Banana Gun...what would you do?

[JoshB]

The 454 is a very large revolver (concealable only in winter under a thick coat). The mere size of it - 8 3/4" barrel, not to mention the rest of the gun -makes it intimidating. No, I don't necessarily think someone would realize it was a 454 per se, but they would know that they wouldn't be on the recieving end of it.
As far as penetration goes, I think that is why he uses hollow points.

[leadcounsel]

Isn't one of the top reasons that we can CCW, following defending ourselves and loved ones, is making society a safer place? That means indirectly safer, simply by the BGs not knowing who is CCW and who is not. That also means intervening in crimes when we safely can. Seems like this is a situation where we safely can intervene.

From "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels"

"Your gun says "Replica" down the side, whereas mine says Desert Eagle Five point O."

If the gun were clearly fake as the question states:

Yes I would intervene. The law doesn't recognize the difference between a real or fake gun in the commission of a crime and nor do I. It is the perceived threat of deadly force. In my state and most states you have the right to use lethal force in the defense of yourself or a 3rd party from the use of lethal force, including perceived lethal force (aka a fake gun). I would likely have a gun myself. This scenario, where a criminal is in the process of the commision of a violent felony, I would quitely draw, take aim, watch my background, and shoot the perp in the com and head several times. Makes it alot less expensive for tax payers (loss of money from the bank, police work, trial, incarceration). You've probably just saved tax payers $500,000 in the "due process" of this criminal. If I didn't have a clear shot and could not move to a clear shot, I would hold this man at gun point for the police. If I didn't have a gun or knife, I think a solid sucker punch or judo takedown, legsweep, or maybe a running shoulder tackle would take him out of commission quite quickly, and I imagine that I'd be supported by the other bank patrons (ala post 9/11 mentality). No, I"m not a mall ninja, but I am a strong, athletic, 6'1" man with quite a bit of martial arts and firearms training. Am I a Navy Seal? No. But I'm very confident that I could kick the average person's A**, especially with the aid of a surprise attack.

Sure there are people who get paid for this sort of thing but:
1. We all pay when bank crooks win
2. Who knows, you could be saving a life down the road (say the perp runs over someone during his flight)
3. Why not stop something you can stop? Not a real big risk
4. I can't imagine you'd be criminalized; quite the contrary you might be considered a hero. In fact, most banks offer $10,000 reward for information leading to the prevention or arrest of bank robbers. I would make a very compelling case that my intervention in a robbery was worthy of that reward.
5. 15 minutes of fame anyone? Could be worthy of its weight in gold. Not to mention a positive news article for CCWs out there, right. Besides, nobody needs to know that you knew the bank robber had a replica gun, right?


As far as painting the tips of REAL guns orange, what would the incentive be? Noncompliance because people think that gun is fake? Crooks want immediate compliance, not questions about the authenticity of their weapons. If anything, they would remove the plastic tips from their guns...

[leadcounsel]

How would those of you who said they would not intervene react if I was also in the bank and drew and shot the perp, or say that I were in the bank and tacked the BG and was struggling on the ground. Would you lend assistance or still stand there, getting the BGs description?


OR


What if you're on a plane and someone with a razor blade tries to hijack the plane. You're clearly unarmed, but are you still taking a "wait and see" and "get a good description" attitude?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

While you make some interesting points, your example of the plane hijacking is irrelevant and just a failed debating trick.

We now know that a plane hijacking is an immediate lethal threat. Implying that the wait and see attitude is related to attacking someone with a known plastic gun makes no sense.

Also, engaging in physical combat with said plastic gun carrier makes no sense. I'm glad that folks have such confidence in their physical ability but once in close contact, your risk level goes up dramatically. Said plastic gun person might easily have a knife and deploy such on you.

The interesting question is whether if you are sure that the gun is fake, you kill or attempt to kill the person under the cover of:

1. The law doesn't distinguish between fakes and real (because it assume you don't know at the time).

2. You think you can get away with it and thus take the opportunity to kill someone as that is congruent with your personal 'philosophy' , personality structure or fantasies of monetary/societal reward.

Taking a life for those reasons is rather problematic. The use of lethal force is usually to prevent grievous bodily harm. Thus, you know that the weapon is fake and will not produce grievous bodily harm and you decide that to be executioner. Does the law in your state mandate capital punishment for an armed bankrobber where no one is killed? However, you decide given your perfect knowledge of the gun being fake that you will apply such a penalty.

If you don't know the gun is fake and the situation is such that shooting will produce the best outcome in protecting others from grievous bodily harm then I have no problem with it.

If you know the gun is fake and you decide to use that fact to safely shoot the guy - that's not in my play book.

[leadcounsel]

While you make some interesting points, your example of the plane hijacking is irrelevant and just a failed debating trick. We now know that a plane hijacking is an immediate lethal threat. Implying that the wait and see attitude is related to attacking someone with a known plastic gun makes no sense.

One NEVER knows what the criminal element has in mind. Maybe the bank robber with a fake gun really has something more diabolical in mind ala 9/11. We just don't know, do we? I'm not about to wait and find out. Besides, he could very well kill someone or cause pursuing police to kill someone in his flight.

Also, engaging in physical combat with said plastic gun carrier makes no sense. I'm glad that folks have such confidence in their physical ability but once in close contact, your risk level goes up dramatically. Said plastic gun person might easily have a knife and deploy such on you.

All the reason that it does make sense. Maybe he intends to take a hostage? I have NO idea what he intends. I'd rather fight a battle on MY terms at MY choosing than on HIS terms. The element of surprise is important and I would attempt to take full advantage of that. Put HIM on the defensive and make HIM alter his plan.

The interesting question is whether if you are sure that the gun is fake, you kill or attempt to kill the person under the cover of:

1. The law doesn't distinguish between fakes and real (because it assume you don't know at the time).

Interesting point. It would be interesting to hear the arguments from the prosecution and defense. Under most state laws a robbery is considered an armed robbery if it is completed with force or threat of force, no matter how believeable or slight. Defendant used a pistol that appeared to be fake, but his actions still qualify as armed robbery. And, you may know it's fake but others may not. They perceive this as a very real threat.

2. You think you can get away with it and thus take the opportunity to kill someone as that is congruent with your personal 'philosophy' , personality structure or fantasies of monetary/societal reward.

No more than I would if I were defending my life or the lives of others or my home. Take away the toy gun and say he appears unarmed and comes up to you on the street and says give me your wallet or I'll kill you in a very intimidating and threating way, cornering you.

Taking a life for those reasons is rather problematic. The use of lethal force is usually to prevent grievous bodily harm. Thus, you know that the weapon is fake and will not produce grievous bodily harm and you decide that to be executioner. Does the law in your state mandate capital punishment for an armed bankrobber where no one is killed? However, you decide given your perfect knowledge of the gun being fake that you will apply such a penalty.

Lethal force can be used to defend yourself against the threat or reasonable perceived threat of imminent serious bodily harm. It can include a severe beating and someone committing a violent felony. Last I checked, a man robbing a federal bank, even with a toy gun, is a violent felon endangering the lives of many (directly and indirectly). Even if the world knew he had a toy gun, the police would still come and draw down on him and shoot him if he made any attempt to point the gun at anyone.

Call me "Judge, jury and executioner" if you will, but I don't distinguish this between if a person trys to rob me through force or the threat of force. As a CCW I will shoot him dead if the situation requires.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That changes the game a bit. If the logic is that he is committing a violent felony even with a known fake gun and is still a risk to folks, then shooting him is quite acceptable. He might have a knife as I posed and could have pulled it out.

However, I was commenting on shooting him has a measure of social house cleaning because you knew that he was not a risk with the fake gun but you get a legal free shot.

That is a personal philosophy question of eliminating a nonrisk for whatever reason. I certainly agree with eliminating a violent risk.

I might conclude that the act of the robbery itself with the threat of force itself is a justification to shoot. Not shooting is based on tactical situations as you decide what is the best outcome path is reasonable also.

I still don't want to wrestle with the dude as most bank robbers tend to leave. It's a risk call. Fake gun man probably wants the money and to go. Will Fake gun man risk a hostage, probably low odds on that but it could happen. However, I think Fake Gun Man flees and that's a little risk of harm. YMMV.

[mvpel]

Even though I "know 100%" it's a fake gun, they pay people to deal with this sort of thing.

To slightly alter Ronald Reagan's famous quote - "When government expands, society contracts."