Jim March said,
The perp is IN custody - he was dropped at the scene right there in the doorway. Notice how the clerk/CCW guy points the gun at the ground for a bit at an angle while looking through the sights - he's covering the downed goblin but doesn't fire at that point.
So far I've seen the youtube version only, but in several replays I think the clerk managed to keep his own fire at LEAST two feet to the right of the baby and possibly as much as three feet. As the mother finally shifted out of the line of fire the clerk stepped around her and continued firing WHILE avoiding putting mother or baby in the line of fire.
You must have a better version of the video. I can't tell whether the shooter is looking through his sights or not when he is pointing his gun at the downed bad guy.
As for shooting off to the side of the mother and baby, whether 2 mm, 2 feet, or two miles, the salient point is that they were not hit.
c_yeager said,
The good guy didnt actually move to avoid the woman and child. If she hadnt stepped aside he may well have been shooting right through them. He also used his female coworker for cover, which im not sure I approve of.
I can't say that I could tell that he moved to avoid the mother and baby either. As for using his coworker (regardless of sex) for cover or concealment, that was just as much her doing as his. She wasn't taking any evasive action and so he went by her just like he would go by a tree. He did manage to help preclude any of the good folks from getting shot by the BG.
Kentak said,
Now the "but" part. Should he have continued to fire as the bad guy was retreating? I would like to know if the BG dropped the gun after the first hit or not. If he still had the gun, you could make an argument that he was still a threat--he could have turned and returned fire at any moment. Second, I was bothered by the fact that the follow up shots were awfully close to the dumb-ass mother and her baby. I know how the tunnel vision thing works. Once the clerk made the decision to shoot, he was focused on putting shots on the perp, but, OMG, imagine if he had hit the kid.
So what if the robber dropped his gun after being shot and the clerk kept shooting. Just because the robber dropped the one known gun does not mean he wasn't carrying another or that he wasn't still a threat.
If you want to play the "but" and "what if" games, then ask yourself, what if the clerk had not taken action, maybe the robber would have shot the mother child, and clerks. He sure as hell wasn't brining in Girlscout cookies to sell.
SSN Vet said,
All movement is towards BG.....first on his feet (standing up like a man)....then to right (feigning to help open safe....but really positioning to draw).....then draw & more to right and into firing position to confront BG......then he keeps moving right as shooting.
Standing up like a man? Just how do men stand up? Are you suggesting that if he remained seated that he would be like a woman? Standing up wasn't because he was a man. Gimme a break. He stood because he needed to move to a place of concealment to draw. He would have looked unnatural and stupid rolling in the chair (if it had casters) or crawling to a place to draw.
Both standing and advancing on the bad guy are potentially problematic. It would well be argued that by standing up, the clerk made the mistake of presenting a much larger target to the bad guy. Also, closing ground on the bad guy increases the danger to the good guy. Assuming Jim March is right and the clerk was looking through his sights at the downed back guy as he went outside, then it appears that he failed to scan the area for additional bad guys. Note that he went from a place of greater safety (indoors) to less safety (outdoors)
I bet he and the co-worker talked about possible scenarios often....she doesn't seem to surprised.
Wow, I guess he and the mother with child also discussed possibile scenarios often as well and she didn't seem particularly surprised either.
