Playing the probabilities in a robbery...

[bayesian]

I'm curious on others thoughts on the following:

I live in a large urban area, work in a downtown area, often coming and going from work at hours when there aren't alot of people around. There are reasonably frequent robberies (muggings?) where the MO is a couple of guys walk up to a person, one of them makes visible a gun (sometimes just in the waistband, sometimes drawn, although not very often actually pointed at the person and says give me your .... (wallet/phone/car keys/whatever). In the areas where I frequent, I know of about 32 of these in the last year. In *every* one of them, the item is given, and the thieves run off/get in a car (a couple of cases the victim was punched, I think in both cases, resisting giving the item).

Ok, I want to emphasize this: In almost all of these cases, at least one of the perps is armed, and in none of these cases, has the individual being robbed been shot.

I've asked myself this many times, and I'm pretty sure that even if I am carrying, I just give them what they ask for and leave it at that. I know that there is no guarantee that this time will be like the others but I also know that the vast majority of these guys are looking for a quick hit and run.

I also know that I have a wee bit of a temper, and in my one past experience, my first reaction was "You must be expletive kidding...", but I think I'm older and wiser now...

If you are in this situation, and you are carrying, what do you do?

(I'll also note that of course, I keep fairly aware of my surroundings and I try not to be in locations/times where this is likely to happen but then, sometimes you've still gotta live your life so I can't avoid this entirely).

 

[zorro45]

Paraphrasing loosely from Mas Ayoob's book "In the Gravest Extreme" this would be a great time to have a second walllet with $20 and your frequent video store user card (do they still have those?).

 

[Mainsail]

Try open carry.

 

[Sam1911]

Every lethal force encounter is series of gambles, risks to be evaluated, and chances you must take.

If you have some pre-knowledge that this happens in your area very often, and in almost all cases it happens in a certain way, it is perfectly reasonable to use that to inform your decisions in the moment.

Certainly there is no guarantee that they won't just shoot you THIS TIME. But there's considerably less than no guarantee that if you draw to their drawn (or brandished, displayed, etc) gun you'll beat them to the shot -- and prevail.

In every such case you need to evaluate as carefully as you can exactly what's happening in this moment and decide each fraction of a second whether you MUST shoot in order to survive. If you don't HAVE to shoot to work through this, don't. If something tells you that things are getting out of control (even if it is thier control) and you are about to die, you must act with overwhelming violence immediately.

But your gun isn't the only "tool" you have to work through a social interaction, however unpleasant. Absent a trigger that tells you that you must draw and shoot NOW, other tools in the toolbox have gotten you this far through life, and will likely get you through THIS as well.

Some folks will say that the criminal having a weapon IS the trigger that you must shoot. But that's a dangerous road. Especially knowing what you already know about crime in your area, you may stand a very good chance of walking away unharmed if you play cool and give them what they want. Once bullets start flying, however, probabilities go right out the window and you really have no idea what the end result is going to be.

 

[velojym]

I'll agree with Sam. Having a hammer (or armed drones) really doesn't make all problems into nails, and it's still up to you to do your best to come out of it alive and well. I'll also agree to the spare wallet. Keep your vital information, credit cards, etc. in something a little more secure. If I can divert his attention with a wallet and get my family and myself out of harm's way, I'll do exactly that. If he's already drawn down and has given me a reason to believe he's about to do something violent, that's about time to make myself a hard target (also hopefully drawing attention away from my family, if they're with me). Hard to say until you're in the spot...

 

[easyg]

32 muggings in one year....
Maybe if more folks resisted with deadly force there might not be so many muggings.

 

[bayesian]

32 muggings in one year....
Maybe if more folks resisted with deadly force there might not be so many muggings.

Yeah, it is a pretty good number. The economy is terrible, the neighborhoods can be pretty spotty, and there's a decent number of younger folks walking around late at night with more goods than sense.

Of course, it might be that there would be a deterrent effect if more people responded forcefully. It might also be that you deter a subset and up the force of the initial mugging for the remainder. I just know that if I'm the one in that situation, I'll probably be thinking of how to get out of the situation intact, rather than broader questions of deterrence...

I've heard about the second wallet idea but for some reason hadn't really considered it myself. I'll probably do that. Thanks for the tips.

 

[taliv]

read this

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_38/477114_Must_read_post_from_GD.html

 

[tuj]

Great advice from Sam1911 and a great link from taliv.

 

[Fryerpower]

I had forgotton the second wallet idea. Any thoughts on an expired drivers license and a canceled credit card that is still in date, along with the $23 dollars? The driver's license would only be a good idea if did NOT have the correct informations on it. Probably the same for the name on the credit card.

I would love to have a wallet full of fake info, but don't know how many laws you would break making it!

Jim

 

[Fred Fuller]

Use the advertising mailout stuff that shows up from time to time - be sure none of it can be tracked back to you. Not fake info, just blank info...

 

[Fryerpower]

Wow! Nice link and read, Taliv!

Jim

 

[mgkdrgn]

I had forgotton the second wallet idea. Any thoughts on an expired drivers license and a canceled credit card that is still in date, along with the $23 dollars? The driver's license would only be a good idea if did NOT have the correct informations on it. Probably the same for the name on the credit card.

I would love to have a wallet full of fake info, but don't know how many laws you would break making it!

Jim

Why? It's not like they are going to examine it before they leave.

 

[Mikhail Weiss]

If you don't HAVE to shoot to work through this, don't. If something tells you that things are getting out of control (even if it is thier control) and you are about to die, you must act with overwhelming violence immediately.

I always find this exceedingly curious.

The sign that your life is in danger right now is the weapon in the hand of the villain. This needs no decoding. It is evident.

So by what magic do you determine the villain is harmless or harmful?

If the magic is, “He is not hurting me now, he will not hurt me,” what makes you so sure?

If the magic is, “He will not hurt me as long as I comply,” what makes you so sure?

It seems this magic relies upon what is not evident while overlooking what is.

I don't ask these questions to say that all armed robberies deserve the same response, but because I am genuinely curious.

Once bullets start flying, however, probabilities go right out the window and you really have no idea what the end result is going to be.

This (bolded) is exactly why I ask. You have no idea which side of the statistical coin your event will fall upon. Data collections are not predictive of individual outcomes.

Studies citing injury or death rates among those who resist armed criminals with guns versus those who do not certainly exist, and they appear to offer, at the very least, food for thought, as they would seem to suggest something curious. Here's one:

In a logistic regression analysis, Kleck and Miriam Delone ("Victim Resistance and Offender Weapon Effects in Robbery," Journal of Quantitative Criminology 9 [1993]: 55-82) found that robbery victims who used guns in self-protection were significantly less likely to either be injured or lose their property than victims who used any other form of self protection or who did nothing to resist. This was true even when controlling for other characteristics of the robbery situation that could influence the effectiveness of defensive actions, such as the number of robbers, the number of victims, whether the robbery occurred in a private place, whether it occurred when it was dark, whether the robbers were armed, the age and gender of victims, and so on. Thus, there is no support for the speculation that gun defenders do well merely because of other advantageous crime circumstances associated with defensive gun use." (Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, New Yorkrometheus Books (2001) pp. 293-94)

Are Kleck's conclusions faulty? Or will some clever soul point out the curious matter and explain it?

 

[Sam1911]

The sign that your life is in danger right now is the weapon in the hand of the villain. This needs no decoding. It is evident.

Sure. That's an easy answer, and I spoke to it previously. He's got a gun. Ergo your life is in immediate danger. Shoot him! ... If you can.

Others who do simulation training say that drawing to a drawn gun is fraught with certain disappointments. It is the "Hail Mary" act of desperation when your life will clearly end if you don't act, and you can accept that it very well MAY end if you do. Only you can determine that you're clearly at that point, and you may decide so the moment you see the gun. Or you may have a bit of inside information that suggests to you that the presence of that gun is NOT truly and certainly the end of the road for you. I took the OP's background on crime in his neighborhood as such a risk assessment input.

So by what magic do you determine the villain is harmless or harmful?

The same magic that helps you get through other interactions with human beings in society every day. How do you gauge anyone's unspoken intentions about anything? Subtle cues, body language, eye contact, nervousness, and so on. Of course you cannot KNOW that you're assessing correctly and this person ISN'T about to point and pull, but then, neither can you KNOW that you can clear leather and end his ability to continue hurting you before he lands a shot. As I believe I said before, you're assessing anew every second and fraction thereof. You're looking for an opening to go for your gun. You're looking for him to signal satisfaction and that he's breaking contact. You're looking for him to signal rage or contempt indicating that you MUST act now because he's ramping up to kill.

If the magic is, “He is not hurting me now, he will not hurt me,” what makes you so sure?

If the magic is, “He will not hurt me as long as I comply,” what makes you so sure?

If you're looking for "SURE," you've picked the wrong game. Try the ponies. This is a violent encounter we're discussing. There is nothing sure about it. Nothing that says he won't hurt you. On the other hand, the OP has something (in the form of prior local knowledge) that seems to well indicate that criminal actors operating in this way in this place are trending to not escalate to lethal violence, so that could be a great indicator of a likely path through. Of course, you can go for your gun instead. Maybe that would work. Maybe it won't. Maybe there are several possible positive outcomes and several possible paths to a quite negative one. You have to use your "street smarts" such as they are. And they may tell you that you MUST shoot. Listen to them, roll the dice and take your chances.

It seems this magic relies upon what is not evident while overlooking what is.

If by "overlooking what is [evident]" you mean "Hey, there's a gun!" then of course not. That's silly. Without acknowledging the threat of force there is not problem to start with. The guy's just a panhandler. That gun, however, is NOT the ONLY piece of information the OP gave us, and it isn't the ONLY piece that might be important to take into consideration.

Now, are Kleck's findings faulty? Oh NO! Certainly not! Why, they'd take away my RKBA card if I even suggested so! But the suggestion that they can control their study for all possible variables, including the OP's prior knowledge, and apply a one-size-fits-all answer to something as complex as a lethal-force-encounter does appear to me prima facie suspect. There are a great many factors which might influence a shoot/no-shoot or resist/comply decision and trying to use Kleck's study (aimed at establishing the widest possible trends for primarily political reasons) as a guide to what you should do in a specific situation is probably absurd. Kleck is a researcher and statistician, not a self-defense trainer, and he won't be at your gunfight telling you what probably should have worked, most of the time.

 

[taliv]

The same magic that helps you get through other interactions with human beings in society every day. How do you gauge anyone's unspoken intentions about anything? Subtle cues, body language, eye contact, nervousness, and so on. Of course you cannot KNOW that you're assessing correctly and this person ISN'T about to point and pull, but then, neither can you KNOW that you can clear leather and end his ability to continue hurting you before he lands a shot.

i'm not suggesting it's 100% black and white. but it is a galactically huge assumption that the person robbing you operates the same way as the rest of society.

i'll make my own counter-assumption here:

*ring*ring* it's the clue phone. it's for you

if you've missed so many easy clues thus far that you find yourself face to face with a robber and his gun, trying to sort out the subtlety of body language, nervousness and eye contact while under pressure is like trying to hit a major league fast ball after you just struck out in t-ball.

for whom does the clue phone ring? it rings for thee

just saying, if your are in fear for your life that would justify pulling a gun, you've probably lost your fine motor skills, possibly bladder control, and yes your mentat abilities

 

[Sam1911]

just saying, if your are in fear for your life that would justify pulling a gun, you've probably lost your fine motor skills, possibly bladder control, and yes your mentat abilities

No argument there. Does that bode better or worse for you ability to draw and engage against a drawn gun? There really aren't any GOOD options. Just bad and worse.

 

[taliv]

bodes worse, for sure. but hey, that's why we practice

 

[BLB68]

Kleck's sample size was very small. I wouldn't take it for gospel.

 

[HorseSoldier]

Others who do simulation training say that drawing to a drawn gun is fraught with certain disappointments. It is the "Hail Mary" act of desperation when your life will clearly end if you don't act, and you can accept that it very well MAY end if you do.

In my police academy we did some work on very close range encounters using airsoft guns and the results weren't real heartening if you were thinking you were going to clear leather in a level 3 retention holster and get hits on the bad guy and walk away from that one unscathed.

One tactic that seemed to work well if the bad guy was also having to draw from the waist was to close the distance on his drawing side, deliver some sort of strike or shove to interfere with his draw stroke, and then create distance to bring your own weapon into play. Even then you were probably getting shot when it was all done at spitting distance with BB guns.

More generally, I'd say win the fight as far back from the gun play as possible. Obviously plan routes and such to avoid the worst areas. Maintain situational awareness when in sketchy areas -- no cell phone use, no headphones, head on a swivel. Carry yourself like a predator, not like prey.

If all that fails, the dummy wallet idea works for me. I'd keep it in my weak side pocket so while I was going for it, I'd still have my strong side hand free to go for my gun or make one of those shoves/strikes I mentioned above if things seem to be going bad.

 

[lemaymiami]

Sam's advice is a pretty good standard to follow....

"Street life" or what actually happens in the real world is so variable that I'd move heaven and earth not to be in a shooting situation. The good guys don't always win (as one of my instructors many years ago said..."the cop misses with every shot at close range - the bad guy fires one shot from a piece of junk weapon and hits the 10 ring every time"). No that's not factual but in real life.... it happens all too often.

The good news is that an armed citizen is usually a self confident individual (or they wouldn't have gone to all the trouble to be able to legally carry) and most street rats don't want anything to do with anyone that might be a problem. Before that shooot/don't shoot moment there are many things you can do to put yourself in a better position. The easiest is to give up your wallet by dropping it as you back away (looking for cover or better tactical positioning). If your opponent just takes the property and retreats you've won the day, period. If more is involved then you'll have to deal with it. The trick is to do anything that lowers the threshold of a possible shooting situation. Property isn't worth dying for - defending your life (or someone else's) ... that's another matter entirely.

 

[bayesian]

HorseSoldier wrote:

In my police academy we did some work on very close range encounters using airsoft guns and the results weren't real heartening if you were thinking you were going to clear leather in a level 3 retention holster and get hits on the bad guy and walk away from that one unscathed.

Right, so this is the other factor that I've had in mind. So, in the data that I have for the area, it seems that getting shot is very unlikely, and with HorseSoldier's comment, it really seems that if you've managed to get to a point where the perp has the gun in hand, that even if, say, 25% of muggings ended with the person getting shot, it might still be a reasonable decision to keep your weapon holstered. Of course, there's tons of variables that a single thumbnail sketch doesn't capture. But it does give me a sense of the baseline scenario. And the idea that I probably need to practice more...

On the other hand, in another part of town last week, there was an altercation between two men outside a club, they both drew on each other, estimated 8 shots fired, no one hit. So, clearly there's alot of poor shots out there...

 

[tuj]

Property isn't worth dying for

While I completely agree with that sentiment, what do you make of the laws that *do* allow for someone to defend their property with lethal force? Let's say I see someone in my backyard stealing my grill; here in Texas I am legally ok to shoot him. Heck even if it's my neighbor's grill I can shoot him.

Don't get me wrong, I have been the victim of property crimes in the past and I despise the perps who did it, and I have absolutely no problem using lethal force to defend myself or my family. I just think it's interesting the continuum of when it is legal to apply lethal force across various state laws.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by tuj: Let's say I see someone in my backyard stealing my grill; here in Texas I am legally ok to shoot him.

Under certain conditions, perhaps.

First, the theft must occur between 30 minutes after sunset and 30 minutes before sunrise.

Second, deadly force must be immediately necessary to stop the theft.

Third, you must have reason to believe that the property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means.

We have members here from Texas who advise us that the condition that the property may not be recovered by any other means has been interpreted to mean among other things) that either the property is unique or that it is not insured.

Heck even if it's my neighbor's grill I can shoot him.

If and only if all of the above conditions are met and you can demonstrate that your neigbor had specifically asked you to protect his property. In one notorious case, that became a problem for the suspect, and his attorney had to convince the grand jury that the suspect's use of force had been immediately necessary for self defense.

The suspect was not charged, but his life has been miserable ever since.

However, the question posed by the OP pertains to robbery, which is not considered to constitute a property crime.

 

[lemaymiami]

Yep, different laws may allow lethal force to defend property (boy, I'd sure want to double check that - wherever I was...) but generally even if it's allowed you'd still face civil consequences after the fact unless the statute specifically prohibits civil action (and I'd want to know that case law confirmed that existing statute...).

Still, as an individual that shot and killed a man on the street (I was in uniform responding to a robbery in progress call, it was the fall of 1979....) I'd want any shooting to be a "no other choice" proposition, period. Here's the thing - you'll have to live with the results afterward.... I almost quit police work after my one shooting incident, but I stayed on the job and went on to have a pretty good career. I had the support of an entire police department and it was still difficult. I can say that I clearly had problems afterwards (serious over reactions in high stress situations, etc.). It took a few years before I was back on an even keel, and I went on to learn and practice officer survival tactics and helped teach them to a new generation of officers.

To this day, that incident is one of the reasons that I have not carried a sidearm even once in the last seventeen years in retirement... I still keep one nearby but my days of carrying a gun are over (and I always had one, sometimes two on me every day of the 22 years on the job....).

I've gotten a bit off topic but anything that keeps you out of a shooting situation is a great idea as far as I'm concerned...