Would you Intervene?

[El Tejon]

ahenry, very well, but what you wish to do puts others (including me if I am walking behind the scene of this arrest) as well as yourself at potential risk with no benefit to you. Difference of reasoning underlying the basis of our being armed perhaps.

I carry to defend myself and myself alone. I have no obligation to others. I do not see myself as Batman or a saviour to the world and am too old to have anything to prove. There is a chance that one could pull this (sucessfully intrevene) off. However, the downside here is enormous which you now see. I believe it is imperative to appreciate fully the risks before we act rashly out of emotion. Besides, emotion just screws up your sight picture!

Ed, look back a bit, I gave the cause number.

 

[ahenry]

However, the downside here is enormous which you now see. I believe it is imperative to appreciate fully the risks before we act rashly out of emotion. Besides, emotion just screws up your sight picture!

I do not wish to continue debating this with you, but you grossly misrepresented me and I must clarify. In my mind, the downside to inaction is indeed enormous and the downside to action is not near as enormous. As you said, perhaps this is a difference in why we choose to go armed. Had you left it there I would have agree with you. You just couldn’t do that though. None of my statements have implied that I would “act rashly out of emotion†and your continued attempts to paint me as somebody that thinks I am some sort of savior or batman or something even after I have politely suggested you stop, are getting tiresome and annoying. Since you don’t pick up on hints, I’ll be real blunt. I do not think I am anything special. Nor do I think carrying a gun transfers some special responsibility (my choice to act or not would be the same sans gun). I was clearly raised with a different moral code than yourself. So be it. I am doing everything I can to avoid labeling you something you might not be; now you return the favor.

 

[Intune]

Well, well,

now things become a little clearer. El Tejon would not shoot if the robbers were sceaming "this is a robbery" come out of the building, shot his wife and kid next to him but never pointed the firearm at HIM, climbed into their getaway car and drove away. That's his choice, it would not be mine.

 

[Intune]

So a situation has to be 100% risk-free before some of you would come to the aid of a fellow human?
Does THAT senario even exist?

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I made the statement previously about some guy with a big Anaconda and hoping he would not ever come save me as he was more likely to shoot me, some passerby, or miss all together than he was likely to hit the bad guy.

After seeing the way a lot of concealed carry folks shoot while not under great stress (taking the Texas CHL shooting qualification) and seeing how several shoot while under stress (first time competitors in IDPA, first time under the gun, first time in a Handgun I class after carrying for years prior to that), I feel about as safe as risking letting some of y'all try to save me as letting the cops try to save me as taking my chances with the bad guy.

I really enjoy seeing the CHL renewal folks come to the shooting line and unload the hollowpoint ammo they loaded up four years ago when they last qualified. The load in the ball ammo for the new qualification and then reload the old hollowpoints that will still be there in 4 years when they come back again.

I know some of y'all are good, some really good, but I know some of y'all are no where near as good as you think you are. For that matter, I may be in that category as well, so I am not suggesting I am better than any of you.

If you shoot me while trying to save me, I can assure you that I won't sue you, but the rest of my family will. I know it sucks, but that is just part of the game you are playing. Whether you shoot me or the bad guy shoots me, it matters not. It is going to suck for me either way. The only person who has the option of getting to shoot me while trying to save me is my wife. She has had dibs on that for quite some time.

 

[Intune]

El Tejon,

my post in reference to your actions (or inaction) came off as crass instead of tongue-in-cheek as it was meant. My apologies before you even respond. Your line caught my attention though "I carry to defend myself and myself alone. I have no obligation to others."

 

[Beer for my Horses]

I carry to defend myself and myself alone. I have no obligation to others.

As a general proposition, that is truly pathetic.

However, concerning the facts of this scenario, it would be unwise to engage a BG in a hostage situation that even SWAT HRT members will tell you is hard to prepare for after a career of training. This is compounded by the second BG who may also be armed. If you challenge the BG from cover then you'll worsen your chances of getting a makeable shot off (which are already low) because the BG will likely put the gun to the woman's head and cock the pistol. If you try to take the shot from your covered position, most of the members in this thread would likely miss, and possibly hit the hostage. The only circumstance I would intervene in this scenario is if I thought I could sneak up on the BG to within 20 feet and then put a round through his head before warning him that I was there. That's the furthest distance I can make such a shot under stressful conditions. I would wait for the cops to show up; anyone who would flee the scene is committing a crime and casting unnecessary doubt on the circumstances of the shoot. But again, as this scenario is presented, it's almost certainly a case for a HRT, and I'm not that.

 

[El Tejon]

Beer, pathetic? Maybe so, but I'll let the heros (and the mall ninjas) save the world. I ain't no hero/mall ninja. As the wise man in Tejas sez, "you cannot save the world, but if you're lucky, you can save yourself and your family."

Intune, no apology required. I have a thick skin and we're all on the same side. We just disagree about a specific scenario. That will happen. Outside this thread, we'll argue about SIG v. Glock.

ahenry, how about this, even if you take action, what if your bullets pass through the "officers/BGs" and hit a bystander? What if you hit the "arrestee/hostage" (good point there, 00)?

What do you tell the "officer's" widow and family? What do you tell the "hostage's" family? What do you tell the husband of the decedent bystander?

Is not the course of action that causes the least harm is to become a good witness rather than a third party to a fight in which you do not know the players?

 

[Edward429451]

OK, I'm confused abut the Indiana vs Annette Chew case, El Tejon. She was charged with 'Assault with intent to do serious bodily harm' (or some such). There is no transcript or information which would shed light on our issue that I can find. The case against her was dismissed.

What point is being made with this case reference? Enquireing minds want to know!

 

[TheeBadOne]

El & Beer's last 2 posts have some good stuff in it w/o all the emotional BS

 

[El Tejon]

Ed, O.K. there inquiring mind you, it was Battery with a Deadly Weapon and Criminal Recklessness with a Deadly Weapon. No such critter as "assault" here in the Land of Truth and Justice.

Point is even if you are clearly in the clear in a case of defense of a third party, Problem #2 can still come after you depending upon a blizzard of variables. If things go badly in Problem #1, e.g. you shoot a bystander or they are police officers, things will go even worse for you. Even though a criminal prosecution against you is dismissed, you are still out big money on bond, attorney fees, private investigators, depositions, etc. et al.

This does not included the civil suit and administrative revocation of your carry license. Those are separate fees.

I can look for some Red cases if you want me to (no, I never sleep anymore).

These concerns, along with the concerns of Problem #1, must be weighed in making your decision to intrevene. To ignore them or wish them away, IME & IMO is very foolish. I am always amazed (well, maybe not) at the gunshop scenarios where the GG always win. Everyone always walks away with the same number of holes and they are not in jail without bail.

Ed, please understand, I'm not arguing that no one should carry a pistol because "something" may go wrong. I'm saying that in this scenario to get involved is to risk it all to yourself and others with little benefit.

To be forewarned is to be forearmed against these problems.

 

[Powderman]

No, I'm not eager to shoot at all.

However, to not even engage in this scenario would be a great error.

This is the way I would do it:

Get into the doorway mentioned, if possible. Draw my weapon, quickly take up a sight picture, and challenge.

"FREEZE! DROP THE WEAPON NOW! DROP IT!"

At this point, a number of things will resolve themselves for you.

1. If they're police officers, they will stop, verbally identify themselves, and slowly produce ID.

2. If they're "cult busters" they will likewise stop, identify themselves and their purpose, and you can take it from there.

3. If they are armed robbers and kidnappers, they will do one of the following:

a. Stop, drop their weapons, release their hostage, and either act like you are the Man, or take off running. Most thieves do NOT count on encountering armed resistance. Guns in robberies are usually used for the intimidation factor. As soon as Momma's little darling figures that he/she is going to catch a terminal case of Glock poisoning, the pucker factor usually elevates.

b. Turn their weapons toward you. In this case, remember the following:

The adrenaline dump that occurs when the challenge is issued will hamper fine motor skills. Also, one of the BG's has a squirming, screaming hostage. Most of the time, there will be a LOT of him/her exposed.

Before you issue the challenge, you should be on target, slack removed from the trigger, and concentrating on your front sight. If a weapon is moved, SHOOT.

And, the hostage taker is not automatically the first target. Always engage the one with the most destructive weapon first. In order of importance, this would be: whoever holds the long gun/shotgun/handgun/knife or other edged weapon/club or blunt instrument.

The point is, though, you can NOT do NOTHING. You can NOT just walk away. You can NOT just watch.

That is, if you are a human being.

 

[DeltaElite]

Kitty Genovese wishes someone would have intervened, instead of just watching.
It appears some don't learn from history.

 

[Diesle]

However, concerning the facts of this scenario, it would be unwise to engage a BG in a hostage situation that even SWAT HRT members will tell you is hard to prepare for after a career of training.

This is where I was headed and didnt get the words out. Its not that I am a hard liner on not getting involved... Its that this particular senario has a lot of big holes in it.

So, first off, secure my position, and if I am capable beyond that point, make a determination on what my next action might be.

I will not risk running into an open area in this senario to get a good shot off. How could I be sure that I knew where all the BGs were... And shot placement would be critical because you wouldnt want to shoot the hostage....

Me and my family get protected first. That is the point of defensive gun ownership. If I can be of service to my fellow man after that is assured, youll get my help.

Civilian,

Diesle

 

[Edward429451]

I agree with Powdermans post exactly. I can certainly see El-Tejons point and do in fact agree with his well thought out reasoning. The only thing I really disagree with is the first things first factor. I certainly would not relish having to shoot another human being and definitly not the ensuing court case probability that I'd probably be ruined even if found justifiable eventually.

But first things first. The lady needs help Right Now. I can swim but am not what you'd call an excellant swimmer. Do I not jump into the turbulant water to save the drowning lady, fearing that I may drown myself? Certainly Not! I jump right in and try to help. Through willpower, determination, and a little grace & faith I intend to prevail because its the right thing to do. If I die trying, at least I went out trying to help. So be it. Odds are I'll fail, but people hit the lottery every day. I may save a life and make a difference.

 

[El Tejon]

Delta, Kitty should have armed herself. No one had a duty to help her.

Powder, cannot be a witness to this arrest? Just watch me! You left out several things that could happen if they are BGs and not officers. The biggest being they start shooting: the hostage, the bystanders, you.

Ed, if you jump into the water to save the drowning lady, you risk no one but yourself. If you start shooting, you risk many people.

 

[Edward429451]

No one had a duty to help her.

I disagree. Besides, this sounds sooooo bad.

You left out several things that could happen if they are BGs and not officers. The biggest being they start shooting: the hostage, the bystanders, you.

This is the problem I have with challenges. Why I think it'd probably be better to just take the carefully aimed headshot before they realize your there. (I've already heard at least one shot so its reasonable to assume they will not hesitate to shoot again)

If you start shooting, you risk many people.

This sounds pretty thin and very oversimplified. Too much so for a life and death situation. Got anything better?

 

[Diesle]

Edward429451,

Your going to take a head shot before you do anything else....?

I guess my comment is..... Dont bend over for the soap.


Diesle

 

[Turkey Creek]

El Tejon- you have come up with several "what ifs" to support your position which of course is your every right and perogative- just as you have every right to act or not act as you choose- our mutual rights to disagree and express those disagreements are perfectly normal and in are in no way personal- those of us that choose to "intervene" in this hypothetical scenario are not going to be swayed from our point of view any more than you wiil be moved from yours- you and I will continue to agree to disagree over this until the cows come home- that said, I have a couple of comments- you can "what if" yourself to the point of immobility if you feel that you have to have to have total knowledge in any decision making process about anything- how many times have any of us taken a course of action, after analyzing the situation to our satisfaction, and with the belief that we have taken care of all the "what ifs", only to ultimately realize we were wrong in our analysis and hence also wrong in our action- I'm not saying that a knee jerk reaction is superior to thoughtful consideration- what I am saying is that at best, "what iffing" yourself through life will not guarentee a mistake free existence, and at worse reduces a life to less than what it should be- risk is part of living- nothing in this world is a sure thing- to endlessly search for no risk sure things is futile- they do not exist- everyone of us takes risks every day in one form or another, some consciously some not- that's just the way life is- the other point that I strongly disagree with you on is your willingness to stand aside when another human being needs help- my point of view is that if we spend our life only taking care of our own, and look aside and walk away when from someone who needs help and we can provide it, is not what were put here for in the first place-I personally could not live with myself if I did not try to help- and that doesn't mean going in blasting right away in this situation- doing nothing here would be a haunting that would never go away for me- even if making an attempt to help resulted in my death, I think that would be better for me than trying to live the rest of my life with the horrible burden that I survived and another person suffered due to my inaction- said another way, I'd would have rather given up my seat in a lifeboat to someone and stayed on the Titanic- call it an overly active conscience or what you may- that's just the way I am- I learned a long time ago that I can't be something that I'm not- I understand your point of view, I hope you understand mine

 

[Bullet]

Turkey Creek I'm with you. If me you and El Tejon were on the Titanic together I think it might have taken both of us to throw El Tejon out of a life boat to make room for a woman.

 

[Jim March]

Take cover, draw gun, point it right at the gunman, verbally challenge, what happens next is up to them. They may well end up dead, or they'll act reasonably - be they cop or crook or whatever (not that there's always a distinction). The store clerk that shot that "unmarked ninja cop" who came into the store to make a drug bust will get off scot free, which is in my opinion both proper and will do more for local police reform than a dozen grand juries.

Folks, I've "been there, done that". I probably saved a man's life once...that was certainly his opinion later, when I met him at the DA's office where we were giving witness statements. I came out with no legal problems whatsoever, and I could look myself in the mirror. I didn't act "for society", I acted because I couldn't live with myself otherwise. Go here for the story:

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25140

Do you all understand that when someone gets carried from the scene by criminals, their odds of survival go WAY down?

 

[El Tejon]

Jim, once again no consideration is given to the bystanders on the street or the hostage/arrestee, only "they." What if "they" do not act reasonably and start shooting? You do not know who "they" are yet you are willing to jump into a fight?

Turkey and Bullet, if you give up your seat on the lifeboat, you risk no other person (other than my murder). If you jump into this unknown fight, you risk the lives of many around you. I fail to see the nobility of putting others at risk.

Ed, disagree all you wish with the facts, but no one had a duty to help Kitty (maybe broke their SEEL Team 37.5 oath or something). How is it bad to ensure that people take responsibility for themselves?

I do not know how to phrase it any better than "if you start a gun fight in the middle of a street, you risk putting pieces of flying metal into fellow human beings who you or your target(s) are not shooting at." How's that?

How do we know it's life or death situation? How do we know what's going on? It may help your feelings of manilessness or cosmic justice, but saying "I'm sorry" or "at least I wasn't a coward" does not help those in wheelchairs or the widows and orphans of those you hurt.

 

[Intune]

Man or mouse?

Some men perform heroic feats when the balloon goes up, some lay in their foxhole with a warm stain spreading across their britches while cryin’ for Mama. The first may very well be the slight, slender young man who spoke with a lisp, while the latter, sporting his stain, may have been the macho, muscled he-man who swaggered around camp. None know how they will react until the deal goes down. Train and plan for war, then, living in peace will be a breeze. One must live with the results of their action or inaction. I think it is a sad reflection on our society when men would stand idly by while a woman is whisked away to potential rape, torture and death because “I might hurt somebody or get in trouble. I don’t know her; she’s not part of my family. Maybe somebody is already rescuing her and I don’t want to get in the way. Maybe the police just want to talk to her for awhile?????†Know how to find out what their intentions are? Step up to the plate and say something, you'll find out quick what their intentions are. Or... Stay behind cover and maybe get a glimpse of their stolen plates while you protect the women and children down the block "in case the bad guys come this way." Sheesh.

 

[El Tejon]

Intune, if we are back to "proving our manhood" as reason to intrevene, then is not part of manhood coupling power with responsibility? Should you not be responsible and ensure you know what is going on? Should you not be responsible and not start a gunfight where bystanders, the arrestee/victim, or the police officers may be hurt? Should you not be responsible to your family and ensure that they will not see you imprisoned or broke?

 

[buzz_knox]

El Tejon, are you capable of having a discussion without denegrating your opponent? So far, you've referred to one person as essentially having a Batman complex, and another as trying to "prove his manhood." Neither of those is justified by the person's comments, but is rather your attempt to spin the issue and try to marginalize their opinions by casting them in a negative light.