PDA

View Full Version : What would you do in this situation?


Big Bill
March 4, 2009, 01:51 PM
I was at my bank (which was robbed recently by an armed gunman) the other day and started thinking about the following scenario:

What would I have done had I been in the bank the day it was robbed. I carry concealed a Ruger LCP with two extra mags. The bank robber came into the bank and fired a shot into the air. So, he was obviously locked and loaded. I ankle carry and am a little slow getting to my weapon. My thought was that had I tried to interrupt in this situation, there is a good chance I would have been shot. I also don't carry one in the chamber for safety reasons. But, I also feel like I would be a coward if I didn't do something.

Now, what should I do differently to be a better CCW holder? What would you do in a similar situation?

(BTW, they caught the guy a couple of weeks later.)

Ricky
March 4, 2009, 01:57 PM
Even if you were able to get your gun out and chamber a round without being noticed by the gunman if you shot him with your .380 I would think it very possible for him to return fire. You might die a hero, I'd rather go home.

Bartholomew Roberts
March 4, 2009, 01:57 PM
I'd have watched him rob the bank because I have no interest in risking my life to protect the bank's money and even less interest in spending several thousand dollars in legal fees in order to protect the bank's money.

Now if I thought there was an immediate threat of death or serious injury to myself or someone else, then I guess you fight with what you've got and not what you wish you had. Although even there, my general thought is that if you don't care enough about your own life to arm yourself and get trained, why should I care enough to help you?

ranger dave
March 4, 2009, 01:59 PM
you can only use deadly force if you or someone esles life is in danger lay on the floor and till then

Brian Pfleuger
March 4, 2009, 01:59 PM
Now, what should I do differently to be a better CCW holder?

Change this for one thing:

I also don't carry one in the chamber for safety reasons.


So far as acting against the guy. (I'll catch some flak for this) Don't do anything unless you feel that people are going to die. The bank has insurance to cover their losses. There's no need to kill over money, especially when it's not yours. He didn't end up shooting anyone so (hind sight, obviously) the safe thing was compliance in this case. The thing is, especially in bank robberies, compliance is almost always the safe thing. VERY VERY few banks robberies turn violent. You are MUCH more likely to die or get others killed if you start a shoot out, more so when you're gun is an expensive brick that you have to load before it's ready.

Dan M.
March 4, 2009, 02:04 PM
Big Bill, the LCP is small enough to carry in a pocket holster. If you want to be a better CCW holder, I say get a good pocket holster or IWB that covers the trigger and carry with a round chambered. And don't interrupt a bank robbery unless the robber is starting to shoot witnesses and he's working his way toward you.

indiandave
March 4, 2009, 02:09 PM
It's the job of yhe police to take on the bad guys. By shooting at them someone could of been killed in the bank. Best not to do anything in that situation.

Big Bill
March 4, 2009, 02:11 PM
Thanks for clarifying some of the issues for me. I also wondered what I'd do if a couple of BGs were exiting the bank after robbing it and I was outside the bank with my little gun. I guess the solution to some of the issues here are obvious.

partemisio
March 4, 2009, 02:13 PM
I agree with everything said. Especially carrying with one in the chamber. To me if you don't have one in the chamber, you don't trust yourself. My M&P9 only has a trigger safety and it always has one in the chamber. Why? because I know the trigger is not going to accidentally get pulled. My blackhawk holster covers the entire trigger guard. And my finger is the only finger that will ever touch the trigger while I'm carrying. If somebody doesn't trust their self enough to not pull the trigger on accident, I don't know if they should be carrying.

chemgirlie
March 4, 2009, 02:13 PM
The bank is insured in the event of a robbery. If the guy just fired a shot into the air I would lay low. But, that all change if he were to threaten my life or somebody else's.

I think (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) that bank employees are taught to cooperate and give the robber the money rather than risk their lives trying to fight about it. Money can be replaced, but a human life can't be.

Also, I would carry with one in the chamber. I would also consider getting an IWB holster or a different non-ankle way of carrying. Drawing from an ankle holster is a bit awkward (at least for me).

In any situation I would draw my gun/fire it only as a last resort and only if there was imminent threat of death/bodily harm. I know there are some people on here who would shoot at anybody who breaks into their house (and that's fine for them). But I'd rather lose my purse, get all my stuff stolen, or see a bank robbed of it's money (assuming it looked like nobody would be hurt) than fire a shot. I'll use a gun as an absolute last resort only.

USMCCPL81
March 4, 2009, 02:13 PM
In my case, I am going to remain calm and do as I am told. I am a family man and the sole provider for my family, My family is my life and through Iraq a few times and personal experiences. If I am doing as the robber wants and I am still being threatened, I will do as I am told.

Only if threatened to the point that I think I am going to die then I will attempt to use my CCW. Honest opinion.

Careby
March 4, 2009, 02:35 PM
I am going to remain calm and do as I am told.
Would that go as far as surrendering your weapon to him or allowing him to search you for it?

chemgirlie
March 4, 2009, 02:42 PM
Would that go as far as surrendering your weapon to him or allowing him to search you for it?


Nope. I think most people robbing a bank would like to get in and out as fast as possible and wouldn't want to hassle themselves with searching each person there. That is also where laying low and not sticking out comes into play.
However, I would not let anybody get a hold of my gun ever. period.

Sparks2112
March 4, 2009, 03:14 PM
However, I would not let anybody get a hold of my gun ever. period.

Great advice. If you are somewhere getting robbed and they start doing personal searches then they aren't there to get in and get out. BG's that plan on sticking around don't usually do nice things to people they make stick around with them.

I would NEVER under ANY circumstances allow myself to be taken hostage.

Yes that is an absolute statement, and yes I realize it makes me seem like some 'NET mall ninja wanna be, or whatever. if you can act decisively with surprise, that seems like the perfect situation for it.

Croz
March 4, 2009, 03:54 PM
As to the use of deadly force in that situation, it depends on where you live. In some states you have to think your life is in danger and some even require an effort at retreat.

Florida says your life, or the life of others are in danger, or to prevent a violent felony, such as armed robbery.

So depending on your state, you may have been in your right to shoot.

But ankle holster, without one in the chamber? Try to shoot in that situation, and you're going to die.

I'd reconsider your carry method.

Careby
March 4, 2009, 04:39 PM
If the bank robber has a gun, you really don't know what he's going to do next. His adrenaline is pumping and his finger is twitching. Obeying his commands MAY save you, but then again they MAY put you in a disadvantaged position. Let's say he says "Everybody on your knees, hands behind your head," and you comply. Now you have much less chance of getting a hand on your weapon without being noticed. You are at his mercy. If he then shoots another customer what do you do?

I'm not saying compliance is wrong, and I know we could come up with dozens of hypothetical variations. Ordinarily I don't like beating dead horses, but in the case of self defense CCW scenarios I would rather hash and rehash from the comfort of my chair and reason out different responses in the hopes that it could one day help me decide what to do when my life is on the line.

Socrates
March 4, 2009, 06:16 PM
First:
Get a REAL gun. That Ruger is NOT a primary carry weapon.
Second:
Carry it in a way that allows you to actually bring it into action if necessary.
Third:
Watch carefully, and, stay OUT of the gun sites. For me, if the guy points a loaded gun at me, I'm moving, and shooting.
Do NOT do anything unless he starts shooting people.
Keep in mind, you don't know if he had a vest on, so, you don't even know what your target area was, and, if you are capable of hitting that area.

If a firefight is started, get to cover, fast. Locate all bad guys, and try and stay behind cover.
Let them leave...

The use of deadly force is only likely to be approved if you have proof that he is going to shoot people. The best evidence of that is that he ACTUALLY shoots someone. If he does, and, it's not you, you should be able to get your weapon out, and into action while he's focused on shooting the other person.

ElectricHellfire
March 4, 2009, 06:31 PM
+1 on whats already been put out there. If you are going to carry IMO you need a 9mm or larger and one in the chamber.

hogdogs
March 4, 2009, 06:32 PM
are you a cop
you can only use deadly force if you or someone esles life is in danger lay on the floor and till then

A gun fired to the ceiling is a threat to my life... Presented a gun is a bad enuff but discharge shows intent. I would never ankle carry as it is a far reach and slow draw... but in the instance mentioned if I had a gun it would be at the 2 o'clock and I would dump it as my body hit the floor... first opportunity I am droppin the crook/s but not at increase risk to me or others. Otherwise I am gonna lay on it. If I am personally approached it is every man for himself as I go 2 COM on 'em! Likely I wouldn't have a gun and at that time I will go "octopus humping a coke bottle" on 'em or stick and git with a buck 110 folder... I just don't like the mentality that I have to reduce myself to victim/prey when I am in the top 10 predator list already!
Brent

wpcexpert
March 4, 2009, 06:56 PM
are you a cop

you can only use deadly force if you or someone esles life is in danger lay on the floor and till then

Not entirely true. Idaho statute says a bit different.

18-4009. JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE BY ANY PERSON. Homicide is also justifiable
when committed by any person in either of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,


http://law.justia.com/idaho/codes/18ftoc/180400009.html

What would i do??? Depends on the dimeanor of the BG. Could I get to my gun without him noticing? Was he going to shoot a bystander? An ankle carry doesn't seem to me to be a good place to carry a gun and get to it quickly. Good place for a BUG but not first line of defense. Also, I've always gone by the code, if a gun isn't loaded, it's no use to me. I don't want to have to rack the slide if a BG is already shooting. But that's just me. If I was in your britches, at that time, I would have done what I was told and survived the ordeal.

Duke505
March 4, 2009, 08:04 PM
I used to have only one carry pistol, a Keltec PF9. It did not have a safety on it ad felt the same way you did. I didn't have one in the chamber for fear that I might pull the trigger or fear of my daughter being harmed if there was an accidental firing. So I bought a PX4 Storm SC which has a safety and a decocker. I feel much more comfortable now with one in the chamber. I have always been told also the carrying on the ankle should be your last resort because it is so hard to get to your gun in tense situations. There for try carrying IWB or pocket carry. Hope this helps some.

Big Bill
March 4, 2009, 08:05 PM
Thanks for the additional comments. I think I'll carry my new SP101 IWB. I also have 4 speedloaders for it. And, I'll probably carry my Ruger LCP in pocket carry mode. Thanks again for all the great advice.

wcpexpert - that's why I live in IDAHO. :D

chris in va
March 4, 2009, 09:16 PM
I ankle carry and am a little slow getting to my weapon

I also don't carry one in the chamber for safety reasons.

You may want to re-think those choices.

Bartholomew Roberts
March 5, 2009, 09:24 AM
Tac Pro Shooting Center hosts a 3-gun match here twice a year. For one year, they introduced Simunitions into the match and did a bank holdup scenario similar to the one you are describing.

They had the robber standing in line at the teller's desk and when he got to the front he pulled a gun and robbed the place. Unknown to the people going through the scenarios, another of their fellow "customers" was actually a bad guy as well and watching the other guy's back.

IIRC, two people managed to even shoot the guy doing the initial robbery and I think one guy cleared the whole thing while only being hit in the arm. Everyone else "died" in that scenario except those that complied.

Keep in mind, these guys weren't actually at a bank. They knew there was going to be some shooting and they were waiting to do it. Their situational awareness could not have been any higher. Despite that, the only guy who was successful was the guy who acted immediately - he didn't pause at all. As soon as he saw the guy start to behave threateningly, he drew his pistol and shot him in the back of the head. In real life, going for your CCW when someone raises their voice might be an issue.

Now the lesson here isn't "Always comply" because that will certainly get you killed sometimes too. But it definitely impressed on me that those things rarely play out the way you would like them to on your little mental movie reel where you are the action hero. If I am going to bet my life on something, I am going to do my best to make sure the odds are in my favor and the prize is something worth my life.

Travelin' Man
March 5, 2009, 09:49 AM
you can only use deadly force if you or someone esles life is in danger lay on the floor and till then

Forgive me for not knowing this, but wouldn't an armed robber walking through a door and firing a shot into the ceiling constitute the possibility of your life or someone else's life being in danger? :confused:

partemisio
March 5, 2009, 09:56 AM
Forgive me for not knowing this, but wouldn't an armed robber walking through a door and firing a shot into the ceiling constitute the possibility of you life or someone else's life being in danger?

Yes. Anytime a gun is brought into a situation, it is a matter of life or death.

azredhawk44
March 5, 2009, 10:13 AM
You had:

1. A mousegun,
2. Unchambered,
3. 2 extra mags???,
4. On your ankle?

I don't think I'd be in that situation...:rolleyes:

I certainly wouldn't expect that particular arrangement to do me any good in a true life/death emergency where a gun would legitimately be useful.

I carry a commander 1911, XD9 or SP101 most days, round in the chamber, on my strongside hip.

Bankrobber comes in and puts a round in the ceiling?

That's bad for anybody left in the bank.

1. The panic alarm has certainly been tripped by someone.
2. Police are on their way, but the bad guy is not gone.
3. Bad guy still needs to collect his money.
4. This could become a hostage situation (it actually already has).

I'm counting seconds until his attention is somewhere other than me, then pulling and putting him down.

David Armstrong
March 5, 2009, 10:40 AM
Sigh. Lay down, let the BG get his money, give info to the police, then complete the business you had at the bank and go on about your day. No need to start a gunfight when not necessary. If the BG wanted to shoot somebody he would have done that instead of shooting the ceiling. There is a very good reason every safety, security, and LE organization I'm aware of recommends not fighting back as long as the robbery is simply a robbery.

Hondo11
March 5, 2009, 11:02 AM
Sigh. Lay down, let the BG get his money, give info to the police, then complete the business you had at the bank and go on about your day. No need to start a gunfight when not necessary. If the BG wanted to shoot somebody he would have done that instead of shooting the ceiling. There is a very good reason every safety, security, and LE organization I'm aware of recommends not fighting back as long as the robbery is simply a robbery.

I'm confused. Is the "sigh" part just you being condescending, or is it part of your recommended actions? Is the guy supposed to sigh and then lay down?

Careby
March 5, 2009, 11:13 AM
After thinking about it a little, it seems to me an armed robber in a bank lobby is a very different animal than a mugger in a parking lot. The odds of someone robbing a bank without any help seems slim. It is not the typical crime of a desperate drug addict.

Drug-related crime is an increasingly prevalent and bothersome problem but there are some mitigating factors that work in our favor. For one thing the desperate addict is not functioning at 100%. For another he typically is short-term goal oriented, i.e. he is looking for enough cash for his next fix and generally doesn't plan ahead. And because of his habit, he usually doesn't have valuable possessions like guns and body armor and doesn't spend money on practice ammo or range time. These are generalizations, of course, and there are also negative factors which may make him more likely to kill or possibly less likely to respond to logic or pain than a rational thinking thug. But overall I'd rather be in the position of defending myself against a lone addict than a team of bank robbers. Tossing $50 to the mugger would very likely be my first move in the parking lot, followed by drawing my weapon if that didn't satisfy him. In the bank I would definitely try to keep a low profile with the goal of having the robbers leave without bloodshed. My luck had already failed me when I found myself in the bank at that particular time.

onthejon55
March 5, 2009, 11:23 AM
If i felt 100% confident that i could get off a clear headshot i would take it. He has fired a round in the air meaning that he isnt afraid of shooting. This tells me Im already in a life or death situation. Other than that i would just play along and only get involved if he actually shot a person.

I'm confused. Is the "sigh" part just you being condescending, or is it part of your recommended actions? Is the guy supposed to sigh and then lay down?

I dont understand that either. Sighing mite draw his attention or make him angry. I would advise against this.

David Armstrong
March 5, 2009, 11:23 AM
I'm confused. Is the "sigh" part just you being condescending, or is it part of your recommended actions?
I'm confused. Is your question a condescending attempt to start an argument or are you seriously attempting to get information?

Glenn E. Meyer
March 5, 2009, 11:32 AM
Stay with the issue - a moderator's Sigh!

:D

hogdogs
March 5, 2009, 11:43 AM
Instead of sighing, you could say out loud... "Geez, I gotta kill another bank robber" as you lay down...:D:rolleyes:
LOL at glenn's reply though!
Brent

Croz
March 5, 2009, 11:45 AM
After thinking about it a little, it seems to me an armed robber in a bank lobby is a very different animal than a mugger in a parking lot. The odds of someone robbing a bank without any help seems slim. It is not the typical crime of a desperate drug addict.

Not sure of current statistics, but when I worked in banking after college, the stats said that most bank robbers were solo actors. Very few coordinated big heists like in the movies.

But most don't walk in and shoot the ceiling to get attention. They walk up to a teller and show a note/gun.

azredhawk44
March 5, 2009, 12:31 PM
They walk up to a teller and show a note/gun.

+1. They want to control the information flow and give as little notice as possible to everyone else. Most will just quietly get a bag of money from 1 particular teller and leave, trying to look like a regular bank patron to most in the lobby.

A bank robber that shoots the ceiling when he walks in is unbalanced, IMO. He's out for control, he's looking to dominate the situation via force rather than discretely getting 1 teller to give him a sackful of money.

That type of bank robber is the type that ends up in a hostage situation, and is more likely to shoot someone as he loses control of the situation. Better to shoot him before he get a grasp on the situation, IMO.

Brian Pfleuger
March 5, 2009, 12:37 PM
Forgive me for not knowing this, but wouldn't an armed robber walking through a door and firing a shot into the ceiling constitute the possibility of your life or someone else's life being in danger?

So far as I know all, or virtually all, states should technically consider it a "good" shoot if you so decided to take this guy out.

One problem you'd have in many states is that it would be illegal for YOU to be in a bank with your CCW. So, you might be charged for that even if the shoot was legal.

The real question is not "legal" vs "not legal" but "What is the wise choice?" In hind sight it is obvious that doing nothing was the right thing since no one got hurt. However, in the heat of the moment you'd have to be analyzing the situation second by second and decide how to react.

Careby
March 5, 2009, 12:57 PM
One possible scenario might be:

Bank robber fires a shot into the ceiling,
Teller presses alarm button,
You draw and shoot robber in the head,
Robber falls dead,
You sweep the room looking for accomplices,
Police show up,
You're the only guy standing in the bank, with gun drawn,
(you get the picture)

Brian Pfleuger
March 5, 2009, 01:01 PM
You draw and shoot robber in the head,
Robber falls dead,
You sweep the room looking for accomplices,
Police show up,
You're the only guy standing in the bank, with gun drawn,
(you get the picture)

That would be:

1) Very slow of you
2) Very fast of the police
3) Very dumb of you to be "looking for accomplices" and not see (and hear!) the police coming and put your gun away

eviilboy
March 5, 2009, 01:16 PM
So far as I know all, or virtually all, states should technically consider it a "good" shoot if you so decided to take this guy out.

One problem you'd have in many states is that it would be illegal for YOU to be in a bank with your CCW. So, you might be charged for that even if the shoot was legal.

The real question is not "legal" vs "not legal" but "What is the wise choice?" In hind sight it is obvious that doing nothing was the right thing since no one got hurt. However, in the heat of the moment you'd have to be analyzing the situation second by second and decide how to react.



How do you figure it's illegal to carry in a bank?

And there is the ever changing scale of crime... which one outweighs the other.

Personally, I wouldn't get involved unless people were getting hurt... be a good witness is what my ccw instructor taught us.. in situations where you don't know everything that's going on.

hogdogs
March 5, 2009, 01:18 PM
OOPS can't spread bad info... possibly legal in Fla according to....
http://floridaconcealedcarry.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=1094&page=3
Brent

partemisio
March 5, 2009, 01:27 PM
In NC it is illegal to conceal into a bank. You can open carry in one though.

eviilboy
March 5, 2009, 01:27 PM
hogdogs, I had this conversation before.

Banks are still private institutions... therefore private property.

If there is a no guns sign up.. then.. well obviously you can't carry in there...

but.. afaik, there is no such thing as a government bank... tbh.

hogdogs
March 5, 2009, 01:42 PM
e-boy, churchs ain't gubmint run but in the L&CR section there is a thread about arkansas LAW being challenged as it was/is against the law to have guns in a church...:rolleyes:
Brent

Brian Pfleuger
March 5, 2009, 02:13 PM
How do you figure it's illegal to carry in a bank?

Some states it is, some states it ain't.


Banks are still private institutions... therefore private property.

If there is a no guns sign up.. then.. well obviously you can't carry in there...

but.. afaik, there is no such thing as a government bank...

Do you know what they call someone who challenges a law they believe to be unconstitutional?

The Test Case.

If you're not willing to BE the test case then it doesn't much matter how you feel about the law. There are PLENTY of "private" places that the government says you cannot carry.

Bars, churches and banks are often among them.

eviilboy
March 5, 2009, 02:13 PM
hotdogs,

Ah, good point.. I guess it would have to do more with locality.

peetzakilla,
Maybe in the draconian state you live in.... I've carried openly into my bank quite a few times.... concealed many more.

Socrates
March 5, 2009, 02:20 PM
Back to the topic.

Beaware, and be armed. Last night I went to the bank with a bunch of cash to cover my rent check. It's about 6 PM, and, the bank is closing. Family walks in, two little kids, oriental lady, and a huge black guy. Keep in mind that the only people that have ever mugged me, or tried, have been very large. This guy was dressed in sweats, and, looked very gang banging type. The irony was I had two guns locked in a brief case in the car, and, forgot the mace at home. I'd just been to the gunshop to try and trade some stuff, no joy.
ALWAYS HAVE A GUN...

Don't think anything happened, other then an incredibly beautiful red head running into the bank at 6PM, who made most Playboy bunnies look like boys...

The combination got way too many hormones going, so I drove home...

Creature
March 5, 2009, 02:30 PM
I would draw if I was certain I wouldn't be seen doing so...and would only shoot if I was certain of a clean shot that did not endanger any bystanders.

I ankle carry and am a little slow getting to my weapon. I also don't carry one in the chamber for safety reasons.

BTW...carrying a LCP with an empty chamber...in an ankle holster?? Isnt that a slightly risky carry method for the LCP? I certainly hope your free hand isn't occupied with fending off an attacker...or rendered useless by injury or otherwise immobilized. Just curious: what will you use to rack the slide back...your teeth? I think would be almost impossible chamber a round without using with your free hand being that the LCP has nonexistent sights or other protuberances to employ using the "snag-technique" to rack the slide.

guntotin_fool
March 5, 2009, 02:42 PM
One get a real defensive use caliber handgun.

Two. Get a proper holster.

Three. Get enough training and practice to be both competent and confident enough that if this scenario actually did happen you would hpave no qualms about stopping this threat in its tracks.

My one fear in a case like that would be an accomplice arriving late or already inside as an overwatch.

MGBYT
March 5, 2009, 02:51 PM
"but.. afaik, there is no such thing as a government bank... tbh."

YET ........

Brian Pfleuger
March 5, 2009, 02:51 PM
peetzakilla,
Maybe in the draconian state you live in....


Oh, I know... My original point was that in SOME places you'd be in trouble. Oddly, my state is not (so far as I can tell) one of them. Only "in or upon the building or grounds of any school, college or university in the state without the written permission of the institution."

USMCCPL81
March 5, 2009, 05:01 PM
I said: I am going to remain calm and do as I am told.

Careby asked: Would that go as far as surrendering your weapon to him or allowing him to search you for it?

Answer: Did I say that? No, I said in a nutshell that I would do as I was told and try to keep a low profile. If I had no other choice then to draw my weapon then yes, I would defend myself.

I really don't see a couple thugs taking the time to search everyone for weapons. Their goal is to get in the bank and out as quick as possible and if it does not involve violence towards me or any other innocent then I'll let them do as they please and Johnny Law can do the rest.

isanchez2008
March 5, 2009, 11:42 PM
I'd have watched him rob the bank because I have no interest in risking my life to protect the bank's money and even less interest in spending several thousand dollars in legal fees in order to protect the bank's money.

Now if I thought there was an immediate threat of death or serious injury to myself or someone else, then I guess you fight with what you've got and not what you wish you had. Although even there, my general thought is that if you don't care enough about your own life to arm yourself and get trained, why should I care enough to help you?


Ditto

DanRHeller
March 20, 2009, 04:46 AM
Never put yourself in danger by trying to use your weapon, if you are in danger and feel that you can make the situation safer, by safely using your weapon....thats the right thing to do.

bababooey32
March 20, 2009, 08:32 AM
...as I go 2 COM on 'em! Likely I wouldn't have a gun and at that time I will go "octopus humping a coke bottle" on 'em or stick and git with a buck 110 folder.

I am fairly new to this. What on God's green Earth did you just say? I have no idea what it means, but I believe I am a little frightened that you carry a firearm....

SquidWarrior
March 20, 2009, 09:46 AM
In that situation, it is entirly up to you; there is not right or wrong and no matter what, the only coward in that situation is the bank robber. It is impossible to say until you are in that situation, but I think I would comply until he leavled his weapon at myself or others, then I would engage threat.

seeker_two
March 20, 2009, 09:51 AM
On the scenario, you've already gotten some great advice (except the whole "humping octopuses with Coke bottles" thing...why a bank robber would bring an octopus to a gunfight is beyond me... :rolleyes: )

I can even go along with the ankle carry method. Sometimes, your required mode of dress doesn't allow for anything else...(though I may look hard at a Smartcarry-style holster...)

But I am concerned with chamber-empty carry on your LCP. Why? Do you not have confidence in its safety features to trust it with a round in the pipe? If not, why not get a different gun....like a PPK or Bersa (w/ a safety)? I had the same "feelings" about Glocks until I learned more about them...unfortunately, not until I'd traded off a G17 w/ XO Big-Dot night sights.... :( ...but now I know better and may consider buying another one (if the price is right)....but fearing your carry gun is NEVER a good thing....learn to love it....or trade it for something you can love.... :D

ZeSpectre
March 20, 2009, 10:41 AM
I was at my bank (which was robbed recently by an armed gunman) the other day and started thinking about the following scenario:
Good! We should all think about these things once in a while, not to develop a rampant paranoia but because "after the whistle blows is a terrible time to come up with a game plan".

What would I have done had I been in the bank the day it was robbed. I carry concealed a Ruger LCP with two extra mags. The bank robber came into the bank and fired a shot into the air. So, he was obviously locked and loaded. I ankle carry and am a little slow getting to my weapon. My thought was that had I tried to interrupt in this situation, there is a good chance I would have been shot. I also don't carry one in the chamber for safety reasons. But, I also feel like I would be a coward if I didn't do something.

I have a few thoughts/opinions.

1) I'm with the folks who say "If you don't have one in the chamber you are carrying a paperweight". If you don't trust your gun with one in the chamber then please get another gun.

2) If you are going to carry a lighter caliber for self defense then you MUST train with it on a regular basis because you will have even less "fault tolerance" when it comes to shot placement. You should also consider and practice some ways to draw from your ankle so that it is also a well rehearsed maneuver.

3) I think that a robber who has shown his weapon, and discharged it, constitutes a clear and present danger. "Means, Motive, and Opportunity" have all been met and it's no longer about property, it's about he lives and safety of everyone present. At the same time I think that if the weapon isn't pointed at you then you should pause long enough to review the entire situation because.....

4) (as we learned in training) You must allways, Allways, ALWAYS, assume that there are more criminals than the one you see. Far too many good guys get plugged by the "backup men" (or woman) because they focus too tightly on the high profile criminal in front of them.

5) On one hand we have the "driving forces", namely that we want to stop the threat, we don't want to feel cowardly, etc. On the other side we have the "quelling forces" which are the normal resistance to taking human life, the concern over personal injury, fear of lawsuit, and so forth. The dynamics of these two forces are situation specific and unfortunately the only person who can deal with them is the person on the spot at the time the event happens. Your best bet is to do just what you are doing, namely consider the options and the consequences and create a few general "game plans" in the (Maker Forbid!) event something does happen. That greatly reduces the chances that what you will do is simply freeze (though that is still and always a possibility).

mrray13
March 20, 2009, 11:24 AM
as an LEO in my area of illinois, we are taught that, say i am off duty, observe and be a great witness is preferred to our drawing our off duty weapon and engaging a target.

that said, with the robber walking in and putting one in the ceiling, he has indeed, at least by illinois law, already used deadly force and we are totally in our rights to engage and kill that person. but is it in our best decision to do so? where is everyone standing in relation to this fella? did they drop and cover or stand in between the perp and me, frozen solid? situational awareness is key, and hindsight is 20/20.

i think that the majority agrees that the observe and be a great witness is the best road. but it's not the only one, and since none of us was there, all the other roads are definitely an option, but we will never know which is the right road until we are in that situation.


all that said, like previously mentioned, the op needs to rethink his carry options. the issues have all pretty much been addressed, so i won't ramble on anymore.

and let's hope none of us has to ever pull our weapon in defense, but pray we can and will when the time might come.

armsmaster270
March 20, 2009, 11:54 AM
We had an off duty officer with his wife and child in a store when it was held up. The officer pulled down on the suspect outside and was holding him at bay when the BG accomplice walked up behind him and put one in his head. If your going to act watch your six.

cracked91
March 20, 2009, 12:05 PM
I would lay low, if possible get my gun in a postition where I could immiatley fire it. As for .380 not being enough gun, unless he was extremely intoxicated, or, as many bank robbers do, wearing body armor, I think 2 or 3 rounds of .380 would drop him. If he started shooting at people. I personally would shoot him until he stopped moving completley, no matter how many rounds it took. When the cops ask, just tell them you were trying to "deescalate the threat as quickly as possible to prevent anyone else from getting hurt"

Daugherty16
March 20, 2009, 01:55 PM
There are many tangent issues to explore, but I'm focused only on the action most likely to have everyone present going home alive. (Well, not the BG but he's already made his choices...) Being in a bank while a BG holds up the teller is not the same thing as having a gun pointed directly at you or your family. In the latter, there is no question of an immediate deadly threat. I don't disagree that presenting a gun, shooting the ceiling, and holding up a teller is a deadly threat to the teller - but maybe not so much to you. Judgment should prevail, if thinking capacity hasn't been frozen on the spot. Drawing down on the BG may very well increase the likelihood of one or more people dying that day. Even you.

As you mull the scenario, remember you're not Ahnold or Bruce Willis and that your body will actually bleed if you get shot. Also that without a script, anything less than instantaneous kill (ie.,fatal headshot) on the BG may well get the teller and other employees or clients - including you - shot or killed by the BG. The teller will be cooperating - every bank in America trains their employees regularly to follow orders, give the money away, not even to push the alarm until safe to do so.

Since it's clear the CCW doesn't confer vigilante or LEO status, you're confined to acting to prevent a deadly threat (or various state-by-state slight variations of the theme), not to stop crimes or rescue the fair maiden. So what do you do? As presented, i submit this scenario calls for watch, wait, and be ready.

First, carry a gun that shoots straight and hits hard - the .380 may well do so. Hornady Critical Defense, or Federal Hydra-Shok are two examples of fine expanding, penetrating rounds, even in .380. I like a bigger gun, 4" or longer barrel and minimum 9mm, but that's a preference thing as long as you're proficient with yours. ALWAYS have a round chambered and choose a double action gun so you can just draw, unsafe and get off the first shot without racking a slide or cocking a hammer. An extra mag or two, or a few speedloaders is mandatory. Never want your gun to go hungry, especially if someone is shooting at you. Personally I prefer autos for SD, due to mag capacity, reload speed, and rapid fire in single action.

In the instance described, i think discreetly drawing and continuing to conceal your gun is most definitely a good idea, if you can. Comply, to the extent it doesn't compromise your ability to shoot if the threat shifts to you or becomes deadly. Like the LEO said, get details and be a good witness. If nobody is being shot, stay cool. You may still get to play hero.

If he shoots someone or starts blasting randomly, all bets are off. Time to shoot until the threat is eliminated. And watch your backside for his partner. Someone said bank robbers rarely have a partner - but they also rarely display a gun. Be ready for anything. Remember - Shoot. Move. Live.

ZeSpectre
March 20, 2009, 04:24 PM
You make some good points but I'm going to contest one.
In the instance described, i think discreetly drawing and continuing to conceal your gun is most definitely a good idea

No, no, for your own sake NO! Again this comes from LE training. There are certain motions that attract attention and "subtle" attempts to unholster and conceal your firearm are nearly always a motion/action that triggers subconscious alarms when someone is hyped and alert.

Don't take my word for it, seek out some of the research that has been done on the matter.

If you aren't ready to move then don't do anything.

If you decide to draw you'd best be ready mentally and physically to go full bore from that point forward because it's very likely that you'll trigger a response.

Whiteboy67
March 20, 2009, 04:55 PM
I'd say it's better to get a look at his face to describe him to the police and not draw unless he starts showing real intent to shoot people.

mskdgunman
March 20, 2009, 05:33 PM
Even as an off duty LEO, I've asked myself this question and have come up with the following answer.

If I can access my weapon without being noticed, I'll do it but engaging the BG will be a last resort option. If the guy is bent on robbing the bank, I'll cooperate as far as possible, get a good description, prepare to follow him out (If I have to engage, I'd rather not do it in a bank full of civilians) and call in description to the PD ASAP as soon as he exits.

Now, if it appears that it is more then a simple robbery and the BG's are lining folks up and shooting them...well, at that point, it's game on as there is really nothing to lose and if I don't act, someone (maybe me) is definately going to get killed.

Most bank robbers (in my area at least) are non confrontational. They generally walk in, hand the teller a note, get the money and walk out. Some times, other customers are not even aware of the robbery.

In the case where the guy comes in and fires a round right off the bat, I still think I'd keep a low profile, try and access my weapon and have it ready in the event he ups the anty and starts wacking customers. I'd try and start making a mental plan in the event I have to engage him while getting a good description. Let him get the money and be a good witness. Everybody else will probably be freaked out and good descriptions will be hard to come by until the video is pulled. The more accurate information the cops get out to responding units in a timely manner, the better the chance will be that he gets caught.

David Armstrong
March 20, 2009, 11:33 PM
as an LEO in my area of illinois, we are taught that, say i am off duty, observe and be a great witness is preferred to our drawing our off duty weapon and engaging a target.
You aren't alone. As I have pointed out repeatedly, LE across the board recommends to not engage unless absollutely necessary, and that compliance should be the initial response.
I'm with the folks who say "If you don't have one in the chamber you are carrying a paperweight". If you don't trust your gun with one in the chamber then please get another gun.
Of course you can't make that paperweight start firing bullets in a fraction of a second, so I'd suggest those that think chamber empty equals paperweight don't understand the process. Many people carry chamber empty for a variety of reasons. Not trusting your gun with one in the chamber is only one possible reason.

ZeSpectre
March 21, 2009, 04:27 PM
Of course you can't make that paperweight start firing bullets in a fraction of a second, so I'd suggest those that think chamber empty equals paperweight don't understand the process. Many people carry chamber empty for a variety of reasons. Not trusting your gun with one in the chamber is only one possible reason.

I'm certainly interested in hearing more on your train of thought.

David Armstrong
March 21, 2009, 07:29 PM
There have been many threads where the advantages and disadvantages of carrying chamber empty have been hashed out in pretty good detail. Try doing a search in this forum and you should have plenty to consider.

hogdogs
March 21, 2009, 07:55 PM
By octopus humpin' a coke bottle I mean physically scrappin' for my life...
And I do not carry a firearm typically but have in the past. I don't dress for concealed carry. But armed with a firearm or not I just don't know how to comply with violent punks.

Brent

ZeSpectre
March 21, 2009, 10:03 PM
David,
I was specifically interested in your take on things. Not to put you on the spot but it seems that we have a very different view on things and I try to see the other side in case I'm being short sighted.

For me, I consider carrying a self-defense weapon empty chambered the equal of driving a car around with no safety belt and thinking you'll always be able to clip it on in time.

There are an awful lot of self-defense situations that either involve contact-distance or some other circumstance that could very possibly tie up your non-gun hand, say fending off the bad-guy, shoving a loved one out of the way or behind you, or trying to open a door or something to create an avenue of escape.

In my book that is no time to need both hands in order to get your firearm functional so I consider empty chamber tactically unsound.

edistomick
March 21, 2009, 11:11 PM
BigBill,

Ditto on most of the posts:
-Carry w/ one in chamber.
-Ankle carry as primary?
-Don't be a hero.
-Practice w/ primary weapon.

.380 loaded w/ quality hollowpoints is a whole lot better than nothing.
SP101 in IWB is weighty and bulky and you may find yourself not carrying as often (short trip to grocery, bank, pizza run).
P3AT or LCP can ALWAYS be on you!
These handguns have the same safety feature a revolver does----DAO with stiff trigger. Safeties almost always have an audible click and safety should be undone while drawing, not when aiming----it's just something else to remember in a severe crisis. Minimize steps in bad situations---pull, point, fire, repeat third step until threat is over.
Oh, by the way, I don't believe the LCP has a lock-back at the end of a magazine, so either count your shots or be prepared to rack the slide again, after getting another mag and inserting it.
Practice, practice, practice!!
With a snap cap and timer, see how long it takes you to start (using your normal carry mode) and fire your weapon.
With a .380, fire, fire, fire, run for cover and reassess.
Of course, if you had a .45, then fire once and be done with the whole mess!
You could also practice by putting your cell phone at your normal carry spot and have a friend call you randomly (different/short/rapid ring tone) and see how fast you can answer it. (just don't do that too often, otherwise you may put your handgun to your ear when you hear your phone ring!):D

swk314
March 22, 2009, 12:40 AM
.380acp not my choice, but if your confident with it then more power to you.

I would not be carrying my primary gun in an ankle holster, but I don't know the OP's situation.

I do believe that not having a round in the chamber could be a recipe for disaster for alot of reasons that have been hashed out too many times before.

With that being said, I think I would try to comply, but I will not stand by while the BG is shooting people. Maybe some people on this forum have walked into their bank, and while standing in line, thought about what they would do personally if this situation was presented to them. My bank is small, almost always busy, and have roped aisle ways making quick movement almost impossible. There are offices on either side of the bank, and the tellers are not protected by bullet prooof glass as they were at my old bank. This all becomes a factor, and that day their might be even more variables we didn't think would happen. All of this would probably make me not shoot unless absolutely necessary.

Situational awareness is key if you want to be a good witness, or if you decide to shoot. Looking for cover, preferably some where a person can't get to you from behind. If the guy comes in shooting and everyone else hits the ground except for one guy standing near the door, then he may be the gunman's partner. He could also just be a customer who is frozen solid. All of these variables have to be accounted for, which is why I think I would comply unless deadly force was the only option left.

David Armstrong
March 22, 2009, 12:39 PM
Not to put you on the spot but it seems that we have a very different view on things and I try to see the other side in case I'm being short sighted.
No problem, I just think that since this issue has been hashed over so much and so often that you will get a much better understand of both sides and their views by checking out the lengthy exchanges already out there with the reasoning, the analysis, the questions, and so on. that way we don't hijack this thread onto a C1 vs C3 debate.
For me, I consider carrying a self-defense weapon empty chambered the equal of driving a car around with no safety belt and thinking you'll always be able to clip it on in time.
And that is part of the problem, whiich is that most folks opposed to chamber empty as an aoption only look at one very narrow set of circumstances, highly hypothetical, without looking at the full CCW paradigm.
There are an awful lot of self-defense situations that either involve contact-distance or some other circumstance that could very possibly tie up your non-gun hand, say fending off the bad-guy, shoving a loved one out of the way or behind you, or trying to open a door or something to create an avenue of escape.
While one might think that, in reality it just doesn't seem to have been an issue. Remember that chamber empty was the norm around the world, including the U.S., for most of the 20th Century, and if there was much of an actual problem with it we probably would have seen it by now.
In my book that is no time to need both hands in order to get your firearm functional so I consider empty chamber tactically unsound.
And if that is what works for you, great. Lots of others, in lots of places, for a lot of time, have found otherwise.

Creature
March 22, 2009, 12:55 PM
And that is part of the problem, whiich is that most folks opposed to chamber empty as an aoption only look at one very narrow set of circumstances, highly hypothetical, without looking at the full CCW paradigm.

That is as cryptic a statement as can be found anywhere on TFL. What does that mean? What exactly is the CCW paradigm?

Remember that chamber empty was the norm around the world, including the U.S., for most of the 20th Century

And why do you suppose this was? Was it purely by choice?...or was it because of equipment safety limitations? Is there a paradigm shift in there somewhere? I think there is...

Tennessee Gentleman
March 22, 2009, 02:14 PM
Remember that chamber empty was the norm around the world, including the U.S., for most of the 20th Century

I don't think this is a true statement and I have never seen any evidence of it being true. Maybe, someone could point that evidence out if I missed it.

What exactly is the CCW paradigm?

That is a good question. I too, would like to know that one.

USASA
March 22, 2009, 06:29 PM
I only have one comment...and, it concerns the 380. Most 380's are only good at extremely close range. In other words, it would be the exceptional shooter that can hit a target with any consistent accuracy at more than ten feet.

Glenn E. Meyer
March 22, 2009, 06:43 PM
Talking about the little 380s? The Beretta Cheetahs or Sigs 230/2s aren't hard to hit with beyond 10 feet.

Also, the unchambered argument is best searched for the 1000s of posts that say the same thing.

What's the CCW paradigm as relevant to this thread - OK, I'll try:

1. The gun is best used to avoid grievous bodily harm to yourself and others you feel responsible. The latter is not the general public - nor is it an instrument to prevent property crime is that entails significant risk of grievous bodily harm if you start the fight. Try to avoid bad situations. Intervention to prevent harm to deserving innocents is considered. However, that is situational. I would have intervened to stop a pedophile from beating a kid with a crowbar and stuff her in a duffle bag. I would have not intervened when two gang members starting huffing and then beating the crap out of each other in the mall. BTW - both are things that I had reasonable temporal proximity to.

2. The gun is used to avoid grievous bodily harm but also as an instrument of altruism as you want to protect society as part of viewpoints referred to as "sheepdog mentality", 'guardian viewpoint" or 'protector of civil culture'. Your motivation vary from reciprocal altruism or defending the common good, to want adulation as a hero or a desire to punish (with force) various miscreants. That significant harm that could be avoided is a possibility is not really relevant to starting the action.

You can mush the two together to some degree.

David Armstrong
March 22, 2009, 06:56 PM
That is as cryptic a statement as can be found anywhere on TFL. What does that mean? What exactly is the CCW paradigm?
Nothing cryptic to it. In fact, it is rather straightforward. The CCW paradigm is just that, the theoretical and philosophical framework of CCW, everything that goes into the lifestyle and activities where the concealed weapon is carried and used. Glenn points out two parts of that paradigm specifically as it relates to when to use the firearm. Others consider further parts, such as their environment and safety issues, or convenience, and so on. As opposed to the very narrow "gotta have a quick draw for a shootout" set of circumstances.
And why do you suppose this was?
Who cares why it was? The issue is that it was, and that when it was we can look at that time to see if these problems were real or hypothetical.

Tennessee Gentleman
March 22, 2009, 09:53 PM
What's the CCW paradigm as relevant to this thread - OK, I'll try

CCW Paradigm? Holy smoke!

How about I carry a firearm to protect myself from harm from others?

All this other stuff seems kind of unnecessary particularly that sheepdog stuff which sounds like something off one of those '50s Westerns I used to watch. Man, let's not overthink this stuff:confused:

Who cares why it was? The issue is that it was,

Well as stated before no evidence to show that it ever was. Sure wasn't in the military.

Nnobby45
March 22, 2009, 10:07 PM
I also don't carry one in the chamber for safety reasons. But, I also feel like I would be a coward if I didn't do something.

Now, what should I do differently to be a better CCW holder? What would you do in a similar situation?


I'd start by carring a loaded gun. There's nothing safe about a gun fight.:cool:

ECHOONE
March 23, 2009, 09:23 AM
First off your not an LEO, your a CCW holder that doesn't give you the right to intervene unless your life or another's is threatened! end of story on that!!Secondly a .380 not chambered in an ankle holster against a pistol already drawn locked and loaded is a joke come on,even if he had his back to you and was turning around you'd have to be lighting fast and one hell of a shot,your already dealing with a underpowered round you better be able to be able to place a one shot kill,are you that good! I'm not sure the best of us are under those conditions,you could be the reason others get killed,you'd be better off retaining as much info as you could for the police to apprehend him instead of trying to be a hero!

Glenn E. Meyer
March 23, 2009, 09:39 AM
TG - the sheepdog metaphor is in the 'official literature' of the discussion of the responsibilities of the armed civilian from the gun world and some military psych types. The 'guardian' mentality comes from a similar discussion in the criminological literature. Civic Culture is from the European views on altruism in dangerous situations.

When folks throw out whether they would act in various ways and give reasons that have surface validity, I think it is better to understand what is below the blanket statements of how one says they would act.

Tennessee Gentleman
March 23, 2009, 03:01 PM
the sheepdog metaphor is in the 'official literature' of the discussion of the responsibilities of the armed civilian from the gun world

OMG are we an academic discipline now?;) Ok, I know that and have read it on here and the gun rags I read from time to time. What I have also read from the psych world concerns the superhero or superman complex that some of us have (nobody on TFL of course:rolleyes:) an unhealthy sense of responsibility, or the belief that everyone else lacks the capacity to successfully perform any task. Such a person may feel a constant need to "save" others.

coupled with the feeling of power that comes with the carrying of a firearm.

some military psych types

They are even more scary!

Glenn, isn't this "sheepdog" mentality what gets us into these arguments about what to do involving third person SD situations. I mean I have seen this stuff linked all the way to the belief in the "armed citizen militia" that I have debated with others before protecting us against the "evil" government. Does the "criminological literature" deal with the Walter Mitty stuff or am I getting off topic?

For the record I am an avowed atheist (Handgunner Magazine John Connor notwithstanding) concerning this sheepdog stuff and personally I see a lot of bad coming out of it at the extreme (not just being a good citizen and reporting criminal activity) with very little good coming out of it (innocent dead and law suits for me) even if successful. Heck, I just want to protect my own butt and that of my wife and son. Does that make me a sheepdog? Again if off topic do me in!:)

Glenn E. Meyer
March 23, 2009, 03:52 PM
The Walter Mitty stuff is in part a giant discussion on the motivations for pro-social or altruistic behavior across the social sciences.

If you want a techy book on it:

Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., Schroeder, D. A., & Penner, L., (2006). The social psychology of prosocial behavior. Mahwah, NJ, : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Also, views of aggression are useful. It is an interesting perspective to see altruism as an outcome of such processes as compared to some philosophical /theological view of the universe and humanity. The latter is sometimes immune to empirical evidence in debate.

Such an academic. Sigh. :D

Tennessee Gentleman
March 23, 2009, 05:50 PM
The Walter Mitty stuff is in part a giant discussion on the motivations for pro-social or altruistic behavior across the social sciences.

Glenn, I checked out the book or rather looked it up and found that it was 424 pages long!:eek: However, the extract talked more about altruistic behavior like volunteering and that sort of thing.

What I did find was a guy named Dave Grossman, who it appears coined the sheep, wolf, sheepdog framework. He is somewhat controversial and doesn't seem to have the approval of "academic" mainstream, but I could be wrong.

It seems that what we are talking about comes from him rather than the textbook you quoted, but I didn't read all 424 pages either. Is that true? Here is a link to a guy who really debates his findings: http://www.theppsc.org/Grossman/Main-R.htm

Again, within the realm of civilian personal SD I see some real drawbacks to the framework even though to someone who spent most of their adult work life in a cubicle or office pushing papers it could appear very attractive if only it were real.

vikz
March 23, 2009, 06:40 PM
I just started carrying with one in the chamber lately , i figure its a lot easier for me to defend myself than practicing racking the slide,every second counts..

Lee Lapin
March 23, 2009, 07:41 PM
Friend Bill,

Why are you carrying a gun in the first place? I'd say that's the first question that needs to be answered in order to begin working through these issues. I can't answer for you, of course, but I can answer for myself- perhaps that might help.

I carry in order to protect myself and my loved ones who might be with me. It's my gun that I carry, I bought it with my money, loaded it with ammunition I purchased, trained with it at venues I paid to attend, and practice with it on my own range with my own ammunition. I even paid for the permit which allows me to carry it legally. I'm an armed citizen, not a LEO.

And if I ever (God forbid) have to use my gun, I will be the one taking all the risks. It will be MY responsibility to make correct judgements about whether drawing or shooting are justified. It will be MY responsibility where EVERY ONE of my bullets goes and what it does. It will be MY attorney paid for with my money who goes to court with me, if court is necessary to defend my actions criminally. And if necessary, it will be MY money paying for an attorney to defend me against any civil actions which arise in the aftermath of my actions.

And I will be the one losing sleep over the whole situation, seeing it in my mind's eye over and over and over. Even if I did everything right, it will still be there. It will take years to go away. Traumatic events are like that for me, I know how I react to them. I have spent enough time in life collecting mental film clips, after all. The most recent one, for example, was from last year. I watched a teenage motorcycle rider describe three slow cartwheels in midair out of a cloud of tire smoke, after the car in front of me that I saw him run right out in front of, hit him at speed. I don't need any more stuff in my mental video library, if I can get by without it.

So no, I'm not going to be starting any firefights in a bank lobby or anywhere else. I might be forced to participate in one, possibly, but I am sure not going to start it. As long as no one is getting hurt or killed, I wouldn't even think about drawing on what appears to be a simple robber.

Stopping a potentially lethal assault, that's a different deal. IF it was absolutely clear what the circumstances were. And that's a big if. But a robbery? Nope. Not me.

So what would I do in a bank robbery? Get down, behind cover, and unobtrusively try to be a good witness. As long as it was just a robbery...

I'd suggest you take a long hard look at http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2006/02_StudyDay.htm - Skip has some good material there. And http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2003/19Mar03.html too- especially the part that says Winning a gunfight, or any other potentially injurious encounter, is financially and emotionally burdensome. The aftermath will become your full-time job for weeks or months afterward, and you will quickly grow weary of writing checks to lawyer(s). It is, of course, better than being dead or suffering a permanently disfiguring or disabling injury, but the "penalty" for successfully fighting for your life is still formidable.

This IS an academic discipline- if it's done right. IMHO we'd all be better off if more plain ordinary citizens who carried guns actually did study more, in order to learn the things they really need to know. It is a demanding discipline we have undertaken, and one not to be taken lightly. Mistakes are awfully expensive, in multiple ways.

Again, to quote Skip Gochenour:

YOU MAY BE WHATEVER YOU RESOLVE TO BE

YOU HAVE RESOLVED TO BE THE ULTIMATE MORAL ARBITER!

YOU HAVE TAKEN IT UPON YOURSELF TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT A SET OF RAPIDLY EVOLVING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND DECIDE THAT THEY MEAN SOMEONE SHOULD HAVE LETHAL FORCE USED ON THEM AND YOU NEED TO DO IT.

As a person who carries weapons about in society you have decided that you are a moral arbiter.

You are obliged to prepare yourself physically, mentally, emotionally and morally for the role as a moral arbiter.
You are obliged to train your body, mind and spirit for your role as moral arbiter.
Failure to accept and exercise these obligations is an exercise in immorality. It is a failure of discipline and self-control.

THE RULES ARE YOUR MASTER UNTIL YOU ARE A MASTER OF THE RULES.
- http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2007/02_StudyDay.htm

Take care,

lpl

Nnobby45
March 23, 2009, 10:03 PM
I just started carrying with one in the chamber lately , i figure its a lot easier for me to defend myself than practicing racking the slide,every second counts..

And so does being able to operate your pistol with one hand if the other isn't available.

Dingoboyx
March 23, 2009, 10:28 PM
if no one is in serious imminent danger of being shot, as seems in your account, is to lay low and try to get a good look at the offender(without being obvious), to be a GOOD witness for the cops. Look for height and accurate description, hair colour, aprox age, limp or unusual walk, voice or accent, an exact description of clothing (oddities/brandnames) colours, smell (does he reek of BO, grog, is he acting rationally? calm? agitated?. If you can, switch on any recording devices.(my phone can record sound) dial 911 (you dont have to speak) so they can listen and your phone can be zero'd in on.

The last thing I would do is attempt to pull a gun on someone set on robbing a bank, unless you are so confident you can 100 per cent be sure you could nail him with one shot. Most banks/shops have cctv, so they (the robber) will probably get caught eventually, but an accurate eye witness account is invaluable to law enforcement. Your best to stay alive to be that witness.

I have never been in a bank when it is robbed, so I, myself would probably just lay there trembling and poop myself.... :o so if you dont listen to what I say....

I agree :D

Muzza

nightwolf1974
March 23, 2009, 10:59 PM
i carry a gun and a backup.i don't go in banks unless i really, really have to.

if i was in a bank and it got held up i wouldn't intrefere with the robber or robbers unless I thought i was going to die!

cracked91
March 23, 2009, 11:17 PM
Thinking about this. It would actually be a tough decison. In the event that a BG actually walked into a bank and shot the ceiling, everyone would scramble. It would among the confusion probably be easy to pull your gun on him before he could point back at you during this. Thinking hard that would be the path I think I would choose, though it would be a split second decision. You would have the opportunity to completley disarm the threat right then and there, and I don't think I would be able to sleep at night if I failed to act, and someone else got shot as a result when I knew I could probably have quickly resolved the issue

Dingoboyx
March 23, 2009, 11:43 PM
I have never been a bank robber, but I would expect apon his dramatic entrance, the first thing he would be looking for is anyone reaching for anything that could be a gun (I would reccomend not even reaching to hit the restart button on your pacemaker) :eek: If he saw a gun come out, that would spell disaster for the person with it. You might be the one and only casualty, and the EXAMPLE he points out what will happen if someone else wants to "play". I would reccomend you do nothing, and be home that night to cuddle your loved ones, rather than the fool trying to be a hero to save a bank a few grand. Just MHO.... I'd still be there trembling..... so ignore me if you like :D

(Added later)
Also, If a person (you) was seen by another ccw, holding a gun, he might think YOU are the robber and do his civic duty to dispatch you? or the cops might take you out thinking you are a co-offender. MHO, unless you or the other victims are in imminent danger.... let the crook be the only one at the scene to bring a gun, hopefully then, only he will pay the price.

Hero's have their heart in the right place..... dead hero's might find their heart all over the wall behind them...

Muzza

David Armstrong
March 24, 2009, 01:21 AM
You would have the opportunity to completley disarm the threat right then and there, and I don't think I would be able to sleep at night if I failed to act, and someone else got shot as a result when I knew I could probably have quickly resolved the issue
And again we see the problem with this sort of stuff. First, the assumption is that the GG will win without any trouble. What happens when you try to disarm the threat, and you miss, or lightly wound him? Or when his partner, who you hven't noticed before, pulls out his gun and now starts shooting? Can you sleep at night if you do act, knowing that your actions started a gunfight where someone else got shot? How does one reconcile "I could probably have quickly resolved the issue" with "I failed to resolve the issue and instead made it worse"?

Folks, there is a reason that EVERY professional security agency, LE agency, and everybody else involved in this sort of stuff recommends against intervention/resistance except as an absolute last resort.

Dingoboyx
March 24, 2009, 05:31 AM
+1 David Armstrong

Muzza

Glenn E. Meyer
March 24, 2009, 08:59 AM
TG, Grossman is controversial but and he is extensively cited in the aggression literature.

The sheepdog cliche comes from a lot of folks - I don't know the exact origin but it goes along with the 'sheeple' line. Some linguist can track it down.

If you want another really interesting but long read relevant to us - Collins book entitled Violence is a great one.

As Lee mentioned - Skip is an awesome scholar of the issue. Having done the NTI three times - the FOF aspect of ATSA village, team tactics, 360 shoot house, etc. are very useful lessons for the FOGish warrior.

BTW - the last time I did it - there were 3 psychologists and an anthropologist, mixed in with folks like the Marine officer in charge of firearms training.

Tennessee Gentleman
March 24, 2009, 11:50 AM
he is extensively cited in the aggression literature

Yes, I saw some of that but he is not always cited in a positive way. Lots of people (some with PhDs) get cited but it doesn't make them valid IMO.

I don't know the exact origin but it goes along with the 'sheeple' line. Some linguist can track it down.

According to this: http://www.macmillandictionaries.com/wordoftheweek/archive/030606-sheeple.htm

On TFL I seem to see two basic philosophy espoused. The Warrior mentality vs. Stay Safe Mentality (my construction).

For me the Warrior or Guardian Mentality seems to be a dangerous thing for Joe Whitecollar for a lot of reasons. Actually, I agree with some of what David Armstrong and some others espouse (not the comply first stuff) in that if you want to be a guardian join the military or LE. Joe Whitecollar (or blue) who fancies him or herself as a "guardian" of society gives me pause and concern over unintended consequences of playing that role. The Stay Safe mentality which I see on Michael Bane's best defense is more useful to me. However, I am not sure I agree with Lee that it is an "academic" thing unless we equate training with academia. Most of this (Stay Safe vs Warrior)seems to be common sense but I won't debate that.

Glenn E. Meyer
March 24, 2009, 01:25 PM
Grossman is more of a summarizer and speaker.

For example, he gets criticized for his suggestion that violent video games prime aggression. There is a tremendous literature on that with complex models of aggression being multicausal. His view though comes across as simplistic.

There are more sophisticated views of the inhibition to fighting that Grossman talks about from the Marshall work.

But then, you have to go read the PhD writtern crappola - which I get paid to do!

Dave Kenik in Handguns had a good couple of articles on being a hero. He was an NTI participant when I was there. I think the resolution is using common sense in choosing an action as compared to what we view as nonthoughtful posturing.

The initiation of the gun fight question is one for thought rather than blanket pronouncements. The Internet tends to generate the latter - it's a group polarization effect, sometimes.

Tennessee Gentleman
March 24, 2009, 01:39 PM
His view though comes across as simplistic.

He really IMO seems to be mixing military/LE up with civilian life as we deal with responses to danger/combat etc. Even between military and LE there are great differences in how one deals with killing and then into the civilian world much more so different. Seems, Grossman is taking a one-size fits all approach which is why he gets the criticism for oversimplicity.

the inhibition to fighting that Grossman talks about from the Marshall work.

Are you speaking of S.L.A. Marshall? You know he has been discredited?

Glenn E. Meyer
March 24, 2009, 02:40 PM
Yep - but there have been folks looking at the issue after Marshall. That's what I think I said.

Re4mer
March 25, 2009, 09:31 PM
Well to be honest you should always carry with one in the chamber and in most cases it should be on the hip and not the ankle. The only time ankle carry is good is if you know you are going to be seated for a long period of time i.e. a truck driver. Even then its only secondary. Its just too much time to reach down there and get it especially if some guy is rushing you.

PoorSoulInJersey
March 25, 2009, 11:24 PM
I've always felt that if I'm going to carry a gun, I need to be prepared to protect myself and those around me if I feel there's a real risk and that I can take action without making things worse.

If the person seems really interested in just robbing the place, I'd probably not take action. As others have stated, $200 of insured money is not worth taking anyone's life over.

If he's actively waving the gun around and making threats to everyone in sight, then I'd be more likely to get involved.

If there are multiple people between me and the BG, I need to be able to move into a position where I can make a safer shot. That may not be possible.

An idiot with a gun robbing the place, to me, is not an automatic "draw your gun and get involved" situation. There are a lot more variables than that.

There's a fine line between defending against a legitimate threat and trying to be an action hero.

HighStrung
January 15, 2010, 12:07 AM
Being someone new to CCW I'm sure my opinion will have minimal value but I'll take the "flames" if they may follow. The OP had mentioned that he was carrying without a chambered round. I am somewhat split on the idea and feel his reasons for carrying that way may justify that act, just as mine do at times. When I'm out and about, I carry loaded and ready to act should the situation arise as I'm sure no one will have access to my carry point. When at home I carry without one in the chamber (let the flame begin) and here's why. I generally carry around the home mainly to get more comfortable with always having it on my person. I live in a good neighborhood with minimal threat even though threat always exists. The reason I do not have a round chambered at home it a two part situation. 1st I carry a Sigma .40 and the fact that there is no external safety is something that I'm relatively new to. 2nd is the fact that I've got two small children (ages 2 1/2 and 8 months) who consider daddy and extreemly fun jungle gym. Though I do remove my weapon when I know I'll be engaging in the wrestle matches with the kids, my oldest is capable of a surprise attack at any moment because sneaking up on daddy is apparantly the most fun in the world. Okay, sorry to sidetrack, it was earlier mentioned that there were more than one reason that someone may carry unchambered and I was just wanting to elaborate on that point. One thing is true for me however, I am 100% certain of the state of my weapon at all times (unchambered at home/chambered when I'm out). As for the situation as listed by the OP, I'd be ready to act but not until BG made threatening actions towards myself or another individual in the bank. I'm not looking forward to the legal repercussions or personal issues that could come from killing a man who effectively killed the finish on a ceiling. Just my $.02.

Nnobby45
January 15, 2010, 03:20 AM
Now, what should I do differently to be a better CCW holder? What would you do in a similar situation?


In most robberies I'd let him take the money and leave and try to be a good witness.

When he came in shooting, that changed the dynamics considerably and would be a reason to fear for one's life and the lives of others. Doesn't mean drawing a weapon would have been the correct approach or even possible without getting shot.


You could have been in a convenience store and, aside from the clerk, could have been the only witness. Think about what you would have done if Bubba Two Strikes had ordered you on the floor or in the back room.

An acquaintence was legally armed while in a bank a number of years ago in California. Back before the gas bag liberals took over the state.

A man came into the bank to rob it. Not sure exactly what transpired, but at some point, he shot and killed a young lady teller. My acquaintence knew what to do. He drew his weapon and shot the robber, who made it outside before piling up dead in the pkg. lot.

HOT TIP: He DID NOT carry his gun UNLOADED for safety reasons in a SLOW to reach ankle holster-----and neither should you. :cool:

However, I like the ankle rig as a BUG and wish I wasn't too old and fat to access it (though it's still an option for driving). Main reason I don't is that I've been reaching in the same places for years. Know of people who used a different carry method and, under stress, reached where they USED TO CARRY it.:cool:

Sorry for the long winded reply---Red Bull, again.

highcaliberprovider
January 15, 2010, 10:17 AM
As the others said; dont do anything unless you're genuinely protecting yourself or others. That having been said, unless you are a LEO why would you be carrying in a bank? Most states strictly prohibit carrying in a financial institution.

Glenn E. Meyer
January 15, 2010, 10:53 AM
This a bit of a resurrection of an old thread and we do have a chambered/unchambered thread elsewhere (as does every gun forum on the Internet and never a new argument! :D).

So we don't need to see the same old as the basic points are well stated.

Feel free to start new threads with new problems.

A gentle close. :)