Can't just blast away!!!!!! [Archive]

newerguy

July 26, 2007, 03:37 PM

My opinions, and the justifaction for them are as follows:

You might be legally allowed to shoot. New York law allows a person (not just a police officer) to use deadly physical force to prevent a forcible kidnapping.

It is reasonable to assume that the life of a person being forcably kidnapped is in danger. The only two reasons I can think of to forceably kidnap someone is in order to commit a subsequent crime to them, which may include rape or murder; or to ransom them, which often times leads to the victim being killed either way.

It is still not a good idea to start shooting. 1) It may not be a kidnapping. The situation on the video looks pretty unambiguous, it looks like a kidnapping, but it wasn't. New York law allows you to use deadly physical force to prevent a kidnapping, but you are vulnerable to prosecution if you use deadly physical force to stop what you mistakenly thought was a kidnapping. In other circumstances, what you think is a kidnapping might be a parent dragging their bratty child home, a cop making and arrest, another kind of gag, etc.. 2) Shooting may endanger the victim. They may not be in any more danger than if they were sucessfully kidnapped (you hit them accidently, or the kidnappers shoot them on their way out), but they might be in more danger than if you shouted to scare of the kidnappers, or called 911 with the location, direction, and description of the kidnappers. 3) The odds are not in your favor. There's only one of you, and more than one of them. 4) You can't call 911 if you are dead. 5) You are likely not equiped (physically and from a training standpoint) to detain the kidnappers, so the best you can hope for is for them to get scared and run off, there are probably better ways to do that, like maybe by yelling, "Get out of here, I just called the cops and gave them your plate number" (extra points if you really did). 6) A real kidnapping of an adult has to happen fast, and once the bad guys get into their vehicle, it's over (you shouldn't shoot at the vehicle, and you probably) aren't going to stop them from leaving. By the time you can react, be sure what's going on, and draw, it's going to be over. 7) Again, it's not you job to intervene. As such, you do not have the gear, the back up, or the legal protections and authority you need to intervene effectively in such a kidnapping. Note: I agree that if the victim was someone you knew well, some of the above would change, and I can envision circumstances where shooting might be appropriate, but in my case, I also know those situations just aren't going to occur.

Creature

July 26, 2007, 04:03 PM

7) Again, it's not you job to intervene. As such, you do not have the gear, the back up, or the legal protections and authority you need to intervene effectively in such a kidnapping.

Wow. Okay...let us test that logic: you are driving along at the posted speed limit of 70mph when all of a sudden you blow a tire. You seriously wreck your car because you rolled more than three times. You need help getting out of your car because your hanging upside down from your seat belt and are unable to reach the release.

I witnessed all of this since I am in the car behind you.

According to your logic and because I am not an EMT, a firefighter, or a police officer, I am not really all that qualified to render assistance. True enough.

So, do me and my pocket knife just stand there and watch you burn alive? Because I have no backup or authority to intervene?

Hogwash.

Ernest T Bass

July 26, 2007, 04:15 PM

In one case you're deciding to take a life, in the other you're deciding to save a life. Besides cutting a seatbelt doesn’t have the same liability associated with it as shooting someone does. Bad analogy.

You could argue that you were saving the life of the person being kidnapped, but the prosecuting attorney would argue that you wouldn't know for sure that the person was going to be killed, therefore the shooting wasn't justified.

I can't help but agree with Newerguy - I don't think that it's your job to intervene. Just my opinion.

Manedwolf

July 26, 2007, 04:33 PM

I would also add that the law in most states says that you can USE deadly force to stop a kidnapping, that is, you can draw and fire your gun.

If you're worried about whether it's real, remember, all you're trying to do is STOP the kidnapping. Who cares if the perps flee or not, as long as the victim isn't taken away...that's all you need to stop! The law says you can fire your gun. That means you can also shoot out the windshield of the car they're trying to drag the girl into, try to shoot the sidewall of the tires, whatever. If they still get away, they're not going to go far, be able to go fast, or blend into traffic with a car with a blown-out windshield.

ALL you care about is stopping the kidnapping, and the law says you can use your gun if it's obviously a kidnapping. You're covered.

So if you don't want to shoot the perps in case it's something like this, wreck the vehicle they're trying to drag the kidnapee into, and it will still be stopped. You can't do much damage to a car with a handgun, but you can bust the windows and hopefully scare the perps into abandoning their victim and fleeing. Just make sure you have rounds left in case they're armed and try to return fire.

Makes sense to me.

FS2K

July 26, 2007, 04:39 PM

"There's many a slip between a cup and a lip." To immediately go to your firearm in such a situation would only serve to escalate a situation, not end it.

There are a LOT of measures that could be taken before resorting to drawing your weapon in a situation like this.

Confront the suspected kidknappers. In this case a good shout would have ended the whole ordeal. At this point had either of the kidknappers brandashed their own weapon THEN it would be prudent to draw your weapon.

Say the situation continued, and the kidknappers got the girl into their car and took off. At this point you could pursue the vehicle and take down the licence number. You could call in the position of the suspects vechicle until the authorities got to them.
Once these kids noticed a car chasing them they would either have stopped, or gone to get help themselves.

It isn't a matter of just standing by and letting a crime happen without trying to help, it is a matter of choosing your actions according to the situation before you. I would definately offer my help without even thinking about it. For me it would be a reactive response. But whether I would respond with a weapon BEFORE assessing the situation first I would have to say, NO.

That being said, none of the people involved would have been in any risk of being shot IF no weapon was presented by the people involved. My own well being would be the last thing on my mind in a situation like this. The law can decifer if I was wrong in taking action against people whom I thought was causing another person harm, but again, resorting to my weapon would not happen if no other weapon was involved.

Manedwolf

July 26, 2007, 04:42 PM

Say the situation continued, and the kidknappers got the girl into their car and took off. At this point you could pursue the vehicle and take down the licence number. You could call in the position of the suspects vechicle until the authorities got to them.

No, THAT will get you in trouble, especially if you cause an accident, or cause the kidnapper's car to have an accident. You'd be smacked with a civil suit from the people in the car that was hit.

Police and judges take a very dim view of civilians trying to engage in pursuits like police.

FS2K

July 26, 2007, 05:00 PM

You're right. But in this case, there wouldn't have been any chase. Like I said, once these kids noticed they were being followed they would have either pulled over or sought help for themselves. It's easy to assume there would be a high speed chase involved, but again, choosing your actions to fit the situation is key.

Ernest T Bass

July 26, 2007, 05:01 PM

Police and judges take a very dim view of civilians trying to engage in pursuits like police.

But it's okay to pull a weapn and start shooting like the police? I think that they [police and judges] would take an even more dim view of a shooting. Also, a civil lawsuit is a lot better to have to deal with than a criminal lawsuit. And I don't think that FS2K was talking about a high-speed dangerous chase. Maybe just following the car at a distance to keep an eye on its location.

FS2K

July 26, 2007, 05:03 PM

That would be the most important thing...IF the situation went that far to begin with.

Let's face it, most of us would be more than willing to help the perceived victim in such a situation, but there is a line between being a concerned citizen and a law enforcement officer. It surprises me that people would so easily go for their weapon in such a situation that didn't involve them directly, and didn't involve any other weapon being present. I understand the mentality of wanting to be prepared for anything, but jumping to your weapon before adequately assessing the situation is, in my opinion very dangerous. It is because of such "Do-gooder" thinking that these kids ran the risk of getting shot while pulling off their prank. Too many people too willing to resort to deadly force too quickly.

In any case I agree...you Can't just blast away!!!!!!

USMCGrunt

July 26, 2007, 05:20 PM

Personally, I carry a sidearm to defend myself and my family...end of list. Somebody is getting attacked, kidnapped, or what have you, I have a cell phone to call 911 and I can fill the role of being a good witness. But as for me jumping in to any altercation that with the intention of potentially using deadly force, sorry ain't gonna happen unless myself or my family is directly threatened. There are WAY too many ambulance chasing lawyers out there that would love to leave my family in the poor-house because I chose to shoot rather than report.
For the victim, sorry this had to happen to you but my famlies well being far outweighs your well being. I'm not going to risk financial ruin or the potential of being incarcerated for a shoot that can be painted by a slick lawyer as a bad shoot that is going to bring about problems for me and my own. I know it sounds selfish and maybe it is but my family comes before an "unarmed victim" that should have armed themselves in the first place.

FS2K

July 26, 2007, 05:28 PM

Not a duty to intervene?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
7) Again, it's not you job to intervene. As such, you do not have the gear, the back up, or the legal protections and authority you need to intervene effectively in such a kidnapping.

Wow. Okay...let us test that logic: you are driving along at the posted speed limit of 70mph when all of a sudden you blow a tire. You seriously wreck your car because you rolled more than three times. You need help getting out of your car because your hanging upside down from your seat belt and are unable to reach the release.

I witnessed all of this since I am in the car behind you.

According to your logic and because I am not an EMT, a firefighter, or a police officer, I am not really all that qualified to render assistance. True enough.

So, do me and my pocket knife just stand there and watch you burn alive? Because I have no backup or authority to intervene?

Hogwash.

Creature, I can't speak for thenewguy, but I think his list of reasons all could have ended..."With a Gun" or "Armed and ready to use deadly force". For istance:

7) Again, it's not you job to intervene. As such, you do not have the gear, the back up, or the legal protections and authority you need to intervene effectively in such a kidnapping...Armed and willing to use deadly force.

As I said before, there is a line between being a concerned citizen and being a law enforcement officer. It IS a police officers job to intervene. We on the other hand are not obligated to taking action and have a choice whether we want to HELP or not.

I'm not picking you out for an argument creature, I'm just trying to clear things up a little.

FS2K

July 26, 2007, 05:34 PM

Straight forward and to the point.

mordis

July 26, 2007, 05:47 PM

TATER

July 26, 2007, 06:05 PM

Ernest, You can “What if” your self in circles.....

With today's society, The two guys were F’en up..
I would weigh that today it is more likely that it in fact
was a real kidnapping.

USMCGrunt, No good deed goes unpunished. But, remember
Karma works both ways my friend.. If some one is in need
And you don’t, when you are in need they wont, Ya’know.;)

Its sad when good people sit silent.:(

USMCGrunt

July 26, 2007, 06:37 PM

So anybody know how Bernard Goetz is doing these days?

JWT

July 26, 2007, 06:48 PM

I find it difficult to believe it's not 'ones duty' to interfer. I don't think it's appropriate to pull a weapon if carrying, but I do think it's appropriate to get a license plate number and follow the vehicle if they take off.

It's a sad state of affairs when our actions are driven more by concerns about liability than they are about trying to help someone that's apparently in danger. Speaks well for the litigatious society we have.

It wasn't a very smart for the 'kids' to do something like that. You can be sure if someone had gotten hurt that there'd be all sorts of law suits.

Manedwolf

July 26, 2007, 07:49 PM

Kitty Genovese

Bob F.

July 26, 2007, 08:52 PM

Ernie boy! Some of us have spent considerable time in emergency services of one kind or another and have some training and a conscience. You read way too much into my statement. I've said before in other posts and on other boards, things are not always what they appear to be; even outlined a force-on-force scenario that drove that home. Don't get your panties in a wad, these are always individual decisions and vary widely from situation to situation. I'll make my own calls when and if necessary, God forbid it ever becomes necessary!

Stay safe. And calm.
Bob

ZeSpectre

July 26, 2007, 09:12 PM

I don't get it. If you saw that kidnapping, why would you blast away anyway? You're life isn't in danger. They're not hurting the girl. They're not committing homicide, they committing a kidnapping. I thought that you can only shoot to stop a threat to your life, not to be a vigilante and take the law into your own hands. Even the police wouldn't blast away. They would first identify themselves and order the kids to stop. Why do people think that since they have a CCW that they're above the law and can play judge, jury, and executioner?

Point #1 - Abduction by force is a FELONY offense.
Point #2 - The slang term for when criminals take someone to a second location is "the doom ride" as it almost always results in the doom of the victim.
Point #3 - In several locations it is completely lawful to intervene in such a situation.

Now while I don't advise playing "lone ranger" and I often counsel others (and myself) to make sure you understand the full situation, I personally wouldn't fault someone for intercepting in this situation.

As for this specific part of your statement...
They're not hurting the girl. <snip> they're committing a kidnapping.
Personally I'd tend to equal "kidnapped" with "being hurt".

FS2K

July 26, 2007, 09:37 PM

Is it just me, or is a key element of this discussion is being overlooked here? To me, the discussion isn't whether or not you would help a stranger in trouble, but whether or not you would involve your firearm when rendering aide to a person in trouble if no other weapon of any kind were present.

I thought Ernest had a legitimate question earlier:Why do people think that since they have a CCW that they're above the law and can play judge, jury, and executioner?

Drastic perhaps, but still...with a point. Having a permit to carry and a sidearm at your side is not a license to whip out your piece on every oppertunity. With this situation in particular:

No other weapon was visible during the abduction.

Didn't anyone else notice how scrawny those kids were? OK I can understand drawing your weapon when faced with numerous 6'7 300lb strongarm types who appear to be hell bent to cause somebody harm, but those kids?!?

It all gets back to what I was saying about assessing the situation and acting upon it accordingly.

Calling in the incident IS helping.

Getting the cars licence number IS being a responsible citizen.

Shouting at the perps to make them aware that they are being noticed can make a difference.

Hanging around till the authorities come to make a statement can be a great help.

I want to know, at what point in this scenerio is it appropriate to draw your sidearm?

And doesn't any one else feel that drawing your weapon in the parking lot of K-Mart could potentially escalate the situation by setting off a chain reaction? You draw and start yelling, someone else with no idea what's going on see's you with gun in hand and draws their weapon, while just then the first patrol car responding to the 911 call is just pulling into the parking lot....

I just think there is a lot you can do and should do responsibly before resorting to drawing your own weapon in a heavily populated area like that.

Ernest T Bass

July 26, 2007, 10:30 PM

Thank you FS2K, you state my thoughts much more eloquently than I ever could. I would help by calling 911, making a statement to the police, etc. But if I saw no weapons, I wouldn't feel right about drawing on them.

You're right JWT, it is "a sad state of affairs when our actions are driven more by concerns about liability than they are about trying to help someone that's apparently in danger." But I don't want to go to jail, loose my guns, etc. So I have to be cautious because I'm not willing to "pay the price".

ZeSpectre

July 26, 2007, 11:19 PM

FS2K

You do make good points. That's part of why I love the discussion of these boards where you can think out the full ramifications of situations and get "outside the box" input that might not otherwise come up.

grey sky

July 26, 2007, 11:57 PM

Sitting in my living room, quiet neighborhood at dusk heared a girl screem outside retrieved my pistol steped out the front door. Found a teen girl standing next to a car she looks over at me smiles and says "I am alright." I responded, "Thats nice can you move away from the car?" she says "yeah, I know them." She moves a few steps back and says, "See." I assesed all was well. Never had to show my hand. Had tshtf I would have intervened. I will not stand by while another is injured if I can stop it. I will render aid if needed within my abilities. this is my home/neighborhood I will not live in fear.
Maybe I am naive. Just my .02

obxned

July 27, 2007, 01:25 AM

Generally speaking, when people kidnap a young girl, it is not because they want to order more Girl Scout cookies. I have 3 daughters and 5 granddaughters. While these particular guys meant no harm, had I been there, it would have been their very last 'prank'.

Creature

July 27, 2007, 01:36 PM

Sad state of affairs our country is in, when people refuse to intervene in a kidnapping, when the statistics i have heard say nearly 90%+ of them end in murder of the victim. Now all you people will ASK for me to site some evidence. All i can site to you is what my law class instructors taught me in College. Irregardless of the outcome i would intervene, resting easy(my bed, jail bed, casket) that i did everything i could save her/there life.

I agree. It is indeed a VERY sad state when people are not willing to personally intervene in a situation like this...especially when a young girl is involved. It is well nigh pathetic and morally decrepit.

The founding fathers surely would not recognize this country today for this "all about me" attitude that is being displayed for all to see.

If anyone thinks that calling in a license plate is "helping" and makes them a good witness or citizen, you can be sure that if the perps are willing to kidnap a young girl in broad daylight and in a public place, then the car they are making their getaway is probably stolen and will be ditched within minutes...if not seconds.

ATW525

July 27, 2007, 02:54 PM

Confront the suspected kidknappers. In this case a good shout would have ended the whole ordeal. At this point had either of the kidknappers brandashed their own weapon THEN it would be prudent to draw your weapon.

Why on earth would you confront people who appeared to be committing a kidnapping without drawing your gun??? I'm not saying shoot first and ask questions later, but for god sakes if your going to intervene and draw attention to yourserlf at least have your weapon in hand. Waiting for them to brandish their own weapons is just insanely unsound tactics. This goes double for when there's multiple assailants... you're going to need to have every advantage you can get to keep control of the situation, and giving up the initiative by waiting for them to draw first is just a fast way to earning an honorable mention at the Darwin Awards.

Creature

July 27, 2007, 03:12 PM

Agreed.

john_galt

July 27, 2007, 03:19 PM

Police draw their weapons plenty without killing anyone. The whole 'don't draw unless you intend to destroy' mantra is overblown. If it is 2 on 1, weapons or not, I would draw. And no I don't mean 'every situation' like some ppl extrapolate 'kidnapping' to equate to a 14 yr old shoplifting some bread. No, I am not talking about a situation like that.

I ssume a singular officer, outnumbered by felonious BG's, with no weapons, would draw as well and shout and call for backup etc, but wouldn't necessarily blow everybody away.

Drawing a gun on 2 punks kidnapping someone is completely reasonable, yes...even if they are not armed. And no, just because you have them at gunpoint does not mean you MUST shoot them.

Creature

July 27, 2007, 03:40 PM

Agree again.:)

dralarms

July 27, 2007, 06:48 PM

I have thought long and hard about this situation and our "legal" response to it. Well I'm just an old southern boy and if I see a women in distress I WILL respond. I may not "blast away" but the lawyers and the legal system be d______ I will stand up for what is right.

I often wonder where we all get our morals, I'm not bashing anyone here, but we were all brought up to know wrong from right and to stand there and do nothing while a young lady (now think about it fella's) gets bagged with a pillow case and dragged out of a mall (shoot if you watch the video they almost knock down one guy getting out), well let's just say I might be looking bail money cause I will intervene. Now this being a prank all it would have taken is to step in front of the van and draw them boy's would have crapped their pants and give up right there. Other wise you have to try and stop them from taking the young lady using ALL means necessary.

We teach our children, scream, yell, kick, bite, anything they can do to get away and/or keep from being taken from their "safe area" are we not supposed to come to the rescue of someone in the same situation?

Creature

July 27, 2007, 06:56 PM

Well put. This Yankee agrees with you 100%.

For a while I was very saddened by what I was reading here...but I am starting to regain my confidence in the overall goodness of the "average joe" with the more recent posts.

dralarms

July 27, 2007, 07:08 PM

Thanks Creature,

I was brought up that you don't strike a woman either, if you see someone beating on a woman it's your responsibilty to do something.

I'm 46 years old and I have never hit a woman ( I did push my ex once to get her out of my face). To me it's just easier to walk away than to lower my standards.

Had a guy tell me once he wouldn't hit a woman but if she hit him then she had stepped into a mans shoes and all bets are off, I asked him as big and strong as he was could he not block her instead of hitting her?

mattro

July 27, 2007, 10:03 PM

agreed with creature, dralarms, obxned, mortis - glad to see there are still men around.

fs2k: I want to know, at what point in this scenerio is it appropriate to draw your sidearm?

If I watch two pukes perpetrating a felony involving the high possiblity of bodily harm, I AM APPROACHING WITH WEAPON DRAWN.

Two bg's capable of doing a serious felony (like kidnapping) are very likely armed. It is crazy to yell at them w/o gun drawn and allow them the element of suprise. They could draw and shoot you before you see it coming.

I wouldn't throw lead unless I had to, but my gun would be in the ready position, and I would be completely within my rights (tactical and legal) to have it drawn. I would try to have me and my gun take complete control of the situation. If it ends up being a prank, if it ends up being a cop in a drill, if it ends up being the real thing; I have complete control of the situation. Otherwise you put yourself and the victim in far greater danger. Nobody gets shot unless someone does something really stupid, at that point I am in the clear.

I can't beleive fs2k comments. Unbelievable.
fs2k: It surprises me that people would so easily go for their weapon in such a situation that didn't involve them directly, and didn't involve any other weapon being present.

and

Too many people too willing to resort to deadly force too quickly.

In this scenerio, a young women is being abducted for God's sake, and you say go for your weapon so easily??? That is too insignificant of an act for you to draw your weapon?? You have been de-sensitized !!

Justme

July 27, 2007, 10:33 PM

This type of scenario, or at least what it appeared to be, is one of the most often cited reasons why CCW laws should be passed. How many people mentioned that the Va Tech incident was worse than it should have been because there wasn't someone with a CCW around.

I think of it as a sort of contract with society. They passed a law that allows me to have a CCW. They have put a certain amount of faith in me that I am responsible and safe etc. They have done so assuming a certain amount of risk, since I may be less stable than I appear on paper and accidents do happen. In return I assume a certain responsibility toward society as a whole to do what I can when I can to defend other law abiding members of our society.

I think it is wrong to ask society to assume some risk without me assuming some responsibilities. Can you imagine trying to sleep if the abduction happened and you had the ability to stop it but didn't?

Thunderhawk88

July 27, 2007, 11:33 PM

Mattro & Justme... +1

FS2K

July 28, 2007, 02:15 AM

OH gentlemen, all of you for drawing your weapon while approaching a situation like the one in question:

Why on earth would you confront people who appeared to be committing a kidnapping without drawing your gun???

Are you saying if you weren't armed at that moment you wouldn't help? I have often said that firearms, handguns in particular are mere tools. They are not sources of power nor are they instruments to carry out moral actions. Handguns are no replacement for courage. They are there to sever a purpose, and that purpose is to defend. In the case of a CCW gun, the handgun in question is NOT intended to be an offensive weapon, it is a defensive tool.

I personally would render aide regardless if I was armed at the time or not, and even if I were armed at the time, I do not feel the level of danger while approaching the situation to assess the problem high enough to warrent drawing my gun. IF, and only if the situation escalated to the point where the perps were to produce a weapon of their own, or took an action that needed an instant response on my part would I ever resort to my gun, or any other weapon for that matter. What is it? Are you people afraid to approach a situation like that on your own unarmed? Surely a firearm would give you the upper hand in a situation where the presence of another weapon hasn't been established, and in real life there is no such thing as a "Fair" fight (in other words you should always strive to get the advantage in any confrontation) but drawing your gun before knowing what is going on is pre-mature, and quite frankly a little cowardly in my opinion. It goes back to what I was saying about how a firearm should never be a substitute for courage.
It doesn't take a pshchologist to see that people like mattro rely on their guns as a source of reinforced security. I'm speaking metally, not physically. Here you are, all galliant in wanting to save this little girl from being abducted, but harboring thoughts like :"Two bg's capable of doing a serious felony (like kidnapping) are very likely armed. It is crazy to yell at them w/o gun drawn and allow them the element of suprise. They could draw and shoot you before you see it coming.
"

Again...how would you react to this exact same situation if you weren't armed at the time?

Would you stand by and hope someone else was armed?

This "weekend hero" metality is silly. You want to be a Hero, but only at the least amount of risk to yourself and only if the odds were stacked in your favor. Forgive me if you are offended by what I am saying here, it is truly not my intention to anger or upset anyone here. I ask to think about what I just said, though. I got these conclusions from YOUR words. Life is funny. Sure bets are seldom easy, and you should never assume anything.

I also found it interesting how the fact that a young girl was being abducted has come up and how she seems to be the incentive behind many of those willing to include your firearms in the situation so quickly. What if she was a 300 pound man? A woman known for suffering from mental illness, or a young Gay boy from the High School? Somehow I don't picture any of those who were willing to gallop in on their white horses to save the young girl with guns drawn doing the same for these people. Other factors come into play, moral issues or predertemined opinions that could change one's willingness to commit to involving themselves in a situation that deals with strangers. I'm NOT saying it's right, but it is a fact of life. I may be wrong, and if I am I apologise but here's my point: If you can take the time to assess a situation, find out who the major players are and decide whether or not you will A). Render Aide and B). the extent at which you will help that person you can certainly take the time needed to figure out if the use of a firearm was needed at the very moment you decide to involve yourself.

This incident did not happen in a dark alley way at midnight in some bad neighborhood. This was in the front of the local K-Mart in broad daylight. Visability is CLEAR. It's easy to see the people involved in the mock kidnapping. No weapon is visable. Nothing resembling a weapon ever shows itself. The Perps are skinny kids.

So, all I am doing here is voicing my opinion. It takes allot more than a screaming little girl and a couple of skinny boys to bring me to the point where I would even think about drawing a gun. Why? BECAUSE I AM NOT A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. It is their job to dive into situations like that head first and because of the nature of their job, they NEED to treat every situation as a life/death issue. They have guns to protect and serve, and those guns are only a part of the list of tools they have to accomplish their jobs. I don't think highly about people who rely on their guns for courage. I pity those who depend on crutch like a CCW to define the person they are. I choose to approach firearm ownership as a privilage and a responsibility and I try to define myself through my actions. I can't say that I do so all of the time, but I try.

I am not here to tell you that I feel superior to anyone else here, I don't. Everyone has the right to choose how they conduct themselves and handle the responsibility of owning a gun. There's nothing glamorous about how I veiw firearms and I don't think that my way is the only way or nessesarily the "right" way, but it is how I see it. There are the criminals that want to do good people harm, and there are Law Enforcement Agencies established to deter such things from happening and somewhere inbetween I own a gun to take up the slack. I see my defensive guns as just that: defensive. They are not "Assault" weapons, they are defensive tools.

The ONLY way those kids could have been shot by mistake while pulling off their little stunt is if someone took OFFESIVE action against them with firearms. How can I be so sure about this statement?

BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T ARMED!!!

Not all situations will be like this. Of course they won't. But drawing your weapon for every little thing is foolish and irresponisble. What if you DIDN'T have a CCW licence and carried a weapon for your own personal safety and for the safety of your loved ones, would you be so quick to draw it on those kids?

What's the difference? After all you were saving this girl from a statistically sure death at the hands of her statistically armed abductors right? Ah, but now you have something to risk. You are outside of the law. You could have your right to own firearms taken away from you. You could face jail time just for having it in your possesion, never mind if you had to actually use it. No, but it is a young girls life were talking about here right? Of course you'd draw your weapon just as you said you would because those abductors are probably (statisically) armed and you'd best get the drop on them etc. etc. etc.

Now take the young girl out of the equasion and replace her with a 16 year old male Chinese exchange student.

I have no problem helping out a stranger in need. I can truthfully say that I am not the type of person who believes that what happens to people I don't know doesn't concern me. I believe in treating everyone the same, regardless of who or what they are. They are all the same; people that needed help.
That said, I am not at all ashamed to say that there is a difference in the extent I am willing to go to help a total stranger as opposed to my friends and family. They are in a catagory by themselves and I do hold their well being HIGH above anyone elses. Under them is anyone else. I will treat that girl as I would the shop owner down the street, or the lady behind the counter of the mini-mart or the Marilyn Manson fan with his colored contact lenses. My help is my help, and I do have levels to the amount of help I will give like I just said, but everyone in the "Anyone Else" catagory gets treated the same.

I wouldn't draw before establishing a DEFINATE threat in a situation like that, not for the Hot Hollywood actress, the girl in the vid, or anyone else I didn't know personally for that matter. For me it's an issue of self dicipline and control. But that is my personal reason.

Feanaro

July 28, 2007, 02:29 AM

but whether or not you would involve your firearm when rendering aide to a person in trouble if no other weapon of any kind were present.

"They was only kicking his brains in, I didn't see no need to involve a weapon." Hands and brains are the deadliest weapons you can have on your person. You can't use most weapons without the former and they won't be effective without the latter.

Is it appropriate to draw a weapon on a person using deadly force on another? If so, consider. Kidnapping is by the very definition of the word a crime of violence. You cannot kidnap someone without using force or the threat of it. This is ultimately backed with lethal force. Kidnappings usually end in in rape, murder, mutilation, or some combination thereof. Most people would not think of responding to an attempted murder or rape without a weapon ready, if they had it on hand.

Yes, grabbing their plate and calling 911 is an excellent idea. You should try to do this either way. But the police are as human as the rest of us and they don't always get their man, or in time. If I have the opportunity to stop a kidnapping COLD, I won't miss it. There are potential consequences. I will consider and plan for them.

Are you saying if you weren't armed at that moment you wouldn't help?

"Why on earth would you confront people who appeared to be committing a kidnapping without drawing your gun???" is not the equivalent of "I would not help if I didn't have one." If you had a better tool at hand, why would you not use it? And calling someone a cowardly, insecure, weekend hero for expressing that sentiment is silly, stupid, and mean.

No weapon is visable. Nothing resembling a weapon ever shows itself. The Perps are skinny kids.

Which tells me that some skinny kids are kidnapping someone without visible weapons, not that it is a fake. You are willing to allow the perp's physical appearance into play as you challenge our physical stereotypes by asking if we would save 300 pound women or chinese teens. Skinny kids can kidnap people just like burly adults, just with more difficulty.

grey sky

July 28, 2007, 02:56 AM

Please sir read my earlyer post. I don't believe I (for example) restricted my response to any age, race, gender, rligion, ... ad nauseum. If one can help another one should if that help is best accomplished by dialing 911 great, if help requiers first aid do it. Assistance is not always at the point of a gun nor should be. I believe "Tactics" are secondary to the assesed circumstance or am I mistaken. Perhaps I am on the wrong thread????

BikerRN

July 28, 2007, 02:57 AM

This is why when I am off-duty I don't get any more involved than to be a good witness. I will intervene in the case of a uniformed LEO needing assistance in a fight or something, but that's it.

Identifying ALL the "players" is very important. This scenario is a nightmare in more ways than one.

Biker

FS2K

July 28, 2007, 03:12 AM

It's encouraging to see that I am not alone in my way of thinking.

Zespectre

You do make good points. That's part of why I love the discussion of these boards where you can think out the full ramifications of situations and get "outside the box" input that might not otherwise come up.

I agree. This forum allows us the time to consider thing we wouldn't have time to if faced with such a situation is real life/real time, and this is a very valuable thing.

Ernest

I would help by calling 911, making a statement to the police, etc. But if I saw no weapons, I wouldn't feel right about drawing on them.

And THAT is the key point to this situation as far as I am concerned. Any help is better than no help at all, and there are situations where information can make up the difference in justice being served, or a crime going unsolved.

Gentlemen, it is clear to me that many of you have a different view on the issue and the level of involvement you feel you are responsible for. My opinion is just that; and opinion and even if I am set in my way of thinking it doesn't mean that I don't think you have the right to feel as strongly about your stance on the issue as I do. I am NOT trying to persuede anyone to start thinking like I do. You have your opinion and I can and do respect that. IS it so hard for you people to take that there are individuals like myself out there who believe in having discipline when it comes to drawing your firearm, and that the factors of this discipline changes from when the situation involves total strangers as opposed to being directly involved in the situation yourself?
There, I've said it. Discipline. Self Control. Responsibility. The incident at K-Mart with these kids didn't involve firearms or a citizen approaching these people with a drawn weapon or anything like that. The reasons for this are infinate, but help was rendered, the people involved were apprehended and no one was the worst for wear, all without a gun ever being a part of the scene.

john_galt

July 28, 2007, 03:31 AM

Are you saying if you weren't armed at that moment you wouldn't help? I have often said that firearms, handguns in particular are mere tools. They are not sources of power nor are they instruments to carry out moral actions. Handguns are no replacement for courage. They are there to sever a purpose, and that purpose is to defend. In the case of a CCW gun, the handgun in question is NOT intended to be an offensive weapon, it is a defensive tool.

no, the quote before that was from someone who HAD a gun on them and wouldn't have drawn it, while confronting the bg's.

I personally would render aide regardless if I was armed at the time or not, and even if I were armed at the time, I do not feel the level of danger while approaching the situation to assess the problem high enough to warrent drawing my gun. IF, and only if the situation escalated to the point where the perps were to produce a weapon of their own, or took an action that needed an instant response on my part would I ever resort to my gun, or any other weapon for that matter.

what if the action they took was to shoot you in the face? I think it would be very hard for someone to shoot ME in the face if my gun was pointed at them already. And if the guy I did have at gunpint was a kidnapper I GUARANTEE worries about a lawsuit would be non-existent in my mind.

What is it? Are you people afraid to approach a situation like that on your own unarmed? Surely a firearm would give you the upper hand in a situation where the presence of another weapon hasn't been established, and in real life there is no such thing as a "Fair" fight (in other words you should always strive to get the advantage in any confrontation) but drawing your gun before knowing what is going on is pre-mature, and quite frankly a little cowardly in my opinion.

Noone has said anything about drawing without knowing what is going on...it's a KIDNAPPING. Now what do you do? What....do you do.....

It goes back to what I was saying about how a firearm should never be a substitute for courage.
It doesn't take a pshchologist to see that people like mattro rely on their guns as a source of reinforced security. I'm speaking metally, not physically. Here you are, all galliant in wanting to save this little girl from being abducted, but harboring thoughts like :"
Quote:
Two bg's capable of doing a serious felony (like kidnapping) are very likely armed. It is crazy to yell at them w/o gun drawn and allow them the element of suprise. They could draw and shoot you before you see it coming.

"

Again...how would you react to this exact same situation if you weren't armed at the time?

I would call 911.

Would you stand by and hope someone else was armed?

yes. i wouldn't put out a fire with no water, wouldn't build a house with no hammer and I wouldn't stop a crime without some sort of advantage and a .45cal tool. If I were unarmed I would use the same mentality they use on planes when you need oxygen. Save yourself so you can save others. I would not recklessly intervene, disadvantaged, but rather collect as much info as possible and monitor the situation as best as possible, without getting killed.

Hopefully a mall ninja would appear and wax the guys with a Sig 552, front grip, laser sight and 14 30-round mags cuz you never know.....then I would be just a witness and not a defendant.

*snip*

So, all I am doing here is voicing my opinion. It takes allot more than a screaming little girl and a couple of skinny boys to bring me to the point where I would even think about drawing a gun. Why? BECAUSE I AM NOT A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. It is their job to dive into situations like that head first and because of the nature of their job

cops aren't always around. and where I live, patrol cops are not elite SWAT, they are fresh-faced kids I could outshoot left-handed.

*snip*

There are the criminals that want to do good people harm, and there are Law Enforcement Agencies established to deter such things from happening and somewhere inbetween I own a gun to take up the slack. I see my defensive guns as just that: defensive. They are not "Assault" weapons, they are defensive tools.

The laws in many states are very clear that DEADLY force can be used to come to the aid of another human being. That's how important it is for ppl to help one another, especially if they are getting kidnapped.

Not all situations will be like this. Of course they won't. But drawing your weapon for every little thing is foolish and irresponisble.

Kidnapping is not a little thing. The thread is not about whipping out your gun at every little thing, it's a pretty specific situation that considering the facts at the time it is happening, is draw-worthy IMO.

I wouldn't draw before establishing a DEFINATE threat in a situation like that, not for the Hot Hollywood actress, the girl in the vid, or anyone else I didn't know personally for that matter. For me it's an issue of self dicipline and control. But that is my personal reason.

A person, over someone shoulders, has a pillow case over their head and the guys are headed out the door to who knows where....what sort of DEFINATE threat do you need to see or hear?

I would never worry about being charged with a crime for drawing my gun in a situation like that. I have been "involved" with the legal system and it's a loooooooooooooooong way from questioning to arrest to arraignment to prelimary hearings to trial to conviction to sentencing.

I don't know what to tell you if you think you will make through that whole system just for pulling your gun on a hoax kidnapping ESPECIALLY after NUMEROUS women have been abducted and butchered from similar types of establishments.

I challenge anyone who has stopped a fake crime by drawing their weapon to post the sentence they received from the judge.

It's just not reality. The law is based on reasonableness and I'd take my chances in court anyday against a bunch of punk kids.

FS2K

July 28, 2007, 03:45 AM

Feanaro,

You ALWAYS have a choice as to how much you are willing to involve yourself into any situation, no? How far are you willing to go to "Help"? When does rendering aide become a rescue? As I've said, I have a limit to how much I am willing to involve myself into a situation involving strangers and I have no problem in saying so. In the case you brought up, (which is TOTALLY different to the one being discussed) where a stranger was getting their head kicked in by a couple of guys (Totally different than a couple of kids grabbing a girl in broad daylight in the parking lot of K-Mart) I have the option of changing my actions to suit the situation accordingly. Your point it moot.

There is a need to assess each and every situation individually and not treat every situation with the same intesity and dedication as a Law Enforcement Officer is TRAINED to do. Law Enforcement Officers have a job to do and opperate on a different level than the rest of us. They don't have the choice of whether they want to put themselves in harms way, we do.

Hey, if you feel as though it is your responsibility to help the helpless and fight the forces of darkeness on a full time basis...well...that's your problem. That isn't realistic to me. I will help if an when I can, but not with a blind devtion of some sort of super hero. I know the idea of being an armed avenger is appealing to allot of people, I just happen to NOT be one of them.

No one, not the Courts, the Police, the Church, your Country or even the stranger you descide to put yourself in harms way for expects you to risk your life everytime you see a potential crime being commited. It's certainly a glorious way of looking at things, but in the end, unrealistic. If you are one of those people who feel that strongly about being a crime fighter I suggest applying to your local Police dept the next time they advertise a need for new Cadets.

Grey Sky, I totally agree with your outlook, and feel the same as you do. It's a good thing to decide that you will always do what you can for others: and to decide that

You will always call 911 whenever you witness a crime or accident

That you will do your best to remember details of what you had seen and take down things like licence numbers, the Make/Model/and color of any vehicles involved, the color of clothing, height and description of anyone who was there and so forth...

And to stick around till the police come to help them in anyway you can,

However...to decide to approach every situation you come across with a drawn weapon is a totally different thing.

I AM NOT A POLICE OFFICER. Having a gun does not give me the right to involve myself and my gun in crimes or suspected crimes I know nothing about and that doesn't involve me directly. Just as I believe I have the right to defend myself and my loved ones by any means possible, I believe that there is a line between my responsibilities as a responisble citizen and the responsibilities of those in Law Enforcement who are paid to protect us.

FS2K

July 28, 2007, 05:04 AM

Allot can be said about taking a step back sometimes to look at the big picture. :)

Doing so made me realize that some of us here were just rattling off on what they'd do if faced with the situation at K-Mart, and by doing so didn't really take the time to think about everything that could happen in a setting like that. The thought of being a hero appeals to allot of people and there's nothing wrong with that. It's all cool when it's in a hypothetical situation and we all can chime in on what we'd do had we been there.

I have to realize that what people say here on the internet doesn't nessesarily translate to what they would do in real life. Every one would prefer to present themselves in a positive way as opposed to negative, and being a Hero is doing just that. The typical responses were as expected, and that's cool. Here on the discussion board is the ideal place to bring up stuff like that when you think about it. No one's life is in danger, and no one is in danger of causing anyone else harm. And that is the most important issue to me here; the safety of others.

I'm just a straight forward guy and I just choose to keep things real. But I realize that some of us here aren't like that all the time and that's fine. Again, I don't think there's anything wrong with using the board as a place to let loose and say whatever's on your mind at the time. I don't feel that my outlook to firearms is unique.

It only makes sense to assess a situation as much as possible before getting involved and putting yourself in harms way.

For those who said that they wouldn't hesitate to stop a kidknapping if it were in their power, I think your feelings are universal, however the means in which you would go about it differs from one person to the next, and the bottom line with this situation is;

THIS WAS NOT A KIDKNAPPING! :)

This scenerio could be a very important learning experience, or, it could be brushed off as just another incident that happened to someone somewhere else that didn't involve you. Any actions stated here by anyone is Hypothetical. We weren't faced with it in real life, so we could say that we'd do whatever it was that we would feel would be the ideal response.

I want to make it clear that my participation to this thread was not to argue, or debate whether or not your hypothetical response is right or wrong. I simply wanted to voice my concern as to how many people here have such a lax ideal on the most basic thing as drawing your sidearm in a situation that didn't involve yourself directly, and how I felt such a situation could be approached when wanting to help. Someone asked if I would base my assessment of the situation based on how the perps looked, and to answer that I would have to say "YES". Based on THIS scenerio, based on what I saw on the video and based on my own gut feeling definately YES. Does it mean that it will be the same for every situation? Of course not, but no two situations are the same. It was in broad daylight in the K-Mart parking lot and I'm pretty sure I would have been very able to see the situation clearly. What should always remain the same in every situation involving firearms is the special care you should always be careful of your surroundings and the potential collateral damage you could cause if ever forced to fire your gun. I just believe in always checking my background as well as immediate surroundings for safety's sake.

So, if you truly choose to approach every situation the same way, that is, weapon drawn and such I'm not here to criticize that. I don't expect anything that I say to change that. Just because I choose a different approach to things than you doesn't mean that I think there's anything wrong with you personally. I just don't agree with your methods, that's all. :) I don't have anything against you, and truly feel that you have every right to your opinion. Oddly enough I thank you for bringing up such a great topic to discuss, and for discussing things in a (mostly) calm and thought out way. Heeheehee.

So have a great weekend everyone. Stay safe.

grey sky

July 28, 2007, 05:33 AM

From the video it looked like this event was very fast. Bag over head straight out the door and into getaway vehical. Dosn't seem like there was much time to react by anyone wittnessing the event. Even geting a plate # would be difficult if not imposible. Taking a shot out of the question with so many colaterals present. looks real looks real bad.

USMCGrunt

July 28, 2007, 06:01 AM

So what happens when you find out the kidnapping suspect or rape victim you just helped is actually Cindy Sheehan?:barf: "Oops, my mistake guys, you can go ahead and keep this one. I didn't see anything.":D

mattro

July 28, 2007, 08:20 AM

fs2k: Are you saying if you weren't armed at that moment you wouldn't help?

Without a gun, I would be very reluctant to try and stop the crime in progress. I would use my cell phone and trail in my vehicle to help, but knowing they are most likely armed, I would not interfere if I was not carrying. This is why I try to carry most of the time.

fs2k: In the case of a CCW gun, the handgun in question is NOT intended to be an offensive weapon, it is a defensive tool.

WRONG - by pulling this weapon to intervene in a felony (in defense of the girl), it could quickly become an offenseive weapon. you're going on the offense to defend someone.

You want to be a Hero, but only at the least amount of risk to yourself and only if the odds were stacked in your favor.
When someone says they will do something, you guys call it 'hero' or 'john wayne'. I called the lack of action 'cowardess'. My goal would be to stop a crime, being a hero is nowhere on my top priorities. I dont put my gun on everyday thinking maybe today I can be a hero. I put it on thinking, maybe today this gun will give me the odds to reverse the desires of some puke to prey on innocent people (or me).

You are 100% right about the risk and the odds. duh.

You are outside of the law. No i'm not

You could face jail time just for having it in your possesion, never mind if you had to actually use it. no I can't.

By the way, I would equally assist if it were being perpetrated against a old frail women, a young gay man, or a chinease exchange student (the options you gave). The 300# guy should be able to help himself, but if he can't, I guess I would.

I wouldn't draw before establishing a DEFINATE threat in a situation like that, not for the Hot Hollywood actress, the girl in the vid, or anyone else I didn't know personally for that matter. For me it's an issue of self dicipline and control.
My self discipline and control would have my weapon out immediately when I cath 2 bg in the middle of a violent felony.

ATW525

July 28, 2007, 09:17 AM

Are you saying if you weren't armed at that moment you wouldn't help?

If I wasn't armed, I would choose a different avenue to help, rather than direct confrontation. At the minimum I would call 911, get the license plate number, the direction of travel and be a good witness.

You want to be a Hero, but only at the least amount of risk to yourself and only if the odds were stacked in your favor.

I don't know about this "hero" stuff, but yes, I think most sane and reasonable people would want to stack the odds in their favor. Intervening in a potential deadly force situation is dangerous enough and somebody who takes unnecessary risks while doing so is just plain foolish. It smacks of somebody with too much machismo for their own good. I'm not superman, I don't play him on TV and I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

mattro

July 28, 2007, 09:26 AM

I have often said that firearms, handguns in particular are mere tools. They are not sources of power nor are they instruments to carry out moral actions..
A gun is not a source of power ???? It's not an instrument to carry out something moral?? Last time I checked, the gun is a souce of tremendous power, to either the good guy, or the bg. If the gun lets me defend someone else (I belive to be a moral act), then it is an instrument to carry out a moral act.

Are you people afraid to approach a situation like that on your own unarmed?
yes. - what are you some kind of hero, or a john wayne?

It doesn't take a pshchologist to see that people like mattro rely on their guns as a source of reinforced security. I'm speaking metally, not physically.
more words of wisdom from a guy with 1500 posts. you're right!! the gun does give me a metnal sense of security when trying to stop a kidnapping or any other violent crime. If I enter condition yellow or red withOUT a gun, I feel mentally insecure.

Do most people go through the trouble of ccw becasue the gun offers NO sense of mental security???

Man you're good.

The incident at K-Mart with these kids didn't involve firearms or a citizen approaching these people with a drawn weapon or anything like that. If it wasn't a hoax do you think it would have went this easily?

So, if you truly choose to approach every situation the same way, that is, weapon drawn and such I'm not here to criticize that Who said anything about handling all situations the same, and drawing a weapon everytime??? I don't in any of our replies that being said????

john_galt

July 28, 2007, 11:19 AM

I don't care where I am or who I am with or what time of day it is or who is around or what the weather is....If I see someone get attacked from behind, their face covered with a sack, grabbed up, slung over someones shoulder
and the guys sprint away through a parking lot, as if to make it LOOK like a kidnapping, you will be confronted by me and my gun. That's the video, that's the scenario, that's how I'd react. Joke, not a joke, hidden camera show, whatever.

w/o a gun I would hesitate and formulate a plan to gain the advantage I did not have while gunless (get some help, call 911, push shopping carts into their shins).

If I walk into a bank and pretend I want to rob it, can any of you (fs2k) tell me whether it matters that IT WAS NOT A BANK ROBBERY? I might not get the same amount of time in jail but a conviction of some kind is a certainty.

People get killed in joke/pretend situations by cops, and I would imagine by civilians. Cops shoot people all the time because it LOOKED like the guy had a gun. Not all die and that's great. Hopefully it teaches them a lesson to not draw down on cops using a hair brush.

Creature

July 28, 2007, 11:42 AM

USMCGrunt wrote:
So what happens when you find out the kidnapping suspect or rape victim you just helped is actually Cindy Sheehan? "Oops, my mistake guys, you can go ahead and keep this one. I didn't see anything."

Seriously...what did that add to this conversation? Cindy Sheehan has a constitutional right to say whatever she wants to say.

I dont agree with her, but I would never wish anything bad on her. Shame on you. Comments like that do nothing for this forum.

yomama

July 28, 2007, 11:48 AM

Some in this post have pointed at laws, and court recourse. I demand laws around this issue protecting the law abiding citizen. I don't care who is in office (hoping a republican), but if they are not pro-gun rights I want them out now.

gvf

July 28, 2007, 02:43 PM

"I demand laws around this issue protecting the law abiding citizen."

We have laws to protect the law-abiding citizens - including stupid citizens who play dumb games but don't need to be killed for it.

We are allowed permits for SELF-protection. The rest is the job for cops, save only one: a violent felony that will result in the immiment death or serious energy of a victim - then a citizen can intervene.

If you want to stop crime become a cop.

USMCGrunt

July 28, 2007, 03:20 PM

ATW525

July 28, 2007, 04:39 PM

mattro

July 28, 2007, 10:07 PM

USMCgrunt: Wow, so you would be willing to risk your freedom, your right to ever have a firearm again, not to mention your financial well being for both you and your family

I have seen very VERY few charges brought on a law abiding citizen defending an innocent person against a blatanly evil person under perilous circumstances. Especially in Indiana. Never seen any in Indiana news.

I think the risk of loosing all that stuff is extremely small if I follow the rules of when deadly force is appropriate, and I act with a cool reasonable head. Escpecially in Indiana. New York and other socialist states is a different story...

gvf

July 29, 2007, 12:13 AM

Why don't the screamers here read the posts, mine for one, the law is clear that you can intervene under certain circumstances. However, the situation that was described at the start of the thread, doesn't come close. Why? It was not a violent felony imminently about to result in the death or ser. injury of a victim. It was a joke.
You're sorry it didn't result in the death of these people?

The law worked fine in this case.

obxned

July 29, 2007, 02:08 AM

How could you live with yourself if you stood there while that girl was being kidnapped and you did nothing???

The video tape shows a kidnapping, not a prank. Whether it is legal to act is irrelevant to me. It is morally required! If I were to be caught in such a no-win situation, I would hope to do the moral thing, and if that conflicts with that which is legal, I would take the consequences.

gvf

July 29, 2007, 06:10 AM

You're ignoring reality - it wasn't but a joke. And no one shot them. WHAT is the problem?

Were you there? Did people in the store see the video while this was transpiring?

Did they see the event live? If so, did it read "live" as more obviously not the real thing?

If it was seen while happening, could you done less than shoot to get authorities within time to find out what was happening? Did people, in fact do that ?

You weren't there were you? you don't know the answers to those questions do you, but you still think it was OK to have shot them? Even knowing that innocents would have been killed and no crime involved? That's OK, so long as "I am right", huh?

And you're talking about ethics?

Well here's the deal: with that kind of approach, many more innocent people would get killed by innumerable others - who are "RIGHT" - running around shooting with no crime taking place, than the few who might not - (and of which there are either close to no documented cases or none at all: that is, of a CCW who would have prevented a serious and violent crime and could have - but didn't - act).

So, in this case you shouldn't have acted with lethal means, because there was no crime. And generally you're inventing something that doesn't exist: a need to have CCWs shoot in crime situations that do not involve them.

And you're nonetheless attacking all who make it legally consequential for you to shoot is such situations.

Inventing villains to scream about.

Creature

July 29, 2007, 08:43 AM

Wow, so you would be willing to risk your freedom, your right to ever have a firearm again, not to mention your financial well being for both you and your family to defend the likes of Sheehan, Hillery, Rosie, Fienstein, et all? Ever think of what happens if the bad guy survives it and files a lawsuit or a fruity DA files charges against this "vigilante with a gun"? What happens to you and your family and for what, so these hipppie liberals can go on about their merry way? To be honest, if I seen Rosie O'donnel getting a bag tossed over her head in a Kame-apart parking lot, well, I don't recall ever having seen it happen and go about my business.
I'd hope you arent' so nieve to know that there are lawyers out there that will take away your financial independence on behalf of the "vicitm of society" you shot as well as prosecuters out there that will do everything in their power to take a "dangerous vigilante" off the streets. Calling 911 and providing details to the cops is as far as I'm going to go for strangers. Family is a different matter but that's not the debate here.

My decision process to intervene in the commission of a kidnapping happening right in front me and why I should or should not and is not based upon a fear of a lawyer who might be "out to get me". It is about the moral issue of right and wrong. NOONE deserves to be murdered, kidnapped, or raped.

Anyone with a willingness to standby and watch a person who doesn't necessarily align to their personal political leanings to be kidnapped, raped, and/or murdered...and to do nothing about it, is quite frankly, cowardly and shows a callous disregard for human life.

Whatever legal ramifications that may come afterwards is nothing compared to the personal torment that I personally am not willing to endure for doing nothing in a situation like this. I actually trust the jury of my peers to make the right decision. I would never be able to look at myself in the mirror again knowing that I did nothing for that person being kidnapped...even Ms. O'Donnel.

dralarms

July 29, 2007, 09:02 AM

Anyone with a willingness to standby and watch a person who doesn't necessarily align to their personal political leanings to be kidnapped, raped, and/or murdered and to do nothing about it, is quite frankly, cowardly and shows a callous disregard for human life.

Whatever legal ramifications that may come afterwards is nothing compared to the personal torment that I am not willing to endure for doing nothing in a situation like this. I actually trust the jury of my peers to make the right decision. I would never be able to look at myself in the mirror again knowing that I did nothing for that person being kidnapped...even Ms. O'Donnel.

Very well communicated. I have to agree with everything you said, and can you imagine the headline "gun nut saves Rosie from kidnappers" I wonder how she would like eating crow?

gvf

July 29, 2007, 11:30 PM

Sounds nice, noble.... So, who was it that was kidnapped that you're talking about?

dralarms

July 30, 2007, 05:38 AM

Some stupid kids staged a kidnapping at a k mart.:rolleyes:

markj

July 30, 2007, 02:55 PM

Corrrect response:

when witnessing a person being kidnapped, shoot that person, the kidnappers will then leave empty handed.

Seriously, I do not belive CCW was intended for folks to go round doing vigilante work. Rather I belive it is as a last defense for your own person. CCW class doesnt have any training for you to go after one that has comitted a crime or to attempt to intervene in any way. You do not have the training for that and the one in trouble may suffer from your actions.

Plate number, car make color, maybe follow with cell phone coverage to LEO.

In Council Bluffs recently a guy CCWing came upon 2 guys threating a guy with knives so CCW guy pulls weapon 2 BGs run off, CCW guy is commended for saving guy. I belive this is how most will play out unless someone gets shot. Then it is open season on who ever shot. Be careful.

mattro

July 30, 2007, 03:12 PM

markj, according to your beliefs that guy in Council Bluffs should not have intervened. He did not have the training, and no ccw instructors advocate that type of action?

It is sad that if it had been you that came up on that crime in progress, you would have done nothing while they murdered the guy (very possible outcome), but at least you would have been a good witness, you could have given the surviving family detail of every knife wound - according to your own words.

or to attempt to intervene in any way.

You can't have it both ways... :(

People on this board call people like me "Trying to be a hero", what do they call people that sit back and watch a crime because it is not there place?

Creature

July 30, 2007, 03:17 PM

Well, that's easy...and you answered it yourself: they call themselves a good witness.

Seriously, I do not belive CCW was intended for folks to go round doing vigilante work. Since when is intervening in a major life-threatening crime being a vigilante? If someone is being kidnapped right in front of you I guess you must wait until they actually cry for help.

mattro

July 30, 2007, 03:18 PM

remember the guy at the end of the bar watching the fat off duty cop beat the female bartender repeatedly?

I would assume that guy did not feel it was his place to intervene. I would assume that guy did not feel he had the proper training.

Did that guy assume if he got involved, the women would be in more danger? Did he assume that no self defense instructor would advocate breaking up a fight wear a guy is beating a women senseless?

If he did, does that make his action right?

I would hate to be that guy and live with the fact that I sat there and watched a women get beat, AND DID NOTHING...:barf:

My parents, wife, kids and friends would be real proud, not to mention the victim.

FM12

July 30, 2007, 05:02 PM

John galt: well said. If something like this happed for REAL to one of my daughters and no one with the means tried to intervene, I would rain hate & discontent on them later.

Liability be d___, this is NOT a mugging, a simple assault, or a purse snatching. This is a crime of violence (even thought staged) until proven otherwise. The time for action is then, not after the escape with the victim has been made.

God help us all if most are going to stand around while this happens.

You just really dont want to know what else I'm thinking. Kitty Genovese (preciously mentioned) is the perfect example of what happens when responsible people do nothing. Ask her family what they think about non-involvement.

Understanding that i risk barring from the forum: I could just puke!

mattro

July 30, 2007, 06:20 PM

We have a new term "bystander effect".

The circumstances of her murder and the apparent reaction (or lack thereof) of her neighbors were reported by a newspaper article published two weeks later and prompted investigation into the psychological phenomenon that became known as the bystander effect or "Genovese syndrome."[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Genovese

Thunderhawk88

July 30, 2007, 06:41 PM

Kitty Genovese (preciously mentioned) is the perfect example of what happens when responsible people do nothing.

I am all for my family's safety comes first, BUT if the good guys all stand around doing nothing and repeating the mantra "me and mine only" then the bad guys have won!

gvf

July 31, 2007, 01:58 AM

Well, it was a real pity some of you weren't at the scene of the kids playing the stupid joke: we could have had you saving the day with several people shot/killed, instead of the tragedy that actually occurred: nothing, no crime committed and no one harmed.

Sometimes it all seems just hopeless doesn't it?

Well, not to worry: sooner or later a horribly innocuous situation will present itself, and you'll be able to act on what it seems to you is occurring (instead of what is), and hopefully on that occasion, reality will keep its ugly head out of it.

mattro

July 31, 2007, 09:20 AM

I've had arguments with anti-gun libs that were more rational and pointed...

markj

July 31, 2007, 04:13 PM

It is sad that if it had been you that came up on that crime in progress

Are you sure that is how I would react? You dont know me at all.

He pulled a gun on a knife holder, woopie. He didnt throw down on a gun wielding guy. Isnt the same. Why cant you give me an example that is real and valid. In the kidnapping scenario you would have done what? Shot them? Good luck to you after that event. I can say you will not be able to carry a sharp stick after they get done with you.

Been shot yet kid? Stabbed? Ever disarmed a guy or several guys? Do that then you can come talk to me. Leave the hero stuff to the men, you may get hurt playing Magnum PI.

Gee all you armchair commandos make me fear to walk out of my house.

JoeBlackSpade

July 31, 2007, 04:47 PM

I would QUICKLY do the following, if I believed I was witnessing a forcible kidnapping:

1.) draw to a safe indoor ready-right carry,

http://www.sttu.com/cqb/Mvmp5.jpg

(yeah, I know, dramatic SWAT picture, but it was the first one I found at the indoor ready; Weapon on safe, trigger finger straight and off the trigger, muzzle down.

2.) move to a covered and concealed position, intersecting the perpetrators

3.) give strong verbal commands to "get down on the ground now!"

It would be important to keep your weapon at the ready, in case you are engaged by the perpetrators, and be aware that law enforcement / plain clothes officers could be nearby. I would keep giving commands to get down, then I would secure the girl if possible. The moment law enforcement arrives, I'd drop my weapon and show hands, following instructions from there, to avoid any potential confusion.

If the perps continue abducting the girl, I'd fire center mass repeatedly to stop them. I feel that once they get out of the building the chances of stopping them are close to zero, and the chances of that girl surviving are less.

In this case, deadly force would likely be justified, since a reasonable person would fear for the life of the victim. The actions of the perpetrators put the girls life in imminent and demonstrable danger of death. As was said earlier, the victims of these kinds of crimes usually end up dead within 24 to 48 hours, floating in a shallow muddy ditch. I couldn't live with myself if I had the means to stop a kidnapping, and didn't- and it ended with a dead little girl.

You aren't law enforcement, and its not your "duty", but I've got a conscience, and I'm not going to live with something like that for the rest of my life. Weapon at the ready, professionalism with regards to muzzle position, cover and concealment, and strong authoritative commands are the only thing one can do.

mattro

July 31, 2007, 06:00 PM

markj: In the kidnapping scenario you would have done what? Shot them?

I dont feal like going back through the post to verify, but I don't recall anyone advocating shooting the bad guys (without provocation). Why is it when a pro-intervention type says they would get involved and draw their gun, the 'bystanders' have to instantly say "You gonna shoot them???"

Walking up with gun drawn does not mean we shoot them.

Why does a 'good witness' feel a gun can't be drawn without shooting?

Maybe that is why they are bystanders, they are afraid they will not be able to control themselves.

Most pro-intervention people feel they can draw without shooting.

gvf

August 1, 2007, 02:14 AM

Yes, but you several posters who continue to offer what you would have done with the non-kidnapping, drawing guns, blasting "perps", whatever, what is wrong with what happened?: Nothing happened. Nothing was real good since there was no kidnapping. That's the reality.

What is the point of fuming about cowards and non-involvement, tactics you would have employed etc.
- as if there was a crime you would have stopped but others didn't? That is all a fiction. It didn't happen. There was no kidnapping.There was no crime. That's real.

Seems to be a real fierce commitment to your own needs to now "fiddle" with an ideal and benign outcome; whatever those needs are they are not in response to the needs of what actually happened, to reality. And people who have all these needs their guns are supposed to fulfill........ dangerous combination.

mattro

August 1, 2007, 03:10 AM

I just don't like the theme of the retired folk, that anything other than self-preserving benign repsonse is 'guns a blazin', when that was never advocated.

markj

August 1, 2007, 04:24 PM

Why is it when a pro-intervention type says they would get involved and draw their gun, the 'bystanders' have to instantly say "You gonna shoot them???"

Well sir, in my training we were not taught to pull until it was shooting time, us old timers live by that. Do not show a weapon until it is time to use it, so I see a person post they would pull I think next thing is shoot. What you describe may be considered "brandishing" in some cases. We are trying to get folks off the anti gun bandwagon, not add to it. Most folks are afraid of guns, cant change it overnight. Keep this in mind when you carry.

I am not a pacifist, used to love breaking heads and getting in the middle of it all. Things change over time and after being shot and stabbed. I am not invinsible, I realize that now, didnt used to. If I am not in fear for my life, no weapon, call 911 etc. let the pros handle it. I would try to help anyone in need but my family is first.

JoeBlackSpade

August 2, 2007, 12:41 AM

gvf, you raise some valid points.

Still, this is a thread with a title "can't just blast away".

I think its important that this kind of thing is said- that the most important aspect of safety is not your concealed weapon, but your HEAD.

Having said that, we also seem to benefit from the discussions about "what would Jesus do" in almost every imaginable scenario. This particular scenario described a crime in progress (or what a reasonable person would understand to be a crime in progress). The nature of the crime was such that it appeared likely that it would end in death or serious injury.

While I'm glad the real-life version of this ended with no casualties, the truth is that the entire scenario is an anomaly. Every other case of "two young men putting a bag over a woman's head" (that I've ever heard of)end in that woman's death- except in a few cases where law enforcement got lucky.

As the father of two children, including a young daughter, I am highly sensitized to issues like this, and frankly, I'm sick and tired of hearing about young girls being murdered almost weekly. Criminals are getting more and more brazen, and have started snatching women and girls off their front lawns, from Target shopping centers, and from their rooms while they sleep. The proliferation of horror movies and **** is probably feeding these unstable people, and may even help push that 1 in 100,000 nutcase over the edge.

By having a chance to talk it through, we imagine a plan of action. In some small way, this makes us feel a bit more prepared for the day, should it ever come, when we are the ones under pressure to make a decision where the outcome could determine whether someone lives or dies. Not being prepared means not having control. In some measure, reading about these scenarios helps us be prepared, and therefore gives us just a little more control over things we secretly fear, no matter how hardcore we might be.

As for "brandishing" a weapon, I don't believe it should be done. What I described above is not "brandishing". The indoor ready position is not a means of flashing your weapon like an MTV Rap star. It is a position which grants the carrier maximum control in an indoor situation that may require immediate action.

If I ever have to draw my weapon to stop the perpetrator of a crime (yes I said perpetrator, since I don't know of a better word), it will be to save a life. There's the litmus test: were you saving a life from imminent death or severe bodily harm?

gvf

August 2, 2007, 02:56 AM

Without being there, or even having even seen what usually is a murky surveillance video that leaves out details and which itself is second-hand record of what went on, it may or may not have read as a certain crime to those who actually saw it. However, it may have - by dint of the youth of all, ("boys" not "men" was the term used here for those who were putting a hood over "a girl") - looked a bit confusing as to what was happening. That would be that for any intervention involving lethal action - for good reason: you don't endanger lives with an indeterminate scene in front of you, or even a doubt. License numbers, following the group outside while calling 911, those could be enough - and were for authorities - or someone - to determine this was a joke.

As to real crimes you mention, yes they are horrible. And maybe on a rare occasion a bystander can help. Practically speaking, there usually is little that can be done because of many things: the speed of the crime, an abduction, the fact that often there IS doubt as to what is happening: is the older man who grabs a 5 yr old and puts her in his car abducting her?, looks like it, but you only see the "middle scenes" of this story. You don't see the whole film: harried cell phone call of the man to his wife from the car saying "how could you lose her at a STORE!?" or him saying "O thank God" before he snatches his daughter up with high emotion and quickly puts her in the car, and speeds away home to make sure she's OK. Then calls his wife to tell her he found her in store parking lot and she seems OK so far.

Even bystanders who see what IS a crime, will often do the wrong thing. Case from the streets of NYC in point: psychotic homeless man acting violently squatting against wall on sidewalk, someone reports he has a knife: what do you do? pull your gun and fire, scream while pulling it: "drop the knife or I shoot", punch him, what? Here's what the cops did: not one cop, but 5 or 6 cars with 2 cops in each, 3 cars drive onto sidewalk forming wall around man, 2 other cars and cops hang back a few yards. Ambulance shows up. All cops leave cars casually and casually form an interior half-circle inside the perimeter of their parked cars, no hands are on guns, they are alert but relaxed. A Lieutenant takes position in middle of the half-circle and begins a long,quiet conversation with the perp, it is inaudible to any but the cops and the perp. After 10 min the talk seems to end and homeless man stands up on his own and quickly but quietly the Lt. cuffs the man with two officers helping, no rough handling of the man, the Lt. still quietly speaking to him while cuffing him. Two paramedics step in and all slowly walk towards ambulance. More quiet talk to the perp in the back of the ambulance, then slowly with flashing lights but no siren it drives away, followed by a squad car, no lights, no siren. It was perfect, professional, must have been done by these cops many times in the past, or rehearsed a lot. The crisis for the man was brought to a close by what seems a counter-intuitive means: non-violence. His acute crisis and danger to all was over. No cop, no bystander, no perp was hurt at all.

I don't think many bystanders in this, an actual threat, could have pulled this off, or even known to try it. Other and very confrontational ways may have produced a full psychotic, berzerk reaction, slashing knife, etc. with wounded and killed, including maybe the homeless and disturbed man.

So,either bystanders are not often in a position to "see the whole play" and really know if the bit of the scene they witness is a crime to begin with.

Or when it is a crime, their participation is based on lack of knowledge, lack of man-power, lack of proper tools to use. And they can unintentionally create more harm.

The few Bystanders that fall into neither of the above, yes they can help stop a killing perhaps. But this is one potential good next to an awful lot of chances at damage and harm.