How to deal with store robbery as a 3rd party CCW

rondog said:

You're not a cop, you have no legal right or obligation to use deadly force on a criminal just because he's committing a crime.

Click to expand...

You're only half right. Actually here in Colorado you DO have the right to use deadly force on a criminal "just because he's committing a crime" if the criminal is threatening to kill or seriously hurt someone (doesn't matter whether you know the victim or not). As a non police officer you don't have any legal obligation to do so however.



When a criminal pulls a gun it doesn't matter what lurks in his heart of hearts, it doesn't matter that deep down in side he would never harm a fly. His action is a clear and declarative statement that "I will kill someone if you don't give me what I want."

So when someone is robbing a store, the crime isn't simple theft, its threatening to murder someone (with theft being the motive).

You really aren't going to have time to play "what if" games in your head at the time so I think you have to decide before you're ever presented with the situation.
Either:
1) No matter what I'm not going to shoot someone unless they are threatening me or mine.
2) I will intervene if I can safely.

Certainly you need to take into account your jurisdiction's laws regarding self defense and defending others.

you have no legal right or obligation to use deadly force on a criminal just because he's committing a crime.

Click to expand...

Well actually most states authorize use of deadly force to protect another innocent person from seriously bodily harm or death. While you have no legal DUTY to protect, you are authorized. An armed stickup would certainly fall in that category of lawful protection.

And yes, I think you could pick up on signs of the intention of lethal use. Foolproof, no. Signs, yep. Lining people up on their knees. Probably gonna be an execution... gotta go with your gut sometimes.

Kleanbore said:

Your immediate use of deadly force may accomplish that. On the other hand, it may cause that innocent fellow man to be killed or injured when that might not have happened but for your actions (yes, the drawn gun probably justifies your use of deadly force, but there's reasonable probability that it would not have been fired). No, you would not be criminally liable for the clerk's death, but if you shoot and the clerk is killed, you will never know whether it would have happened otherwise.

It may also cause others to be killed or injured, bad enough without the attendant liability. It may result in your death or serous injury.

If you shoot him in the heart, he would still have an adequate blood and oxygen supply to his central nervous system to empty his magazine, likely hitting the clerk and possibly others including you. From what I've read, two shots to one lung would not stop him instantly. If you empty your magazine quickly, you stand a chance of shooting someone else.

All of that could happen, and if he has an accomplice, he may open up, too.

No matter what happens, if you survive, you will be entirely on your own, with no community to defend you or to pay your expenses during the investigation, pay for a legal defense, compensate you for your likely loss of income, defray medical costs should you be injured, or to pay civil damages assessed against you.

If you do not fire, he may or he may not injure the clerk.

If it becomes an active shooter situation, you and others a clearly in great danger. If my wife were present, I would not consider escape a viable option, but otherwise, I would not rule out escape if it were possible unless it were plainly obvious that I could stop the perp effectively with very little or no risk of hurting someone else.

Click to expand...

Great answer.

But I personally see one flaw. You say that there is reasonable probability that the gun may not be used. If you were the clerk in this situation and you had your CCW, would you use that same mentality or would you protect yourself?

You may think I'm comparing apples to oranges but when you get down to it it's the same thing. It's a human life in danger.

I find it incomprehensible that you'll wager the clerk's life on "reasonable probability" yet not your own. Are you actually telling me that your life or the lives of your family members are more valuable than the clerks?

Well, y'all can argue about it all ya want. I know what I'm going to do when/if the time comes, and that will be whatever is the right thing to do at that moment, in that situation. Far too many possible factors to say what's right or wrong on an internet forum.

If the BG just wants to do a cash & dash, I'll try to remember as much detail as I can and try to be a good witness. If the BG issues so much as a hint that he might harm me, the clerk, or someone else, it's a different story. Regardless of how it goes, if at all possible, my .45 will be in my hand and alongside my leg.

The subject of this thread is one that has haunted me for a couple of years. I wish it was possible to avoid concluding that it would be wise to take preemptive action and shoot an armed robber without warning but it isn't.

It seems that the only other options would be rolling the dice with my life and the lives of other innocent people.

Draw and Shout a Warning: Can my reaction beat the robbers action?
Once I draw and shout a command I will be reacting to the robbers action. How will I tell if the robber intends to comply with my commands or is getting ready to fire on me? Does action beat reaction? Would the robber’s action beat my reaction? It seems like there is a very good chance that the robber’s reaction would beat my reaction. So I’d draw and shout, “drop your weapon or I’ll shoo…” bang, bang, bang. And there I am lying in a pool of my own blood.

Do Nothing to Stop the Robbery: Rolling the dice with my own life?
With each passing second of the robbery the robber could gain more and more control over his environment and there may never be a better opportunity to take action to avoid a disastrous outcome than in the first seconds of a robbery. Do I want to give control of my survival to an unpredictable antisocial criminal with a firearm in his hand?

Shoot Without a Warning: The odds favor my survival
Shooting without a warning to stop the threat seems to favor the survival of innocent people including myself. There is no reliance on the good will of an antisocial criminal not to kill everyone in the store and there is no worry about the robber’s action beating my reaction if I were to call out a warning to him.

I’m not comfortable with the idea of shooting an armed robber without a warning but it does seem to be the action that most favors my survival and the survival of other innocent people when confronted with a criminal threatening to kill people if his demands are not met.

Great answer.

But I personally see one flaw. You say that there is reasonable probability that the gun may not be used. If you were the clerk in this situation and you had your CCW, would you use that same mentality or would you protect yourself?

You may think I'm comparing apples to oranges but when you get down to it it's the same thing. It's a human life in danger.

I find it incomprehensible that you'll wager the clerk's life on "reasonable probability" yet not your own. Are you actually telling me that your life or the lives of your family members are more valuable than the clerks?

Click to expand...

There's a flip-side to your argument -- the clerk's life is not mine to wager but my life presumably is. This is mostly an academic issue, because not everything is knowable in this situation, and what particular action or inaction are we considering a reckless gamble? (and why the question is not answerable)

KodiakBeer, you're right if we're talking about point-blank range for the scumbag.
This is the problem with threads of this nature, everyone has a different preconception of the scenario.
My mental picture/map of the scene was with the armed robber threatening the clerk across perhaps 15 feet, from right inside the door, and in my little mental map I was back at the drink fridge (maybe 20 feet behind the robber) with an unobstructed view of the crime in progress and no particular attention on me.

Now I imagine that in your map the robber has pretended to make a purchase and is within bad-breath distance at the register, and on that board you're right, dropping the scumwad is probably hazardous to whoever his gun is trained on.

Of course, if either one of us is ever in the OP's posed situation, I'm sure it won't resemble either one of our imagined layouts, and it will be over one way or another before we can do much analysis ... all I know for sure is that I'm not going to be ordered about by some armed robber thug wannabe, particularly if it looks like he's about to go into a Luby's/VT/Lane Bryant style fantasy of executions. I'm pretty sure that I'm not going to count on the good will of a scumbag knocking over a gas station or convenience store either, they're so far off of the rationality scale that I can't predict what they're planning on doing with a gun they've already been posturing aggressively with.

Lane Bryant? (I hadn't heard of that one)

My mental picture/map of the scene was with the armed robber threatening the clerk across perhaps 15 feet, from right inside the door, and in my little mental map I was back at the drink fridge (maybe 20 feet behind the robber) with an unobstructed view of the crime in progress and no particular attention on me.

Click to expand...

Most of the crime videos I've seen involve the clerk on one side of the counter and the gunman or gunmen in arms reach of the clerk (to control the clerk, receive cash, and intimidate the clerk, or assault the clerk with a pistol whip, etc.). Sometimes on the opposite side of the counter as the clerk, and sometimes they jump the counter and get on the same side as the clerk. In nearly every video they are constantly moving around (moving target, fidgety, etc), and looking in every direction (out the windows, at the door, at the register, at the clerk, scanning the store. It would be VERY hard to remain unnoticed unless you were completely obscured when the holdup started.


Let's look at it from another perspective. Let's say you're the convenience store clerk and some thug comes in a shoves a .38 caliber revolver 2' from your chest and face and demands the register cash.

As you are complying (first you wanna live and second it ain't your cheese in the box) you see some unknown person (the customer, one of us CCW folks) sneaking around and drawing a handgun.

At this point the gunman only wants the cash and presumably (admittedly a big presumption that could change in an instant) wants to flee. Maybe he shoots on his way out, maybe he lines folks up on their knees, or maybe he just flees with the bread. Dunno at this point.

Would YOU, as the clerk, want this unknown person touching off rounds which will absolutely escalate things? Keep in mind the thug may be literally a couple feet from you, moving and looking around, with a gun pointed right at your chest and face.

I gotta say that, as I stand there, as the clerk, with my 50/50 odds of the gunman shooting vs. an BIG unknown variable of the CCW guy touching off a gunfight; I might rather take my chances with the robbery and not being shot.

I've seen some people shoot very poorly. It isn't pretty or accurate. Some people are really bad shots. At 20' I've seen people entirely miss man sized targets. I've seen Soldiers that FAIL to qualify with pistols and rifles!!! I've shot with cops that are terrible shots. Throw in pressure, sweat, adrenaline, speed, and other variables and if the perp is standing within a few feet you could easily get hit by either the CCW guy or the perp. God forbid the perp kills the CCW guy. Street rules mean no witnesses.

LB shooting:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327908,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_Bryant_shooting

Of course, that shooting never happened, because carrying a handgun outside of the home is illegal in IL and therefore impossible.

Regarding the Lane Bryant situation, it was clear they were all to be executed because they were led to the back of the store ...

I think we're all in agreement that when indicators such as that occur you've reached the point of fight or flight, and I would be surprised to find a single CCW holder or other able bodied person to not try to fight at the first given opportunity with any handy weapon. Problem is that unless you have a weapon on your body and/or are able bodied, your chances of fighting an armed gunman are poor. Most of the victems were overweight woman and likely easy to control at gunpoint (probably terrified and unfit and untrained to fight back).

and I would be surprised to find a single CCW holder or other able bodied person to not try to fight at the first given opportunity with any handy weapon.

Click to expand...

How many at VT lined up?
There were 6 at that LB store (one played dead and survived)

Sorry to burst your bubble, but not every LB customer or employee is morbidly obese and riding around in a scooter, your assumption is not valid.
VT students were willing to be victims, not a single thrown stapler or book, not a single chair broken over Cho's head, were they all fatties wheezing too hard to resist as well?

I think you underestimate the "sheep at the slaughterhouse" mentality of the average citizen, or at least the ability of the average victim to convince themselves that the situation is about to be resolved by an altruistic criminal or the magic arrival of the police.

Quote:
and I would be surprised to find a single CCW holder or other able bodied person to not try to fight at the first given opportunity with any handy weapon.

How many at VT lined up?
There were 6 at that LB store (one played dead and survived)

Sorry to burst your bubble, but not every LB customer or employee is morbidly obese and riding around in a scooter, your assumption is not valid.
VT students were willing to be victims, not a single thrown stapler or book, not a single chair broken over Cho's head, were they all fatties wheezing too hard to resist as well?

I think you underestimate the "sheep at the slaughterhouse" mentality of the average citizen, or at least the ability of the average victim to convince themselves that the situation is about to be resolved by an altruistic criminal or the magic arrival of the police.

Click to expand...

I wasn't there, but according to Wikipedia RE: Lane Bryant:

Four customers, a part-time employee, and the store manager, all plus-sized women, were taken to the back of the store and executed.

Click to expand...

College students are, sadly, mostly indoctrinated to be sheep. VT was an anti-gun campus. As was Columbine. Most of these mass shootings are in calculated places where most or all of the folks will be unarmed and hence really caught off guard and unable or untrained to resist. Heck, sadly, even the military bases don't allow masses of Soldiers to be personally armed :banghead: These choice places to rob and execute also don't have ample weapons like hardware stores or sporting good stores... they are sheep places where folks are hearded around and just wait to be victims. Fort Hood was the same. Soldiers, unarmed of course, standing around in big lines waiting to for various administrative processing. And then we see what happens like Ft. Hood. However, not many of these types of shootings in gun stores or police stations.

And even in businesses, they tend to happen in anti-gun states where there are no CCW people... and frankly in my experience the type of people who would like to CCW are the type that would fight back. Sheep tend to live in states where they cannot CCW. They will be the easiest to comply - and voila we have LB in Illinois in 2008 (and the list goes on).

Obviously, in the cumulative case study, even if some of us would not act during a 'normal' robbery, some of us would. And that's typically a big enough deterant to robbery. And nearly everyone with a CCW and carrying would act if an executing were imminent. Hence less of these in CCW locations (in support of John Lott's book, More Guns = Less Crime).

rondog-You're not a cop, you have no legal right or obligation to use deadly force on a criminal just because he's committing a crime.

In Texas you do have a right to defend a third party that is a victim of aggravated robbery and other such crimes.

There are a lot of variables (lots of IF, ands/ors) to the OP question but here would be my take.

1. I would only draw IF the weapon was not directly pointed at someone and I had a clear line of fire OR if I was immediately threatened with harm (they were rounding people up, or advancing on me). I am NOT going to be taken captive to rely on the criminals good intentions but if I have the luxury of time I will use it to my advantage.

2. IF I did draw, I will fire at the individual until the threat is gone. I have seen too many clips and vids and read to many stories about someone with a CCW drawing and saying "Freeze!" followed by the him/her losing the advantage, the BG getting time to engage them in a tit for tat gun battle. If you draw, shoot. You give him the warning in a store with everyone in close proximity, you may get yourself or someone else shot.

you have no legal right or obligation to use deadly force on a criminal just because he's committing a crime.

Click to expand...

You could argue though, the BG's actions pose a direct threat of serious harm or death to the clerk and anyone in the store including yourself. Personally, I would not shoot someone to protect property, but to protect a life, I have no issues with that. I would see firing on the criminal in this case an action necessitated by the threat he poses to everyone in the place (including myself) not because he is stealing property.

In Texas you do have a right to defend a third party that is a victim of aggravated robbery and other such crimes

As is the case in many other states.

But along with that right comes a heaping helping of responsibility, and the intervening concealed carrier is likely to be assuming full responsibility for everything that happens subsequent to his or her involvement in a totally unpredictable situation. Exercise the right, assume the responsibility. That might be worth keeping in mind.

lpl

I never had a nightmare about losing all my money, but I've certainly had nightmares about situations (much less dire than this one) where I failed to do the right thing. So I think we can all tell what my subconscious would prefer.

How long does the average gas station robbery take? A minute? Seems like most of the time is dominated by the clerk figuring out that yes, he's being asked to open the register, actually doing it, and then removing a sum of cash. Not a lengthy operation. I'd expect the robber to be on his way out by the time most folks have noticed, processed and accepted what is going on, and started deciding what to do. If the robber is still around once you've gotten through that, doesn't it seem to suggest something more is happening? (And in this circumstance, more seems to be bad.)

I just want to point out that there are a number of states where lethal force can be used to prevent a felony, even when there is no threat of death of grievous bodily injury.

Great discussion!! Well done folks.

Thank God I live in Texas, with its Castle laws, concealed carry and pro-carry LEOs. The bottom line someone mentioned really applies here in Texas, "I was in fear of my life and the lives of others and shot to defend myself and others, Amen!"

They teach that loud and clear at the CC courses here in Texas. I really feel for those poor citizens in states and cities with ultra liberal politicians that have passed laws robbing them of their second ammendment rights. Let's start cleaning house and Senate both in the next elections and get people that are really concerned with our liberties and not free stuff for illegals and non-producers . . . nuff said. Why carry if your not going to take courses, practice using it and be prepared to save yourselves when the threat is obvious? Us non-felonious citizens should be allowed to carry openly, like Robert Heinlein said in one of his books, "An armed society is a polite society."

Remember our Vets this Memorial Weekend, many died to preserve our freedom!!

Cdr. Mike Boyd USN, retired (and tired!!)

1) Open fire on the robber immediately, since he is clearly threatening the clerk.
2) Aim your weapon at the robber and say "get out of here or I'll shoot!"
3) Stay out of sight with gun drawn in case the robber tries to eliminate witnesses, and maybe call the police.

Click to expand...

Me? Option 3.

Option 1 makes me the first person on the scene to pull a trigger. In other words, I'd be starting a gun fight. Sure, assuming I'm a good shot the gunfight lasts for one bullet. But if I miss? Or hit, and the guy isn't instantly disabled? Now bullets are coming towards me or the clerk. This bad situation just got a whole lot worse.

So, no Option 1.

Option 2 startles the robber, tells him that someone is pointing a gun at him, and gives him the initiative. All three of those things are bad, and will likely result in the "whole lot worse" situation described above.

So, Option 2 is even worse than Option 1.

That leaves Option 3.

Another way to look at the situation is in terms of game theory. What are the most desirable outcomes for all actors? In order:

Clerk: Survive, keep money, robber is arrested.
Robber: Survive, take money, clerk survives.
CCL holder: Survive, clerk survives, robber is arrested, shoot robber.

The robber values his second priority (take money) over his third priority (clerk survives). In other words, he values the money over the clerk's life. Fortunately, the clerk values his own life over "keep money". So, in order to achieve his #1 priority, the clerk will give up the money. The CCL holder has no interest in the money; his top two priorities are his life and the clerk's. So the optimal rational result for this encounter is the Robber gets the money, the CCL holder doesn't shoot anyone, and everyone achieves their top priority. And if the clerk and CCL holder are good witnesses, they might be able to (eventually) achieve their third priorities.

The CCL holder taking action right now in order to arrange his third priority--the arrest of the robber--would jeopardize his top two priorities, and could very well result in his least desirable priority (shoot robber) instead of his third (robber is arrested). It does not make sense to risk your first two priorities for a chance at achieving your third or fourth priorities.

In my opinion, if a private citizen values "shoot robber" over "CCL holder survives" and "clerk survives", then I humbly submit that a re-examination of priorities might be in order. Or a change in career, to law enforcement.

This is a reason to try this in some high end FOF like the NTI or various course. As BullfrogKen and others on the forum can attest - when you actually are in this scenario, it doesn't alway come out your way. I've been good guy, bad guy and won and lost.

Getting hit by sims, Code Eagle, etc. is instructive. First response, flee! Worked for me in one. Also, if you do flee - don't stand around to watch - head for the horizon. I saw one guy flee and then the robbers burst out and hosed him.

Last year a secret service agent was buying liquor at a liquor store near me and a guy came in and tried to rob the place with a gun. The secret service agent killed the BG.

I think it depends on if you know the guy behind the counter and if your by yourself or have a wife and child in tow. The robber may also have the drop on you also, so drawing your gun could just get you killed.

rondog-You're not a cop, you have no legal right or obligation to use deadly force on a criminal just because he's committing a crime.

In Texas you do have a right to defend a third party that is a victim of aggravated robbery and other such crimes.

Click to expand...

Jesus, read what I wrote. You have my quote right there. You don't have the right to intervene and shoot someone just because he's commiting a crime and you're licensed to carry. Robbing a store is committing a crime. Just because he's using a gun to do it doesn't mean he's going to shoot someone, or even threatening to, it could be a fake gun or a toy, or unloaded. Oh, you didn't know that not all robbers use real guns, loaded with real bullets?

If it's apparent that someone might get hurt or shot, that's another story. But just because Homie is holding up the Circle K with a gun is not a reason to whip yours out and start shooting. There's a fine line between a crime and a violent crime, you gotta make sure it's a good shoot or YOUR life is going to suffer.

If any of you think it's OK to start shooting at the mere sight of a criminal with a gun because it's "the right thing to do", go ahead. We'll miss you here. Myself, I'm gonna make damn sure it's necessary to do so first. I like my freedom. I'd rather let the perp take the money and run, instead of me going to prison for shooting some fool with an airsoft gun in his hand. But if it's apparent that violence is imminent, innocents are in danger, and I have the opportunity to intervene, I will.