Gun trumps machete in robbery try

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
Gun trumps machete in robbery try
By COLIN MCDONALD, The Enterprise
http://www.southeasttexaslive.com/s...7106197&BRD=2287&PAG=461&dept_id=512588&rfi=6

A small arms race between a Beaumont man and two would be robbers ended with the suspects fleeing the scene, according to the Beaumont Police.

Police received a report of an attempted aggravated robbery just before 2 a.m. Thurs-day morning. According to police reports, two black men approached the door of a house in the 1200 block of Oregon Street When the lone male resident answered the door one of the men pulled out a machete and demanded cash. The resident then pulled out a hand gun. :evil:

The two suspects fled the area when the resident fired two rounds into the ground, the police report. No one was injured.

The suspects were both described as being about 5 foot 10 inches, in their early 20s and thin. Both were wearing white shirts and blue jeans and were seen leaving the area in a black older model vehicle. Police have no suspect.

[email protected]
(409) 880-0735
 
The two suspects fled the area when the resident fired two rounds into the ground, the police report. No one was injured.

Sad story...wasting two good slugs like that.
 
You know, there has to be a way to get these stories more publicity, because they're everywhere. Its all well and good when they're in American Rifleman, but these stories need to be where people who don't already agree with us can see them. They're not much good if they're printed on the last page of the paper.
 
I lost that website the last time I formatted, thanks for the link.

Nothing brightens up your day like seeing honest citizens standing up to the bad guys.
 
And yes we are still dealing with Katrina evacuees here in San Antonio also. It is not nearly as bad here as it is in Houston. My Uncle is an arson investigator in Fort Bend County and he has had to travel back and forth to New Orleans a bunch to make arrests on cases he is working on.
 
Still, if the robbers had been quicker the fellow would have been DOA with a blade in his head. This is another reason I avoid answering the door.
 
The suspects were both described as being about 5 foot 10 inches, in their early 20s and thin. Both were wearing white shirts and blue jeans
Does anyone else think this is a totally useless description?
 
Well...I believe if you pull a gun - you must use it. Otherwise, there wasn't really a need to pull it in the first place.

That's just like Florida law. If you don't use it, it means the threat wasn't bad enough.


Now, you'd be a fool to think that a machete is not a deadly-force threat. It is. So, if this guy had shot the machete-wielding thug...he'd be 100% justified.


I consider this to be a success for personal self defense, but a failure in a sense because these dirtbags could have been liquidated - justifiably. No more going around and doing it to someone else. Although...I bet this will leave a lasting impression on them.


Sorry if that viewpoint seems abrasive. But the world isn't all apple pie.
 
Sorry if that viewpoint seems abrasive. But the world isn't all apple pie.

Even though I tend to agree with your viewpoint, I have a hard time berating someone that defuses a situation like this without killing someone. It shows that someone that carries a gun can show restraint even in a life threatening situation.

Hopefully the sound of gunfire will give the two assailants something to think about as they make future carrer decisions.

Unfortunately, my cynical side believes the assailants will most likely decide that they need a gun of their own before their next caper.
 
Well...I believe if you pull a gun - you must use it. Otherwise, there wasn't really a need to pull it in the first place.

That's just like Florida law. If you don't use it, it means the threat wasn't bad enough.
I don't hink that is written in the law of any state. The laws of the various states state when a person may employ lethal (or "deadly," depending on the state) force in defense of self or a third party ... they do not state that the person must employ lethal force. Further, many, if not most, of the states define merely pointing a gun at another person as use of lethal force. In accordance with that definition, just drawing and letting the BG run away IS using lethal force.

Yes, part of me laments that fact that two scumbags are alive and free to knock on other doors with their machete, but the guy in the home also doesn't have to deal with any lawsuits filed by the heirs of the fine upstanding young men whose lives he tragically cut short by his unreasonable action. I can't find any way to think of that as a bad thing.
 
From the story.
The two suspects fled the area when the resident fired two rounds into the ground, the police report.
Personally, I think that is an appropriate response. The BGs were not sucessful and the home owner does not have to live with the thoughts that he had shot two people. We can hope the BGs had an enlightened experience and change their ways. If not, some other home owner or policeman may be their demise.

Just like a baseball bat, a hammer or a knife, a firearm can be a tool for good or evil. In this story the knife was a tool for evil and the firearm was a tool for good.
 
I have a CCW, I've always carried a weapon. My attorney told me not to shoot anyone ever. Even if I'm justified. The point being beating a crimminal charge requires guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, a civil matter well we all know about that. My philosophy is whack em and dump the bodies and cover them with concentrated acid after removing all evidence. I have no wish to deal with the local constabulatary or become a victim.
 
Well, if you pull a gun and don't use it...it is effectively brandishing now isn't it? That's how Florida law works. I've even seen concealed carry classes teach that it is better from a legal standpoint to shoot than not to shoot. I can't say I completely agree with that but....It's kinda-sorta of true. You are either in a life threatening situation, or you are not. There aren't any inbetweens. If you pull a gun because you want to "scare" them away - that is a legal misuse of a firearm, not to mention a stupid gamble. Of course the thug is the one who initiated the use of deadly force, so I suppose no matter what you do with your deadly force response is ok during that time frame or mode - which is probably why shooting shots into the ground, air or warning shots will be excused.

There's a gray area. Like you pull the gun, the guy almost instantaneously turns around and starts running. How can you use it then? Shoot them in the back? That's WORSE. Can't do that. Although it depends on the proximity and position of everything.

What I'm discussing is what happens BEFORE that decision process is made by the thug to flee or attack.

Best is to draw your weapon quickly and begin lighting up the machete wielding thug while he's still face to face. NOTE: do not confuse this with blood-lust or whatever other bizarre homicide fantasy stuff people might have. This is the best strategy for defending your life. But that's my view and anyone can disagree.

Truth is, he's only one lunge away from killing you. It is the only logical thing to do. Hesitation can equal death. It isn't wise to rely (not that it was his intention) on weapon brandishing to diffuse a life threatening situation. It is probably better to use the gun. Brandishing was a side effect of this man's potential use of the firearm. It worked, and he kept his cool enough to resist shooting and getting himself in a legal situation.

I'm NOT berating this guy - whoever said that in this thread is putting words in my mouth. He did the best he could in a difficult situation. Not everyone is that lucky to get out alive.

If you draw a weapon, and the thug has time to identify that you are now a threat, turn around so that his back is facing you and begins to flee - your draw is too slow. Work on it. That's all I am saying. This has 2 positives: 1] one less scumbag on Earth who might beat, sodomize and murder some 11 year old later on 2] You will leave a LOT less things to chance by taking the initiative to eliminate the threat with the most speed and violence possible. Thus, you will be safer.


Reminds me of people getting robbed and counting on the criminal to truly be using their firearm as an ultimatum tool. Doesn't always pan out. After you give them your wallet/money, or after they have you on the ground face down...they sometimes execute you because they are sick psychopathic garbage. You lose your life, and you never get to at least fight for it, no matter how bad the odds - something is better than nothing. This is kind of the same as pulling a gun and being hesitant with it. You're counting on not getting a violent response from the thug. That's stupid. That's not survival instinct.


Remember, it is better to be alive than dead. Everything else, absolutely everything else (including the law) is secondary.
 
Well...I believe if you pull a gun - you must use it. Otherwise, there wasn't really a need to pull it in the first place.
I couldn't disagree more strongly. You draw to stop the confrontation. If you draw and the aggressor stops and runs away, you have stopped the confrontation. There is no need to fire. I would agree that you should never draw without the will to fire, but sometimes firing is completely unnecessary.

Now, in this particular situation, I agree the homeowner should have shot at least the one with the machete. They were close enough to be an immediate threat. But let's say they were farther away. Say, outside the much-proclaimed "Tueller Drill" distance of 21 ft. (Or, realistically, whatever distance you feel is an immediate threat.) Say they're at the front gate with a machete, making threats. He certainly isn't justified in shooting them at that point. Is he therefore not justified in drawing his weapon at all? Must he wait until they get closer, and then draw and fire at the same time? I don't think so.
 
I don't know about Florida law, but TX law clearly states that a firearm may be legally used as a threat when deadly force is not justified but force is justified.

In other words, it's definitely legal to brandish a gun in TX as long as the situation warrants the use of force even when deadly force (shooting) is not authorized.
 
The suspects were both described as being about 5 foot 10 inches, in their early 20s and thin. Both were wearing white shirts and blue jeans and were seen leaving the area in a black older model vehicle. Police have no suspect. [sic]
Hahahaha. Who'd have guessed. With a description like that, I suprised they arn't already in custody.


But pulling a gun as a threat wise. I'm still against it. It turned otu better here. Less medical bills for the community to pay. But they could have just as easily sliced his neck instead of running.
 
Well, if you pull a gun and don't use it...it is effectively brandishing now isn't it? That's how Florida law works. I've even seen concealed carry classes teach that it is better from a legal standpoint to shoot than not to shoot.

CCW instructors will be the death of us all... ;)

Seriously, though, even the classes that have Real Live Lawyers to answer questions are all over the map on this particular issue. You need to check your state and local laws. For instance, in Oklahoma if I feel threatened with grave bodily injury or death I might pull my pistol but decide not to fire if the threat suddenly evaporates, e.g. assailant was armed with a tire iron and I brought a gun to the fight. If I pull my pistol and they turn and run, shooting them in the back would probably be a Bad Move (TM).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top