Gunfight Rule #1: Have A Gun

[HankB]

This *just* happened to a friend of mine Christmas eve in Austin, TX.

As church let out, right about midnight, he heard one of the other churchgoers yell "Help! There's a man in my car! Help!"

It turned out a Mexican had broken into his car by smashing out a side window during services and was having a drink (!) and trying to get the radio out.

The somewhat inebriated bad guy didn't open the car door to get out when he heard the yelling, but instead crawled through the broken window and took the guy's wife's purse with him. (No need to comment on the wisdom of the woman who left her purse in the car.)

The bad guy started running, the car's owner in hot pursuit, and my friend sort of intercepted the BG . . . at which point the BG pulled a big knife and started waving it around. My buddy - a CHL holder - didn't have his carry piece.

So he got into a fighting stance, and with the other guy closing in, the knife-armed BG dropped the stolen purse and departed at speed.

No further pursuit happened of the knife-armed bad guy.

Significant lessons . . .

1. You NEVER know when you may need your concealed weapon. This happened right after church on Christmas eve.

2. Don't depend on ANYONE ELSE to help you. Except for one woman who called 911 on a cell phone, NOBODY ELSE from the church so much as lifted a finger to help. Nobody.

3. He was lucky.

 

[mbs357]

As someone at Packing.org said, "My life is irreplaceable anywhere," on the same subject as carrying in church.
I'll try to find the guy's name in a bit.

 

[Fumbler]

Don't depend on ANYONE ELSE to help you. Except for one woman who called 911 on a cell phone, NOBODY ELSE from the church so much as lifted a finger to help. Nobody.

It's called the bystander effect in psychology.
Something is happening and no one knows what to do because it's an unfamiliar situation. everyone sits around to see what others do and if nobody does anything then nothing gets done (obviously).
In situations like this if you give a person a command they will do it.
One shouldn't yell "someone call the cops", it should be "you (point), call the cops." and it will get done.
People dont think for themselves, so it is easier to just tell them what to do.
Glad noone was hurt, your friend is a brave man for standing his ground when the knife came out.

 

[adi]

One shouldn't yell "someone call the cops", it should be "you (point), call the cops." and it will get done.

To be nitpicky, it should be "You (point) call 9-1-1". I have heard stories where people pick up the phone and ask what the number is when they are in a stress situation. Also don't say nine-eleven, because they might look for the 11 button. At least thats what I was brought up to do in situations like that.

 

[Archangel]

Actually, it should be "call the cops."

In some places, 911 doesn't work, or a direct line to the local station might be more effective / faster. And, if you just tell someone to call 911, they may not be aware enough of what's going on to know what emergency service to ask for. Better to tell them specifically to call the police / fire department / an ambulance.

 

[The Rabbi]

Umm, I realize things work a little differently in Texas but I am concerned about the wisdom of chasing after the guy, armed or not. The guy was not a threat to anyone until he was cornered. In an uncharitable mood I would say that anyone who leaves a visible purse in her car is going to get an education at private school rates.

 

[Felonious Monk]

Chalk this one up to:
One more anecdotal reason to carry in church.
Glad everyone's okay.

 

[SHOOT1SAM]

With all due respect, HankB, stating that the bad guy was "a Mexican" is completely irrelevant to the story. He MAY have been a Mexican, and by that, I mean someone FROM Mexico, or he MAY have simply been an American, or some other nationality, with dark skin. Either way, it stereotypes by stating "a Mexican"; simply calling him a crook, thug, bad guy, etc. will be more effective, in my opinion.

And I fully agree with The Rabbi. Chasing after the bad guy who is not directly threatening anyone until he is cornered, could very easily be seen as "escalation" if the chaser(s) were forced to shoot, AFTER cornering him.

Everyone was lucky, from the events described.

Sam

 

[WT]

What? No Christmas spirit? Is that anyway to treat a Thief? WWJD???

You should have given him the car keys and money for gas.

 

[HankB]

SHOOT1SAM:

stating that the bad guy was "a Mexican" is completely irrelevant . . . it stereotypes . . .

I wasn't there, but I paraphrased the story as it was related to me. The individual was dark skinned, swarthy, and cursed in a mixture of Spanish and heavily accented English. Though the BG may have been from El Salvador, Costa Rica, etc., given the heavy population of Mexican immigrants - legal and illegal - in central Texas, describing him as a "Mexican" is reasonable and almost certainly accurate, under the circumstances. (Nobody checked his papers.)

I'm not one to deliberately leave out a detail of a crime because it MAY offend someone's ideas of political correctness.

And as far as the escalation issue is concerned . . . I don't advocate becoming trigger happy and blazing away without thought, but be advised, what the law says is OK in dealing with thieves in Texas is different than in other states, particularly at night.

 

[Brian Williams]

I think that the use of Mexican was totally relevant to the retelling of the story, particularly since he was drunk and eventually pulled a knife. I have seen the results of a drunk Mexican with a knife. It was not a pretty sight.

 

[Felonious Monk]

You! Don't stereotype.
You! Stop all that pansy political correctness.

Both of you are in time out until I tell you different.

...besides, I would have said "a(n) Hispanic" man, since no one asked if he was from Mexico or not.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Send the bill for the busted window to George Bush for failing to protect the borders.

 

[unreal45]

I'm not one to deliberately leave out a detail of a crime because it MAY offend someone's ideas of political correctness.

Right on

 

[Firethorn]

Him: Quick! I'm looking for a murderer! He's slightly overweight, about 6 foot!

Me: There's about 5 guys who meet that description. One's white, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Middle-Eastern.

Him: I can't tell you that! It'd be discriminatory!

 

[Tom Givens]

I have been teaching firearms use for 29 years now, the last eight years full time. I have trained around 1,000 military personnel, a few hundred police officers, and thousands of private citizens. In 2005, Rangemaster will graduate the 20,000th basic course student, plus I have taught another 1,000 students in road classes all over the United States.
A lot of my military and police students have been involved in shootings over the years, as that is in the nature of their jobs. When considering only the private citizen students, however, I know of almost forty who have been involved in shoot-outs with criminals. The students have won in every single case I am aware of. I may not know about every instance when a student defends himself, but I’m sure I know about most of them. Usually, one of the first things a student does after a confrontation is report back to the school that trained him.
To the best of my knowledge, I have had two private citizen students who were killed by armed criminals after their training, in separate incidents. Both had one thing in common- they were not armed when they were killed. For whatever reason, both decided NOT to carry a gun on the fateful day, and both paid with their lives. I don’t care how highly trained you are, a one-sided gunfight is a good way to lose if the other side is the one that’s armed. One thing you will NEVER get to decide is which days you will need your gun. Someone else makes that decision, and you will only be informed at the last minute. That’s OK, as long as you have your gear.

 

[sm]

One of the things that burns me up is the "NO CCW" areas. Here in AR , I cannot carry on a College Campus, in a hosptial, in a church the Courthouse...etc.

Now Criminals are not Stupid, actually many know more about the law than the law abiding citizen. These criminals often know a Church goer leavein a late service is not going to armed here in AR , because the Statute says he cannot CCW.

This is where working on changing Statutes is VERY important.

I attend college as an older returning student, I have, and will again take night classes. I don't park "on campus", I have to adapt - to the best of my ability and what I am comfortable doing - to balance the statutes and MY personal safety.

My ex worked in a Hospital, I met her around midnight as she was leaving here shift. MY CCW was just in my car, 8 steps from the bldg on campus where I went in to meet her. I was going to drive her to her vehicle in the bigger lot.

I was talking to a Fella I knew doing Security, well worn Model 19 with Herret Stocks, this guy could shoot, Retired LEO , and we had shot together. He stepped outside with us as he always did , he had planned on walking my wife to her car, but I showed up.

We step onto the sidewalk and take 3 steps - shots rang out, he "took " my wife up and against my truck for cover, I was right behind them.

Gangbangers having it out, we could see the bullets richochet of the street and cars.

He handed me his BUG. Mine was "right there" in the truck...still too far away. I open the door the light would come on, giving our location away.

I had a similar thing in Memphis. St. Judes is not in best part of town, especially at 11 pm. Again my gun was in my vehicle, My passenger took my truck to run an errand, she comes to pick me up , before I can make it to her , all hell breaks out and I run behind a parked car. I yell for her to leave and get safe, she "skidded" my gun to me before she did leave the area. I knee walked out of the area to where she was. So my gun had more " character" - it is a tool. Knee walking and crawling made my knees hurt more than the scratches on the gun.

I hate these NO CCW areas, the BGs use them against us law abiding folks.

 

[Andrew Rothman]

Concealed means concealed.

I'm pretty lucky -- with MN's new law, only schools, day care centers and courthouses are off-limits. (And while the antis have their day in court, we're under the old law -- none of these are off limits!)

I'll say it again: Consider a SmartCarry for your deep concealment needs.

 

[Rimmer]

Somehow I fail to see any rational logic behind having a CCW and not carrying.
I am very careful how I carry. The pistol is hidden from everyone all the time. The only way anyone is ever going to know I have a firearm on me is if I'm stupid enough to walk through a metal detector (Not) or I am forced to defend myself. Only one of my friends, who carrys himself, knows I carry. Nobody else.
Obviously I don't carry into "federal/state buildings" that are listed by the state AG. Other than those areas........ Church, schools, college campus... etc.. who's the wiser?

 

[SHOOT1SAM]

Hankb: I don't really give sh*t if the bad guy is Mexican, Laotian, Russian, or a by-Gawd all-american Texan. He's simply a bad guy; his nationality is completely irrelevant in the telling of your story, unless you are reporting it to the police. Is it somehow worse that he was a Mexican breaking into the car than if he was, say, Swedish?

As a for-instance, do you tell a story to a someone like this: "Well, Bill, I was talking to my friend Jim the other day, uh, Jim's a black guy, and he was telling me about this really nice Ruger he got for Christmas"? Jim being black is irrelevant to the story-the same irrelevance to the main points of your post about the circumstances surrounding your friend's car being broken into.

It's like the Hate-Crime legislation that you Texans, rightly, IMNTBHO, have never passed (at least, last I knew). A crime is a crime, and it's no worse because of the perp's nationality OR what his thoughts were at the time he/she was committing the crime.

<<<And as far as the escalation issue is concerned . . . I don't advocate becoming trigger happy and blazing away without thought, but be advised, what the law says is OK in dealing with thieves in Texas is different than in other states, particularly at night>>> (Sorry gang, I don't know how to do the "quote" feature properly).

Now, HankB, I don't purport to know the law, (even the law in Texas) but I did drive by a Holiday Inn Express once. Are you telling us that, IN TEXAS, you, as an ordinary armed citizen, can chase down someone who is running AWAY, and therefore, NOT threatening you or anyone, and if this resulted in
you cornering the perp, he pulls a weapon, and you shoot him, it would be LEGAL???? (Cough, cough, bullcough, sh*tcough)

I'm pretty sure that in ANY jurisdiction, this would be considered escalation, whether at high noon or at midnight. Even if it is LEGAL, and you were therefore, not criminally liable, I'm pretty sure it would open you up, civilly, although you folks in Texas do do things right, most of the time. Probably a jury would find in your favor, but you'd still be on the hook for the attorney's fees if it came down to it.


<<<I think that the use of Mexican was totally relevant to the retelling of the story, particularly since he was drunk and eventually pulled a knife. I have seen the results of a drunk Mexican with a knife. It was not a pretty sight.>>> (That "quote thingy, again)

Well, gee, Brian Williams,I didn't realize that the results of a drunk MEXICAN with a knife were so much more terrifically horrible than the results of, oh, I don't know, a drunk Frenchman with a knife (Oops, bad example-even a drunk Frenchman with a knife would just give up. See guys, I can stereotype too ). Or a drunk Canadian with a knife, or a drunk Greek with a knife, or a drunk Englishman with a knife, or........

See, the whole point of Hankb's original post was that you never know when or where you'll need your weapon, and that you can only depend on yourself for your safety. Those facts remain true and accurate, regardless of the nationality of the bad guy.

And my point was that the nationality of the thug is irrelevant; it doesn't change Hankb's main points, but it does stereotype, even in Texas, with an indisputable immigration problem.

 

[ksnecktieman]

It looks like it is getting very easy to offend people here. Could I suggest a roll of duct tape to hold the chips on your shoulders? We have some people here that managed to restrain their indignation, for instance,,,,,,,

No complaints were made about it being a male,, no one care about sexual profiling?

No complaints made about him being drunk,,,,,,,, No one care about the poor alcoholics rights?

And no one spoke of his poor education,,,,,,, Of course he crawled out the window, he broke it as the only way to get in, and no one had taught him you can unlock a car from inside without keys.

AND JUST maybe, he was not threatening with that big knife,,,, maybe it just poked him when he ran, so he was holding it in his hand to keep from getting cut .

And, what do you mean "bad guy" He was just a good guy that was tempted to go wrong by the lady leaving him an opportunity to go wrong,,, right?


Does tolerance not mean anything any more? Is it ok if I get offended when someone calls me a "white anglo saxon protestant"?

 

[HankB]

SHOOT1SAM, as for you disapproving of writing that it was a Mexican guy breaking in . . . well, that's what he WAS (at the very least he was Hispanic) and that's that. But upon due consideration of your viewpoint, I'm not wrong, I'm not sorry, and I'm probably going to do it again.

As for the law in Texas:

SHOOTSAM1:

Now, HankB, I don't purport to know the law, (even the law in Texas) but I did drive by a Holiday Inn Express once. Are you telling us that, IN TEXAS, you, as an ordinary armed citizen, can chase down someone who is running AWAY, and therefore, NOT threatening you or anyone, and if this resulted in you cornering the perp, he pulls a weapon, and you shoot him, it would be LEGAL???? (Cough, cough, bullcough, sh*tcough)

Here's section 9.42 of the Texas Penal Code.

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property: (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and (3) he reasonably believes that: (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Section 9.41 refers to one's own property, section 9.43 refers to a third person's property. Civil action is always a possibility - you can sue ANYone for ANYthing - but the above is the LAW.

Note that a stolen purse is certainly property.

(Cough, cough, bullcough, sh*tcough) indeed. In the future, I suggest you spend some more time in that Holiday Inn Express instead of just driving by.

 

[PressCheck]

US Marine Corps Rules for Gun fighting

1. Bring a gun. Preferably, bring at least two guns. And bring all your friends who have guns, too.

2. Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap; life is expensive.

3. Only hits count. The only thing worse than a miss is a slow miss.

4. If your shooting stance is good, you're probably not moving fast enough nor using cover effectively.

5. Move away from your attacker. Distance is your friend (lateral and diagonal movement are preferred)

6. If you can choose what to bring to a gunfight, bring a gun. Long guns and friends with long guns are preferred.

7. In ten years no one will remember the details of caliber, stance, or tactics. They will only remember who lived.

8. If you are not shooting, you should be communicating, reloading, and running.

9. Accuracy is relative; most combat shooting standards will be more dependent on "pucker factor" than on the inherent accuracy of the gun. Accuracy declines proportionally as pucker factor increases.

10. Use a gun that works every time; all skill is in vain when an angel pisses in the flintlock of your musket.

11. Someday someone may kill you with your own gun, but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty.

12. Always cheat, always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.

13. Have a plan before going into the gunfight.

14. Have a backup plan, because the first one never works.

15. Use cover and concealment as much as possible.

16. Don't drop your guard (or your grenade).

17. Always tactically load and threat scan 360 degrees.

18. Watch their hands; hands kill ("In God we trust...everybody else keeps their hands where I can see them")

19. Decide to be aggressive ENOUGH, quickly ENOUGH.

20. The faster you finish the fight, the less likely you are to be shot.

21. Be polite. Be professional. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

22. Be courteous to everyone and friendly to no one.

23. Your number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.

24. Do not attend a gunfight with a handgun, the caliber of which does not start with a "4" or higher.

25. When in doubt, call in an air strike.

26. Do not eat the Claymores.


US Navy Rules for a Gunfight

1. Go to sea

2. Send in the Marines

3. Drink coffee

 

[LawDog]

Now, HankB, I don't purport to know the law, (even the law in Texas) but I did drive by a Holiday Inn Express once. Are you telling us that, IN TEXAS, you, as an ordinary armed citizen, can chase down someone who is running AWAY, and therefore, NOT threatening you or anyone, and if this resulted in you cornering the perp, he pulls a weapon, and you shoot him, it would be LEGAL???? (Cough, cough, bullcough, sh*tcough)

Article 18.16 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure reads thusly:

Art. 18.16. [325] [376] [364] Preventing consequences of theft

Any person has a right to prevent the consequences of theft by
seizing any personal property that has been stolen and bringing it,
with the person suspected of committing the theft, if that person
can be taken, before a magistrate for examination, or delivering
the property and the person suspected of committing the theft to a
peace officer for that purpose. To justify a seizure under this
article, there must be reasonable ground to believe the property is
stolen, and the seizure must be openly made and the proceedings had
without delay.

You , as Joe Citizen, in the Great State of Texas, have the right to seize stolen property (as long as you ain't sneaky about it) and the person suspected of stealing said property, and drag the property and the critter in front of the nearest judge or Peace Officer.

Other interesting Texas Law:

§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;

A car is "tangible, movable property"

Once the critter in question pulls a knife, well, Texas does not frown upon her children defending themselves from deadly force -- ie.,

§ 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A
person is justified in using deadly force against another:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.31;
(2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation
would not have retreated; and
(3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to protect himself against the other's use or
attempted use of unlawful deadly force;

Texas...it's a whole different world.

LawDog

 

[SHOOT1SAM]

Hey HankB; Take a deep breath and calm yourself down and then go back & read my first reply to your first post. I simply stated my OPINION that your stating the perp's nationality was irrelevant and stereotyping-your story loses nothing by stating that "a guy had broken into his car." I'll betcha you wouldn't have stated "a white guy broke into his car.", but I may be wrong, too.

As to my second post, notice that I did NOT purport to know the law? And that I stated y'all in Texas do most things right? Here in Idaho, the law states that you may deadly force in several circumstances too, but just because the LAW states what it states, doesn't mean someone won't be arrested & even indicted for their actions. For instance, unless it has been changed, Idaho law states that you can use deadly force to prevent arson. Do you really think that if I saw someone trying to light a house on fire, I could just shoot him & not face any legal ramifications? Perhaps there are test cases in Texas where an armed citizen chased a fleeing thug, cornered him, had a weapon pulled on him & shot the bad guy & did not face legal ramifications, I don't know. Mighta happened while I was (cough cough) driving by that Holiday Inn Express (which, by the way, I didn't know had Texas law books available ) Glad to know that there are no rogue DA's in Austin who wouldn't see this as wrongful escalation on the armed chaser's part.

Further, didja notice how I agreed with the main points of your post? That you never know where or when you're gonna need that roscoe? Or that everyone involved was lucky? Or how I agree Texas has an immigration problem? I'm far from being politically correct, or even offended. Had you stated that a member of the Sri Lankan Weightlifting Team had broken into the car, it would have been just as irrelevant to your story, and equally sterotypical, in my opinion. Your opinion obviously differs, & I'm okay with that. I just don't understand how pointing out someone's race, color, creed, religion, etc. has any relevance to the story, or to your main points.


By the way, HankB and LawDog; I stand humbly corrected on the finer points of Texas law. As I've stated twice previously, y'all do most things right in Texas. Hopefully, there will never be a test case where someone was shot for running away with a purse, from an armed citizen.