Duke Junior
member
I don't know if it's a NC thing,but it's certainly a human thing.
We stop the threat,pronto.
Are we Policemen?
- Thread starter art sr.
- Start date
- Status
I don't know if it's a NC thing,but it's certainly a human thing.
We stop the threat,pronto.
art sr.
Member
How many of our soldiers have died in past wars to protect our countries freedom and liberties? I agree, too many, and I salute each and every one of them. The point is we as a nation will band together to fight a foreign threat to protect our way of life,I would like to see the day when every law abiding American citizen carries a gun and a promise to every other law abiding American citizen that together we can protect each other from the BG's in this country who would rather see us crawl away and hide and let them have their way with us. I say NO, I will fight and I hope you will fight with me, I am not prepaired to let the bg's take my freedom and liberties that were fought and died for by so many brave American soldiers. Just say NO to the bg's and take the fight to them if that's what want. Carry a gun and be ready to use it if someones life is being threatened. AMEN.
sacp81170a
Member
Then you'd better be ready to accept the consequences if you've misjudged the situation.
BTW, having a CCW still doesn't make you a cop. Moral obligations are nice, legal obligations are what you will be judged by.
art sr.
When you got your CCW how many hours of criminal law were you required to take before they gave you your permit? How many hours of conflict resolution training does your state require for you to complete before you get your permit? Once you passed all the tests and received your permit, how many hours did you have to spend on the street in a field training program, dealing with conflicts and gaining experience in these matters under the supervision of an experienced CCW holder before you were permitted to carry by yourself?
I think we all know what the answer to these questions are. No, your CCW permit is not a peace officers commission. It gives you no special insight that allows you to observe a situation, decide what is actually happening and intervene. It doesn't obligate you to intervene. It isn't a license to fight crime and/or evil. It's a permit to carry a firearm for your own personal protection. That's it, nothing more, nothing less.
One of the things I've learned from reading this forum is that many CCW holders have the same day dreams that rookie cops have about jumping in and shooting the bad guy and being a hero. The difference is that the rookie cop soon gets enough exposure to real situations and realizes that in real life things are seldom clear cut, along with that comes experience in court that also helps quell those fantasies.
If someone is clearly in imminent danger of great bodily harm or loss of life, the decision to act or not to act is a personal decision that everyone must make when they are confronted with it. There isn't any right or wrong answer. There is only what's right or wrong for the person making the decision. Does he know what's really happening and who is the good guy and who is the bad guy? Is he capable of making the shot without endangering others? What are the legal implications of acting?
You can't answer those questions for someone else. It's a personal decision.
There is no public safety benefit to concealed carry. Concealed carry is for your own personal protection. If you think you have taken on some kind of obligation to protect society when you got your permit, then you need to rethink having a permit.
Jeff
rbernie
Contributing Member
This is an important sentence to re-read. If you feel that you have a moral duty to protect others, at least be sure to understand the legalities of it all.
I can best answer this by borrowing a quote from El Tejon in another, similar thread:
To which I will add:
When you shoot another human being, you will face a lengthy criminal investigation whereby your every move and possible option is examined and Monday-Morning-Quarterbacked by folks who were not there and do not know how it went down. And when that is done, you will probably face the civil legal wrath of the deceased, who was his momma's 'little angel, who was in the process of turning his life around'.
If you are in fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury - all of the legal travails you're fixin' to go through doesn't sound all that bad, compared to the alternative. But if you're NOT - then you probably ought to think long and hard about what you're willing to go through so that you can play BatMan.
I agree the waters of the thread have been muddied a bit by folks throwing in home intruder situations when the OP was about robbery, presumably in an establishment not your own. The OP's words also implied you were NOT DIRECTLY the object of the robbery. You might be the customer in a pharmacy when a robbery goes down.
Remember this:
The vast majority of armed robberies (whether or not a weapon was show or implied) end without bloodshed. That is a statistical fact. Check it out.
Also, keep in mind that the robbery you are witnessing has TWO possible outcomes. One is the outcome that will happen if you don't intervene and play cool. The other one is the outcome that will happen if you do intervene.
If you do intervene, do you have absolute confidence that doing so won't make the situation worse, not only for yourself, but for other innocents in range? Will your shots incapacitate the robber immediately, or cause him to panic and start shooting everyone in sight? Does he have an accomplice already in the store as a secret backup? Etc.
Drawing to defend yourself against an imminent threat is one thing. Drawing to intervene in third party situations is another. As has been said, be sure you are up to the tactical challenges and legal consequences.
K
Remember this:
The vast majority of armed robberies (whether or not a weapon was show or implied) end without bloodshed. That is a statistical fact. Check it out.
Also, keep in mind that the robbery you are witnessing has TWO possible outcomes. One is the outcome that will happen if you don't intervene and play cool. The other one is the outcome that will happen if you do intervene.
If you do intervene, do you have absolute confidence that doing so won't make the situation worse, not only for yourself, but for other innocents in range? Will your shots incapacitate the robber immediately, or cause him to panic and start shooting everyone in sight? Does he have an accomplice already in the store as a secret backup? Etc.
Drawing to defend yourself against an imminent threat is one thing. Drawing to intervene in third party situations is another. As has been said, be sure you are up to the tactical challenges and legal consequences.
K
I don't need a class in criminal law or a law degree to know when a robber is a robber and a burglar is a burglar.
I have, on the other hand, seen plenty of folks who have had criminal law training break the law when exercising their powers of arrest. It comes down to knowing the difference between a bad guy and a bad attitude.
I have, on the other hand, seen plenty of folks who have had criminal law training break the law when exercising their powers of arrest. It comes down to knowing the difference between a bad guy and a bad attitude.
Really?? What are the elements of both offenses in your state? Don't look it up, tell me, you are online right now, you've got 2 minutes...go!
Jeff
If you can't define a crime, how do you intend to act on it? How will you know that the robber isn't another CCW holder attempting to defend himself of an off duty or plainclothes officer attempting to make an arrest? The simple fact is, you don't. And until you rolled up on a few situations and found them to be totally different then your first impressions led you to believe, you'll always think you know right and wrong when you see it. In reality, the typical daydream about standing in line at the stop and rob when the bad guy comes in and shooting him down and becoming a hero is pretty rare. In most cases you are going to see some kind of confrontation where who is the good guy and who is the bad guy isn't quite so clear cut.
Off duty and plainclothes officers are frequently shot by responding officers because first impressions aren't always correct impressions.
Now you want to add a few hundred thousand more armed people trying to be the hero into the mix....
Jeff
So you're implying that if someone approaches me with a gun and asks for my wallet and I can't quote what section of code he is violating, I don't know enough to defend myself? YOur position is ludicrous.
If I catch someone uninvited in my house in the middle of the night, I know what he is.
If I catch someone carrying my TV out the window, I know what it is.
For thousands of years of recorded history, people knew right from wrong and enforced right and punished wrong without the benefit of full time police departments, lawyers, law books, and, in fact, without even the benefit of stone tablets.
I, and I think most others on this thread, have tried to keep things civil and not let it slump down to cop bashing but I think there should be a rule on this forum about cops bashing non-cops as well. Remember it is the non-cops that make up society. It is the non-cops who rule a free society, not the cops.
If I catch someone uninvited in my house in the middle of the night, I know what he is.
If I catch someone carrying my TV out the window, I know what it is.
For thousands of years of recorded history, people knew right from wrong and enforced right and punished wrong without the benefit of full time police departments, lawyers, law books, and, in fact, without even the benefit of stone tablets.
I, and I think most others on this thread, have tried to keep things civil and not let it slump down to cop bashing but I think there should be a rule on this forum about cops bashing non-cops as well. Remember it is the non-cops that make up society. It is the non-cops who rule a free society, not the cops.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Straw man.
The initial post was about intervening in a robbery of a public business, presumably (from the tone) with the CHL holder as an observer and potential actor. That is the scenario being discussed, and in that kind of scenario it's a lot harder to tell what's going on than it is when you're directly accosted.
If you intend to play Caped Crusader and dispense justice in the streets, you really *do* need to know the laws relevant to that.
Please quote anything in my posts that suggest someone should try to get in the hero business or try to take the law into their own hands outside of protecting themselves, their families, or their property. In fact, any of my posts from any thread, not just this one. Or my posts from any forum.
You and Officer White have completely misconstrued my position on the subject. I'm a firm believer in drawing your weapon only when your life is threatened.
sacp81170a
Member
That, my friend, is the understatement of the year.
I just got back from court this evening. Our prosecuting attorney called me in to his office to place a young man under arrest. He was wanted for a multiple victim shooting in another town in the southern part of Arkansas. He came to our court to plead not guilty to a public intoxication charge. The PA ran a routine check for warrants and up popped our young fellow, wanted for shooting up a wedding party and hitting his girlfriend and several others in the process.
Why do I relate this story? Because this kid waited patiently and quietly in line for his turn to see the prosecutor. He acted like he had a slight chip on his shoulder, but he sure didn't seem like a multiple felony fugitive. Appearances can be completely deceiving. That "simple" armed robbery may be anything but. Best not to inject yourself into the situation unless somebody is truly under imminent threat of harm.
(I don't have any details as to why his warrant didn't show up when he was cited for the public intox, except that it might not have been in the system yet. I'll know more tomorrow.)
So when you can't defend your position you change the subject? This thread is about CCW holders acting as police officers and involving themselves in situations that don't directly involve them.
Sorry but the calendar says August 2008. Now there are laws, police departments, prosecutors and defense attorneys, and judges. Apparently your system didn't work so well. Now days people who take it on their own to punish wrong are called vigilantes and are as criminal as those they seek to punish. I suppose if your son (say you had one) was with some friends and they took some apples from an orchard and we shot for their trouble. I suppose that would be ok, because for thousands of years people knew right from wrong and didn't need full time police departments or laws or even stone tablets.
This isn't about bashing anyone. It's about if CCW holders have some kind of police powers. They don't. And one of the big things here, where we don't have CCW yet is the fear that getting CCW passed will put thousands of armed and untrained people on the street trying to enforce the law. And so many of you seem to think that that goes hand in hand with carrying a gun. I'm just trying to get some rational thinking into the process.
Quite frankly if you think that you have a duty to enforce the law because you have a CCW permit then maybe you should rethink that decision before you learn the hard way that a CCW permit is not a peace officers commission.
Jeff
Please read posts 56 and 68. As I said, you can search for my posts in this thread, in this forum, on this site, on any site and you will never see a post from me suggesting that anyone should try to play cop just because they have a CCW. The thought of half of the people I see in these forums playing cop scares me to the point of soiling my pants - and that includes half of the cops.
I was very clear: If you believe the situation threatens your life - not just the life of the cashier, then you can act. I do believe, though, and have seen plenty of cases to back up my own personal feeling fear in the situation that a criminal who shoots the cashier may also shoot other bystanders. In that case, you have to decide whether to shoot to defend yourself before the bullets are flying or afterwards but that decision must truly be made on your fear for your life.
Now, as for changing the subject, trying to twist the fact that a non-LEO civilian can recognize a crime, a criminal, and a threat to his life without being able to quote that murder is a 187, that is argumentative and innappropriate. I think that your clear contempt for the idea of non-LEOs having guns or defending themselves is just not very high road.
On last time. Please quote anywhere that I have ever even shown tolerance to the idea that a non-LEO with a CCW should try to interfere with a crime where his own life or the lives of his family, or his property were not threatened. Before you start attacking and making accusations, you should find out about what you are speaking.
Your words, Officer White. Now why don't you live up to them.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Then you're in the wrong thread and arguing the wrong issues, cuz this one is about CHL holders' moral obligations to step in and protect third parties.
RNB65
Member
Easiest question of the day. NO, unless you or a loved one's life is threatened.
Carl N. Brown
Member
This is another thread that appears to have strayed from
the opening post:
Are we obligated to perform as police because we have a gun?
No. But I hope I am able to judge the level of imminent threat
to respond to prevent loss of life or greivous bodily harm to myself
or an innocent third party.
Am I obligated to perform as police because I usually carry a
notepad and pen?
No. But I hope I have presence of mind in a robbery to write
down pertinent details like a car tag number.
You know, under common law posse comitatus the county
sheriff could deputize anyone of us to act in an emergency
as a policeman. But even reserve officers receive far more
training than carry permit holders. To get my Tennessee handgun
carry permit required a 4 hour class on the laws of self-defense
and a passing score on the written exam. I know any LEO
reading "four hour class" is going to shake his head. There
are limits on what you are obligated to do legally.
I discussed such issues back in the 1970s with two city
detectives (before there was a handgun permit law). You
had a right to have a gun in your home or place of
business for self-defense, but you could not carry in public.
The detectives told me that in our town (pop. 45,000) a successful
armed robbery would be followed by more armed robberies. An
armed robbery in which the perpetrator was shot by a
policeman or a victim would be followed by a quietus on
armed robbery lasting months. Stopping a robbery in progress
could deter future robberies.
the opening post:
Are we obligated to perform as police because we have a gun?
No. But I hope I am able to judge the level of imminent threat
to respond to prevent loss of life or greivous bodily harm to myself
or an innocent third party.
Am I obligated to perform as police because I usually carry a
notepad and pen?
No. But I hope I have presence of mind in a robbery to write
down pertinent details like a car tag number.
You know, under common law posse comitatus the county
sheriff could deputize anyone of us to act in an emergency
as a policeman. But even reserve officers receive far more
training than carry permit holders. To get my Tennessee handgun
carry permit required a 4 hour class on the laws of self-defense
and a passing score on the written exam. I know any LEO
reading "four hour class" is going to shake his head. There
are limits on what you are obligated to do legally.
I discussed such issues back in the 1970s with two city
detectives (before there was a handgun permit law). You
had a right to have a gun in your home or place of
business for self-defense, but you could not carry in public.
The detectives told me that in our town (pop. 45,000) a successful
armed robbery would be followed by more armed robberies. An
armed robbery in which the perpetrator was shot by a
policeman or a victim would be followed by a quietus on
armed robbery lasting months. Stopping a robbery in progress
could deter future robberies.
Not a cop at all
Chasing after fleeing bank robbers or thieves is a world of trouble CCWs would be asking for if they do it.
In defense of self or others from attack is what CCW should be for. Just wandering around the scene after a shooting has occured ,waving a firearm ,will get you killed by responding Law Enforcement. You only draw your weapon when their is immediate threat of serious harm from another.
Chasing after fleeing bank robbers or thieves is a world of trouble CCWs would be asking for if they do it.
In defense of self or others from attack is what CCW should be for. Just wandering around the scene after a shooting has occured ,waving a firearm ,will get you killed by responding Law Enforcement. You only draw your weapon when their is immediate threat of serious harm from another.
ServiceSoon
Member
It is a personal decision, one with possible great consequences.
I am not a police officer per se. I don't go looking for trouble, but if trouble finds me and loved ones are in harms way I will do everything I can to protect them.
"The only way evil prevailes is for good men to do nothing."
I am not a police officer per se. I don't go looking for trouble, but if trouble finds me and loved ones are in harms way I will do everything I can to protect them.
"The only way evil prevailes is for good men to do nothing."
D
Deleted member 66305
Guest
art sr. said:
Obligated? Legally, definitely not. Morally? That's up to you -- though I firmly say no. I am under no obligation to render aid to anybody, especially when it comes to lethal force.
I bet Joe Horn is sincerely wishing he'd minded his own business right about now.
CountGlockula
Member
In certain states' laws, third party self defense is allowable but you are taking a huge risk of exposing yourself to the bad guy...and even cops.
Be a great witness, unless the threat is solely directed to you.
Be a great witness, unless the threat is solely directed to you.
D
Deleted member 66305
Guest
General Geoff said:
If they are insured, and thus replaceable, then this is a moot point. It then becomes a matter of law enforcement to attempt to regain the property to offset the insurance company's loss.
- Status
