What Does a Bad Guy Look Like?

[Lnf Crzr]

That’s the Underlined Topic

“Evil Doers”

Not easy to spot them

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

Perhaps this extremely distilled discussion will clarify things:

(1) "To Have a plan" smacks of premeditation. That would not be at consistent with lawful self defense.
(2) "To kill" is not a lawful objective of self defense.

1) So you're saying verbatim that training is forfeit. Training is planning and planning is premeditation.

 

[Kleanbore]

Training is planning and planning is premeditation.

Has someone told you that ridiculous assertion?

We do not approach an encounter with a plan to do violence.

We train to be able to survive it should it be thrust upon us.

 

[luzyfuerza]

1) So you're saying verbatim that training is forfeit. Training is planning and planning is premeditation.

This conundrum is a good example of why properly-documented training is so critical.

Many of us have heard cops say on the stand that "...my training and experience..." led me to XYZ conclusion. Police departments are used to developing and documenting training (say, regarding how to recognize threatening behaviors like we learned about in this thread) that prepares their officers not only to respond to the threat in time, but also to respond appropriately to the legal aftermath.

Sound, documented training protects both the sworn and the non-sworn from a prosecutor who might try to turn appropriate preparation into premeditated mens rea.

 

[Lnf Crzr]

It would certainly be a challenge to do this as a job in today’s society ,and have to do This Subject every day while at work, under scrutiny. Let alone as a civilian. Great appreciation for any career like that.

 

[Old Dog]

Sound, documented training protects both the sworn and the non-sworn from a prosecutor who might try to turn appropriate preparation into premeditated mens rea.

And therein lies another conundrum. The very fact that someone obtains a license to carry a concealed handgun, and does so -- the questions get asked: is this person looking for trouble? Why was this person where he/she was? Why carry a firearm if one does not plan to use it? Witness the Zimmerman case... and many more. Every bit of one's personal history and actions are called into question by the legal system.

We can overthink this whole topic 'til the cows come home, but at the end of the day, it's still all about avoidance and situational awareness.

 

[luzyfuerza]

I should add something else.

Understanding and recognizing the cues that bad guys show helps good, sane, moral people identify another's mens rea, OR lack thereof. And describe the rationale for this determination succintly afterwards.

 

[Lnf Crzr]

And therein lies another conundrum. The very fact that someone obtains a license to carry a concealed handgun, and does so -- the questions get asked: is this person looking for trouble? Why was this person where he/she was? Why carry a firearm if one does not plan to use it? Witness the Zimmerman case... and many more. Every bit of one's personal history and actions are called into question by the legal system.

We can overthink this whole topic 'til the cows come home, but at the end of the day, it's still all about avoidance and situational awareness.

That’s A sound minded Post. Unfortunately preparing for the worst case scenario can be used against you. Alternative is being a victim?

Well I suppose that’s The Truth…. as odd as that is.

 

[Kleanbore]

the questions get asked: is this person looking for trouble? Why was this person where he/she was? Why carry a firearm if one does not plan to use it?

The questions can be answered, in the light of all of the evidence.

Witness the Zimmerman case...

Good example.

Every bit of one's personal history and actions are called into question by the legal system.

Including all of those public posts.

at the end of the day, it's still all about avoidance and situational awareness.

Yes indeed.

 

[luzyfuerza]

And therein lies another conundrum. The very fact that someone obtains a license to carry a concealed handgun, and does so -- the questions get asked: is this person looking for trouble? Why was this person where he/she was? Why carry a firearm if one does not plan to use it? Witness the Zimmerman case... and many more. Every bit of one's personal history and actions are called into question by the legal system.

It's not really a conundrum. Asking those questions is part of doing a complete, thorough investigation. Any defender must be prepared to answer them. Truthfully.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

And therein lies another conundrum. The very fact that someone obtains a license to carry a concealed handgun, and does so -- the questions get asked: is this person looking for trouble? Why was this person where he/she was? Why carry a firearm if one does not plan to use it? Witness the Zimmerman case... and many more. Every bit of one's personal history and actions are called into question by the legal system.

We can overthink this whole topic 'til the cows come home, but at the end of the day, it's still all about avoidance and situational awareness.

It is not the job of prosecution to do anything other than prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. They will, by nature, present everything they can in support of a conviction.

It is the job of the defense to present what evidence the circumstances support to show how his client is not in violation of the law(s).

It is the job of the jury to look at what both sides present and draw a conclusion based on that.

"He was carrying a gun, therefore he was looking for trouble" may SOUND "bad", but if the person's history and the circumstances dictate otherwise, then it actually carries little (or less) weight with the jury. "My client was carrying in full compliance with state laws, and has been for the past 25 years with no history of problems. The circumstances of this event show my client sitting at dinner in a restaurant with his family when Mr. Big and Tough burst into the restaurant firing a shotgun..."

Prosecution will ALWAYS present in favor of the state. That's a given. This is why it's important for us to understand what the laws actually say and mean and to act accordingly.

 

[Hangingrock]

In my far distant past thus Marine Days we walked Shore Patrol usual in pairs but in difficult environments we walked in threes. Learning to read people (body language) was extremely important thus you had to be observant and understand body language of individual's whom who could potentially could or would be problematic. This duty was not for the faint of heart. There are behavior queues that are relevant that shape your assessment of the situation. To day in my seventh decade avoidance of stupid people, places and things is a way of life.

 

[Kleanbore]

To day in my seventh decade avoidance of stupid people, places and things is a way of life.

And I, also.

 

[danez71]

Here's another bad guy look:

A man pushing a shopping cart around and pretending to look at stuff on shelves, but looking around at others in the store.

Possible predator or accomplice to a robber.

Or its just someone pushing a shopping cart around while actually looking at stuff on shelves, and also looking around at others in the store as part of their situational awareness.

Very well could be someone with high blood pressure checking every brand of green beans for how much sodium is in it... or someone with high cholesterol checking every package of cookies looking for saturated fat content.... or a diabetic looking at sugar content that doesn't want sugar free as it causes flatulence in many people.

Or simply a man that is new to doing the grocery shopping.

 

[Kleanbore]

Or its just someone pushing a shopping cart around actually looking at stuff on shelves, ... could be someone with high blood pressure checking every brand ....

Do you think yourself capable of readily distinguishing between those and a likely criminal accomplice?

 

[danez71]

I'll venture to guess about the same as you do about yourself. But that has little relevance to to discussion

Why would you ask such a question?


What you described is more than a tiny fraction, or rare occurrence, of the "men" in a grocery store, that I see while "pretending" to look at stuff on the shelves while also keeping situational awareness around me, in part, by looking around.

Can we stay on topic and discuss what subtle differences that you did not describe that may indicate a BG vs what I did describe and is not rare?

 

[Kleanbore]

I'll venture to guess about the same as you do about yourself.

What?

But that has little relevance to to discussion

How so?

Why would you ask such a question?

To point out that while persons innocently shopping are not a threat, there are those who may pose concern, and one should be able to distinguish among them, with a little effort.

What you described is more than a tiny fraction, or rare occurrence, of the "men" in a grocery store, that I see while "pretending" to look at stuff on the shelves while also keeping situational awareness around me, in part, by looking around.

Gosh. "The bad guy" is among a tiny fracion of the persons we encounter when we are out and about--but this thread is about identifying him.

Can we stay on topic ...

We are on topic.

and discuss what subtle differences that you did not describe that may indicate a BG vs what I did describe

No, I will not expend the effort by going into it further. If one would have difficulty with that, one's "situational awareness" is an illusion.

...and is not rare?

What we read about in Greg Ellifritz's piece is uncommon, but it is certainly worth our consideration.

The tip I provided is relevant, and it has been mentioned by others, including Massad Ayoob.

 

[danez71]

What?

Simply, what I said.

How so?

The obvious I can explain no better.

To point out that while persons innocently shopping are not a threat, there are those who may pose concern, and one should be able to distinguish among them, with a little effort.

Correct again. You asking me what I think of my ability is is clearly not the topic of the thread nor relevant to it.

I asked if we could discuss the subtle differences of what you described vs what I did.

Gosh. "The bad guy" is among a tiny fracion of the persons we encounter when we are out and about--but this thread is about identifying him.

Correct again. You asking what I think my ability is is not on topic as you noted above. Hence why I asked you why did you ask me that.

I asked if we can if you, or we as a group, can discuss the subtle differences of what I described vs what you did in order to benefit all and stay on topic. If you're not able to or unwilling to, that's fine.

No, I will not expend the effort by going into it further.

Not willing to or not able?

Odd, since thats the topic of the thread as you just noted.

What we read about in Greg Ellifritz's piece is uncommon, but it is certainly worth our consideration.

Odd again as you just said "No, I will not expend the effort by going into it further."

Perhaps, if you didn't want a discussion, closing the thread after stating "Greg Ellefritz has prepared a good article on the subject, linked below." would have been more appropriate for your intention...?

 

[loneviking]

Clothing can be a big clue as well. It’s a hot day and a guy with a hoodie, hood up and hands in his pockets, in strolling towards you really looking you over. On a hot day, why is he wearing a hoodie and hiding his hands?

Crips wear blue clothing and especially blue bandannas.

Bloods wear red clothing, red bandanas.

 

[Lnf Crzr]

Hope no one is eyeballing me , Becouse I’m not reading fast enough the soup cans sodium content or the sugar content in the Cereal. That’s sounds a bit Weird and odd.

I also pay close attention to others, subconsciously- as I live my life daily in society. It’s a natural habit from training and my 24 year career.

 

[Kleanbore]

Simply, what I said.

I'm afraid that "I'll venture to guess about the same as you do about yourself" means nothing to me.

The obvious I can explain no better.

Well, you missed it. Indications that someone may be a possible threat are what the entire thread is about.

I asked if we can if you, or we as a group, can discuss the subtle differences of what I described vs what you did in order to benefit all and stay on topic. If you're not able to or unwilling to, that's fine.

I said "pushing a shopping cart around and pretending to look at stuff on shelves, but looking around at others in the store", and you said "or...someone...actually looking at stuff on shelves". Noting the difference should be relatively easy. There are a lot of possible cues. One might be that the man you describe is reading labels , and that the one to pay attention does not focus on them.

Perhaps, if you didn't want a discussion, closing the thread after stating "Greg Ellefritz has prepared a good article on the subject, linked below." would have been more appropriate for your intention...?

We have had some excellent discussion, and some replies that were off topic.

For some reason, you discounted my additional suggestion, which has been described in the same words by Massad Ayoob, and you noted that men in stores may be looking for low sodium foods and such. Do you not think the suggestion worth while, or are you just feeling argumentative today?

 

[bdickens]

Crips wear blue clothing and especially blue bandannas.

Bloods wear red clothing, red bandanas.

Not so much any more.

Besides the fact that "civilians" may wear the same colors.

 

[bdickens]

Noting the difference [between someone pretending to be shopping and someone actually doing so] should be relatively easy. There are a lot of possible cues

Bingo.

So should being able to tell the difference between someone who is looking around to maintain awareness of his surroundings and someone who is looking around for possible victims and/or witnesses.

 

[Lnf Crzr]

Wow. Some very skilled “Lookers” we have here.

Perhaps we can discuss those abilities???

So to assist with the topic of the thread and “Help” one another.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

There is a difference between being alert to cues of possible nefarious behavior and actually positively identifying a person intent on committing harm to another.

Sometimes the two converge into one and the same, other times not.

Being alert to one's surroundings is part of a complicated strategy of chess, where the behavioral cues and actions of another dictate a range of moves which can be made to avoid being placed in check, or worse in checkmate.

This does NOT require positive identification of a "bad guy".

There are plenty of people I give wide berth to who probably have no real harmful intent towards me or mine. My maneuvers do not necessarily require me to be rude, or even obvious.

I do not have to positively identify "The Bad Guy" in order to make myself less appealing as a potential target. I simply need to be aware enough of my surroundings to pick up on cues which I can use to my advantage in improving my safety posture.

If I see somebody acting suspiciously, I just need to evaluate it in context of the rest of my surroundings and choose a personal behavior to mitigate any perceived potential dangers.

That can be a simple as being more alert to that person's activities.