PDA

View Full Version : what would you do in a stick up situation?


Mausberg
January 14, 2009, 01:10 AM
this might have been asked, but i couldnt find it on these forums

so lets say you just went shopping, its dark out, and some one runs up from behind on you(putting items in car). lets also say you have a bit of cash, some jewelery on and what not. they have a gun, you have a gun, only problem for you is, his is drawn. his guns pressed to your back and he's telling you if you even hick up, he's dropping you. do you give it up? or do you go for your fairearm? i know there might be some certain circumstances and variables that could change things, but for the most part he caught you with your pants down and if he's serious you risk dying being resistent.. what would you do?

MTS840
January 14, 2009, 04:39 AM
this might have been asked, but i couldnt find it on these forums

so lets say you just went shopping, its dark out, and some one runs up from behind on you(putting items in car). lets also say you have a bit of cash, some jewelery on and what not. they have a gun, you have a gun, only problem for you is, his is drawn. his guns pressed to your back and he's telling you if you even hick up, he's dropping you. do you give it up? or do you go for your fairearm? i know there might be some certain circumstances and variables that could change things, but for the most part he caught you with your pants down and if he's serious you risk dying being resistent.. what would you do?


I think that until we find ourselves in that situation it's difficult to say what we would do in reality.

Sometimes I think we get it in our minds that since we now carry a weapon, we are suddenly capable of fending off an attack, and that kind of thinking may get us killed.

The best way to prevent such a situation is to be aware of our surroundings and to avoid them if possible.

If it's not possible, then the circumstances may dictate the appropriate response.

Gazdik
January 14, 2009, 04:45 AM
Give up your stuff...live to fight another day...And never, ever forget his face..you just might see him again.

B.N.Real
January 14, 2009, 06:12 AM
Gun in your back.

You could try to be a hero and do the turn and swipe that gun to the side as you turned and drew your weapon but then again you could shot immediately.

I'm reading more and more about criminals that are simply shooting their victims anyway after they get their valuables so they cannot be witnesses against them.

Have the gun drawn,or at least in an area in front of you where you can easily get to it.

The bad guy asks for your wallet-give IT to him.

Just make sure it's loaded and safety off before you draw.

And for God sake,don't try to reason with a guy that drew a gun on you to rob you.

Come up blazing.

There's your discussion,bad guy.

I'm with those that say,be very wary and aware of your surroundings at all times out in public.

Chuckusaret
January 14, 2009, 07:54 AM
I would do as told, get as much ID as possible, and if events allow go for my gun

US ARMY '92-'96 Thanks to all who have served!!
Thank you for your service to our country. I am quite sure you saw a many 80 to 100 hour weeks while in Hawk.
I also played with the Improved HAWK as a Hi Power Maintenance Chief in Seoul in 1974-1977

Mausberg
January 14, 2009, 09:26 AM
nobody wants to get shot, or killed at that

its kinda hard to say i guess.. a couple factors are going to take effect, the main 1 being fear..most people freeze in deep fear, especially the fear of being shot. i know everytime i think about getting shot all i can see in my head is a **** bag, or a wheel chair, even worse a coffin.

but sometimes you can fight back. what made me ask this was a story i saw in the papper a while ago

a man was going into his appartment at about 4:30 am, when a man ran up from behind in and put his gun right behind the mans ear. the man somehow managed to get his gun out and fire first. maybe the mugger didnt have the intention to actually kill him who knows

this was the story

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2008/12/robber-killed-in-street-robbery.html

onthejon55
January 14, 2009, 09:47 AM
personally i would just give up. as long as hes behind you with a gun theres absolutely nothing that can be done. on the other hand if hes facing you and you think he is definately going to kill you, you might want to try something just to say you did. getting in a close range shootout beats getting shot in the head anyday

George PT-111
January 14, 2009, 10:03 AM
or you could pretend that you are having a heart attack, fall on your back, put your hands in where the back is, pretending that you hurt your back and try to draw the pistola and shot that @%$#

:mad::barf::mad:

rburch
January 14, 2009, 10:38 AM
Tough situation to get out of if it becomes violent.

My actions would depend on the exact circumstances, normally i'd give the guy my money and hope it doesn't end bad.

If I got the vibe he was gonna shoot, then there isn't an option, I'd have to try something.

The main goal is to make him miss the contact shot, if the gun is pressed to your head then ducking down while tilting your head could work.

If it's held to your back, then your stuck with the turn and swipe or other similar method, which are harder to pull off unharmed.

The main goal is to give yourself enough time to get your weapon into the fight.

In a face to face robbery where there's a bit of distance the best option tends to be retreating at an angle. Forcing them to turn to track their target, and increasing the distance making it harder for them to hit. Getting beyond the range where point shooting is effective, and using your own sights to get hits.

In our situation, it's much harder to get passed that point shooting range, and I'm not sure I wouldn't just forget distance, and my gun, and use my knife.

It's the one time where it's not a horrible disadvantage to bring a knife to a gunfight.

Milspec
January 14, 2009, 10:46 AM
In Ohio we're not allowed to use deadly force to protect property. Drawing your gun could make the guy mad (because you're not following the rules). He might even sue you for turning a simple exchange of property into an actual gunfight... :D

Seriously, if a guy has the drop on you hope he doesn't notice you're carrying and politely give him what he wants. If you really think he's going to shoot you no matter what you do then rely on your best judgement and act in accordance with your training. Hopefully you have some. Oh...don't keep your Carry License in your wallet.

As stated earlier the best defense is to be alert at all times. Do everything you reasonably can to avoid situations that would put you at risk. If that doesn't work, do as Kathy Jackson says, "fight like a cornered cat"... :)

http://www.corneredcat.com/Mindset/corneredcat.aspx

Milspec

Keltyke
January 14, 2009, 10:48 AM
Tough situation to get out of if it becomes violent.

The BG has a gun in your back - it's already a violent situation.

The ultimate solution is to be aware of your surroundings and the people in them so you don't get into that situation to begin with. If you feel the BG will kill you no matter what you do, you lose nothing by fighting back. This is serious - no Marquis of Queensbury Rules here. Knee groin - several times. Gouge eyes, choke, break bones, kick, slam head into concrete sidewalk, do WHATEVER is necessary to win. This is YOUR life at stake. If you can get his gun dropped or turned away long enough to bring yours into play, good! If you practice and are reasonably fit, it's easy to disarm someone who has a gun actually touching your back.

"rburch" is right - this is one situation where a flick or switch blade knife or easily-accessed pocket gun is preferable to your usual 1911-full-size-in-a-belt-slide piece.

It's a situation by situation call...

Glenn E. Meyer
January 14, 2009, 11:14 AM
This kind of post points out the utility of FOF training as compared to speculation. Nothing like getting shot with simulated rounds when you plan goes awry - or seeing it work out.

There is no right answer - the answer(s) is have the skills to do 'something' that maximizes your survival.

I've seen it go right for the GG and wrong for the GG.

besafe2
January 14, 2009, 11:47 AM
Circumstance will determine, but like others have said it's best to be as aware as possible & not get in that situation.

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 11:54 AM
If a guy has a gun to your back then you've got 2 choices:

1) Comply and wait for an opportunity to act or until he leaves.

2) Put your head between your legs and kiss your arse good-bye.

troy_mclure
January 14, 2009, 12:48 PM
In Ohio we're not allowed to use deadly force to protect property. Drawing your gun could make the guy mad (because you're not following the rules). He might even sue you for turning a simple exchange of property into an actual gunfight...


ohio just adopted the castle doctrine, so now you can defend your property.

hell, i might wait till he is leaving with my wallet, then shoot him in the back.
just because he is retreating doesnt mean he is no longer a threat, plus he now has my address, i consider an armed aggressor having my home address a threat of its self.

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 12:53 PM
ohio just adopted the castle doctrine,

The Castle Doctrine has nothing to do with your wallet. It has to do with your home and, sometimes, your vehicle (RV's even), occasionally even a tent. If you shoot a mugger in the back you WILL go to jail.

Dirty Bill
January 14, 2009, 12:55 PM
I figure he's going to kill me anyway,so I would try to kill him first. Nothing to lose.

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 01:01 PM
I figure he's going to kill me anyway,...


Do most stick-ups end in fatalities?

Sparks2112
January 14, 2009, 01:08 PM
I prefer not to let them get close, it's worked so far for me. :D

If someone other than me introduces a gun into a situation and they're "asking" me for my property then I feel it's only fair for me to "ask them" to start bleeding from multiple GSW's. Seriously though...

I don't know when a personal robbery suddenly became only a property crime? When they talk about not being able to kill over property they're saying that if you see someone stealing your car you left on the street you can't fire out your window at them. An armed robbery is by definition a VIOLENT CRIME against YOU!, not your wallet.

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 01:11 PM
An armed robbery is by definition a VIOLENT CRIME against YOU!, not your wallet.

I agree with that but not when they're walking away. Bullets in the back makes YOU the criminal.

I'd have no problem trying to shoot if I got the chance and thought it was the best course of action, during the robbery. A gun in your back is NOT one of those times that drawing is your best chance at survival. After they turn and run the crime is over. Shooting them at that point, in almost all jurisdictions, is murder.

David Armstrong
January 14, 2009, 01:23 PM
Do most stick-ups end in fatalities?
No, they do not. In fact the huge majority of armed robberies of all type end without the BG causing any major physical harm to anyone. The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying.

Sparks2112
January 14, 2009, 01:30 PM
I agree with that but not when they're walking away. Bullets in the back makes YOU the criminal.

Obviously, and I agree. If someone turns and runs away though after robbing me my CCW is out, and aimed. If they turn back around then I can only assume it's to do something bad to me... The plus side is none of my shots will hit them in the back...

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 01:32 PM
Obviously, and I agree. If someone turns and runs away though after robbing me my CCW piece is out, and aimed. If they turn back around then I can only assume it's to do something bad to me... The plus side is none of my shots will hit them in the back...

Can't argue with that.

vytoland
January 14, 2009, 02:05 PM
sweep twist to the left and at the same time drop down loooow....now facing your opponet, grap him/her behind the kneees and pull the legs out from underneath them.........next reach into your bag of groceries that you had been carrying and grab the can of mixxed vegetables in your right hand and quickly and firmly bring it in contact with the opponets vital area.........then jump to your feet , look down at the opponet and scream i win ha ha:p

SNFullerAK
January 14, 2009, 02:40 PM
Good one vytoland! I like that hahaha! I have another thing realistic but funny. Call me weird but yes i do conceal a 460 S&W Magnum 5" barrel. I do belive if i was in that situation i would make the attempt to pull my gun on him and even if the bullet missed im sure that the shock and muzzle flash would knock him out and or incinerate him. PROBLEM SOLVED!!!

V/R
SN Fuller
USCG

Bauer
January 14, 2009, 02:53 PM
Give the person whatever items they wanted. If they wanted my life...Krav Maga.

cjw3cma
January 14, 2009, 06:16 PM
(#1) I never park where it is dark when I go shopping. Well lighted areas only. If one is not available I will find another store to stop into.

(#2) If a BG does happen to get the drop on me then I agree to give them what they want - they want my wallet I'll give it to them. Being that I am aware of my surroundings I will drop it trying to act as nervous as possible to distract them ever so much. If I am able to distract so I can get to my 1911, then I will. But I will NOT if I am not sure I will "win".

I'm not the cowboy or hero mentality kind of concealed carry person. If I am not 100% sure that I will "win" in the outcome, the BG can have all of my stuff - I may drop everything they want until.............................


Give the person whatever items they wanted. If they wanted my life...Krav Maga.

Lichtenfeld's methods are sound / solid - but you need to know what you are doing - do you practice?

Mausberg
January 14, 2009, 07:43 PM
since when does a theif "ask" for your goods? haha i think when he says start peelin, its a bit more of a life or death demand


you also have to take into consideration you CCW holders and carriers, that he could have his gun on you, search you, and find your. now your helpless

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 07:46 PM
you also have to take into consideration you CCW holders and carriers, that he could have his gun on you, search you, and find your. now your helpless

Absolutely positively. That's why situational awareness is key and we should all work our best at achieving it. We had this conversation in a recent thread. When somebody pokes a gun in your back you have VERY few options and none of them are very good.

ZeSpectre
January 14, 2009, 08:07 PM
Real world answers to the OP's question.

Flatiron got caught flatfooted.
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=164445

Zespectre Ambushed in DC
http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=274291

WildAlaska caught off guard
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=217749&highlight=robbed

Sodbuster75
January 14, 2009, 08:33 PM
"Do most stick-ups end in fatalities?"

"No, they do not. In fact the huge majority of armed robberies of all type end without the BG causing any major physical harm to anyone. The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying."

Sadly, there is no guarantee that your attacker will not kill you even though you fully complied with his requests. Although not common, it does happen. I work in Minneapolis, and about a year and a half ago here a family was exiting a restaurant when two men robbed them at gunpoint and demanded the mother's purse. If I remeber correctly, the adult son told his mom to give them the purse, and when she did, the son was shot anyway. He died from his wounds. The police did arrest them after a couple days, but it goes to show that you are at their mercy if they get the drop on you.

Brian Pfleuger
January 14, 2009, 08:36 PM
Sadly, there is no guarantee that your attacker will not kill you even though you fully complied with his requests.

There are never any guarantees. Fighting back doesn't guarantee success. It's not about guarantees, it's about maximizing your chances of walking away. Sometimes that means cooperating, sometimes it means shooting. Situations like this are unique and dynamic. No action is correct for every situation or even from one second to the next. All we can do is read the tea leaves and act accordingly.

David Armstrong
January 14, 2009, 08:55 PM
Sadly, there is no guarantee that your attacker will not kill you even though you fully complied with his requests.
There are no guarantees, just probabilities. If you start shooting at someone who has a gun, the probability that you will be shot at is fairly high. If you do not start shooting the probability that you will be shot at goes down quite a bit.

ActivShootr
January 14, 2009, 09:03 PM
next reach into your bag of groceries that you had been carrying and grab the can of mixxed vegetables in your right hand and quickly and firmly bring it in contact with the opponets vital area.........

And dent mama's Veg-All? I don't think so...

You could always use your ninja-like skills to take his gun away. Hey, it works on TV.

hogdogs
January 15, 2009, 05:26 AM
SA, SA, And SA!!!
I had a buddy that was held up outside a "gentlemen's club" near closing time. He tells me the story and then finishes with, "If I woulda had my...." I stopped him cold and finished the setence for him... "... just put a snubby nose .38 in a crooks hands." It does no good to be armed and unaware. I swiftly delivered elbow shot to their snot locker should it happen to me but first you have to get thru my personal defense zone to rob me.
Brent

Larry Spencer
January 18, 2009, 12:30 AM
Just do what this man did: 70yr Old Louisville Man Survives Armed Holdup (http://www.wlky.com/video/16509601/index.html)

scorpion_tyr
January 18, 2009, 01:51 AM
It is true that one cannot describe every detail and circumstance of any hypthetical senario. Taking just the information that you have said my answer is this:

In a split second I have to make the a decision. I can either surrender or fight. Fleeing in such a senario isn't really an option. No matter what I do the outcome will be that I will either live or I will die.

I will very calmly tell the BG something like this: "I'll give you everything. You don't have to shoot me, it's not worth it. I'll give you everything and I'll go home and you'll walk away with my money and valuables. I'm going to reach down and give you my wallet"

At this point I slowly move my right hand down to my wallet. Once my hand is as close to my weapon as it can be without letting the BG know it's there I explode with movement. I quicly turn to and move to the right, knocking his weapon to the left with my elbow or arm. With my left hand and/or one of my legs I push and/or kick him as far away as possible while drawing my firearm. I immediately take aim. If I have time I tell him something like "Drop the gun or I'll shoot you and kill you." If he doesn't do as I tell him to, or as soon as the muzzle on his gun begins to move in my direction, or if he makes any kind of movement I take as hostile, I open fire. I shoot until his gun contacts the ground or I run out of ammo.

That's the best answer I can give. I don't surrender to his threat because of three main reasons:

1. If he gets my gun that will only give one more BG the means to kill an innocent person. I'd die to keep that from happening.

2. He's a BG and I'm really sick and tired of BG's. I really wish I lived in a world where I didn't feel the need to have a firearm. I wouldn't have guns if none of the BG's had them.

3. I've defended myself from lethal force using hand to hand combat before. I know exactly how I react in such situations and I feel cofident I can take the average BG quick enough and long enough to pull my weapon. If the BG is close that close to me, he's close enough for me to engage him and I believe that because of my experiences and training I have the upper hand in that situation.

I'll be the first to admit that if the BG were to engage me using tactics that gave him the upper hand, and if I believed he would shoot me if I resisted and would let me live if I didn't, I would gladly hand over whatever he wanted. Until it came to my gun that is. I am a firm believer I am responsible for all of the firearms that I own, and every single bullet that goes through it's barrel. The only way to relinquish that responsibility is to transfer ownership of the firearm to someone who I believe to be just as mature and responsible as I am (another good guy). I'll die trying to keep my guns out of the hands of rapists, murderers, etc.

ActivShootr
January 19, 2009, 09:33 PM
^ good luck with that.

hillbillyshooter
January 20, 2009, 12:55 AM
In Ohio we're not allowed to use deadly force to protect property. Drawing your gun could make the guy mad (because you're not following the rules). He might even sue you for turning a simple exchange of property into an actual gunfight...

You have to protect the property between your ears. Gotta love the legal system. You would probably get more time than him even if he has 4 other felony convictions. Prosecutor would negatively skew it because the BG was outgunned with his Pheonix .25 and you had your "man killing" .45 auto that will be claimed was overkill for personal defense.

Keltyke
January 20, 2009, 08:31 AM
^ good luck with that.

I'll second that remark!

Go ahead, Mr. Norris, try your ninja stuff. Let's hope the BG isn't better trained than you.

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 11:48 AM
Let's hope the BG isn't better trained than you.

Trained? Hell, you better hope he'd doesn't have his finger on the trigger. One quick move and BANG. All that dodge this and that will be a might tougher with a bullet in you and more on the way.


I know exactly how I react in such situations and I feel cofident I can take the average BG quick enough and long enough to pull my weapon.

Problem is, you have to pull your weapon, at least point it and pull the trigger. The BG has to pull the trigger. Two things:

1)How fast do you think you are? Unless you have YEARS of training (and not 2 or 3 "years") you have virtually NO chance.

2)What makes you think the BG is going to be in contact range? Sure if the gun is poking you in the back then you might have stellar odds, like 1 in a million. If he's 3 feet away, they go to about 0.

Glenn E. Meyer
January 20, 2009, 01:14 PM
Just a question - before one speculates on chances - how many folks have tried this scenario in some kind of FOF class?

I've seen guns drawn and shot against someone who has the drop on you. I've seen folks get off the X of a drawn gun. I've seen folks get 'shot' by trying such.

There are no guarantees but one should try it.

RainbowBob
January 20, 2009, 02:55 PM
The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying...If you do not start shooting the probability that you will be shot at goes down quite a bit.

Mr Armstrong:
Can you cite some kind of reference for those statements - or are they simply your personal opinion?


What about this?

Victim resistance can be passive or verbal, but much of it is active and forceful. Potentially, the most consequential form of forceful resistance is armed resistance, especially resistance with a gun. This form of resistance is worthy of special attention for many reasons, both policy-related and scientific. The policy-related reasons are obvious: if self-protection with a gun is commonplace, it means that any form of gun control that disarms large numbers of prospective victims, either altogether, or only in certain times and places where victimization might occur, will carry significant social costs in terms of lost opportunities for self-protection.

On the other hand, the scientific reasons are likely to be familiar only to the relatively small community of scholars who study the consequences of victim self-protection: the defensive actions of crime victims have significant effects on the outcomes of crimes, and the effects of armed resistance differ from those of unarmed resistance. Previous research has consistently indicated that victims who resist with a gun or other weapon are less likely than other victims to lose their property in robberies[3] and in burglaries.[4] Consistently, research also has indicated that victims who resist by using guns or other weapons are less likely to be injured compared to victims who do not resist or to those who resist without weapons. This is true whether the research relied on victim surveys or on police records, and whether the data analysis consisted of simple cross-tabulations or more complex multivariate analyses. These findings have been obtained with respect to robberies[5] and to assaults.[6] Cook[7] offers his unsupported personal opinion concerning robbery victims that resisting with a gun is only prudent if the robber does not have a gun. The primary data source on which Cook relies flatly contradicts this opinion. National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data indicate that even in the very disadvantageous situation where the robber has a gun, victims who resist with guns are still substantially less likely to be injured than those who resist in other ways, and even slightly less likely to be hurt than those who do not resist at all.[8]

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 86, issue 1, 1995.

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 03:39 PM
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) data indicate that even in the very disadvantageous situation where the robber has a gun, victims who resist with guns are still substantially less likely to be injured than those who resist in other ways, and even slightly less likely to be hurt than those who do not resist at all.[8]


I'll just say that "robber has a gun" is substantially different than "robber has a gun aimed at you".

and... it should be common sense obvious that if you resist a gun toting BG when you DON'T have a gun then you are more likely to get hurt than if you DO have a gun.

and... I'd like the definition of "hurt" in their study. I'd rather be "hurt" than dead.

RainbowBob
January 20, 2009, 04:11 PM
I'll just say that "robber has a gun" is substantially different than "robber has a gun aimed at you".

"Robber has a gun" INCLUDES all robbers with guns pointed at a victim. To be included in the studies, the victim had to be aware the assailant had a gun. The difference between a gun in hand and a gun actually aimed at you may not be that significant. It is likely that a gun in hand can be aimed and fired faster than we can draw and fire. And yet the data strongly suggests that you are safer resisting with a gun than not resisting at all, as was asserted by Mr Armstrong.

and... it should be common sense obvious that if you resist a gun toting BG when you DON'T have a gun then you are more likely to get hurt than if you DO have a gun.

Yes. But the point I'm trying to make is that being armed and resisting an armed assault with your gun increases your odds of avoiding injury and death over not resisting at all.

and... I'd like the definition of "hurt" in their study. I'd rather be "hurt" than dead.

I think it is safe to assume that "dead" is included in the definition of "hurt".

Pyzon
January 20, 2009, 04:20 PM
I'm sorta late checking in on this but for Milspec, a fellow Buckeye-here is some recent (April '08) good news regarding self preservation in Ohio.

If you didn't know this happened blame it on the media, they obviously don't cover good news.

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/5602

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 04:43 PM
"Robber has a gun" INCLUDES all robbers with guns pointed at a victim.

I don't disagree with that. My point is that the "hurt" statistic doesn't differentiate between the two. It seems very likely that more injuries result from the "gun pointed at you" resistance than "has a gun" resistance.


I think it is safe to assume that "dead" is included in the definition of "hurt".


I would assume so also. Which is why I say I'm not sure I'd put much faith in those numbers because "hurt" could be dead or it could be a hang nail. If they don't make a distinction then non resistance could get you hurt (for example) 70% of the time with a knock on the head and dead 10%, whereas resistance with a gun could get you dead 30% of the time and otherwise hurt 20% of the time. If they don't makes distinction it seems better to resist but in reality you could be 3X more likely to die. I'm not necessarily looking to avoid injury, I'm looking to not die.

Tennessee Gentleman
January 20, 2009, 04:55 PM
peetza,

I think this is taking us back to these "academic statistics" which as rainbow has shown say all sorts of things. I guess I like some of the old rules of thumb that I have seen posted here before like Kathy Jackson and others have done. It seems to me that the minute we start quoting these "studies" without laying out what they mean we will get contradictions.

Crime "studies" are like all studies in that depending on the questions asked and the way the data is collected may contradict each other. I use coffee as an example, every few years a "study" comes out that coffee is good/bad for you. I just drink the stuff and make sure I am near a bathroom and don't drink the leaded stuff after 7:00 PM! :)

Anyway, thanks rainbow for publishing the reference. Some who post here won't do it but get ****** off when asked for the study and I thank you for your courtesy.

There are no guarantees but one should try it.

Now Glenn, there we have a strong case of agreement. I think FoF would show me more than conflicting studies. Where do you go to get all this FoF training?

RainbowBob
January 20, 2009, 05:15 PM
Anyway, thanks rainbow for publishing the reference. Some who post here won't do it but get ****** off when asked for the study and I thank you for your courtesy.

I've noticed that. In any case, I was specifically asking if Mr Armstrong had any data supporting his seemingly "definitive" answer to peetzakiller's question: "Do most stick-ups end in fatalities?" *

No, they do not. In fact the huge majority of armed robberies of all type end without the BG causing any major physical harm to anyone. The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying.

Not trying to pick on anyone, but IMO, an answer as definitive as "No, they do not" should either be supported by some kind of data or qualified as a personal opinion.

David Armstrong
January 20, 2009, 05:19 PM
Mr Armstrong:
Can you cite some kind of reference for those statements
Yes I can and yes I have. Might want to do a search, save us all some time, trouble, etc.
Yes. But the point I'm trying to make is that being armed and resisting an armed assault with your gun increases your odds of avoiding injury and death over not resisting at all.
Are we discussing armed assault or are we discussing robbery? The two are very different.
In any case, I was specifically asking if Mr Armstrong had any data supporting his seemingly "definitive" answer to the OP's question: "Do most stick-ups end in fatalities?"
Just the Uniform Crime Reports, which show that, for example, in 2004 there were 401,326 robberies and only 988 that resulted in a murder. Seems pretty definitive to me.

Nnobby45
January 20, 2009, 05:40 PM
Are we discussing armed assault or are we discussing robbery? The two are very different.


Blessed are those so bold as to think they can, in an instant, decide whether a robber is armed or not and have a seperate plan for dealing with either.

A weapon in a hand you can't see, or in a pocket can be rather difficult to spot.

Even more blessed are those who can formulate a plan for a dangerous situation and utilize it just like they had it planned in their head.

Not criticizing having a plan, but neither do I discount the importance of being quick of mind and feet in such matters. A boxer in a ring doesn't plan each move, but they do have tactics and strategy.

David Armstrong
January 20, 2009, 06:00 PM
Blessed are those so bold as to think they can, in an instant, decide whether a robber is armed or not and have a seperate plan for dealing with either.
A robber, armed or not, is still engaging in a robbery. Again, an armed assault is different than a robbery.

Ridgerunner665
January 20, 2009, 06:07 PM
I carry my wallet on the same side as my 45...If I could (depending on circumstances)...I'd probably shoot him then take his money. (No...I'm not kidding, times are hard around here...the loss of only $50 would mean the difference in whether or not my family has food to eat)

Sparks2112
January 20, 2009, 06:09 PM
I'd probably shoot him then take his money. (No...I'm not kidding)

While I agree with that for moral reasons, I can't help but think that it might get you in trouble if put to practice.

Ridgerunner665
January 20, 2009, 06:11 PM
Agreed...If I got caught.

Hondo11
January 20, 2009, 06:12 PM
Just the Uniform Crime Reports, which show that, for example, in 2004 there were 401,326 robberies and only 988 that resulted in a murder. Seems pretty definitive to me.

Robbery and Armed/Aggravated Robbery aren't the same thing. UCR lumps both types of Robbery together and we can assume that Armed/Aggravated Robberies are probably not the majority. We can also assume that most Robberies that are committed without the use of a weapon aren't likely to end up in a Murder. So that takes out a huge part of that 401,326.

988 of them resulted in a murder... But how many of them resulted in an injury to the victim? Just because it didn't result in a Murder doesn't mean the victim wasn't hurt. That makes the 988 number MUCH higher as well.

Yep, sounds pretty definitive...if you want to use it to back your position and start another condescending lecture.

Otherwise, not so much.

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 06:13 PM
Interesting. So stealing money from bad people is OK? Or, is it only OK if you're using it to feed your family? I wonder if the hypothetical "BG" was just trying to feed his family.:barf:

Ridgerunner665
January 20, 2009, 06:15 PM
NO...stealing money is not OK.

But survival of the fittest is mother natures way...the "BG" got himself in this mess when he picked me...remember.

If it ever comes to that...I won't be robbing people to feed my family...I may get caught poaching game out of season, but I won't be the guy stealing purses at WalMart.

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 06:19 PM
Ah, the old "my behavior is justified by his behavior".

Wrong + Wrong = Right

I see.

Ridgerunner665
January 20, 2009, 06:21 PM
You still don't see my point...

And its clear to me that you never will.

csmsss
January 20, 2009, 06:22 PM
Interesting. So stealing money from bad people is OK? Or, is it only OK if you're using it to feed your family? I wonder if the hypothetical "BG" was just trying to feed his family.Me? I wouldn't touch anything off a scumbag robber, but wouldn't feel the least bit offended if they hang the bastard's head on a pike in the town square. I'm sick to death of those who would treat criminals as victims and who might insist on some sort of proportionality in their treatment. Someone sticks a gun in my or anyone else's face? Deserves the very worst the law can provide - and then some.

Oh, and by the way....I'm happy I live in a state that provides the very common-sense doctrine that it is legal to defend one's or others' property with deadly force.

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 06:24 PM
You still don't see my point...

And its clear to me that never will.


You're right I don't. Taking something you didn't earn or purchase is stealing. Whether it's a gallon of gas or a pad of paper from the office or the money in a dead guys pocket. Wrong is wrong.


Me? I wouldn't touch anything off a scumbag robber, but wouldn't feel the least bit offended if they hang the bastard's head on a pike in the town square. I'm sick to death of those who would treat criminals as victims and who might insist on some sort of proportionality in their treatment. Someone sticks a gun in my or anyone else's face? Deserves the very worst the law can provide - and then some.

With that I can agree.

Ridgerunner665
January 20, 2009, 06:37 PM
Hypothetical situation...

If you found a wrecked plane with $10,000,000 in a bag, about a ton of cocaine, and everybody on the plane was dead.

Would you turn the money in???

I wouldn't...but I'd darn sure leave the bag (No Country for Old Men)

I don't see anything wrong with turning "bad" money into "good".

RainbowBob
January 20, 2009, 06:41 PM
Mr Armstrong:
Can you cite some kind of reference for those statements?

Yes I can and yes I have. Might want to do a search, save us all some time, trouble, etc.

Huh? What are you suggesting? Are you saying you DID cite the source of your assertion
(i.e., "The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying...If you do not start shooting the probability that you will be shot at goes down quite a bit.)?

If so..I missed it somehow. Mea culpa.

On the other hand, if you did not provide a citation in this thread, are you suggesting I should do a forum-wide search or an internet-wide search of all possible variations on the theme in order to try and ascertain your source? How would would that be easier (and as accurate) as simply asking you to cite your source when making definitive statements that are presented as fact rather than opinion?

RainbowBob
January 20, 2009, 06:56 PM
Are we discussing armed assault or are we discussing robbery? The two are very different.

I was thinking of armed robbery as an armed assault, although that is probably not a correct legal definition.



Robbery and Armed/Aggravated Robbery aren't the same thing. UCR lumps both types of Robbery together and we can assume that Armed/Aggravated Robberies are probably not the majority. We can also assume that most Robberies that are committed without the use of a weapon aren't likely to end up in a Murder. So that takes out a huge part of that 401,326.

988 of them resulted in a murder... But how many of them resulted in an injury to the victim? Just because it didn't result in a Murder doesn't mean the victim wasn't hurt. That makes the 988 number MUCH higher as well.

Peetzakiller's question had to do with whether or not MOST robberies resulted in murder. The data cited by Mr Armstong seems to definitively answer that question.

The OP's question (if I understand correctly) centered on whether or not it is tactically sound to resist an armed robbery with force, particularly if the firearm is actually in contact with the victim.

To answer the OP's question, it may be reasonable to suggest we disregard the outcomes of incidents in which the robber was not armed with a firearm.

It is also reasonable to consider robberies that resulted in injuries, rather than limit our consideration to those incidents that resulted in murder.

Now the question becomes: How many ARMED robberies result in injury or death to the victim?

I think it is safe to say that MOST robberies don't end in murder - but a MUCH higher proportion of armed robberies result in injury or death.

Having said that, if I'm being robbed, regardless of whether I see a weapon or not, I'm no longer inclined to wait to find out if this particular incident will result in injury or death.

I say "no longer inclined" because the only time I was robbed at gun-point (many years ago), I was unarmed and froze and gave it up (all $3). In this incident, the firearm was not in contact with my body. The robbers were in a car and had stopped me in a cross-walk (on a crowded street in broad daylight).

Although I didn't get shot, in retrospect I think I would have been smarter to take evasive action. Had I been armed, I think evasive action coupled with defensive ability would have presented better odds for avoiding injury or death than "stand and deliver".

In a recent news story (which I can't cite or link because I can't remember where I saw it) - a man was stuck up at gun-point at a gas station. The gun was in contact with his head and the BG stated that he was going to kill him. The victim was able to sweep the gun aside while drawing and firing his own, thus ending the threat and saving his life. My point for this unsubstantiated story is that if a BG has a gun to MY head, my assumption is that I WILL die, and have little to loose by taking action rather than surrendering.

That, of course, is a very personal decision that must be made based on the circumstances and gut sense.

Brian Pfleuger
January 20, 2009, 07:08 PM
Hypothetical situation...


If you found a dead guy on the street with $100 dollars in one hand and a baggie of crack in the other, would you take the money?

I wouldn't. I'd call the police.


$100 or $10,000,000, stealing is stealing.

Stevie-Ray
January 20, 2009, 07:12 PM
I'm with those that say,be very wary and aware of your surroundings at all times out in public.+1, and I probably look very suspicious to most people, as I am constantly watching for anything that doesn't look quite right. I have come out of what I would otherwise call harmful situations, simply by seeing it beforehand and diffusing it before it started, sometimes with a look, sometimes by hand movement or something else entirely. Probably most of us have, even if we didn't know it.

If somebody truly got the drop on me, I can't say for sure what I'd do, it would depend on a whole lot of circumstances and variables.

Nnobby45
January 20, 2009, 08:58 PM
A robber, armed or not, is still engaging in a robbery. Again, an armed assault is different than a robbery.

David, that's not the point. Your life may depend on being able to determine if the robber is armed, and what he's armed with.

I'm not sure how an armed assault could be different from a robbery when both are happening at the same time. I doubt that you are either.

"Hey man, gi'mme ten bucks" may be the start of a robbery, armed or not, or it may be an act of intimidation that, in the eyes of the law, stops just short of a robbery.

scorpion_tyr
January 20, 2009, 10:58 PM
1)How fast do you think you are? Unless you have YEARS of training (and not 2 or 3 "years") you have virtually NO chance.

2)What makes you think the BG is going to be in contact range? Sure if the gun is poking you in the back then you might have stellar odds, like 1 in a million. If he's 3 feet away, they go to about 0.

1) Pretty fast when I need to be. 13 years of on and off training... probably enough to total 4-5 years steady. I've ran this exact drill w/ a digital stopwatch. From my first movement to my trigger pull is 2.25 seconds, 3.5 with proper aiming. What's better than that is I have 6 years BTDT experience. Much of that in countries where the common practice is to let you hand over your valuables so they don't waste time looking for them, and then kill you so there's no witness. This is common practice in some places, not the exception.

2) The OP said the BG was in contact range. Because of my experiences, and my confidence in knowing how I react I feel that as soon as the BG enters my "dead zone" he has put the odds in my favor. Anyone who gets that close is probably not trained at all.

My response was just what I would do. I would advise others to practice such drills and find out what works for them and what doesn't. Get an airsoft pistol and a buddy. Tell him to pull the trigger as soon as you move. You'll find out just how you need to move to prevent getting shot.

Would I get shot if I tried this? Maybe. Would I get shot if I complied? Maybe. Is it worth fighting back? Abolutely! Why? I love my guns and I don't want them in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to clean them properly.

David Armstrong
January 21, 2009, 01:38 PM
You still don't see my point...
And its clear to me that you never will.
I'm not sure I do either. I may get caught poaching game out of season, but I won't be the guy stealing purses at WalMart. So you think that your crime is better than somebody else's crime??

David Armstrong
January 21, 2009, 01:43 PM
Huh? What are you suggesting? Are you saying you DID cite the source of your assertion
I'm not suggesting anything. I am saying this has been done several times in the not-so-distant past, and rather than going through it all again you can find the information by searching a little bit. This issue is starting to reach the level of "Which is better, 9mm or .45".

David Armstrong
January 21, 2009, 01:52 PM
David, that's not the point.
Of course that is the point. If we are discussing robberies one does not mix them up with armed asssaults. They are two very different things.
I'm not sure how an armed assault could be different from a robbery when both are happening at the same time. I doubt that you are either.
I am quite sure that I know the difference. I would suggest that if one does not know the difference one should probably find out the difference before commenting, since there is obviously a problem in understanding the issue.
"Hey man, gi'mme ten bucks" may be the start of a robbery, armed or not, or it may be an act of intimidation that, in the eyes of the law, stops just short of a robbery.
Actually, if there is intimidation with that phrase, a robbery is in progress. Again, it is important to understand what words and concepts mean if one wishes to comment on them.

RainbowBob
January 21, 2009, 02:16 PM
I am saying this has been done several times in the not-so-distant past, and rather than going through it all again you can find the information by searching a little bit.

Mr Armstrong:
When you say "...this has been done..." - what are you referring to? What "this" do you mean?

Please give me a clue where to start my search for "this". I am not being facetious here, I really would not know where to begin to search for a reference or citation for your declaration, "If you do not start shooting the probability that you will be shot at goes down quite a bit."

I do not understand why you are so defensive about your comments, and refuse to either provide a source for your statement or own it as your personal opinion.

There is nothing wrong with sharing your personal opinion here - unless you characterize it as "fact" supported by empirical evidence gleaned from peer-reviewed studies.

Heck, 99.95% of what is written on forums is comprised of personal opinions (in my personal opinion).

R1145
January 21, 2009, 02:24 PM
...not your wallet. Even if you are able to get him, it will end up costing you far more than what's in your wallet.

When I was in basic training, we were issued batons and posted at loading docks, etc. The Sergeant of the Guard was giving us our special orders, and one of the trainees asked what to do if confronted with a gun.

"Son," said the drill, "If he's got a gun, you help him load the [sic] truck!"

Your first course of action should be to be the best witness possible, get a license plate number, call the cops, etc. The system works pretty well in this country, if you give it a chance to work.

An earlier comment spoke about using lethal force to defend property. In this situation, you are defending your life, so self-defense is an option. If the robber is running away, and THEN you shoot him, well, you're on thinner ice...

You'd have to make some quick decisions in the situation described. You would probably be legally justified if you used lethal force. For moral and legal reasons, any sensible person will avoid that option except as a last resort.

If you draw and shoot against a man covering you with a gun, you have a surprisingly good chance, but it depends on many factors (not least of which is luck...) and you're betting with your life.

I'd look for my chance, I guess. I'd give up my wallet. I would not allow myself to be transported, because that drastically cuts the odds of survival.

Keltyke
January 21, 2009, 02:34 PM
If you draw and shoot against a man covering you with a gun, you have a surprisingly good chance,

Really? It takes between .5 and 1 second for the average human to be aware of and react to a movement. Are you SURE you can disarm or incapacitate him in that brief instant? Can you draw and fire in that time? If you fail in the famous "sweep the gun" maneuver, he's gonna recover and kill you dead. If it's a revolver and cocked, you're dead anyway. He'll be able to pull the trigger before you can "sweep" completely and get out of the muzzle line. Try it with some buddies using squirt guns.

If I'm SURE I'm gonna die anyway, I'll try it. Until then, it's your world, fella. You ninjas can go for it.

I'm outta here!

Tennessee Gentleman
January 21, 2009, 02:40 PM
There is nothing wrong with sharing your personal opinion here - unless you characterize it as "fact" supported by emperical evidence gleaned from peer-reviewed studies.

That is the issue and I suspect that ego comes into play at times. Even the "facts" that studies state have to be understood in context. That is why many say: "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics" or my personal favorite "Figures lie and liars figure".:)

Heck, 99.95% of what is written on forums is comprised of personal opinions

Some think their opinions are fact, based on their personal experience. They might be right...or dead wrong so it makes sense to check those ideas out with others and LISTEN to what they think. When you get to the point that you can't or wont' listen..look out.

I would not allow myself to be transported, because that drastically cuts the odds of survival

Don't know what the odds are and they don't matter, common sense tells us that if we get into the car with the BG he has more control over us and can take us somewhere quickly and far away where there are no witnesses. There are other indicators as well and I am not sure you need statistics to know them.

RainbowBob
January 21, 2009, 03:11 PM
Are you SURE you can disarm or incapacitate him in that brief instant?...If I'm SURE I'm gonna die anyway, I'll try it.

How can you be SURE in either case? Doing nothing with a gun pointed at you is a BIG risk. So is doing something. You could die either way.

It comes down to your gut feeling about the particular circumstances in that moment. It's a high-stakes gamble either way. I think (although I can't be sure unless it happens to me) that I would rather gamble on gaining control of the situation, rather than allow the BG to decide if my time is up.

David Armstrong
January 21, 2009, 03:32 PM
When you say "...this has been done..." - what are you referring to? What "this" do you mean?
Not sure why you are having trouble following the conversation. "This" is what you were talking about, read YOUR quote right above the statement. See, it says "Are you saying you DID cite the source of your assertion" which in turn refers back to YOUR statement "Can you cite some kind of reference for those statements?"
Please give me a clue where to start my search for "this".
Well, you can try doing a forum search for things like defensive shooting, robbery, and other key terms. Or you can do a full net search. Personally I'd suggest you start your search by reading a few dozen articles from academic journals regarding defensive gun use, supplement it by reading some of the better books on understanding robbers and criminals, go over about a decades worth of UCR and NCVS data, and read as many police reports as you can.
I do not understand why you are so defensive about your comments, and refuse to either provide a source for your statement or own it as your personal opinion.
I do not understand why somebody wants to suggest that statements are wrong, or that they are incorrect, or want to argue about them, when they have not done basic research on the topic.
There is nothing wrong with sharing your personal opinion here - unless you characterize it as "fact" supported by empirical evidence gleaned from peer-reviewed studies.
When I present my opinion I try very hard to identify it as an opinion. I also try very hard to present facts as the facts, and to the best of my knowledge I have never presented my opinion as a fact in this or any other forum.

RainbowBob
January 21, 2009, 03:58 PM
Well, you can try doing a forum search for things like defensive shooting, robbery, and other key terms. Or you can do a full net search. Personally I'd suggest you start your search by reading a few dozen articles from academic journals regarding defensive gun use, supplement it by reading some of the better books on understanding robbers and criminals, go over about a decades worth of UCR and NCVS data, and read as many police reports as you can.

I do not understand why somebody wants to suggest that statements are wrong, or that they are incorrect, or want to argue about them, when they have not done basic research on the topic.


I've done quite a lot of reading and research, probably much of the same sources as you. Regardless, I STILL don't know if the following statements were presented as fact or opinion. And if they were presented as facts - what evidence are they based on? If you don't remember where you read it, why not say so?

"If you do not start shooting the probability that you will be shot at goes down quite a bit."

"The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying."

Giving us a laundry list of all the reading you have done - and suggesting we attempt to read everything on your list before disagreeing with your statements - is kind of ridiculous.

I don't agree with the statements quoted above. I think ithey may even be dangerous ideas. I've stated my disagreement and cited sources that discount the veracity of your statements. You have yet to provide a credible source for the statements. Why not? Instead you suggest I do more research before disagreeing with you.

David Armstrong
January 21, 2009, 04:46 PM
Giving us a laundry list of all the reading you have done - and suggesting we attempt to read everything on your list before disagreeing with your statements - is kind of ridiculous.
Expecting somebody to go back over everything they have read for decades to find a particular citation is kind of ridiculous. And suggesting one become familiar with a topic before commenting on it is quite sensible, IMO. If you don't agree with what I have posted as a fact fine, there might be conflicting data out there. Feel free to post it and give a citiation if you wish. If you really think it is less likely that someone will shoot at you if you are shooting at them than if you are not shooting at them, fine. Feel free to give a cite if you want. If you have something that says non-compliance is not the most common reason for violence to occur at an armed robbery, fine, tell us what is most common. Feel free to give a cite if you want. I've played this game before, several times (thus the "do a search") and I've yet to find any evidence of people actually going and looking up the information or even considering it. Usually what happens is it turns into an argument over why the info is wrong or why it shouldn't be believed instead of a discusssion of the issue itself.
I don't agree with the statements quoted above. I think ithey may even be dangerous ideas.
Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. I prefer to discuss issues in a factual and scientific basis where possible.
I've stated my disagreement and cited sources that discount the veracity of your statements.
And I can cite sources that discount the veracity of the statements of the source you cited. See Cook and Ludwig, 1997, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownershhip and Use of Firearms." So where does that leave us?

#18indycolts
January 21, 2009, 04:50 PM
probably with a mod closing this...

Sparks2112
January 21, 2009, 04:52 PM
So where does that leave us?

With too much time on both of your hands?

Really the end of the argument is that each situation is inherently different, and only the person living through it can make the call. I'm almost certain statistics will have very little sway on what each individual does in a given situation. Sometimes cowards fight, sometimes heroes run, it all depends.

"My statistics say" vs. "My statistics say" arguments are boring, tedious, and generally no fun.

Can't one of you call the other a cheese snorter or something? I mean, really guys. :)

David Armstrong
January 21, 2009, 05:04 PM
"My statistics say" vs. "My statistics say" arguments are boring, tedious, and generally no fun.
I agree, which is why I try to avoid getting into them.

Tennessee Gentleman
January 21, 2009, 06:58 PM
My vote is whenever someone asks a question about tactics, try to avoid stats and academic studies unless you are willing to explain what the stats and studies mean in context. I think analysis of those might help develop tactics otherwise known as rules of thumb. I think Kathy Jackson should post her list about things she won't do concerning a BG and let's refine it?

I thought most people come on the forum to sort through this stuff. During my CCW class (which was two full days) we spent about 3/4 of the first day talking with the instructor about laws, crooks (he was an ex-leo) and we saw a film where some inmates who were robbers talked about what they did etc. Seemed to help. I heard no stats or odds during the class that I remember.

RainbowBob
January 21, 2009, 07:32 PM
"The most common reason for violence to erupt at an armed robbery is the victims not complying."

The most common reason for violence to errupt at an armed robbery is the violent predator's propensity to commit violence for any reason or no reason at all. Law-abiding citizens should be prepared and willing to resist violence - not comply with it.

So where does that leave us?

That's where I'll leave it.

Tennessee Gentleman
January 21, 2009, 07:52 PM
The most common reason for violence to errupt at an armed robbery is the violent predator's propensity to commit violence for any reason or no reason at all. Law-abiding citizens should be prepared and willing to resist violence - not comply with it.

Good comment.

21CFA
January 21, 2009, 07:58 PM
Throw down your stuff with a commotion, scream, knock the perp away from you and run like hell for cover. If there is a chance he may follow you and not run off, then THAT is when you think about bullets. He expected compliance:eek: and was disappointed. You may be lucky if you stay and comply, but luckier if you run. Give up your wallet before you give up your hide-out gun. The story is changed if you have a wife or sweetie with you. The story is changed again, and ENORMOUSLY if his attack occurs in the store or where ever you are with potential hostages. Remember that one perp can't watch them all, including you -- the only one you know for sure has a weapon. I would not hesitate to take down any perp the same instant that he began lacing people up with duct-tape or other means. There is rape, hostages, and murder in the beginning of that scenario. But, it's all movies until you actually act out the scenario with some friends and their wives. Try it. You'll enjoy it.

monkeywrench
January 21, 2009, 08:11 PM
While it all really depends on the circumstances, the best thing is prevention by making yourself look like someone who is not an easy target. After that knives would be my pick. They only work close in, but that is when someone with a gun is at the greatest disadvantage, and I would rather not take my chances when someone has the drop on me.

Only S&W and Me
January 21, 2009, 09:49 PM
If you could draw like Bob you wouldn't need to worry about being drawn upon:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iHryGNpyc0

ElectricHellfire
January 21, 2009, 11:19 PM
If you could draw like Bob you wouldn't need to worry about being drawn upon

You aint kiddin. That guy is amazing.

To the OP. I guess I would try to comply, throw my goods at his feet and empty my mag in his guts.

Nnobby45
January 22, 2009, 12:13 AM
I am quite sure that I know the difference. I would suggest that if one does not know the difference one should probably find out the difference before commenting, since there is obviously a problem in understanding the issue.


There could, indeed be a problem understanding the issue. When one is being robbed and assaulted at the same time, but feels they're two different issues, it could be frustrating trying to classify the incident as one or the other.

Apparently, if you, David, were the victim, only Bubba would know that the two are very closely related since he'd be using one to accomplish the other.

pax
January 22, 2009, 12:21 AM
My vote is whenever someone asks a question about tactics, try to avoid stats and academic studies unless you are willing to explain what the stats and studies mean in context.

I can go with this.

This morning I was short-tempered when I came on here, so I resisted replying to some things that probably needed moderator attention. For that, I apologize.

Tonight I'm not short-tempered at all, but I do have to tell you that I'm bloody well sick and tired of threads in this forum getting hijacked by micrometer-waving weenie-measurers brandishing academic credentials and by their counterparts uttering insulting phrases about people who have academic credentials. It's been going on for awhile, and it's destroyed far too many otherwise worthwhile threads. Go play somewhere else if you want to play an academic game of "gotcha!" with nonexistent statistics and unsupplied quotes. We're not playing that game here anymore.

The thread hijack on this thread will cease, immediately. If you are not prepared to directly answer the question posed in the opening post, do not post at all. Don't tell us about studies you refuse to quote, or statistics you refuse to supply in context, while smarmily implying that everyone who doesn't agree with your point is an ignorant fool. Answer the actual question presented in the original post or don't post at all. And if answering that original question about tactics really-and-truly somehow requires you to cite a study or refer to statistics, QUOTE the study (don't just cite it, quote it) and supply the hard numbers you claim support your argument. No more free rides on flash and dazzle. Put up or shut up -- and stay on topic while you do it.

To be clear:

Off topic posts from this point forward will be deleted as soon as I spot them. In some cases, that deletion will be accompanied by a ban. I'm not kidding about this. The statistic-centered weenie-measuring contest has gotten old and it's tiresome and it's going to stop now.

pax

Mike Irwin
January 22, 2009, 10:46 AM
Of course I give up my money and jewels.

Those are things that can be replaced.

Far too many people confuse blatant stupidity with heroic action, to their final detriment.

.
January 22, 2009, 06:57 PM
Pick the grenade that you are going to jump onto!

Von_H
January 23, 2009, 01:57 AM
If I got that "Vibe" dudes gonna kill me. I'd hand him the stuff in away to force him to move attention.
I Then would probably slap the gun, hold the gun arm like @$#4 hell and pull shooting downward through his armpit.

Now, If I was unarmed and snapping his neck doesn't work, I'd grab the gun hand, drag him to the ground and smash his head till the cops came. But, I do know how to kill more than fight. Damn violent Sen-say.

----------------
The only way to win is to be more violent then they could ever be. They aren't ready for semi-evil violence levels.

Tennessee Gentleman
January 23, 2009, 10:35 AM
Of course I give up my money and jewels.
Those are things that can be replaced.
Far too many people confuse blatant stupidity with heroic action, to their final detriment.

Mike, I couldn't agree more. My wallet is not worth my life or anybody elses IMO.

The problem is, and the reason I think for most of these threads is: what if the robber wants more than your money? How can you tell and what should you do?

I still am voting (now public) for a list of rules of thumb Kathy once posted here. Maybe make it a sticky or something and add to it? Maybe not. I think the vast majority of us (me included) have not been robbed or otherwise violently assaulted before and so the questions persist.

Byron Quick
January 23, 2009, 07:51 PM
I've got a bunch of habits I've acquired over the years to try to avoid this situation. I'm right handed. My wallet, my keys, etc. all reside in left hand pockets and are handled by my left hand. My firearms are holstered for access by my right hand and I endeavor to keep that hand free for weapons. I stop at my vehicle and do a complete 360 degree sweep before opening my door. With my left hand. If I'm not completely assured of the situation, my right hand will be on my pistol's grip. Call me paranoid. I've been the victim of assault.

However, if someone gets the drop on me to that point, I will comply while hoping for an opportunity to turn the tables.

Deaf Smith
January 23, 2009, 09:35 PM
so lets say you just went shopping, its dark out, and some one runs up from behind on you(putting items in car). lets also say you have a bit of cash, some jewelery on and what not. they have a gun, you have a gun, only problem for you is, his is drawn. his guns pressed to your back and he's telling you if you even hick up, he's dropping you. do you give it up? or do you go for your fairearm? i know there might be some certain circumstances and variables that could change things, but for the most part he caught you with your pants down and if he's serious you risk dying being resistent.. what would you do?

I'd keep aware enough not to get in that situation. If for some reason I was idiot enough to let someone come up to me at night and do that it would depend on just how close, were the gun was pressed, and other variables. I'm well skilled at H2H techniques not to mention firearms. But... again the course of action would depend on alot of things.

Rifleman 173
January 25, 2009, 11:10 PM
1. Look over the situation ant the odds. Think things through just a bit if possible.
2. Wait, look and watch. Hope that the bad guy gets distracted. If the bad guy gets distracted, draw my gun and shoot him Mozambique style.
3. Scan around for another bad guy and be ready just in case there is another bad guy. My rule of engagement is that, "There is always one more bad guy to confront."
4. Scan outside of the business because often the bad guy has a car nearby. Sometimes there is a driver in the car waiting for the 1st bad guy.
5. Wait for the police to respond.