Incident reflection: decisions just before draw to firing

[IlikeSA]

Background:
Our good guy (let’s call them Good Guy) is a security professional with extensive training in martial arts and defensive tactics, including BJJ, TKD, and various de-escalation techniques. They are armed with a 9mm Glock with a red dot and no less-lethal options available. Since this is a real scenario and I want to protect the people involved, no further details will be given.

The Situation:

• Location: A 30x25-foot interior room with 3 tables and several office chairs scattered around. Good Guy is near the door on the northeast corner.
• People Involved:
  • Good Guy: Armed and ready to act.
  • Good Guy2: Unarmed and in close proximity to the subject.
  • Subject: An individual in an angry state for over an hour, now holding a bladed weapon.

Sequence of Events (3-5 seconds):

1. Threat Perception: Good Guy is about 20-30 feet away and sees the subject pull a blade, threatening Good Guy2.
2. Good Guy Draws: Good Guy draws their gun but keeps it pointed down due to concerns about the backdrop — there are people behind a drywall in the background that could be at risk if a shot is taken.
3. Approaching the Threat: The situation evolves quickly. Good Guy runs closer (about 6-10 feet) to get a better angle while Good Guy2 uses a chair for cover.
4. Holstering Attempt: With no clear shot, Good Guy tries to holster the firearm, aiming to free up both hands for a physical takedown.
5. Subject Charges: The subject suddenly turns and charges at Good Guy, still holding the blade. The shot still can’t be safely taken due to the backdrop and risk to others.
6. Physical Engagement: Good Guy takes the subject to the ground using their reaction hand, while staying off-line to avoid being stabbed. The firearm remains pointed down throughout the encounter.
7. Resolution: Law enforcement clears Good Guy, and no one is injured.

Afterthought:
A tactical expert suggested that Good Guy should have considered the backdrop before drawing the weapon. Ideally, they should only have drawn the firearm when a clear shot was available.

---

Discussion Points:​

1. Backdrop Considerations: Should the backdrop have been assessed before drawing the weapon, rather than waiting for the situation to develop?
2. Balancing Threat and Backdrop: How would you balance the immediate threat with backdrop concerns in such a rapidly evolving situation?
3. Prioritizing Actions: When the threat is close and others are at risk, how would you prioritize the backdrop, reaction time, and shot placement?

 

[Shawn Dodson]

The max distance is 7 to 10 yards in a CQB situation. Being that the bad guy is preoccupied with others, this is an easy shot on a static target for a well-practiced person. Backdrop is a non-issue, IMO.

The threatening knife is a deadly weapon, in which a deadly force response is reasonable.

The "tactical expert" isn't.

I'm glad to hear the situation was resolved by a person who is apparently more confident in their unarmed skill than armed skill.

 

[The Night Rider]

Bottom line, the good guy got away with it. I'm amazed he wasn't fired because that's usually what happens when security guards draw.

 

[shafter]

The backdrop must always be considered. If you have to move to make a clear shot then move. If you can.

In this scenario I'd have bladed my body and discretely drawn my gun. I'd maintain my distance but I'd verbally engage and try to deescalate and get the attention on myself. I'd direct the unarmed good guy to back away if he could. If the bad guy continues to escalate I'll produce my firearm. If he chases I'll shoot. I'd consider shooting him in the leg if I couldn't get a safe shot angle or take a kneeling shot at an upward angle. It depends on what else I know about the surroundings.

There is no way I would attempt a takedown against someone with a knife with bare hands only.

Funny thing about life is you can do everything wrong and still prevail. Or, do it all correctly and lose.

 

[Old Dog]

Afterthought:
A tactical expert suggested that Good Guy should have considered the backdrop before drawing the weapon. Ideally, they should only have drawn the firearm when a clear shot was available.

Wait, what??? Just now reading through this thread. A "tactical expert" suggests that Good Guy should wait to consider "backdrop" (well, we don't commonly hear the term "backdrop" when covering Rule 4, but all righty then) BEFORE drawing his firearm -- even though he's already been presented with a lethal threat? (Hey, just how does one go about getting recognized as a tactical expert, and who awards this designation?)

Okay, we're good - thanks Shawn.

The "tactical expert" isn't.

Indeed.

 

[DT Guy]

The right solution is to learn alternative shooting positions/angles. There was a safe shot there, as there almost always is.

Larry

 

[JohnKSa]

If Good Guy is going to be similarly constrained in future situations, he would be wise to carry some other means to subdue attackers armed with contact weapons so that he's not stuck choosing between a gun that he likely won't be able to use and his bare hands.

 

[TimRB]

I am not a "tactical expert" by any means, but I find it a bit bizarre that someone with a drawn gun would attempt to holster his gun so he could engage in hand-to-hand combat with someone holding a knife.

Tim

 

[Jeff White]

Happens all the time.....in the movies.

 

[Kleanbore]

Good Guy is about 20-30 feet away and sees the subject pull a blade, threatening Good Guy2.
Good Guy Draws:

A sworn officer would be expected to act appropriately in that situation but a civilian may lawfully employ deadly force in the defense of a third person only if he has an objective basis for believing that that person would be justified in using force to defend himself---that he had not in any way initiated or provoked the confrontation, and that he met all of the other conditions for lawful self defense.

With no clear shot, Good Guy tries to holster the firearm, aiming to free up both hands for a physical takedown.

That does not sound prudent at all.

The subject suddenly turns and charges at Good Guy, still holding the blade.

I suppose the charge resulted from the presentation of the gun. I agree with @shafter : "In this scenario I'd have bladed my body and discretely drawn my gun." But as @Shawn Dodson points out, the armed person would now be justified to employ deadly force to defend himself.

The shot still can’t be safely taken due to the backdrop and risk to others.

I presume that means "backstop". A backdrop is a hanging sheet.

It would be incumbent upon the defender to move to minimize the risk.

Good Guy takes the subject to the ground using their reaction hand, while staying off-line to avoid being stabbed. The firearm remains pointed down throughout the encounter.

I agree with @shafter : "There is no way I would attempt a takedown against someone with a knife with bare hands only." I cannot visualize "staying off-line to avoid being stabbed".

A tactical expert suggested that Good Guy should have considered the backdrop before drawing the weapon. Ideally, they should only have drawn the firearm when a clear shot was available.

No.

Some time ago, I walked into a grocery just as a robbery was about to occur. I realized that a man I had seen in a car ws the getaway driver. I had a revolver in my pants pocket. I could not safely withdraw, and I was standing between the would-be robber and the manager in the office where the cash was kept. I had no choice but to act.

I moved to ensure a clear shot and to have a backstop (freezers). The would-be robber was alarmed by my attention, and he fled.

I never drew.

The incident led me to realize that pants pocket carry was not the best practice.

 

[Boattale]

Shoulda bopped bad guy on the head with his gun.

 

[Kleanbore]

Shoulda bopped bad guy on the head with his gun.

Let no one take that seriously.

 

[Soonerpesek]

presume that means "backstop". A backdrop is a hanging sheet.

Well….backstop is a barrier…..

………backdrop is the scene/area beyond the “target”…..


……was MY interpretation of his statement….

 

[Kleanbore]

could be

 

[Soonerpesek]

could be

Simply saying that I took that statement as “know your target and beyond” type of thing…

YMMV

 

[Boattale]

Let no one take that seriously.

But hey, it works in the movies.....Right?

 

[DT Guy]

View attachment 1251792

But hey, it works in the movies.....Right?

That said, it's been done-more than once-and often worked. "Pistol whipping", while not safe or recommended, is something to be aware of from a purely defensive perspective.

Larry

 

[whisler]

My son was an Army MP stationed in Korea. He was assigned to AWOL apprehension, which in Korea is a dangerous assignment. He and his partner where trying to grab an AWOL wanted for killing his step daughter. During cuffing the guy turned on the other MP and was on the floor choking him. My son said he was afraid to shoot for fear of hitting his partner, so he "went upside his head with my 45". (Direct quote) I think that qualifies as "pistol whipping" and in that instance it worked.

 

[DT Guy]

My son was an Army MP stationed in Korea. He was assigned to AWOL apprehension, which in Korea is a dangerous assignment. He and his partner where trying to grab an AWOL wanted for killing his step daughter. During cuffing the guy turned on the other MP and was on the floor choking him. My son said he was afraid to shoot for fear of hitting his partner, so he "went upside his head with my 45". (Direct quote) I think that qualifies as "pistol whipping" and in that instance it worked.

Your son sounds like an intelligent man.

Safety issues aside, even a Glock has a big chunk of steel in it. Hence my warning to not disregard a firearm as an impact weapon. (And yes, I'm a bit pedantic-can't help it.)


Larry