assaulted by mob.... no good solutions

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think if he would have just drawn a medium caliber handgun the crowd would have dispersed with no shots fired. The crowd is lucky the Marine was mentally stable given the mental trauma these soldiers endure in hotzones. Knowing some of my friends who have been deployed since 05, those cowardly teens should be thanking God that the Marine remained passive throughout the incident. I applaud the Marine for showing self control, he probably prevented a lot of flak being thrown to our serviceman and women in the process.
 
Just because they're kids doesn't mean they aren't deadly.

amen. kids that are almost man grown hormone driven and no good sense. plus darwin hasn't had time to weed em out yet
 
I think if he would have just drawn a medium caliber handgun the crowd would have dispersed with no shots fired.


substitute imagine for think

you gpt a 50 50 chance not odds i play given a choice
 
I understand but you have to be very careful in a mob situation to use force against the right person, if you decide to use it at all. It's entirely possible the guy screaming and yelling in your face the loudest never touched you.
Click to expand...

I saw a video where Ayoob went over a very similar type of situation. Basically he said if you are confronted by a group of people every person in that group shares equal responsibility. From what I remember he put it like this...let's say one guy is coming at you with a knife, you take a shot, miss and hit someone else in the group, well sucks to be that guy.

I understand you're example was about verbal threats. I'm just throwing this out there.
 
Saw this video today and found the last few seconds to be interesting. The reporter says that the mob at least partially dispersed because a bystander went to his car and got a gun which he flashed at the mob. The comments on the gun start at 2:20

Report on theater attack
 
Lets examine this from the POV of a DA. To be justified, it needs to meet the following criteria.

Was there ability? Absolutely! There was a grave disparity of force.
Was there opportunity? Yes, they were trapped in a parking lot amongst a large number of involved, hostile people and escape would be difficult if not impossible.
Was there jeopardy? Yes, there was jeopardy when they were threatening, not just when the assault began.

Regardless of age, I think that he would have been justified in drawing and firing at the most active, particularly the ones closest. He most definitely would have been justified after they hit his wife. He may have been painted in a bad light by the media, but I think a judge and hopefully a jury would see his actions as justified. I doubt that it would go before a jury, and that the responding officers would have the presence of mind to simply take a statement and let them go.

Now for a bit of humor: They've got us surrounded! Now we've got them where we want them, and can't miss!
 
Last edited:
Guys, you're missing the point of S & T. There are 2 goals. Get out alive and stay out of jail. If you loose your head in a fight or allow your emotions to rule-you loose. Are you really going to indiscriminatly start shooting? You may get out alive, but you'll spend time in jail. Bad result.

Sticks and stones etc. Shoot ganster style once. It can be surprisingly accurate. We did it once for fun, and all of us put rounds on target. If all they are doing is yelling at you, you are not justified in using deadly force. If one of them hits yours with his fist, you are not justified in using deadly force. If you are actually being attacked, hit, kicked, etc by multiple persons, teens or not, you probably are justified in using deadly force depending on your jurisdiction.

Use your head. I wouldn't have wanted to be beaten, but if you "drop a few of them", you'll spend time for them. When the lead starts flying, the game and rules change. If you brandish a firearm, you have just excalated the situation to a point you may not be able to control.

I wouldn't be in this situation. Nor would I have separated from my wife. No one thought this through. Lots of mistakes and better options. It's wonderful to spout off about shooting them down, but IMHO that is not the answer here. That will land you in jail and lead to some fairly nasty charges. Situational awareness and a well developed thought process would had served much better.
 
The Marine and his wife should have just left and requested a refund.
Click to expand...

That's the answer.

The way of the urban warrior is to make decisions that do not result in being surrounded by a loud, angry mob. The age of the miscreants is immaterial. Once the odds go to 100-to-1, you've done something wrong.

Sorry, but the guy made a bad decision and his wife paid for it. He decided that his $10 ticket entitled him to a distraction-free movie, and he had other patrons ejected from the premises. What did he think was going to happen?

Did he think that these feckless teens were going to gather in the parking lot, grin sheepishly at one another, say "aw, shucks" and head for a soda at the nearest Sonic?

Damn fool could have got himself and his wife killed over the price of a movie ticket. Instead, they should have left the theater, obtained a refund, and done something else that evening.

Now, all that said, let's go to S&T. Maybe it's mistaken identity and you're innocent but have been confused with another couple and you're facing an unruly mob. If you're armed, a shot fired in the air is a viable move.

That's because of crowd logic. A large group milling about is trying to get "closer to the action." When a shot rings out, nobody except the closest will know who fired, but they will know that bullets are now flying around. Expect rapid disbursement. The people fleeing to get away will encourage others to do likewise.

The alternative is to take your chances.
 
IMO, first he should have quietly gotten up and gone to the manager without talking to the kids. Let the manager deal with the BS.

After that, the manager should have called the cops to escort the kids out. It should be standard policy when having someone removed.

The Marine, probably being overwhelmed at being home and not in a war zone probably dropped his guard and his SA was down so he did not realize before he walked out that the group was out there.

Personally, I do not think you can win with a crowd like this. IMO, once the beat down happened probably the only recourse would have been pepper spray the front of the group and attempt to flee back into the theater with the time it buys you.

Pulling a gun is a gamble, IMO. First of all, you go firing into a crowd, you are going to lose in court. Every one of your "victims" will cry that it was the OTHER people who did it not them and they were just innocent folks caught up in it. Plus you may actually hit a person who does get caught up in it. Also, if they are not immediately scared off by your gun they can rush you and you are going to lose and get shot with your own gun.

A word on these mobs, I had the unfortunate experience in college of being at the flash point for what was called a "mini-riot". There were a couple hundred drunk college kids leaving bars on a block at closing time. I was behind a group of 5 of them. one of them was walking on the curb and would slip off in the street every other step. A cop walked up to him said something to the tune of "get your sorry *$$ off the street punk" and poked him in the gut with a baton. He threw a punch at the officer his buds did and then like wildfire violence ripped through the crowd. It was like most of the group went insane. Those who could flee did, I was stuck in the middle of it. I barely got out of it without getting in the hospital. A couple of my friends did. The brutality, almost animal like brutality of the mob was absolutely unbelievable. I saw them beat one dude with an umbrella with a beer bottle loaded into it till he stopped breathing. They though it was funny as heck. That is the mentality you are talking about, they beat down both cops without a second thought. These were people with absolutely no criminal record until that day.

So when thinking about strategy, IMO, the guys who go to the do not engage or only engage enough to buy time to flee are right on.
 
After that, the manager should have called the cops to escort the kids out. It should be standard policy when having someone removed.
Click to expand...

I worked for a theatre for over a year and we had to kick people out from time to time. Calling the cops each time for such an event would be silly. Why do the cops need to be called if the people being kicked out actually leave?

The couple should sue the pants off the theatre and mall complex.... when those kids were ejected from the theatre they should have been ecorted off the mall/theatre premises... you can't tell me that the theatre manager wasn't aware of the mob gathering outside....
Click to expand...

As well as every one of the little thugs parents.
Click to expand...

Everybody wants to sue. Did the manager know there was a group outside the theatre? Maybe. If groups aren't outside of the theatre somewhere, it is going to be a slow evening. When groups do form, business is usually good. It happens all the time, groups forming up before and after movies. The do so beforehand so that the group can sit together. The form up afterwards to consolidate plans on what they are going to do next, such as going to dinner, parties, etc. Groups outside of a movie theatre do not necessarily indicate anything bad and are commonplace.

I don't know where the head count of "over 100 little savages" came from. No such information was provided in the article which only mentioned 10 or 15. There were over 300 bystanders it says. That isn't a surprise. When theaters let out, there can easily be hundreds of folks leaving plus you have hundreds of folks showing up to attend the next showings.
 
Last edited:
Where does the bullet go that was shot into the air or the asphalt parking lot?
 
You know.. I live in Richmond, VA back in the early 90's we had the highest murder rate around. We do go to the movies often and yes I would have left long before movie was half over. I would have let the management take care of the issue. The Richmond Police would not let this happen. On the weekend they have so many cops already there that no mob could form. I never thought I would say I am lucky to live in Richmond. But in reading the rest of the stories, I am. I am a firm beliver that people do things that put themselves in bad situations and then try to get out rather than avoid them in the first place. There is not enough information for me to figure out what I would have done. But walking out in to a mob is not high on my to do list. Fighting a mob not high on my to do list. Running not high on my to do list. ( where would you run to, and how far could you get, and how far could my wife get, and you car is behind you) The only good answer is to stay inside and make the management do something. Or to call the police yourself.
 
this is how we treat those who fight for our country......that is truly saddening..

every one of those little bastards deserve nothing less that 50 lashes.....and im not even kidding, perhaps a good beating would help to straighten them out.
 
Where to start........

The idea of "Go the manager and get a refund, then leave". Fat chance - not gonna happen. You go to the manager and ask for a refund, he is going to tell the kids to be quiet / eject them and you are in the same position. The proper response is to chalk it up to experiance and leave, period. Complain and immediately leave maybe, but the operative part is LEAVE. - The best way to win a fight is to not get into one.

The question of whether to brandish to "scare them off": Maybe they will run. Maybe they will rush you. Maybe they will all pull guns and start shooting you. I'll bet against the first oprion. Never pull a gun unless you intend on using it.

The question of what level of force is justifiable: Are you in fear of your life? Did you start the confrontation outside the theater? Could you leave? If the answers are Yes-No-No, then lethal force, or anything less that is effective, is justified. Overthink it and you will wind up on a slab. The question is not if lethal force is justified, but who is lethal force justified against. Not the one(s) yelling at you, but definately the ones that strike you or your wife. Disparity of force gives you a viable defense in court as to why you shot the 1 man (out of the 100, or 20, or 4) that attacked your wife while they were verbally assaulting you. You may spend a lot of money defending yourself but ... what was that saying again ..... oh yeah: Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

To the idea that they will scatter and then return once they get thier weapons. B******t. It's a mob with a mob mentality. When they scatter, they will quite suddenly revert back to individuals with individual mentality - scared individuals who were just reminded how mortal they are. Given 15 minutes to screw up their courage again, those closest to the one you shot might return for revenge. But by then you shouldn't be there unless the police are too.

To the idea that they will draw guns and return fire. Yeah, it's a possibility. However, if they have guns, and are in a mob like that attacking you, what do you think are the odds that you will get away with "just" a beating that will put you and your wife in the hospital? More likely you will be beat half to death, then forced to watch as they gang rape your wife, then they'll put a bullet in each of you to prove how tough they are. When in doubt, go down fighting. It costs nothing extra, and who knows but you might win.
 
Gouranga said:

A word on these mobs, I had the unfortunate experience in college of being at the flash point for what was called a "mini-riot". There were a couple hundred drunk college kids leaving bars on a block at closing time. I was behind a group of 5 of them. one of them was walking on the curb and would slip off in the street every other step. A cop walked up to him said something to the tune of "get your sorry *$$ off the street punk" and poked him in the gut with a baton. He threw a punch at the officer his buds did and then like wildfire violence ripped through the crowd. It was like most of the group went insane. Those who could flee did, I was stuck in the middle of it. I barely got out of it without getting in the hospital. A couple of my friends did. The brutality, almost animal like brutality of the mob was absolutely unbelievable. I saw them beat one dude with an umbrella with a beer bottle loaded into it till he stopped breathing. They though it was funny as heck. That is the mentality you are talking about, they beat down both cops without a second thought. These were people with absolutely no criminal record until that day.

So when thinking about strategy, IMO, the guys who go to the do not engage or only engage enough to buy time to flee are right on.
Click to expand...

Absoloutely right. The best option is to not engage, avoid the fight instead. If that is impossible, don't engage any more than necessary to get away. The problem comes when you can't get away and they don't back down. In that case, you better be prepared to take out as many as needed, quickly. Mobs, riots and bar fights aren't like in the movies .... were everyone gets up afterwards with a black eye or cut lip. They more often result in people going to the hospital or morge.

As to the incident you relate above, the cop with the baton was stupid. Had he not "poked the guy in the stomach" it would likely never have escalated. If he had to arrest the guy, he should have had backup called and waited for them to get there first.

To win in a fight you have to think at least one step further than your opponant. To win in a mob situation, you have to think one step further than the last person who will get involved. Since you don't know who that will be, your only options are to a: not be involved or b: end it (usually necessitating overwhelming force) as soon as it starts.
 
every one of those little bastards deserve nothing less that 50 lashes.....and im not even kidding, perhaps a good beating would help to straighten them out.
Click to expand...
This is definitely NOT the answer.

Most violent teens come from homes where they were beaten routinely.

Beating a kid does not turn that kid in to a useful and law abiding citizen.
All it does is create a violent kid who will one day grow up to be a violent man who will one day beat his own kids, thus continuing the cycle of abuse.
 
Most violent teens come from homes where they were beaten routinely.

Beating a kid does not turn that kid in to a useful and law abiding citizen.
All it does is create a violent kid who will one day grow up to be a violent man who will one day beat his own kids, thus continuing the cycle of abuse.
Click to expand...

says Dr. phill and all those other daytime talk show psychologists........i suppose a stern talking to and being sent to their room is more appropriate...?

kids think they can act up and suffer from no real consequences.....oh no, a week without play station....thats harsh.

i know when i was younger, when i screwed up majorly....i got a well deserved beating.....you learn pretty quick not to do stupid stuff when there is someone willing to deal with you afterwards.

and there is a difference between smacking your kids when they mess up....and habitual domestic violence(which you are correct, where some violent teens come from, however it sounds to me that these kids suffer from a lack of dicipline).... but for something like this situation....they need to be dealt with majorly.
 
Well we've got the guy on the metro... the guy on the bus with his pregnant GF and the marine at the movie theatre with his wife...

anybody noticing any patternss or common characteristics here?
 
This is definitely NOT the answer.

Most violent teens come from homes where they were beaten routinely.

Beating a kid does not turn that kid in to a useful and law abiding citizen.
All it does is create a violent kid who will one day grow up to be a violent man who will one day beat his own kids, thus continuing the cycle of abuse.


how many kids you raised?


and in particular would be real interested to see you support this
Most violent teens come from homes where they were beaten routinely.
 
S and T also means going or not going to a place where trouble maybe found.

Being a resident he may have been blinded by the fact that Bradenton is a modern day cess pool.
 
how many kids you raised?


and in particular would be real interested to see you support this
Most violent teens come from homes where they were beaten routinely.
Click to expand...
Two of my own and I have fostered 9 children, some of which came from homes where they were beaten.

Do the research yourself.
Beating kids does nothing good.

The only folks who support beating kids are those who were beaten themselves.

And were not taking about swatting a 2 year old on the tush with a bare hand....
The poster above thinks that "50 lashes" would somehow reform these teenage kids.
The lash never reformed anyone.
 
easyg......i really want to know......if you found out that one of your kids was in that group.....how would you deal with them.......honestly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

2
  • Locked
The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban - A Public Opinion Nightmare
Replies
0
Views
689
2dogs
2
2
  • Locked
Veterans Report...
Replies
6
Views
434
trueblue1776
T
G
  • Locked
If it is a good shoot, the jury, DA - blah, blah
Replies
23
Views
2K
GRB
G
T
  • Locked
Tactical Response HRCC Direct Action AAR
Replies
10
Views
1K
Mandolin
M
H
  • Locked
Bill Clinton: May 2, 1994, REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AT ASSAULT WEAPONS EVENT
Replies
6
Views
558
Ben Shepherd
B
Back
Top