Vern Humphrey
Member
Exactly right. You don't shoot if your life is not in immanent danger. But when it is in immanent danger, shoot fast!
held up at gunpoint Saturday night!
- Thread starter Tried'nTrue
- Start date
- Status
Exactly right. You don't shoot if your life is not in immanent danger. But when it is in immanent danger, shoot fast!
Tried'nTrue
Member
Jiml3, I agree. Having personally been there, I am convinced that this is true. It doesn't guarantee safety (what does?!) but it's a much more sound mindset. Experience is the greatest teacher.
As for those wondering why I went to the PO at that time, I've lived in this town for 20 years, have been going to the PO at that time or later for several years, and have never had any problems. This used to be a very safe, small town. Now, that is changing.
Finally, I'm not a teenager as my brother is and we weren't out-numbered, unless the female accomplice was also armed...
I and my bro learned much from this situation, not least being do not show fear and do not empower the perpetrator by giving in to demands. For those of you who've been in this situation, your experience, such as Jiml3, bears this out. No, it doesn't guarantee safety, but it's a more sound mindset than, "Give the perp whatever he wants and you are guaranteed safety."
I'm thankful to be alive and to have learned what I did.
Mr Kablammo
Member
You should take the police report to the post office and report the incident to the clerks or call the Postal Inspector. The signs that I see regarding CCW on federal property even state that having the gun in the parking lot is a violation. Let the Feds add even more grief to their punishment.
chaim
Member
Why do you two automatically assume that those of us who don't think your course of action was very smart haven't "been there"? While it is true that I've never been robbed, I have once had a gun pulled on me (I was around 12 and some teens wanted to scare me), I was there when a coworker had a thug pull a gun on him (my coworker turned the guy in about 6 months earlier when he caught him shoplifting), and I was once assaulted badly enough that it merited a trip to the ER.
And a wise man would have just learned why going there that late was a bad idea. Just because you never had problems in the past doesn't mean it is a safe course of action.
Why would the female need to be armed for you not to be outnumbered? There were two of you, unarmed. There were two male BGs and a female BG, or do you think women can't be a danger to you unless armed?
It is fine and good to act confident and not show fear. Showing fear is showing that he can control you and may get you into more trouble. There is a difference in being confident and in being unwise.
And here it is obvious you have learned nothing worth while.
To refuse to give them what they ask for (assuming property and not your body) statistically does make things much more dangerous for you. They get mad and often react violently. No one says that complying will guarantee anything, there are no guarantees in life. However, by refusing you are much more likely to be hurt or killed than by complying. And if the situation tells you that complying won't help, don't just refuse (since that can get you killed- you only refuse when you KNOW violence will be brought against you regardless of your actions) you fight.
mljdeckard
Member
I'll keep this short,
In the towns I have lived in (2) where we had only a post office, one had no in-town police at all, just a token drive-thru by the sherrif every day, and the other had notably sub-standard police. Not being a cop hater, but statistically, in the state I live in, the further away one lives from the capitol, the worse the local cops are. I would have taken my chances on my own. The other town had a mandatory firearm ownership law, and therefore the liklihood of this happening would have been very unlikely indeed.
Watching this incident get picked apart after the fact reminds me of why I don't want to be a cop. There is never a shortage of people who will tell you how they could have done it better after the fact.
Bottom line, you're still alive, no one got hurt, the bad guys got caught. Now, to find a way to avoid having to go to the post office on a regular basis........
In the towns I have lived in (2) where we had only a post office, one had no in-town police at all, just a token drive-thru by the sherrif every day, and the other had notably sub-standard police. Not being a cop hater, but statistically, in the state I live in, the further away one lives from the capitol, the worse the local cops are. I would have taken my chances on my own. The other town had a mandatory firearm ownership law, and therefore the liklihood of this happening would have been very unlikely indeed.
Watching this incident get picked apart after the fact reminds me of why I don't want to be a cop. There is never a shortage of people who will tell you how they could have done it better after the fact.
Bottom line, you're still alive, no one got hurt, the bad guys got caught. Now, to find a way to avoid having to go to the post office on a regular basis........
Amen to that... a pissed off 98lb woman can make you have a hellava bad day.
And for the original post. Next time, just keep driving. If your running out of gas, make sure your headed to a safe place.
Whatever you do don't speed off and try to find a cop. If you do, make sure the vehicle following you is actually still following you when you find the cop. Otherwise you'll end up with a speeding ticket despite the excuse.
Now I wonder how many officers have heard this excuse for illegitimate speeding?
My life is priceless.
-Dev
cxm
Member
Irrevlant?
I don't agree... it is important to be aware of who commits crimes.... what race, nationality if it is a distinguishing characteristic... of course I'm not even a little politically correct.
Fact is most of the crime is committed by a relatively small segment of crime in the U.S.
Want to DRASTICALLY reduce crime? Deport all illegal aliens... in some states (such as Texas, Arizona, California to list a few) crime would go down over 50% in some categories.
There is another facet to the subject too... reporters are ever so careful in their political correctness to not report the ethinc information of criminals or the victims of their crimes... which is a serious disservice to the general population. If you watched the news with regularlarity you would think every neighborhood is under seige (well... maybe in Dallas proper it is...) which is not the case... most of the violent crime is among drugies, gangs, and limited groups... most people don't know that... which makes them afraid and that makes them anti-gun... which we don't need.
So nationality and race is MOST important in reporting about crimes... we need to know who the enemy is befor we can deal with them.
FWIW
Chuck
Lennyjoe wrote:
Quote:
What nationality were they?
Irrelivant.
I don't agree... it is important to be aware of who commits crimes.... what race, nationality if it is a distinguishing characteristic... of course I'm not even a little politically correct.
Fact is most of the crime is committed by a relatively small segment of crime in the U.S.
Want to DRASTICALLY reduce crime? Deport all illegal aliens... in some states (such as Texas, Arizona, California to list a few) crime would go down over 50% in some categories.
There is another facet to the subject too... reporters are ever so careful in their political correctness to not report the ethinc information of criminals or the victims of their crimes... which is a serious disservice to the general population. If you watched the news with regularlarity you would think every neighborhood is under seige (well... maybe in Dallas proper it is...) which is not the case... most of the violent crime is among drugies, gangs, and limited groups... most people don't know that... which makes them afraid and that makes them anti-gun... which we don't need.
So nationality and race is MOST important in reporting about crimes... we need to know who the enemy is befor we can deal with them.
FWIW
Chuck
Lennyjoe wrote:
Quote:
What nationality were they?
Irrelivant.
Jiml3
Member
Quote:
Jiml3, I agree. Having personally been there...
Why do you two automatically assume that those of us who don't think your course of action was very smart haven't "been there"? While it is true that I've never been robbed, I have once had a gun pulled on me (I was around 12 and some teens wanted to scare me), I was there when a coworker had a thug pull a gun on him (my coworker turned the guy in about 6 months earlier when he caught him shoplifting), and I was once assaulted badly enough that it merited a trip to the ER.
Chaim:
To respond to your comment above, one of my points is that some people who have never been under the gun will play the macho card by saying how they would have handled it. Being under the gun, and making life threating decisions versus arm chair fantasy thinking are two very different things. In the real life situation, your first reaction is "how to handle this to survive".
Not showing fear I believe is a very good choice, it has worked for me and the gentleman that started this thread. Your choice may be different and you are entitled to it. All I did was share my experiences and say that I agreed with Tried n True in his handling of the situation. Others including you have expressed your opinions that he was wrong. That's monday quarterbacking. Unless you were there, you can't say for sure how you would have handled it. And that is a fair statement!
Jiml3, I agree. Having personally been there...
Why do you two automatically assume that those of us who don't think your course of action was very smart haven't "been there"? While it is true that I've never been robbed, I have once had a gun pulled on me (I was around 12 and some teens wanted to scare me), I was there when a coworker had a thug pull a gun on him (my coworker turned the guy in about 6 months earlier when he caught him shoplifting), and I was once assaulted badly enough that it merited a trip to the ER.
Chaim:
To respond to your comment above, one of my points is that some people who have never been under the gun will play the macho card by saying how they would have handled it. Being under the gun, and making life threating decisions versus arm chair fantasy thinking are two very different things. In the real life situation, your first reaction is "how to handle this to survive".
Not showing fear I believe is a very good choice, it has worked for me and the gentleman that started this thread. Your choice may be different and you are entitled to it. All I did was share my experiences and say that I agreed with Tried n True in his handling of the situation. Others including you have expressed your opinions that he was wrong. That's monday quarterbacking. Unless you were there, you can't say for sure how you would have handled it. And that is a fair statement!
Tried'nTrue
Member
In response to Chaim:
This statement of yours was overstepping your insight.
Here's an example that I believe backs my stance - Flight 93 of September 11. All throughout the '80's, we were told that giving in to terrorists was the best bet. Give a terrorist what they want and you'll have better odds of surviving. Well, the people on the 2 planes that crashed in New York obviously did not resist. They died, and thousands of others did, too. The passengers of Flight 93, howevr, resisted. They still died, but countless other people were saved. And before you think that this is an inept comparison to our disagreement, it is very possible, and historically likely, that the terrorists aboard the planes assured the passengers that if they just sat quietly, all would be ok. That is the standard line of reasoning - the terrorist wants the plane, the publicity, the transport, the bargaining leverage, but not the people. The Flight 93 people acted contrary to the standard reasoning and saved lives by doing so. As a side note - if anyone knows about words exchanged between the terrorists and the passengers of Flight 93, I'd be interested to find out.
On the issue of compliance or non-compliance, Chaim, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your stance; however, I'm fully aware that every situation is unique. A revenge situation, as you encountered with your friend, is a different situation than armed robbery.
As for the other situations you've encountered, I remember reading about them and I'm sorry that you had to experience them! ER's are somewhat less than fun; I know from mucho personal experience (an 800 pound boulder + my leg...).
take care,
TnT
I assumed that because , for the most part, this is a true assumption. Most people haven't had guns pulled on them in a criminal situation. Most people these days recommend compliance. Your own experience is non-normative.
True enough.
Well, this is a good point. I was speaking from a purely physical standpoint. Given the size and physical condition of the guys confronting us, I wasn't too worried for safety. I am sure that's why the one perp carried a gun. If you'd seen him, you'd understand. And, I admit, I usually assume that a female is not a big threat to me personally, as I am definitely stronger and bigger than the vast majority of the women I see daily. As you pointed out, though, one can't merely discount womens' abilities. And before I get flamed: I am not sexist or chauvenistic, I am realistic in the knowledge that, by and large, men are physically more likely to win in a man-vs-woman physical fight.
Completely true. If you re-read my posts, though, you will see that I didn't withhold truck keys for the sake of saving my property/having unwise motives. I didn't even have the keys on me, as it was my brother who'd been driving! I said what I did for 2 purposes: to keep the BG's attention away from my brother and to throw the BG off-guard and take him out of his intimidation/fear response game.
And since you can read my mind and understand all of my thoughts, you can speak authoratively on what I've learned
This statement of yours was overstepping your insight.If you have the statistics to back up your statement, I may be more inclined to believe you. Truly, every such situation is unique. However, I fundamentally disagree with your premise, which is why you believe I didn't learn anything of merit. My own experience tells me that resisting victimization (not necessarily with violence, mind you) is a more sound strategy than acquiescing to demands. Women's magazines across the country are now agreeing with this position - resist, period. That is the message being sent out to women all over the country, and it refers to demands on both personal body and physical possesions. I bring up the magazines because safety is an ever-increasing issue for women and, as such, merits a look. I'd be interested in any data you can get that would show evidence to the contrary of my experience and women's magazine advice.
Here's an example that I believe backs my stance - Flight 93 of September 11. All throughout the '80's, we were told that giving in to terrorists was the best bet. Give a terrorist what they want and you'll have better odds of surviving. Well, the people on the 2 planes that crashed in New York obviously did not resist. They died, and thousands of others did, too. The passengers of Flight 93, howevr, resisted. They still died, but countless other people were saved. And before you think that this is an inept comparison to our disagreement, it is very possible, and historically likely, that the terrorists aboard the planes assured the passengers that if they just sat quietly, all would be ok. That is the standard line of reasoning - the terrorist wants the plane, the publicity, the transport, the bargaining leverage, but not the people. The Flight 93 people acted contrary to the standard reasoning and saved lives by doing so. As a side note - if anyone knows about words exchanged between the terrorists and the passengers of Flight 93, I'd be interested to find out.
On the issue of compliance or non-compliance, Chaim, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your stance; however, I'm fully aware that every situation is unique. A revenge situation, as you encountered with your friend, is a different situation than armed robbery.
As for the other situations you've encountered, I remember reading about them and I'm sorry that you had to experience them! ER's are somewhat less than fun; I know from mucho personal experience (an 800 pound boulder + my leg...).
take care,
TnT
simon
Member
Just a couple questions;
How long were you & you're brother in the PO?
DO/Did you have a pull-out stereo?
How long were you & you're brother in the PO?
DO/Did you have a pull-out stereo?
You should have given him the keys. While you took the chance that it would throw him off his game and it did, it could have easily gone the other way. He got the drop on you, so you're at his mercy. Don't aggravate him, just give him the keys and note the license plate(s), vehicle description, appearances of suspects. Getting caught driving your stolen truck ensures a couple more years on their sentences.
Of course, if you had your CCW, dropping him like a sack of potatoes wouldn't have been a bad idea. It may actually be your civic duty.
Resistance is a fine policy, but you got cornered. Don't let it happen again.
Of course, if you had your CCW, dropping him like a sack of potatoes wouldn't have been a bad idea. It may actually be your civic duty.
Resistance is a fine policy, but you got cornered. Don't let it happen again.
joab
Member
All cell phones whether activated or not can call 911, get one
Tried'nTrue
Member
Simon asked:
Grey stated:
NeveraVictimAgain: thanks for the well-wishes. Can I rightly deduct from your name that you've also been in a situation in which someone threatened your life? If you're not comfortable talking about it, I understand fully.
joab: that's how we called 911 after the perps drove off.
Here's a question for all those who say that I should've complied with the demand for the truck keys:
Have any of you been held up at gunpoint and had something demanded of you? I ask this in sincerity, not sarcasm.
We were in the PO for 60 seconds or less. The pull-off face was stuck onto the deck (I'd previously tried to take it off) and the stereo had been broken for a long time.
Grey stated:
In this situation, no. Both my brother and I lived and all the perps were caught. We did the right thing. Will the same response be appropriate for the next situation, should one occur? That's impossible to say. I'm still more convinced that, for most situations, a stance of non-compliance is more advantageous.
NeveraVictimAgain: thanks for the well-wishes. Can I rightly deduct from your name that you've also been in a situation in which someone threatened your life? If you're not comfortable talking about it, I understand fully.
joab: that's how we called 911 after the perps drove off.
Here's a question for all those who say that I should've complied with the demand for the truck keys:
Have any of you been held up at gunpoint and had something demanded of you? I ask this in sincerity, not sarcasm.
Tried'nTrue
Member
FOR THE LAST TIME:
I DIDN'T HAVE THE KEYS, MY YOUNGER BROTHER DID. I WASN'T ABOUT TO LET THE PERPS KNOW THAT.
I DIDN'T HAVE THE KEYS, MY YOUNGER BROTHER DID. I WASN'T ABOUT TO LET THE PERPS KNOW THAT.
Tried'n True,
I, at least, will say "well done." Nothing gripes me like people saying "you should've complied" or "your stereo's not worth your life," or, "don't check your mail that late." Blah blah, it's all the rhetoric of victims. No thanks. It's my stereo. Furthermore, it's my decision when I check the mail. It's my life, and it won't be dictated, abridged, or altered by scumbags. If you live in fear, you're not living at all. Until I have a wife and children, I'm not going to be scurrying around like a mouse because some jackass thinks he can threaten me. Cheers, mate.
I, at least, will say "well done." Nothing gripes me like people saying "you should've complied" or "your stereo's not worth your life," or, "don't check your mail that late." Blah blah, it's all the rhetoric of victims. No thanks. It's my stereo. Furthermore, it's my decision when I check the mail. It's my life, and it won't be dictated, abridged, or altered by scumbags. If you live in fear, you're not living at all. Until I have a wife and children, I'm not going to be scurrying around like a mouse because some jackass thinks he can threaten me. Cheers, mate.
joab
Member
I would have definitely called sooner then.
I would have called to report an erractic driver when they started playing bumper cars, just putting the phone up to your ear may have been enough to warn them off.
hm
Member
Tried,
2 things...
1. congrats on walking away from that one
2. when did your vehicle and your machismo pride become more valuable than your life or your brother's life? (in other words, listen to Chaim, bro)
2 things...
1. congrats on walking away from that one
2. when did your vehicle and your machismo pride become more valuable than your life or your brother's life? (in other words, listen to Chaim, bro)
Jiml3
Member
From Grey 54956:
"He got the drop on you, so you're at his mercy"
Next paragraph:
" Of course, if you had your ccw, you could have dropped him like a sack of potatoes."
When somebody has the drop on you and is not trying to search you, why would you want to escalate the situatation and possibly get you, your brother or a bystander shot? In the process, you would also being inviting a hell of a lot of legal problems that could bankrupt you.
From hm:
2. when did your vehicle and your machismo pride become more valuable than your life or your brother's life? (in other words, listen to Chaim, bro)
That is a cheap shot and not what Tried n' True said. His point was not to empower the BG's by showing weakness that would possibly encourage them into thinking that just because they had a gun, they could do anything they wanted. Also, in my earlier post, I stated that unless you have experienced being under the gun, don't assume to know how you would react. In my opinion and experience, tried n' true handled the situation correctly. He was in a bad situation but was not a coward. That does not mean he was trying to escalte the situation, just making the point that he was not a willing victim.
Lighten up guys, he handled the situation successfully. Maybe you would have done it differently, but if you haven't walked in his shoes, don't be so dam sure!
"He got the drop on you, so you're at his mercy"
Next paragraph:
" Of course, if you had your ccw, you could have dropped him like a sack of potatoes."
When somebody has the drop on you and is not trying to search you, why would you want to escalate the situatation and possibly get you, your brother or a bystander shot? In the process, you would also being inviting a hell of a lot of legal problems that could bankrupt you.
From hm:
2. when did your vehicle and your machismo pride become more valuable than your life or your brother's life? (in other words, listen to Chaim, bro)
That is a cheap shot and not what Tried n' True said. His point was not to empower the BG's by showing weakness that would possibly encourage them into thinking that just because they had a gun, they could do anything they wanted. Also, in my earlier post, I stated that unless you have experienced being under the gun, don't assume to know how you would react. In my opinion and experience, tried n' true handled the situation correctly. He was in a bad situation but was not a coward. That does not mean he was trying to escalte the situation, just making the point that he was not a willing victim.
Lighten up guys, he handled the situation successfully. Maybe you would have done it differently, but if you haven't walked in his shoes, don't be so dam sure!
Zundfolge
Member
Wow ... that's one of the most asinine comments in this tread.
It wasn't about the vehicle or "machismo pride", it was about not turning the attention of an armed man to his little brother (in other words, his actions were to PROTECT his brother).
One doesn't know until AFTER the BG has left the scene that they will not be harmed. Once you see a gun in the hand of the BG it would be prudent to assume that he intends to shoot you regardless of your compliance or lack thereof. Complying and doing nothing would have the same chance of getting his brother or a bystander shot.
These guys aren't out robbing peole because its a good way to make a living ... sure the money is part of it, but there are much better ways to make more money (even illegally) than stealing car stereo equipment and crappy pickup trucks. The other reason people run around sticking guns in people's faces and taking their stuff is because they "get off" on the power trip. Eventually some people get bored with just frightening people and making them cower and they start killing. YOU don't know if this guy has the stones or not until AFTER you're laying on the ground bleeding.
As for the whole "self defense causes legal problems" mem ... if you live by the lawyer you die by the lawyer ... even thinking of the legal issues over the tactical ones in such a situation is a good way to die young (but hey, at least you won't be charged or sued
).Q-Lock
Member
I'm glad the situation worked out the way it did for you and your brother! I think you did a good job, and obviously, you did the correct things in this situation(you and your brother are unharmed and the BG's are caught = you did the right thing).
One thing I do disagree with though: "And before I get flamed: I am not sexist or chauvenistic, I am realistic in the knowledge that, by and large, men are physically more likely to win in a man-vs-woman physical fight."
- Which is why most women will not rely on hand to hand combat when encountering a larger male. Don't forget what she could be holding up that sleeve of hers. When one is at a size disadvantage, use whatever you can to win the fight --this is just as important to remember when you are the smaller one as when you are the bigger one!
All in all, you two made it out unharmed...great work!
Regards,
One thing I do disagree with though: "And before I get flamed: I am not sexist or chauvenistic, I am realistic in the knowledge that, by and large, men are physically more likely to win in a man-vs-woman physical fight."
- Which is why most women will not rely on hand to hand combat when encountering a larger male. Don't forget what she could be holding up that sleeve of hers. When one is at a size disadvantage, use whatever you can to win the fight --this is just as important to remember when you are the smaller one as when you are the bigger one!
All in all, you two made it out unharmed...great work!
Regards,
Why people still steal car stereos is beyond me. They are less then $100 brand new in the stores and even cheaper on ebay. Those stupid thugs are going to be tried as adults and probably go to jail for a few years for possession, theft and possibly attempted murder.
the naked prophet
Member
Jiml3 said:
It could be that some of us have never been under the gun because of "how we handled it."
Of those of us who say "I would have done this..." most of those actions would have resulted in not getting a gun pulled at all - ie. call the police when it becomes clear there was an aggressive driver, don't stop at all when being followed, or just let them go with the stereo.
Tried'nTrue made several mistakes before there was a gun involved. Once he got to that point, I think he did very well. I'm sure he has learned from not only the experience, but from the discussion as well. He is not likely to make those mistakes again. It was due to discussions like these that I learned not to make those mistakes, and have never been "under the gun."
Tried'nTrue
Member
Huh, it's been a heckuva discussion, hasn't it? I'm gonna re-cap what I've learned from this experience:
- Never assume that an individual or group are not potentially lethal threats.
-When someone makes me the target of their erratic behavior, particularly if it is of an anti-social nature (such as swerving repeatedly at me on the road), know that they probably have ill intention and, therefore, mitigate any potential encounter by avoiding those individuals.
-If avoidance of hostile individuals is impossible, an attitude of resistance and calmness, even if evidenced only on the outside can be a great asset.
-Do not have the mentality of a victim. This empowers the predator. This is also the most debated thought in my list.
-Know that every situation is different and there is no set-in-stone method of handling them. However, the principles of awareness, calmness, and non-victimhood hold true. I believe that they are transferrable to all aspects of life.
- Never assume that an individual or group are not potentially lethal threats.
-When someone makes me the target of their erratic behavior, particularly if it is of an anti-social nature (such as swerving repeatedly at me on the road), know that they probably have ill intention and, therefore, mitigate any potential encounter by avoiding those individuals.
-If avoidance of hostile individuals is impossible, an attitude of resistance and calmness, even if evidenced only on the outside
can be a great asset. -Do not have the mentality of a victim. This empowers the predator. This is also the most debated thought in my list.
-Know that every situation is different and there is no set-in-stone method of handling them. However, the principles of awareness, calmness, and non-victimhood hold true. I believe that they are transferrable to all aspects of life.
- Status
Similar threads
