Crowding

[RPZ]

Came across this monitoring what is happening in europa, in this case France. But these guys could just be neigborhood thugs, a flash mob, the fringes of a riot - anywhere. In this case the defender made the smart decision to keep moving as much as possible, only turning and challenging when an armed antagonist was dangerously close. Otherwise he continued making distance. This is a crucial thing to do, both to avoid direct confrontation, and to widen the distance advantage should things deteriorate.

It is a good actual event to expand on hypothetically. Say there were more in his path and they boxed him in. What can then occur is what I refer to as crowding. The antagonists do not do anything to warrant an immediate shooting response, but simply edge closer and closer until they are close to contact distance. None of them even need to be overtly or actually armed. At some point, if you have no exit, what are you going to do, and when?:

 

[psyopspec]

Generally, if I have no exit I'd like to make one.

More specific to the scenario, I'm not a French detective nor familiar with their ROE, so it's difficult to say.

 

[MedWheeler]

It doesn't seem that, despite the fact he made it clear he was armed, they were inclined to back off. Perhaps the level of restraint typically held by French police is high enough that fewer criminals fear being shot by them than we Americans would think. Without understanding the conversation, I can't speculate on the motive of the antagonists and why they were so persistent, or if their dialogue included actual statements that an attack was imminent, or simply being threatened if the victim didn't "move on" or something.

I think most of us would have seen that bat as a legitimate and potentially-deadly threat and, had it gotten as close as it appears in the video, would have at least cleared leather.

It's hard to keep eyes on the threat and still monitor one's path while continuing to work on increasing distance.

 

[RPZ]

Just an aside, I believe France does permit concealed carry for certain individuals in special cases, so this guy was not necessarily a policeman. If he had been a policeman he may have stood his ground and made a phone call or done so while maintaining distance.

Regardless, I think he was wise not to draw. Had it been prudent to make a really fast exit, perhaps having to scale obstacles, hands free would be best as long as he was still making distance.

Had other antagonists appeared or moved in from other directions things could have turned much worse. It underscores the need not to be so focussed on one badguy and that a 360 watch should be maintained as far as possible.

 

[lemaymiami]

Distance is your best friend in any possible confrontation.... period. Withdrawing from an area with more than one possible opponent is just good sense. That's something that many young officers (myself included, way back when...) have to learn on the job. Most will learn it without injury - but you can bet more than one officer is killed each year after allowing possible hostiles within close proximity....

 

[RPZ]

In this case, and it was not the just the armed guy, everyone one else along with him were trying to make distance. However the armed guy along with any of the others may have become boxed in when they entered from the street. Further along their path was also walled in both sides. My question is what do you do if you get boxed in, cornered, and a group of thugs starts advancing on you. The only visible weapon was the ball bat, so at some point his close proximity alone might make deadly force imperative. However at some point the other, at least visibly unarmed, antagonists might edge close enough to rush you and over power you. This is the real question I am posing.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

My question is what do you do if you get boxed in, cornered, and a group of thugs starts advancing on you. The only visible weapon was the ball bat, so at some point his close proximity alone might make deadly force imperative. However at some point the other, at least visibly unarmed, antagonists might edge close enough to rush you and over power you. This is the real question I am posing.

Three (or more) on one in a cut off environment seems pretty justifiable even if the attackers are unarmed. Assuming I had been keeping a good distance and still had the time, as soon as I realized I had nowhere to keep retreating to the gun's clearing the holster and getting pointed at the biggest perceived threat of the three. What happens from there would be completely dependent on their actions.

 

[RPZ]

Three (or more) on one in a cut off environment seems pretty justifiable even if the attackers are unarmed. Assuming I had been keeping a good distance and still had the time, as soon as I realized I had nowhere to keep retreating to the gun's clearing the holster and getting pointed at the biggest perceived threat of the three. What happens from there would be completely dependent on their actions.

But this is the crux of my post. They could simply inch closer and closer, without any verbal threats. One or more may even be smiling.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

But this is the crux of my post. They could simply inch closer and closer, without any verbal threats. One or more may even be smiling.

Well if these silent smiling weirdos kept advancing after I drew my gun then I suppose both of our follow up actions would be spoken for, without anyone ever saying a word.

Seriously though, the scenario is a bit far fetched. Moreover, the way in which I live my life would never leave me boxed in with a group of "thugs" advancing on me, silent, smiling or otherwise.

The French guy in the original video is a much more realistic possible situation. A group in the open making verbal threats. In that scenario I would've done pretty much as the guy in video up until the time he turned and put his hand on his gun. I would've cleared the holster and let the pursuer's decide where the cards would fall.

 

[RPZ]

Well if these silent smiling weirdos kept advancing after I drew my gun then I suppose both of our follow up actions would be spoken for, without anyone ever saying a word.

Seriously though, the scenario is a bit far fetched. Moreover, the way in which I live my life would never leave me boxed in with a group of "thugs" advancing on me, silent, smiling or otherwise.

The French guy in the original video is a much more realistic possible situation. A group in the open making verbal threats. In that scenario I would've done pretty much as the guy in video up until the time he turned and put his hand on his gun. I would've cleared the holster and let the pursuer's decide where the cards would fall.

Not far fetched at all. I don't know your life experience, but on a professional and non professional basis I have been very close to this scenario, which is why I brought it up. Had there been a few more badguys in the area ahead of him and the others he may well have found himself boxed in.

In this case the armed guy cleared the entrance to the "alley" from the road. Had a sort of on off contact then entered another enclosed area (both sides) as he and others were making distance. I don't understand why you do not see this as a possible scenario when an actual videoed event is presented. The actual motives of the badguys and that they were all behind him is immaterial. I am asking what would you do if they were ahead as well and boxed you in. It's there for you to see both actual and with my addition hypothetical. And I ask my question of "what if". It's not Hollywood. This is a very real possibility. What are you going to do?

 

[herrwalther]

Had the Frenchman shot, it would have been a justified act. At least based on US police standards. You have multiple attackers. Several of them are armed with bats, clubs, and knives. Their faces and heads are hidden. Their body motions appear aggressive. And finally, based on what French I can remember from school, they were egging the police officer to shoot.

Now if I were in the exact same situation, with no exit or way to make one, rounds would fly. I have a large enough bullseye on my head being a Veteran. I am not going to take a chance when I have a dozen armed assailants following me. If I have an exit, take it. Shots fired involve paperwork and investigations, both of which I loathe. If I don't have an exit, make one if possible. Deadly force should always be a last resort. But always a possible one.

 

[Girodin]

Just an aside, I believe France does permit concealed carry for certain individuals in special cases, so this guy was not necessarily a policeman. If he had been a policeman he may have stood his ground and made a phone call or done so while maintaining distance.

Regardless, I think he was wise not to draw. Had it been prudent to make a really fast exit, perhaps having to scale obstacles, hands free would be best as long as he was still making distance.

Had other antagonists appeared or moved in from other directions things could have turned much worse. It underscores the need not to be so focussed on one badguy and that a 360 watch should be maintained as far as possible.

The video says he was police. The officer asks him what he is doing with the bat and orders him to let go of it repeatedly. From beginning to end the other guys are being threatening in their language. As well as being vulgar and insulting. At one point one says if they come back they will hit him in head with the bat. Throwing rocks and bottles is something I saw a lot from those types when I was in Europe. I'd love to know some more the context of this video.

 

[RPZ]

Girodin,

Thanks for the input.

This stuff is common place (and much, much worse) in Europe and Scandinavia now. I am just glad I got see alot of continental Europe in the 70s and 80s before it this all started.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

My French is too rusty to get what was really going on.

 

[armoredman]

He was a police officer? Must be one of the "no-go" zones I hear about. In Arizona we have a law called "defensive display" that I would have used, drawing and coming to the low ready, and clearly communicating my intent to withdraw from the situation without further conflict if possible. I believe Massad Ayoob covered in "In The Gravest Extreme" the legal concept of Disparity of Force, where you might be armed, but the multitude of attackers lightly armed or unarmed make for a greater force than you can threaten... if I am remembering that correctly. If I was in the Frenchman's position, I would hope I would be unlikely to let them swarm me and take my weapon, for then I am truly a helpless victim who has also antagonized my now captors, who are not likely to treat me as a bosom buddy.
I wonder what sidearm and how much ammo DID he actually have with him> Wonder if he carries a bigger sidearm/more ammo now.

 

[Rick McC.]

I could care less about anywhere in Europe, but here; the implied danger in disparity of force (multiple individuals against one) is clearly understood.

Whether they were visibly armed or not, "smiling" or not, I'd be taking them out if they pursued me during my attempts to get away prior to them closing within striking distance, in tactical priority.

I actually went through just such a scenario during FoF training last year.