Panzerschwein
member
EDIT: On second though, yes this could have ended quite badly. I withdraw my previous comment. I just hate robbers and criminals with a passion and I got a little overzealous there. My apologies.
Last edited:
Cooldill said:I wish he would have popped that SOB right between the eyes.
But not to anyone with any training.Posted by Cooldill: Looked good to me.
Careful! We do not allow that kind of comment here.I wish he would have popped that SOB right between the eyes. He had a nice shot lined up.
The only reason he "should have" was to save himself.I bet we wouldn't be debating about this video if he just spread his brains all over the ceiling like he should have!
In previous discussions on THR concerning armed robbery, many advocate that victims should “read” a perpetrator to determine if, (a) a perpetrator will escalate the violence and, (b) if the victim should respond with his own gun.
I'm the same way with people that drink and drive, but I advocate making DUI a capital offense after a trial.EDIT: On second though, yes this could have ended quite badly. I withdraw my previous comment. I just hate robbers and criminals with a passion and I got a little overzealous there. My apologies.
Kleanbore said:He was reportedly under the influence.
that a person can be in fear of their life from a B-B gun?
officers'wife said:the sensitivities of juries in Colorado
I think it much more likely that he would have suffered greatly had he happened to take the life of the robber.Posted by X-Rap: The clerk, if he follows up, might be disapointed that he could have saved someone elses life.
Officers' wife said:It's what happens when you try to post from memory and lack of sleep. I had just read a number of article on CO and - made a mistake. Comes from being human and seriously overdrawn at the sleep bank. Is that a satisfactory explanation?
No. Just not very prudent.Posted by Tirod: I don't read a "What would a reasonable man do" in that response. A reasonable man would take what he knows in his training and experience, apply it to the estimation of risk in handling his opponent, and apply the amount of force necessary to equal the others attempt. And yet, it's said this clerk was incompetent in doing that.
In most such cases, the defender did not face a person with gun in hand and decide to not shoot.I'd remind you that there is a study out there that purports millions of like incidents occur every year - no shots fired. At the very least, it sets up the debate among his detractors that there isn't enough evidence to assert one way or the other whether shots are fired or not in the majority of cases.
Of course not!Nonetheless, it's being totally ignored here. Incidents without shots being fired actually do happen. Apparently that is situation to be deplored as not being High Road?
"Uncontrolled fear"? Really?What was the harder choice to make? I would suggest pulling the trigger from uncontrolled fear was the easy way out.