How NOT to shoot the good guys!

[Sheldon J]

Here is a subject that I have not seen broached before, and hopefully we will never experience. Many of us practice regularly at the range for a SHTF scenario how many of us think about this, will the BG / terrorist / shooter always be blindly apparent, or could it be that they are just one of the crowd.


Whether you OC, CC, or are just out and about this is in need of open discussion. the bellow is borrowed from The Warrior Talk News, September edition

If you choose to get involved in an incident as CCW Operator, or Off Duty Officer, or if you are sent as a Uniformed Officer to a call involving gunfire, consider these three elements before making your deadly force decision. If you have time to analyze what is going on, you also have time to evaluate what you see before you. Everyone wants to shoot the bad guy, but nobody wants to shoot a good guy.

It may not and very likely will not be a black and white situation where PERP ID is blindingly obvious, so it's time for discussion and thoughts!!!

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

CCW Operator? Can't say I've heard that one before. But a good article nonetheless.

 

[Shadow 7D]

HUH, it's the intervention part that is the kicker,

Why are you intervening, little kid getting dragged into a van by a ruff looking, shady character. Gee you just shot daddy, who is at his wits end after having to chase Jr. for 3 hours while mommy gets her shopping in, and Jr. just escaped from his car seat while daddy was putting baby in, and daddy is trying to keep Jr. from getting run over....

Domestics, even if you do get the right one, the 'victim' is going to come after you legally and physically.

Cops shoot cops, cops shoot 'good guys', so I would advise caution until/unless you KNOW not think, what is going on.

 

[herkyguy]

the 'operator' thing bothers me... it's a bit over the top. how about 'CCW permit holder'? there is a huge difference. to suggest that 'black' semi-auto pistols will distinguish oneself moreso than a 'shiny' revolver is also a stretch. some valuable points though are brought up.

 

[longhair75]

In my recent CHP class the instructor stated this case: A man is wrestling with a rather small woman on the front seat of a taxi. The CHP holder intervenes and draws a weapon, pointing it at the man. The man disengages and hides behind a nearby parked car.. The woman, who was trying to rob the male taxi driver at gunpoint shoots the CHP holder who has assumed that the man in this scenario is the BG and is holding his weapon on the frightened taxi driver who has just tried to get away from his assailant.

Before you intervene, make sure you know what is happening.

 

[167]

In my recent CHP class the instructor stated this case: A man is wrestling with a rather small woman on the front seat of a taxi. The CHP holder intervenes and draws a weapon, pointing it at the man. The man disengages and hides behind a nearby parked car.. The woman, who was trying to rob the male taxi driver at gunpoint shoots the CHP holder who has assumed that the man in this scenario is the BG and is holding his weapon on the frightened taxi driver who has just tried to get away from his assailant.

Why would you draw your gun? I see no justification for the use of a firearm in that scenario, bad example. Even a permit holder needs to have some understanding of a basic force continuum and how to properly intervene. It rarely involves the immediate use/brandishing of a firearm.

Before you intervene, make sure you know what is happening.

I think anyone with half a brain knows this. But you can't always "know" what is happening, anyone with half a brain knows that too.

What a person chooses to do in that couple seconds or so they have to make a decision is on that person. It is not for us to tell anyone else what or when to do something or not to do something. It is for us to remind them and ourselves that the consequences of their actions or inaction rest only on their shoulders and they assume all responsibility. Carrying a gun is big boy business and big boy rules apply. You screw up, you pay a heavy price. Everyone carrying a gun should carefully think about if they are willing to accept that responsibility.

 

[longhair75]

I agree, my friend. I would not think twice about using my weapon in my own defense or in the defense of my wife and family, but my pistol is not some sort of magic wand that allows me to right all of the wrongs of society.

 

[Kleanbore]

Many of us practice regularly at the range for a SHTF scenario...

Maybe some of us do, but just a friendly reminder, we do not discuss them here. But--to the discussion...

...how many of us think about this, will the BG / terrorist / shooter always be blindly apparent, or could it be that they are just one of the crowd.

It may not and very likely will not be a black and white situation where PERP ID is blindingly obvious, so it's time for discussion and thoughts!!!

Perhaps someone could describe for us a plausible scenario in which a person would have a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force is immediately necessary and lawful, and yet not be able to distinguish from others the person against whom said force must be used.

From the excerpt from Warrior Talk News:

...Everyone wants to shoot the bad guy, but nobody wants to shoot a good guy.....

I think everyone agrees with the latter, but I would distrust the motives of anyone who professes to want to shoot a "bad guy." Anyone who has had it happen or who has learned anything on the subject knows that it would be a traumatic, life-altering experience, however necessary it may have been.

If someone who is not a sworn officer does not know which person it is that would necessitate his use of deadly force, he has no business producing his weapon in the first place. 167 nailed it on that point.

There have been many discussions here on the subject of whether to intervene to protect a third party.

I don't see this going anywhere, but I don't have perfect vision, so we'll leave it open for a while in case someone has anything new and constructive to add.

 

[uspJ]

I think that in most cases the type of scenario explained in the link it would be clear who is the threat. If you are in a public place and you see someone shooting bystanders indiscriminately I would say it's safe to assume he's the threat. The choice to act or not is completely up to you. You legally have no responsablity to act but the moral side is up to you to decide.

If you were to round a corner and see two people fighting or maybe multiple people confronting or attacking a single person then the lines begin to blur. Perhaps the person being confronted or attacked is being detained due to a crime, perhaps he's being robbed, perhaps it's a domestic dispute...who knows. If you are not sure inaction is most likely the safest action.

I lurk on Warrior Talk because they have alot of info the AK, I've noticed that Gabe Suarez is a big proponent of taking action in the incident of a terror attack or active shooter incident. If he believes this himself or if it's just to help him market his products/classes is yet to be seen, but that is a topic for another thread.

 

[nalioth]

CCW Operator? Can't say I've heard that one before.

Over at warrior talk, everyone's an "operator" and going to the grocery store is a "tactical mission".

WT is very "over the top", imho.

 

[uspJ]

Over at warrior talk, everyone's an "operator" and going to the grocery store is a "tactical mission".

WT is very "over the top", imho.

Agreed.

While there is plenty of good info to be found there you have to sift through a lot of chest thumping and advice that would most likely get you arrested.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Over at warrior talk, everyone's an "operator" and going to the grocery store is a "tactical mission".

Hey, if that's what gets them through their day, it's better than a lot of things people use to get their jollies.

 

[merlinfire]

Over at warrior talk, everyone's an "operator" and going to the grocery store is a "tactical mission".

I lol'd.

In seriousness though, I think it would be easy for people to start in a situation on false pretenses or because it matched some imagined scenario they had practiced for, when in fact nothing nefarious was going on. One of the most tragic things is friendly fire.