Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

All we hear is "don't fight back'...

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Hardtarget, Feb 28, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hardtarget

    Hardtarget Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    2,901
    Location:
    Nashville, Tn.
    ...and it makes me sick! I just looked at the Comcast Fan. There was a segment about clerks fighting off would be robbers. The only comments from the "professionals" was "don't do it". They just expect us to lay down and take it. I wonder what percentage of robberies end with the clerk shot... even after complying? It just irks me.
    Mark.
     
  2. NukemJim

    NukemJim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,201
    Hard numbers relating to self defense/the use of firearms/outcomes of disarming attempts are extremely difficult to get.

    As more and more video cameras that are being used for "security" ( Sorry, your son/daughter is dead but don't worry their murder was caught on videotape so we can prosecute the person who killed them. :banghead: ) I hope that accurate stats become available as more crimes are recorded. Might as well get some use out of the cameras.

    NukemJim
     
  3. Graystar

    Graystar Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,756
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    According to the NCVS the victim injury rates of violent crime are:

    For those who fight back without a gun - 1 in 2

    For those who comply with the attacker - 1 in 4

    For those who fight back with a gun - 1 in 5
     
  4. Jim K

    Jim K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,566
    There just is no hard and fast rule, even for police. In some of the "scenarios" people come up with, only a complete idiot would draw and fire. On the other hand, there are conceivable situations where that could be the only chance of staying alive, even if drawing against a gun pointed at you.

    Jim
     
  5. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    12,151
    Location:
    DFW Area
    I don't know the exact numbers, but I recall seeing the results of a study showing the likelihood of injury in a crime, broken out by the type of resistance.

    Here are the results in order from most likely to be injured to least likely to be injured.

    Resisting with ANY methods not involving a firearm. (Injury most likely)
    Compliance.
    Resisting with a firearm. (Injury least likely)

    So, if you assume they're NOT going to tell you to get a gun (which is a given due to liability issues) then they are sort of telling the truth when they say that compliance is your best chance for remaining uninjured. I tend to mentally reword the advice to "Since we can't/won't tell you to get a gun, your best chance of remaining uninjured is to comply with the criminal."

    IIRC, resisting with a knife offered the BEST chance of being INJURED. It was absolutely the worst way (statistically speaking) to resist if you want to avoid injury.
     
  6. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    It's criminals who should live in fear of us.
     
  7. PlayboyPenguin

    PlayboyPenguin member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,717
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    If these numbers are correct I would say the moral is..."Do not fight back, UNLESS you have a gun". I know it says victims of violent crime, I assume they include anytime some robs a store with a gun as a violent crime and not just when they actually attack the clerk.
     
  8. Gordon Fink

    Gordon Fink Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,322
    Location:
    California
    Compliance worked so well on September 11th, so it’s no wonder that the authorities are still recommending it. :barf:

    ~G. Fink
     
  9. BigRobT

    BigRobT Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2005
    Messages:
    399
    Location:
    North Central Texas
    It's that attitude of "give them what they want and maybe they'll just go away". It hasn't worked for centuries, except in very RARE cases. Even then, those people became constant victims. I forget where in England it happened, but there was a village where they didn't fight back against the Vikings.That village became a constant target. Personally, I've never quite grasped that attitude.
     
  10. TonyB

    TonyB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,153
    Location:
    Schodack NY
    Unfortunately these days the scum bags are not happy just getting your money.They want to hurt and/or kill you......fight untill you can't fight anymore,gun or not.I may be killed by the BG,but it won't be for lack of fighting back.
     
  11. Oldtimer

    Oldtimer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Messages:
    370
    While this may not SEEM applicable to this post, I think that it's a "textbook" example of what might happen if you merely give up and don't try to resist.

    Back in the 1960's, two "seasoned" LAPD officers, working a "Felony car" (plainclothes) confronted two "suspicious" males in Hollywood. One of the "suspicious" males drew a handgun and got the drop on both officers, but one of them (Officer Karl Hettinger) drew his service revolver when his partner (Ian Campbell) was being held at gunpoint. One of the suspects (Greg Powell) ordered the officer to give up his weapon, or else his partner would be killed. Officer Hettinger COMPLIED, thinking that if he handed over his revolver, the two suspects would depart and not harm him or his partner.

    Instead of leaving, both officers were taken hostage and driven around the Los Angeles area for awhile, before they were taken to the Bakersfield area and an "Onion Field". In that onion field, one of the suspects (Powell) erroneously thought that the "Lindbergh Law", regarding kidnapping, applied to the situation, and would result in the death penalty for both suspects. To "resolve" the situation, Powell wanted to kill both officers, so that there would be no witnesses. Officer Campbell was gunned down, but Officer Hettinger quickly ran away and hid.

    If you haven't seen the Joseph Wambaugh movie of "The Onion Field", I can only suggest that you try to find it for viewing.

    Shortly after the Campbell/Hettinger incident, the LAPD chose to make a firm ORDER for all officers to adhere to....NEVER surrender your firearm!

    I was a "rookie" LAPD officer back in 1971, and had heard about the Campbell/Hettinger incident in the police academy. In late 1971, when I was a "field" officer, former Officer Karl Hettinger attended one of the daily briefings. He "preached" about never surrendering your firearm, no matter what, and his short speech was definitely a gut-wrencher. His life changed drastically after seeing his partner killed, and having to recount his side of the story many times over in court. Eventually, Hettinger became a "basket case", turning to booze to "ease the pain". He had been given a somewhat "posh" position on the LAPD after that incident, but was eventually deemed to be unfit for police work.

    If you are ARMED, in my opinion, you DO have a somewhat "reasonable" amount of being able to defend yourself, even if a gun is aimed at your head. If you're NOT armed, you MIGHT be able to survive through other means. It might mean that you need to run, or to cause a distraction of some sort. It might mean that you'll need to use your most valuable "weapon"....your BRAIN....and to utilize some other sort of available "weapon" to survive! The world surrounding you is filled with non-descript "weapons", if you think about it! It could be in the form a sharp pencil, or maybe a heavy object of some sort, to disarm the armed suspect. How about a "ruse"....yelling something like "There's the police!" just might work as a temporary diversion tactic. Maybe dropping to the ground and trying to kick the legs of the armed suspect, so that he loses balance and falls. Inside of a store, you might be able to pull a shelf full of canned goods down, then run like you've never run before. A fraction of a second might mean "survival" to you. Heck, even if you ARE shot, your chances of survival are better than giving up without doing anything!
     
  12. MikeJ

    MikeJ Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    801
    Location:
    Phoenix
    +1 to Standing Wolf. A statistic I read many years ago stated that 2 to 3% of the population keeps the other 97-98% living in fear of a crime being committed against them. It is a staggering and sobering thought about how much time, money and energy are expended to protect ourselves from such a small percentage of scum. It is a shame that America doesn't wake up to this fact and say enough is enough. We are tired of paying outrageous sums of money for security, prisons, stolen and vandalized items etc. and the emotional cost of being victimized. I could go on about this as it seems insane that we allow this to continue with so few consequences for the bad guy other than maybe being put in adult time out (prison). I will now step down from my soapbox.
     
  13. engineer151515

    engineer151515 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    388
    Location:
    US Southern Gulf Coast
    Now THERE is an Oleg poster idea.... :)
     
  14. PlayboyPenguin

    PlayboyPenguin member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,717
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    This is like when people (mostly kids) are abducted. I have always told my neice and nephew to kick, scream, punch, bite, run, etc. even if they have a gun. Once you are taken the chances of being seen again are small. Your best bet is that they decide you are not an easy enough target and flee. As for the 911 references I am not getting it.
     
  15. Gordon Fink

    Gordon Fink Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,322
    Location:
    California
    Compliance with the terrorists on September 11th allowed them to murder thousands more.

    ~G. Fink
     
  16. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    Of course, at the time the FAR's in force mandated compliance. They were based on experiences from the days of DB Cooper and the PFLP hijackings, where passengers and crew were better off just complying with demands. Obviously this is no longer the case.

    The advice to victims of street crime to comply has more to do with the desire for law enforcement departments to preserve what they see as a just monopoly on the use of force. They view themselves as "sheepdogs" and don't think the "sheep" have any business fighting back. It's their rice bowl.
     
  17. PlayboyPenguin

    PlayboyPenguin member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,717
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Ahhh, I get it now. You are saying the passengers did not fight back and look what happened. My brain was going a different direction. I see people try and tie 911 to things it does not corespond with so often that you get used to not seeing the correlation. That makes perfect sense.:)
     
  18. another okie

    another okie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,850
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Rudyard Kipling, 1865-1936

    It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
    To call upon a neighbour and to say:–
    “We invaded you last night–we are quite prepared to fight,
    Unless you pay us cash to go away.”

    And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
    And the people who ask it explain
    That you’ve only to pay ‘em the Dane-geld
    And then you’ll get rid of the Dane!

    It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
    To puff and look important and to say:–
    “Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
    We will therefore pay you cash to go away.”

    And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
    But we’ve proved it again and again,
    That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
    You never get rid of the Dane.

    It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
    For fear they should succumb and go astray;
    So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
    You will find it better policy to say:–

    “We never pay any -one Dane-geld,
    No matter how trifling the cost;
    For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
    And the nation that pays it is lost!”
     
  19. Mainsail

    Mainsail Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Washington
    It’s actually good advice, in their world.

    In ‘our’ world it isn’t by a long shot, but we shouldn’t forget that we are in the minority. We have chosen to be armed and responsible for our own security; the vast majority of Americans actually believe that job belongs solely to the police. The so-called experts will always dispense guidance based on what the majority believes. Even here in Washington, a ‘shall issue’ state, I am amazed at the number of people who believe carrying a concealed weapon is a criminal offense. When you tell them you’re doing so legally, with the full knowledge and consent of the state, they still don’t believe you aren’t breaking the law. They move about in their world preparing for and hoping for the best. Like the flying business, we choose to prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
     
  20. jondar

    jondar Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    481
    Oldtimer,

    Is Karl Hettinger still living? Once you read that book, "The Onion Field", you never forget it. Hettinger finally saved his life by screaming at the top of his voice and running at the limits of his endurance, even tho he was being watched by the armed duo. Lots of lessons to be learned from that book. He was finally taken in by armed citizens and protected.
     
  21. Colt

    Colt Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    670
    Location:
    PA
    I'm in the Philly area, and CCW every day. My father, an upstate NY native doesn't understand my desire to do so.

    A few days ago, 2 individuals from Philly robbed a jewelry store near my parents' house, in upstate NY. They wrecked their car trying to get away, and when a young police officer approached, he was shot and killed. One scumbag fled on foot, the other stayed in the car. (not sure if he was injured or just stayed put out of common sense) I don't have details on what happened with the cop that was killed, but some have speculated that he thought the car was an ordinary injuring accident, not a felony fleeing the scene.

    The fact that NY makes CCW much more diffiicult for the average citizen was probably a motivator to rob a store in upstate NY. Criminals know who can fight back. And who can't.
     
  22. V4Vendetta

    V4Vendetta member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    1,055
    Location:
    NC, USA
    "Criminals know who can fight back. And who can't."


    +99999999.
     
  23. BHPshooter

    BHPshooter Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    3,451
    Location:
    Utah
    One of my favorite examples of this is the Inca King Atahualpa, who, when trying to bargain for peace from the Spanish, promised to fill a 22' by 17' room as high as he could reach, once with gold and three times with silver. Atahualpa lived up to his word, but after he had paid up, Francisco Pizarro then charged him with conspiracy against the Spanish.

    Atahualpa was taken to the square to be burned at the stake, but then he tried another version of the same thing: He said that he would convert to Catholicism. The Spanish allowed him to be baptized, then very graciously said that he wouldn't be burned at the stake -- instead, he would be tied to a pole and strangled.

    Appeasement just doesn't work.

    Wes
     
  24. ctdonath

    ctdonath Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,618
    Location:
    Cumming GA
    The "don't fight back" line largely originates from those who are responsible for the collective, not the individual. Basically, it makes THEIR job easier: when the only actor in the scenario (criminal assailant) has run off (disappeared), it's just a matter of paperwork and maybe taking him down on their own terms; when both parties involved are actors (victim fights back) then police/etc. have at least one party in hand (victim who has not disappeared; maybe even injured/dead assailant present) who must be questioned, investigated, charged, tried, etc. to ensure which participant did what to whom.

    Basically, "don't fight back" amounts to "let the assailant go" leading to "out of sight, out of mind."

    "One death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic."
    - Stalin

    When dealing with a large population, a certain percentage of casualties is considered acceptable.
    When dealing with a population of one (i.e.: YOU), the only acceptable casualty rate is ZERO.

    "Don't fight back" is advice given EXCLUSIVELY to someone else, and amounts to "it's OK for you to be a casualty."
    Correct response is "NO, it is NOT OK for me to be a casualty of crime, I WILL fight back to save MY life, and maybe even save YOU from being the next victim!"
     
  25. Manedwolf

    Manedwolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,693
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    Last time I was in Florida, a guy held up a woman in a Wal-Mart parking lot. She complied and handed over her purse. He stabbed her in the chest anyway.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page