I know which gun is the absolute best.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I should have said in hindsight "I'd rather lose $65 to two thugs and not get hurt than I would have to shoot two thugs and get arrested and my guns confiscated and go to court etc., et yada."


So you believe that giving it up the coin guarantees your safety? One can not be sure of anything in complying as others have mentioned.

It was deadly force used against him with the knife. Self defense kicks in when they have the means, motive, opportunity [ all were present here ].

In reality, if they turned and walked away after taking the money one would be hard pressed to state it was then self defense as they stopped being an immediate threat.

I would be more apt to wait till they made the move on me to defend, empty handed [ you won't get to the gun unless mexican carrying probably ] or wait until they walked away and then pulled the gun, not shown it and politely asked for my money back. If they turned toward me and did not just run away when I yelled for them to stop and give it up, they are then again a potential threat to me and I have moved back into the area of self defense from lethal force where they get to see the heat.

That may make them comply or they may just run. If they comply, they get on their bellies and interlocked fingers behind their heads at gun point. If they run, they get the money anyway. I'm not going to shoot either of them for the money as they are not a threat while running away and theirs no self defense doctrine that can protect my actions against them.

The knife wielding felon can have my $65 or whatever else is in my wallet, pocket or whatnot. Unless he threatens my life or folks around me I am not going to respond with deadly force.

But the victim was threatened with deadly force and was threatening his life [ it was implied by the statement made and the knife being brandished ]. Whats hard to understand about that? Those who feel the victim wasn't threatening should reexamine their thought process on this.

So, you pull a gun, you're still going to get stabbed

I'm not sure many would pull heat while that close to a blade, but I suppose some would be prone to making the mistake and do so. The above statement could happen, it's written like it's a etched in stone you would be, again, I'm not so sure of that. It would depend on ones training, where the guy was who had his hand in my pocket, the guys positioning with the knife in relation to both of us, other variables.

Their best hope is to run like hell after they walk away and keep moving with me in this scenario. If they turn when confronted, we are back to lethal force justification unless he drops the knife when he does so.

Robin Brown
 
So you believe that giving it up the coin guarantees your safety? One can not be sure of anything in complying as others have mentioned.
Click to expand...
No, that is not what I believe, and not what I said. Both WH and I were unarmed during each robbery. We each were threatened with a knife. There was no alternative but to comply. I agree that compliance guarantees nothing. As each instance turned out, neither of us was physically harmed. We were lucky, that's all.

I would be more apt to wait till they made the move on me to defend, empty handed [ you won't get to the gun unless mexican carrying probably ] or wait until they walked away and then pulled the gun, not shown it and politely asked for my money back. If they turned toward me and did not just run away when I yelled for them to stop and give it up, they are then again a potential threat to me and I have moved back into the area of self defense from lethal force where they get to see the heat.
Click to expand...
As they are leaving, you are determined to either arrest them if they comply, or employ deadly force if they do not. Fine. I would not go that far. If I had been armed and drawn on them, then they fled, I would not pursue them. At that point, I was no longer in "imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm" and my use of deadly force would not be justified. The fact that I was armed saved my money and possibly my life. In many cases (most cases) this would not even be a reportable event.
 
"Excuse me ... holding out a knife and demanding money is not a threat to your life ........?"

That is not threat to your life, the knife was displayed, no lunging, no slashing attempts. The BG just wanted to steal a quick buck, I'm not trying to be a monday morning quarterback, but no ones life is worth $65.

Charby
 
charby:

Wrong again--though I understand the thought process you have.

A knife at 21 feet is considered the minimum lethal force distance with a knife by police academy standards most everywhere I know of in the US.

An officer is justified to pull his gun if the knife is presented within that distance [ and would be wise to not wait till then if he has the chance as thats the MINIMUM distance opne can reach you beofre you can get a shot off ].

As well, your statement that "The BG just wanted to steal a quick buck" is an assumption on your part, we have no way of knowing what he wanted or his intents except to rob at knife point which has been established ].

Robin Brown
 
That is not threat to your life, the knife was displayed, no lunging, no slashing attempts.
Click to expand...
Oh, well ... I guess this wasn't even a robbery after all ... :rolleyes:

Just some panhandler who happened to have a knife in his hand ... he was probably in the middle of trimming his fingernails or something, when he decided to ask for a handout (or "hand-in" in this case)
 
I think you did the best that you could because you are still alive and not hurt. At least they didn't kill you for not having enough cash.

At my campus some food service workers were robbed, complied with the robbers, gave them money and then were all shot. Fortunately they lived. Compliance won't save your life...it may just make the scumbags job easier.

Consider the money a payment towards better perimeter protection (fence, lights, dogs, etc.)

Good luck!
 
White Horseradish, I am am glad you did not get hurt. In your situation you did the right thing since you were not armed.

The guy was holding a knife and said we do not want to hurt you. That my friends is a threat. Anyone who would not draw their gun (if they had one) in this situation should rethink carrying a gun.
 
He didnt have a weapon

I am sorry you got robbed. I am happy you are allright.
Rileymcs' point is one i share
 
Last edited:
Quote:
That is not threat to your life, the knife was displayed, no lunging, no slashing attempts.


Oh, well ... I guess this wasn't even a robbery after all ...

Just some panhandler who happened to have a knife in his hand ... he was probably in the middle of trimming his fingernails or something, when he decided to ask for a handout (or "hand-in" in this case)

So you say that if anyone points a knife in my direction and dictates orders its okay to put 2 in the chest and one in the head?
 
If the knife was under 4" in blade length and as cheap as you say, they'd have had a fight on their hands even over $65 and having no gun if it had been me. Too many objects in my garage (bats, clubs, etc.) for a quick gimme from a couple of thugs.
 
That is not threat to your life, the knife was displayed, no lunging, no slashing attempts.
Click to expand...
So, if I draw a gun and demand your money, is it not a threat unless I point the weapon and place my finger on the trigger?

Would anyone willingly hand over all their cash if they weren't in fear for their life/bodily injury?
 
right and wrong

I don't understand all the concern over the amount of money or the fear of reprisal. What ever happened to right and wrong? What these people did was wrong. Why can't we take responsibility for our actions? If an idiot shoots people at a school people want to sue Colt and S&W, yet if we defend ourseves from criminals we get sued. I don't understand these things I guess because I the only moral barometer I have is right and wrong. If they had come in my garage I would have called the police and told them that there were two dead bodies in my garage, one still clutching a knife.
 
Ok, I'm breaking one of my rules and posting on a thread without reading all the way through it.

Here's what it boils down to:

* Owning a gun doesn't mean you have to kill someone.
* Carrying a gun doesn't mean you have to kill someone.
* Pulling a gun doesn't mean you have to kill someone.
* Pointing a gun doesn't mean you have to kill someone.
* Statistics show that self-defense firearms are rarely fired even when they are used to deter crime.
* $65 is not worth killing someone over.
* $65 is not worth GETTING killed over.
* BUT! $65 is not the issue--not even close!
* Giving a criminal money does not ensure your safety.
* Having 2 criminals threaten you with deadly force when they have the means to follow through on the threat is sufficient cause to pull a gun on them.
* Holding a knife while demanding someone's money constitutes a threat of deadly force. That's called armed robbery.
* Having them attempt to follow through on the threat would be sufficient cause to shoot them.
* Not having a weapon severely limits your response options.
 
The question isn't whether the weapon being used against you is a deadly weapon, but whether you can get out of the situation without shooting. If you say you'll shoot anyway then you either haven't had any CCW training or ignored it.

The situation in the garage was different - confined space and your own property. If I'd of had a gun in that situation it would've been out. That doesn't mean I would've shot anyone - that would have depended on their reaction.
 
JohnKSa...you pretty much summed up this whole thread, in your post...except one "we are all glad, he is ok" !! but he knew that. Arc-Lite
 
reprisal

I think you guys have overlooked something. These people know where you live if they robbed you in your garage. You mean to tell me you are just going to chase them off with a gun? Think that might piss em off a bit? You better not ever leave your family alone in the house again...
 
I edited this for some spelling and grammar errors.

There are some really good points made in this thread. Some really unbelievable ones too. I always enjoy reading things that go back and forth regarding a real situation like this b/c of the fact that we all no doubt have several things in common, or we wouldn't be here together, yet we see certain things so differently.

I give my vote for the "then what the hell is a ccw for anyway?" camp in this debate.

Why carry a firearm, or any weapon for that matter, if you're too scared to use it to protect yourself because of legal action? That's the @#$! problem in this country. We don't REALLY have 2nd amendment rights......they are severely limited and we don't really have a right to defend ourselves without suffering for it. All because someone else thinks they know what's better for us than we know for ourselves????? Who the hell are they?

For me it comes down to this........if you have the salt, stupidity, crazed mentality or whatever it is to step up to someone, anyone, and commit an act like armed robbery, you deserve whatever you get. If you succeed, good for you. That sheep you just bested who was too afraid of protecting themselves probably deserved it since they no doubt have allowed themselves to be victimized in some fashion their whole lives (with some obvious exceptions here). If you get the hell beat out of you, shot, stabbed, run over, or killed, good for you, you deserved it you scumbag. Make an honest living like the rest of us and stop praying on the weak.

The stupidity of this topic is beyond me and it is one of the most nonsensical debates I've ever seen in the US. An American citizen with supposed Constitutional rights defends his life, liberty and private property, all of which are supposed to be protected by the Constitution, and then the courts send him to jail or some welfare rat sues him and continues to work the system and prey on people even though he's now in a wheelchair b/c he's a piece of trash. The good guy gets screwed once again. Makes sense to me, I guess.

As far as the environment on this board and nearly every other one I've spent time on, it's getting waaay old to keep hearing justification for being a damn vicitim b/c of bad guy reprisals or legal action. Reach down and grab a set for crying out loud. Ok, so you don't have to shoot the guy in most situations........if some guy comes into MY GARAGE with A KNIFE to ROB ME he is in for a workout at the very least. Stab me now cause you aren't getting my wallet.

I guess I'll go out and buy a new $500-$1100 handgun, pay for a carry license that I shouldn't need, research defense loads until I'm blue in the face so I get just the right one for human stopping power, practice and train, spend another $250 on my "carry rig" of deep concealment holster, mag pouch and quality dedicated gun belt that provides the most stability and comfort so I can wear it 18 hours a day since God forbid I'm caught for 2 seconds without my "carry piece", I continue to practice and train, I constantly remind myself to maintain "situational awareness", continue to practice and train, finally invest another $100 in a tactical surefire light and practice and train with that so I learn how to "clear the house", more practice and training on the range wich many guys have to pay a membership fee for, spend countless hours posting and reading posts on gun boards such as THR so I can spend time with like minded fellows and even learn a few things along the way...................and then finally...................that scary, yet exciting, dreaded, yet yearned for moment.............the one I've prepared for years to prevent from happening to me, finally happens. And I'm caught off guard or too damn scared to actually do anything about it b/c................ I might get in trouble. So I justify it by saying "well, $65 isn't worth killing someone or getting killed over and even if I would have exercised my Constitutional rights and protected myself, I might have to go to court b/c the politically correct liberal piece of s*** society I live in gives more rights to trash than to hard working, law abiding good compassionate citizens.

So what's the point?

If that's how a man can justify not protecting himself and allowing himself and his home to be violated, I guess he can sleep better at night than I could. I bet if guys like that were women, they'd all end up being rape victims too right?
 
Riverrat66,

Your view on how the grand jury would look at whether or not he could have escaped... doesn't the fact that the events occured on HIS property void that question? If your on Your property, where are you going to escape to? I can understand if this happened in the parking lot of Wal-mart, but in his garage, at his home, I think that has its own set of rules. Thats just my oppinion.

Cyanide
 
Glad you're OK. Live and learn. Had a similar situation. Gun was in the car 20 feet away. When they left the garage they could just as easily walk back into the garage. So they are still a danger to:
1. YOU
2. Every other person they meet.
3. The police officer who stops them.

Here in TN their actions would be considered suicide. You were probably not their first or last. They need to be killed ASAP. :fire: No way to know how many lives you will be saving.
 
Bottom Line

If someone didn't have a gun or didn't draw it when they got robbed and posted the story here, then they didn't really need a gun since they survived the encounter.

I am more concerned about those who didn't have a gun, or didn't draw it when they should have, and AREN'T posting here.
 
In PA, you have duty to retreat until you are in your own home. He was in his home. They came into his residence. This is no different than if they would have come into his bedroom and robbed him at knifepoint.

No way someone is pulling that crap at MY house.
 
Charby said,
You did the right thing by just letting the BG grab your cash.
Click to expand...

White Horseradish didn't exactly just let the BG grab his cash. He was forced to comply by a threat to his person. No doubt that there would have been no "letting" if the bad guy was unarmed, or if the bad guy wasn't part of a team.

I understand folks want to believe that there is no reason to fight over $65 or other material goods. I don't either. The problem is that the folks visiting White Horseradish were not asking for a handout. Had they just asked for a handout, he would not have given them all his money. Knowing this, they decided on armed robbery. The way that they are assured of getting his money is by a threat on his life. Of course, once that happens, the money is immaterial and it becomes a life or death situation where the robbers in this case had all the power on their side. White Horseradish was forced to comply or be injured or killed. There was no real choice for him in this case. He relingquished the $65 and hoped it would satisfy the robbers, so his life rested on the whims of the bad guys.
 
I think that a focus on the amount of the robbery is completely wrong-headed. The issue isn't that they stole $1 or $5 or $5000. The issue is whether we believe our social fabric or individual liberty is worth defending.

Clearly if caught unawares or unarmed, as in this case, your strategies are limited. No one wins every fight. In some cases the best strategy is in fact to submit. I would not argue that someone is obligated to engage in a suicidal attack.

To argue, however, that it is somehow not appropriate to defend oneself against a robbery based on the amount stolen or the demeanor of the robber completely misses the point.

The man who pulls a knife or gun on you and asks for your wallet is abrogating the social contract. The damage he does is completely unrelated to the item he steals from you. The violation is fundamental, he has stolen your right to self determination and liberty. He has threatenen your very existence. I am NOT persuaded by the arguments above that somehow that threat doesn't really exists. To present a weapon and a demand to someone CLEARLY defines the proposed arrangement, to wit "Give it up, or I'll hurt you." To argue that refusing to submit to such demands when at all possible is somehow not justified is to argue that self determination of the individual is subject to some minimum price tag.

Personally, I believe that the pervasiveness of this 'logic' greatly contributes towards just this sort of behaviour by miscreants. Every person who voluntarily accepts that '$10 isn't worth hurting someone over' encourages those who would hurt someone to obtain that very same $10.

Snyder in his article a nation of cowards (which is well worth reading in its entirety) makes the point way better than I ever could:

Crime is not only a complete disavowal of the social contract, but also a commandeering of the victim's person and liberty. If the individual's dignity lies in the fact that he is a moral agent engaging in actions of his own will, in free exchange with others, then crime always violates the victim's dignity. It is, in fact, an act of enslavement. Your wallet, your purse, or your car may not be worth your life, but your dignity is; and if it is not worth fighting for, it can hardly be said to exist
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Had a scare today...
Replies
11
Views
858
foghornl
F
K
  • Locked
I ALMOST, had to clear my house today.
2 3
Replies
71
Views
3K
hollywoodfl
H
CAS700850
  • Locked
Paranoid or prepared?
Replies
18
Views
731
cool45auto
C
T
  • Locked
Backing out of the garage between 4-5 am
Replies
21
Views
2K
shooting time
S
C
  • Locked
Lawn Salesman came banging on my door.
2 3
Replies
64
Views
4K
KAS1981
K
Back
Top