Would-Be Armed Robber Ends Up With A Loaded Gun In His Face

Status
Not open for further replies.

vtail

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
340
http://sgfnow.co/18oiKeQ


The guy with a gun picked the wrong clerk.

How wrong?

A veteran of four tours in Iraq. A 30-year military man. A former prison guard, private investigator, professional extraditor of federal prisoners and — perhaps most important on this particular Sunday night — a proud owner of a Walther PPX 9 mm handgun.

Loaded, with one in the chamber, like he always carries it.

As a store security video shows, Alexander used his left hand to push the robber’s handgun back while — in a smooth but rapid motion — pulling and swinging his 9 mm into the robber’s face. The man’s mouth, to be exact, as the robber haplessly holds his own weapon at his side.
 
Ok, I wanna know what kind of security camera jiggles around like it was handheld, and also zooms. That didn't look kosher to me.
 
Ok, I wanna know what kind of security camera jiggles around like it was handheld, and also zooms. That didn't look kosher to me.

+1 Looks like a stage play to me also.
 
It's moving because somebody is videotaping(with a phone or handheld camcorder) a tv that is playing the video from the security camera system.
In fact, look at the way the picture is. It's definitely a phone being used to record vertically. Also known as Vertical Video Syndrome.

What's weird though is the way he just reaches over to the bad guy and the bad guy just pulls the gun further towards his back and says something that looks
like" don't touch my gun". As calm and nonchalant as the robber was, he must have been drunk.
 
Last edited:
Lol at those who can't see its someone recording a monitor playing the security video. You can see the person press play button on the screen as well.

Id say its real, clerk had some balls, robber was probably stunned and didn't want a shootout over chump change.
 
Last edited:
Utterly disagree with the clerk's actions. Utterly. :barf:

Ever heard the phrase "a little training will get you killed"? Well, here ya go, that the clerk is still sucking air is due to luck, certainly not skill.

Why in the world would you put your firearm right into someone's work space and why would you fail to neutralize the bad guys weapon? That's just begging for the bad guy to grab your pistol and let you hold everything he has in his revolver.

Somebody out there is going to imitate this clown and get hurt. The four count draw, count two/three is there for a reason. :scrutiny:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OZfgutNufU
 
IMO, a dumb move that ended up with the clerk being very lucky.

My theory is that if you need to pull your gun on someone there is a very good chance you need to shoot them. I think in this case, neither the would be robber nor the clerk was willing to shoot so both came out alive.
 
The clerk's "tactics" were not the reason why nobody got shot. I agree with ilbob: neither the would-be robber nor the clerk got shot for the simple reason that both decided that the money in the register wasn't worth somebody taking a bullet.
 
What I don't get is the perp did not react to the clerk putting his hand on him.
No reaction at all which gave the clerk ample time to draw.
Most armed robbers would have reacted pretty rapidly to the resistance of the clerk I would think.
 
Long street experience with armed incidents taught me that how folks react to a gun in front of them is so variable and random that I'd never want to guess how it will turn out.... Brave guys panic or just freeze up... little clerks turn into tigers... I've seen the results of wild melees where neither side fired one shot (two guns involved, one got taken away from one of two bad actors) and yet everyone involved got pistol whipped, with blood spatters and bits of hair on the walls....

Lots of fun to review the incident on video -not much fun to be on the scene at the time.... Yes, there are cool customers that can keep their head in an armed confrontation, but there sure are lots and lots of the other kind (and that goes for good guys and bad guys alike). With a little luck I'd really like to avoid those kind of things and live a long life. Maybe that's why I retired from police work and do something entirely different.....
 
Ok, I didn't even consider someone might be re-filming off a TV or monitor, that makes sense now. My bad.

But I agree the whole scene looks to have been handled poorly. Oddly anyway.
 
... neither the would-be robber nor the clerk got shot for the simple reason that both decided that the money in the register wasn't worth somebody taking a bullet.
The clerk should have realized that from the get-go--his firearm was to defend himself.

I think he was terribly indecisive, and just plain lucky that the man did not shoot him. I see no basis for the clerk believing that the robber would not shoot.

The robber remained an imminent threat until he departed.
 
It seemed to me that the robber didn't even realize the gun was in his face for a second. Also it looked like the clerk pushed the robbers hand away but was not in control of it the robber could have very easily tilted his hand up and fired
 
I think he did pretty well...

he closed distance rapidly and prevented the robber from pointing the gun at him.... then his right hand goes to his own holstered gun... and stops... while he assesses the threat.

the robber is going to have to step backwards and open the distance to bring his handgun up and on target... but he looks a little wobbly on his feet (which the clerk would certainly asess better than the video)

if the clerk stepped back, or raised his left arm to his chest (as per the 4 count draw video), the robber would have immediately been free to point and shoot.

after the exchange of words, the clerk's draw is very fast, but still, if he opened up to a safe distance, he would have freed up the robber to point and shoot. If he had drawn and immediately put a bullet in the robbers head or chest, everyone would be singing his praises.

I think the clerk was more than justified to shoot, but chose to threaten the guy and spare him.... that is the only "flaw" I see.
 
If it's real, the clerk should have shot him. The weapon is not secured and the criminal is still very much an imminent, unlawful deadly threat to the clerk. That means shoot.
 
...he closed distance rapidly and prevented the robber from pointing the gun at him.... then his right hand goes to his own holstered gun... and stops... while he assesses the threat.

the robber is going to have to step backwards and open the distance to bring his handgun up and on target... but he looks a little wobbly on his feet (which the clerk would certainly asess better than the video)

if the clerk stepped back, or raised his left arm to his chest (as per the 4 count draw video), the robber would have immediately been free to point and shoot.
Don't think so. The robber could have fired at any time. No need to bring the gun up.

The perp did not shoot, but he was not prevented from doing so by the clerk.
 
I'm assuming the clerk had enough experience to make the judgment call that the would-be robber was no real threat and acted accordingly. In my eyes the robbery foiled with minimum bloodshed is a positive. I won't deny that he took a risk large, but considering the background given it was a calculated risk that paid off.
 
Murphy's Law of Combat #6: "If it's stupid, but it works, it isn't stupid."

In this kind of situation, you can do everything right and still get killed. Or, you can do everything wrong and end up winning.

Bottom line, the good guy won and the bad guy lost.
 
If it's real, the clerk should have shot him. The weapon is not secured and the criminal is still very much an imminent, unlawful deadly threat to the clerk. That means shoot.

Read the clerk's own statements. He said that the gun was not aimed at him. If it was, he would have fired.

He did not feel it necessary to shoot and he was there. No need to armchair quarterback this one when the clerk himself proved you wrong.


As a side note, how do you propose the clerk determine if it is real? Ask the robber to show him the bullets? :rolleyes: If someone is using something that resembles a gun to threaten you, then you should defend yourself as if it is. There is nothing that says you must prove that it is a real gun to defend yourself.
 
Posted by allaroundhunter: Read the clerk's own statements. He said that the gun was not aimed at him. If it was, he would have fired.
How long does it take for someone to slightly adjust the direction in which a handgun is pointed at close range? How long does it take for defensive fire to prevent a man with his finger on the trigger from shooting?

Think about it.

He did not feel it necessary to shoot and he was there.
Obviously.

No need to armchair quarterback this one when the clerk himself proved you wrong.
The clerk proved absolutely nothing. He gambled and won. The robber proved that the clerk had not needed to shoot.

The outcome was the most desirable of all possible outcomes, but when someone points a firearm at an innocent person, it is an extremely dangerous situation.

Had the clerk fired immediately upon drawing, he might well have been shot anyway; had he waited until he thought the gun was pointed at him, he most probably could not have prevented himself from being shot.
 
I don't think the robbers gun ever hits the floor does it? The only reason the clerk doesn't have a hole in him is because the robber didn't want to shoot. That's not saying the robber wouldn't be dead but who want's to play those odds?
It just show that these things happen quite fast and it is just lucky and amazing that there weren't shots fired.
Look at a hundred convenience store robberies and you will get different outcomes, this was two guys who didn't want to kill someone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top