot at you, then has to hit you, then has to deal with your body and maybe a scared/pissed driver...

That's a lot to deal with if he's looking for a quick getaway.

Jeff White said:

...

My point here is that we need to think about other options besides our gun. It’s not always the best option.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. The old hammer and nail conundrum.

A dismaying number of folks seem to think that carrying a gun means it's going to be the best solution to a problem.

While some properly oriented training regarding legal issues involved in the use (or threatened use) of deadly force can be helpful for many folks, it may often be a perception and mindset perspective that may need to be addressed.

If you're already inside a great source of potential cover, when properly used to best effect, which can also be used to escape and evade the perceived threat, the most effective use of tactics and options available to you would seem obvious. This is something that can be taught to cops during recurrent training, but it might not be discussed as often as it might in some "firearms-oriented" training offered commercially.

How many "students-of-the-gun" eagerly paying for a training class want to be told many ways to not have to use their gun? More's the pity.

It takes an incredible amount of training to reach anywhere for a firearm, aim, and fire before a weapon already pointing at you does. And even then you either succeed or you die. There is very little middle ground.

On the flip side, I have actually seen cases in which a would-be carjacker, angered by his intended victim driving off, has opened fire at him or her, killing in at least a few cases. In none of those cases did the vehicle succeed at outrunning the fired bullets.

Without actually seeing/hearing/feeling everything I would have had I been in Schuster's situation, I cannot say for sure what my response would have been. I'm not that good at keyboard-quarterbacking, I guess. It's quite possible I might have actually tried to exit the vehicle to give it up, watching for any opportunity to escape or, if necessary, go to arms.

FWIW, for what it's worth, it appears Schuster was neither injured nor relieved of his vehicle. This is despite his neither cooperating nor fighting back. Why the suspect didn't shoot him and then pull him out is a forever-unknown.

Jeff White said:

Tuesday there was a nearly 200 mile pursuit of a kidnapping suspect that started in Jefferson City, MO and ended in rural Bond County, IL. The suspect and an attempted car jacking victim are dead.

Today I see this article with an interview of another attempted car jacking victim that the suspect didn’t shoot:

http://broadcaster.lee.net/t?r=7&c=1046323&l=43&ctl=1650099:085355EF49D757101ACAD772DD464B01

Retired carpenter Charles Schuster pulled over when he saw the pursuit approach him. He was unaware that it was a pursuit. The suspect pulled up next to Schuster got out of his disabled vehicle (4 flat tires from stop sticks), walked up to Schuster and pointed a gun at him. Schuster said he assumed he was being carjacked and leaned back behind the door post hoping it was cover. The suspect then got back into his disabled vehicle and drove down the road where he shot and killed another motorist who had pulled over.

However Schuster had this to say:



I don’t know if that’s brave talk for the press or if he actually thinks it’s a good tactical move to draw on a drawn gun.

What would have been wrong with driving off?

If he had his gun with him on Tuesday he might well be dead today and his family would be telling the press what a good man he was and the anti-gun people would have another story “proving” that carrying a gun is useless for self defense.

As things stand today he’s lucky to be alive, the suspect did shoot the next driver he tried to carjack.

There is nothing wrong with driving away. He was on the shoulder of a rural highway. I drive RT 140 frequently and there is nothing to block you in there like there might be in an urban environment.

Click to expand...

My dad always said: the man with his gun drawn first is the boss !! Unless you of course have suicide on your mind......

Clearing a potential armed threat by simply driving away is your best response - but remember as well that your vehicle itself is a weapon.... if that would be carjacker or armed assailant is foolish enough to be in front of or directly behind his target he (or she) might be on the wrong end of that deal... Yes, indeed, there are other responses than firearms to defeat an armed attacker... In the years when I was in police work (and in a car most days...) I made a point of never allowing anyone to approach my vehicle without stepping out of the car before they could get near - so that I had at least a chance of evading if a confrontation turned ugly. If I was forced by circumstances to remain behind the wheel - the car was always in gear for an instant response it needed... Funny the things you consider when you spend much of your life by yourself in a car on the street -at all hours of the day or night.

No you don't want to find yourself trapped in a car motion-less if an opponent starts shooting... that's a very bad deal any way you look at it....

I think the he average citizen would need some kind of training or at least education on matters involving being in a car and being threatened.

Yes the answer is nearly always to drive away. One who has never thought about it before would be woefully unprepared for it.

Never seen a car jacking so what do I know. Sometimes you can't move forward or even out of the way if traffic is congested.

Jeff White said:

Tuesday there was a nearly 200 mile pursuit of a kidnapping suspect that started in Jefferson City, MO and ended in rural Bond County, IL. The suspect and an attempted car jacking victim are dead.

Today I see this article with an interview of another attempted car jacking victim that the suspect didn’t shoot:

http://broadcaster.lee.net/t?r=7&c=1046323&l=43&ctl=1650099:085355EF49D757101ACAD772DD464B01

Retired carpenter Charles Schuster pulled over when he saw the pursuit approach him. He was unaware that it was a pursuit. The suspect pulled up next to Schuster got out of his disabled vehicle (4 flat tires from stop sticks), walked up to Schuster and pointed a gun at him. Schuster said he assumed he was being carjacked and leaned back behind the door post hoping it was cover. The suspect then got back into his disabled vehicle and drove down the road where he shot and killed another motorist who had pulled over.

However Schuster had this to say:



I don’t know if that’s brave talk for the press or if he actually thinks it’s a good tactical move to draw on a drawn gun.

What would have been wrong with driving off?

Click to expand...

To answer your query stated in the title of the thread, people often then a gun is the answer because they feel it offers finality to the problem.

As for the brave talk, the talk is very similar to Suzanna Gratia Hupp's story of the Luby's shooting, where she left her normally illegally carried pistol in her vehicle. She expressed the same sort of sentiments about being able to shoot the gunman.

Sometimes, you have to draw on a drawn gun, though it is best not to do it when the bad guy is actually watching you.

With that said, brave talk is always easiest when you didn't actually do anything to stop the bad guy. Would of, could of, should of post hoc glory is pretty darned meaningless, but sometimes rampant after such situations.

What would have been wrong with just driving off? I can't believe you would ask that question! (sarcasm) People in American society, particularly males, have been taught through much of their lives that running away is something cowards do. Never mind if it is the smart thing to do. So here we have Charles Schuster, who would have fought if he had a gun, but he didn't run away either. He shielded himself with his door, standing his group (or sitting his car), so to speak.

Driving away from a carjacker doesn't always work. Across the river from me in Council Bluffs, Iowa, an escaped convict, who had just shot two sheriff's deputies, tried to carjack a passing pickup. The driver caught a bullet in the neck as he drove away.

Suzanna Hupp might have had an opportunity to shoot the gunman while he was preoccupied shooting others.

After he shot Gabby Giffords and others, Jared Loughner was taken down by a middle aged woman who grabbed his magazine during a reload. That gave other people the chance to pile on and subdue him.

Statistically, folks can’t hit moving targets very easily even at close range. I’m playing those statistics and driving away if I can.

The old guy was out of it from the jump, should have been more observant.

Since he couldn’t react to pull away I doubt he would have shot anybody.

as to why he lived BG noticed something he didn’t like, maybe it was stick?

huntsman said:

The old guy was .....as to why he lived BG noticed something he didn’t like, maybe it was stick?

Click to expand...

Good thinking, Huntsman. Had to be a reason why the BG moved on from Schuster.

This is a disturbing story.

I totally agree with the assertions that driving away was an appropriate response. I view the use of a firearm for defense outside my home as a last ditch effort to preserve my life or someone else being victimized, not as a primary response to a threat. I believe people have a duty to retreat if possible, unless in their own home, where they have already retreated as much as they can to their own dwelling.

I have actually given this thought for various reasons, primarily due to some of the places I drive. For me any population center is a concern, but I also drive forest roads that are single vehicle wide, often dead end, and may be blocked by fallen trees. A few years ago, a well armed nut was fleeing police, and when blazing past where I had worked the day prior, and my crew was working that day. We aren't allowed to carry on the job. However I recreate in the woods also, and do carry then. What would I do if confronted by an armed lunatic driving down a gravel road? I would drive away if still in my vehicle. This occurrence gave me reason to consider this possibility.

In an urban setting, it seems best to pull over as required, but my vehicle has automatic locks on the doors. Once the vehicle is placed in drive, the doors lock. I think a good tactic when pulling over for any law enforcement vehicle would be to leave the vehicle in gear until an actual police car pulls up behind you. If another motorist pulls up, leave it in gear. If they get out of their vehicle with a gun and start to move toward your vehicle, duck down and stomp on the gas.

I think drawing on an already drawn gun is the worst idea possible. I'm not faster than someone's trigger finger. This sounds like bluster, and the gentleman in this story is clearly not thinking it through.

I don’t know if that’s brave talk for the press or if he actually thinks it’s a good tactical move to draw on a drawn gun.

Click to expand...

That’s an assumption.

What if he got out of the car, scooted over or any number of things that made the BG assume he was complying, then engage.

I don’t own an automobile worth the post shooting hassle but if someone’s life was on the line...not like it hasn’t been done before.

This guy likely thought he was “home free” before he was killed.



This guy stuck his gun in the window a bit too far before he was killed.



Another where it looks like no one could hit anything.

https://www.newsflare.com/video/235947/other/carjacking-gone-wrong-2018-caught-on-camera#

Worth noting that all three were already completely stopped and likely not even in gear.

Drawing gun against a drawn gun is a bad option. Movement, distance, cover,and reassess the situation. It would be simple if it is as easy as a gas pedal.

Ironically, Schuster is a retired carpenter. And there's the answer to your question. To a carpenter, everything looks like a nail. To gun guys, gals and transpersons, the answer to armed aggression is an armed response.

Had the chap on the run pulled over Alexis Stafano, a hairdresser from Rye, NY, running, screaming at a debilitating, ear destroying decibel level, or fainting might have been likely responses. And might have all been equally effective too.