Quote:
|
... they may NOT take the gun off of them or they may shoot the person.
|
And they may not. The majority of the time, it is "not."
But if
you shoot, they will most certainly try to shoot.
It is amazing to me how many keybpoard strategists seem to believe that their shooting of an armed robber will somehow so immediately and effectively disable the person shot that that person will not be able to squeeze a trigger at least once.
As
threegun has stated very well on more than one occasion here, the armed citizen who intervenes may well precipitate a tragedy that would not have happened
but for his intervention.
Yes, in an armed robbery, one is
justified under the criminal code to employ deadly force if immediately necessary, and there is some civil protection (relating to the perp, and to the injuries of no one else), but that gives the citizen neither the skill nor the power to do so successfully.
So--what
would make it a good idea for a person other than a sworn officer, who is not indemnified by the community, to try to draw and shoot someone because he may shoot someone else? Not much. Perhaps, if the perp and his M.O. resemble that of someone who has in fact been shooting his victims in the area; perhaps, if the shot is clear and close; the backstop is good; the perp's attention is drawn from the citizen who is the would-be hero;
and the perp's gun is pointed in a safe direction... maybe, then....
But then, no one has mentioned the likelihood that the perp has an armed accomplice standing behind you for just such an eventuality.
A friend of mine who recently took his CCL training in FL said that the recommendation was to do nothing unless and until it became quite clear that shooting was almost certain to take place.
An indication of that would be the issuance of orders for everyone to get into a back room, or on the floor. Absent such, unless shooting breaks out, my gun stays put.