Another Example of: If you draw a gun you need to be prepared to use it

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff White

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
38,399
Location
Alma Illinois
This woman could be the poster child for the anti-gunners who say; "The bad guy will just take your gun and shoot you with it."

Not a lot of detail in the article, but it's an example of why you need to be prepared to shoot if you draw a gun:

Florissant man takes pistol from woman defending her friend, shoots her, police say http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_aed9a632-7f45-5f2a-af17-7c49a738d1dc.html

Florissant man takes pistol from woman defending her friend, shoots her, police say
Joel Currier [email protected]
Sep 22, 2015 17:15
UNIVERSITY CITY • A Florissant man was charged Tuesday with grabbing a pistol from a woman Saturday as she was trying to prevent him from attacking her friend in University City, then beating her and her friend with the gun and shooting one of the women.

Mario Pearson, who turned 31 on Saturday, of the 2600 block of Northridge Place, was charged Tuesday with first-degree assault and armed criminal action. He was being held on a $150,000 bail.

University City police said in court records that Pearson shot the woman Saturday at a home in the 1200 block of Meyer Avenue. The victim pulled out a handgun when Pearson "began to get rough with the victim's friend," court records say.

Pearson then took the gun and beat the women with it. He shot the woman who had originally pulled the gun, police say. She was struck twice in the chest.

The woman's age and condition was not available Tuesday. Pearson's criminal history includes a 2014 conviction of unlawful use of drug paraphernalia, a misdemeanor.

Over the years I've run into a lot of people who think that just having a gun is enough. I've even had people tell me they didn't need ammunition because just the sight of the gun would make the criminal run away.

And yes, there are plenty of examples of that happening. You can usually read of a couple every month in the Armed Citizen column in the NRA publications.

But as this incident proves, it's not always the case.
 
Yeah, no one should expect merely presenting a gun to solve the problem. I hope the women are okay and that the one who was shot survives.
 
wow

ironically, the woman who provided the gun to the criminal probably has quite a lot of liability at the moment

i suppose, if you aren't willing to shoot someone, it would be best to brandish an UNLOADED gun
 
JEFF WHITE " ... Over the years I've run into a lot of people who think that just having a gun is enough. I've even had people tell me they didn't need ammunition because just the sight of the gun would make the criminal run away. ..."

When I lived in Los Angeles I was in B&B Gun Sales in North Hollywood one day. I knew the manager quite well. A woman in her 60s was looking at some small handguns for "protection" and said she'd buy one.

My friend said something about the type ammo she should buy. She said, "Oh no, I don't want any bullets. I don't want to shoot anyone: I want to scare him away."

She was extremely adamant about not wanting to ever shoot anyone so no bullets in her house!

My friend talked her out of buying a gun.

Yep, they're around.

L.W.
 
Why escalate a situation by bringing a firearm into it without intention to end said situation?
 
While it's not the "head space" I, or most THR members occupy, from a statistical safety perspective having an unloaded gun makes sense.

In the majority of cases the criminal would run, thus making it a much better option than no gun which offers no deterrent. Odds of having an ND, zero, odds of getting shot with your own gun, zero.
 
Someone who waves a firearm to frighten others can be charged with brandishing even if the firearm is unloaded. A person waving a firearm could also be perceived by law enforcement as a credible threat, with all its potential consequences. This could put bystanders at risk. If you just want to scare away perceived bad guys, with minimal risk of anyone getting seriously hurt, carry a stout umbrella or a loud obnoxious whistle.
 
A person waving a gun around could be thought a threat by another ccw and get that person shot!
 
Another example but in the opposite direction.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/police-681029-homeowner-suspect.html

Santa Ana homeowner shoots armed intruder with his own weapon

SANTA ANA – Erickson Dumaual knew he was in a deadly struggle but never considered surrendering.

When two intruders broke into Dumaual’s home in the 2500 block of West Manly Avenue in Santa Ana early Friday, his martial arts training kicked in.

And for 15 minutes he fended off a beating, wrestled a large-caliber revolver from one of the robbers, shot him twice with the weapon as they struggled, and finally, held him in his swimming pool until police arrived.
 
Someone who waves a firearm to frighten others can be charged with brandishing even if the firearm is unloaded. A person waving a firearm could also be perceived by law enforcement as a credible threat, with all its potential consequences. This could put bystanders at risk...

But there was no law enforcement around to percieve her actions as a credible threat let alone thwart the attack by the guy. Also many defensive gun uses happen without a shot being fired. Im not saying that she didn't need to shoot, she did obviously. She should have taken a shot the second ol' Mario went hands on with her friend.

I think there are a couple of possibilities for this situation:
1. She thought it was a talisman, and it's mere presence deters attack.
2. She didn't have confidence in her skill or ability.
3. She wasn't mentally in the game enough to cause serious damage to another person.

20/20 hindsight.
 
If an assailant doesn't immediately stop whatever action caused an armed, law-abiding citizen to draw a handgun, the armed, law-abiding citizen should shoot the assailant as many times as it takes to get the desired effect. End.Of.Story.
 
I think there are a couple of possibilities for this situation:
1. She thought it was a talisman, and it's mere presence deters attack.
2. She didn't have confidence in her skill or ability.
3. She wasn't mentally in the game enough to cause serious damage to another person.

I haven't seen anything to lead me to KNOW she ever even cleared leather
From what I read (unless I missed something), it's entirely possible the attacker caught her "on the draw"

A Florissant man was charged Tuesday with grabbing a pistol from a woman Saturday as she was trying to prevent him from attacking her friend in University City
That's mighty vague, while the OP's points are 100% correct, I don't think we can say for sure that's what happened in this case.
 
My KISS philosophy..... if it's time to draw, it's time to shoot.

However, things can happen quickly and from the time you decide to draw to the time your ready to pull the trigger, the situation may no longer warrant shooting (BG turns and runs or throws hands up and cries "don't shoot").

Also, you could find yourself in a bad situation where you have opportunity to draw without revealing that to the BG and stand ready for what comes next with the weapon at low ready.
 
Last hunting season my immediate neighbor was leaving in the wee hours of the morning to go hunting. There was a guy sitting in his truck rummaging through it when he stepped out the door. The guy was massive he said. He was not carrying. The guy came at him and he stepped back into the house and the iron storm door closed behind him. He grabbed a shotgun that was sitting near the door and the guy was still standing at the door looking in telling him to open the door and use the gun on him. He told the guy to leave or get shot. He stood there staring and did not leave until the neighbor called 911 and started giving a description. Then he slowly turned and leisurely walked away.

If my neighbor had of been carrying he could have very possibly been in a shoot or have his gun taken away because this dude was not scared. Hearing stories like this will invoke some serious thought as to what a law abiding citizens actions would be. I say this because most people are under the assumption that just the sight of a gun is all it will take to stop an incident. As we see, clearly it is not.
 
It clearly MAY be not. Anecdotes are always anecdotes. In my family, as I have mentioned in the past, we have 4 cases of firearms being used for self-defense. In each case the firearm was a revolver. The time frames span some 80 years from beginning to end.

The very first case was my great great grandfather, a logger who went to retrieve stolen oxen. They were his, the equivalent to stolen skidders (large logging machines that haul trees from the woods to a loading deck), and without them he could not run his crew. He owned his company, owned the train that took the logs to the mill, and was well-thought of in the community. When he arrived, the guy who stole the oxen (his brother-in-law) began firing at him. My great great grandfather returned fire with a single shot after four from the other man and killed him. My great great grandfather was alive but was arrested and tried for murder. He won the case and continued his job. The family supported him over the event.

The next case was my grandfather (different side of the family) who defended his house from an invasion in the 1950's using a Hopkins and Allen Safety Police. He did not shoot either man and held them, back-to-back, in the front yard until the sheriff showed up. The men complained that my grandfather almost shot them, the deputy told them if they did not shut up, he'd shoot them. End of story, no shots fired.

The next one was in 1969 after Hurricane Camille. My dad was at work (worked in television) and mom was at home with the kids when looters showed up. She positioned herself at the kitchen table, in view of the outside (looters were in our back yard trying to get in) with my dad's Colt New Service pointed at the door. She was ready to fire. The baddies fled. No shots fired.

The final one was with my grandfather again in the 1980's at a rest area in Florida (where they were from, the panhandle where they farmed). My grandmother, hobbled by arthritis and could not run (hardly walk) was in the front seat and my sister was in the back. This was in the time frame when the rest area attacks were happening in Florida. A man came up and tried to force his way into the car. My grandfather pulled his S&W Model 10 (he bought it after the invasion 30 years prior) and the attacker fled. No shots fired.

In all cases, people were ready to fire. In only one did it actually happen. In all cases people were saved.

I have a few times gone to my door with pistol in hand, held out of the way, when odd people showed up. I did not feel comfortable and so was ready to act. In no case did it turn out that I needed to.

In these days on THR, alternate views are quickly quashed with a pile-on mentality and so I expect that to happen. A remarkable intolerance has emerged. However, no number of news stories changes the 4 self defense cases in my own family. One should always be ready to fire. But even the NRA points out that the majority of firearms used in self defense result in no shots fired at all. Those instances rarely are reported to police yet they happen.
 
Last edited:
Posted by Ash:
I have a few times gone to my door with pistol in hand, held out of the way, when odd people showed up. I did not feel comfortable and so was ready to act.
Discussed here many times. Not a prudent thing to do.

In no case did it turn out that I needed to.
Good.
 
@ ASH,

I liked all your scenarios.

And I see that you were not at any and so rely on heresay.

That is good as to the turnout of those events.

I have hands on gun storys after 25 years as a youth in NYC,and then 26 years as an LEO.

Suffice it to say that using a gun as a talisman [ love that another poster used that expression ]is BEYOND dumb and lethal.

I know for a fact that most who carry do NOT know weapon retention and have never practiced it.

AND too many believe in the "talisman" theory.

Bring out a gun and all hostility stops,that is the same group that do the ".44 mag will blast people honest even with a miss".

I hate to say this as I know many will flame the heck out of it,but I really wish we had a NATIONWIDE carry permit ---- AFTER all took classes and shot quals.

If you cannot pass the qual, WHY are you carrying a gun = to shoot innocent people in AO.

It is VERY,VERY,VERY hard to hit your intended target under stress.

Cannot do that for a simple test to carry,dont carry.
 
In these days on THR, alternate views are quickly quashed with a pile-on mentality and so I expect that to happen.

What are we supposed to pile on? If it's not a shoot situation, don't shoot. I don't think anyone in this thread is advocating shoot every time you draw. My point in starting the thread was discuss the mindset many people have that if I display my weapon that in itself will end the encounter favorably.
 
I already know I'm just an ignorant gun owner who does things he shouldn't do. Perhaps the first mistake was even to post in this thread. But I get it. Rule of thumb is: draw, shoot, shoot until the body stops twitching, holster. Never go to a door armed. Or, go to the door armed and shoot first, ask questions later. But never go armed. That is bad.

Catch 22.
 
Ash, it's not that anyone is ignorant. I would imagine that over the years, a fair number of us have gone to the door with gun in hand, held out of sight. I have.

But after we have seen one or two terrifying accounts of what can happen to people while the door is unlocked and when more than one person forces his way in violently from out of sight, we learn from the mistakes of others. Consider the risks.

The Ayoob clip shows a better way to go about it, and I would call it the school solution.
 
I think that we all need to spend the mental energy to "know" that we are prepared to use deadly force well before we put the gun in our holster or take the gun from our safe. During an actual life or death struggle, there is no time to think about such questions. If the justification is present (ability, opportunity, intent are shown by the bad guy) we need to start the process of applying deadly force and continue its application until the threat no longer exists, before the first shot or after many shots.
We we have any doubt about being able to use deadly force against a deadly force threat, we should not have a gun but have some other plan/tools.
 
I think that we all need to spend the mental energy to "know" that we are prepared to use deadly force well before we put the gun in our holster or take the gun from our safe. During an actual life or death struggle, there is no time to think about such questions.

I agree. I did some serious soul-searching after joining the military at 18 and haven't thought about it since in terms of would I be willing to or do I think it is moral in war or for personal protection. Of course, I should have done that before enlisting...but it didn't all sink in until I got to my first duty station in the type of unit that would go in first.
 
I hate to say this as I know many will flame the heck out of it,but I really wish we had a NATIONWIDE carry permit ---- AFTER all took classes and shot quals.

If you cannot pass the qual, WHY are you carrying a gun

Not going near the question of nationwide permitting, but I do think a person should have to demonstrate reasonable ability with his or her weapon to be granted a permit. Of course "reasonable ability" needs to be clearly defined in writing so the qual doesn't become a way to deny a permit to someone the examiner just doesn't like or whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top