Robber walks in with gun already drawn

[Nanuk]

Glenn and Kraig are right on. Training,training,training.

You can beat it, you are against the curve but you can do it.

I beat it 2 times as a big city cop. Both times the actor received a broken arm.

[TailGator]

Lots of good comments so far. I will only add that there can still be an element of surprise that slows down a robber's reaction, in the sense that an armed robber may not expect resistance of any sort. It just may take him some variable amount of time to recognize that you are not complying and to make the decision to fire. Will it be enough? Maybe, maybe not, but if you quit you are sure to lose. Move, distract him, grab his gun, draw and fire - whatever you think might work. But you cannot wind up more dead than you would be otherwise.

[ClydeFrog]

About four/five years ago, a video was put up on www.youtube.com of a plain clothes security officer(retired LE officer) who shot a strung out robber in a drug store. The incident was in the Daytona Beach FL area.
The security guard/ex-cop used good tactics & was able to end the critical incident without any excessive risk to the store employees or any customers who might have been in the area.
It's worth viewing.
The armed officer moves to the side & then gets to the rear of the thug.

In US military aviation, this is called OODA loop.
Observe, Orientate, Decide, Act.
Trained license holders(CCW/gun permit) or armed professionals can apply the OODA method when faced with these critical incidents.

In general, as discussed in other TFL topics, if a armed robbery or lethal force incident looks like it could quickly turn into a hostage situation or there are multiple bystanders around, I would not draw a firearm or deploy lethal force.
In that event, it would be more prudent to leave or flee & contact 911/law enforcement.

CF

[raimius]

Yep, if you are already at a disadvantage, you need something to regain the advantage. Speed, surprise, and violence of action are generally the common choices. Creating a distraction and quickly attacking/escaping is a common tactic. It certainly takes a level head and guts though!

[Deaf Smith]

If you see the guy draw his gun and start to bring it up... move and move FAST.

I don't care where you move as long as it is toward some kind of cover.

Then you have a bit of time to assess and bring your weapons to bear.

Deaf

[TenRing]

The scenario is daunting because (1) the criminal already has his gun ready and (2) most stores do not allow employees to go to work armed. Some stores actually train employees not to fight back, informing them that to fight back is to be fired. The same stores do not provide security glass or a secure working environment for those employees. I think the most prudent thing is not to work in such establishments. The pay is not very good in the first place and it should not be hard to find a better or equivalently paying job in a better environment.

In the midst of fighting for their life, the employee has to overcome the employer's "training" which says to just give the robber what he wants and you will be OK. Too often, robbers shoot compliant victims after getting their loot.

Employers are not going to provide practical self defense tactical training because that would be a tacit admission that the work environment is dangerous.

[WardenWolf]

Your options depend somewhat on how close the person is to you. If the person makes the mistake of getting too close, there's a high likelihood you can deflect his gun with a quick sweep of the arm, giving you time to draw your own before he can recover his balance. More advanced techniques are also available, but I am not going to advocate anyone do something that makes it more likely they will get shot. If a person has you dead-to-rights, your safest bet is usually to cooperate until they either make a mistake or they do something to make you believe they intend to kill you. Just be ready to move at a moment's notice, regardless of what path you take.

A good indicator that they intend to kill you rather than simply rob you is if they try to move you to another room. I do not remember the reference, but when a criminal tries to move you to a secondary scene there is a VERY high likelihood they're going to kill you.

There is no "one size fits all" here. You must keep your wits about you, pray you survive, and be ready to take action at a moment's notice, whether that action is diving to the floor or moving to deflect / disarm.

[Tactical Jackalope]

People get a little too delicate when I say this, but I'll say it anyways for the sake of conversation and planting the seed.

What stops a violent criminal with a gun? A good guy that's better at being violent with a gun. Even if you subtract firearms from the equation. A good guy that's trained to be as violent or even more violent when they need to to defend their life will triumph. Buying a gun and carrying it after going to range a couple times doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of required training.

They have the drop on us. Period. Most we can do is prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

[cookie5]

Having a gun doesn't always make you equal. You can have the fastest reflexes the quickest trigger finger and the most accurate shot. But bad stuff happens.

[RBid]

This reminds me a lot of DeFoor on mindset. The feeder vs receiver, defender vs go on offense bit really resonates.

[dayman]

Some stores actually train employees not to fight back, informing them that to fight back is to be fired.... Too often, robbers shoot compliant victims after getting their loot.... Employers are not going to provide practical self defense tactical training because that would be a tacit admission that the work environment is dangerous

Store policies are directed by insurance which is dictated by statistics.

While I agree completely that too many people are killed by robbers (1 would be too many), it's extremely rare that compliment victims are killed.
The overwhelming majority of convenience robbers don't kill anyone. According to the FBI there were 354,520 robberies in 2012, resulting in 652 homicides, which means that even if you're being robbed, the likely hood that anyone's going to get killed is less than 0.18% (less because the raw number of homicides doesn't take into account multiple homicides resulting from one robbery etc.). However, those odds go up significantly when employees resist (DOJ pg16). Most robbers just want money, but - like anyone - are far more likely to become violent if they perceive a threat.

That, coupled with the fact that the average cost of "an episode of workplace violence" is around $250,000 for the store, and the average robbery nets under $1000 is why most businesses discourage employees from resisting. Not because they don't want to admit that the job can be dangerous.

I am not saying that nobody should ever resist a robbery. Sometimes it's absolutely the right choice. However, we also don't want to get carried away with the posturing.
It seems like things end badly far more often then they do, because that's what makes the news. And with national news coverage, we even hear about the horrible crimes that get committed 1000's of miles away. And we hear about them over and over and over.
It's why, despite the fact that violent crime rates have been going steadily down since the 70's people still perceive things as getting worse.

I hate to "go against the flow" as it were, but armed resistance isn't always the most tactically sound option. If you're working behind the counter and someone walks in with a gun, statistically, it's safer and a good deal cheaper to give them the money than is is to go for a gun.
In your house, or in an ally it might be a different story.

But, gauging your baseline response to robberies on statistically anomalous events (like the story in the OP) is - logically - on par with basing gun legislation on .... well, "statistically anomalous events".

[40-82]

Reminds me of an old Jeff Cooper dictum, "You know you have trained enough when the person trying to kill you is in more danger than you are."

[Double Naught Spy]

Reminds me of an old Jeff Cooper dictum, "You know you have trained enough when the person trying to kill you is in more danger than you are."

Wouldn't that be great if it was true?

[ClydeFrog]

Retired LE officer, author & gun writer; Evan Marshall once wrote in a gun press item that as a cop(or retired cop), he would not act in a armed robbery event unless the crooks were starting to put victims(bystanders) on the ground or told them to lay down. Marshall, who retired from the Detroit MI police department(most of it in the 1960s/1970s) said when thugs do that, they plan to murder any witnesses.

As noted, you can not predict or assume what a armed robber, thug or hostage taker is going to do. You can follow your formal training or make tactical decisions .

In some critical incidents you should use restraint but in others it may require violence of action.
As the formal motto of the UK's elite SAS or Special Air Service; Those Who Dare, Win!

[Double Naught Spy]

As the formal motto of the UK's elite SAS or Special Air Service; Those Who Dare, Win!

Another motto/gun saying that just isn't necessarily true. Many who do not DARE also win. Many who do dare end up dead. That you dared to take action does not in any way imply that you will win. It just means that you dared to take action.

Mottos and sayings are typically nothing but feel good devices and are typically not strategy or tactics for life and death situations.

I don't see the guy working at the convenience store as having SAS training and living by such a motto should armed bandits enter.

Glenn and Kraig are right on. Training,training,training.

You can beat it, you are against the curve but you can do it.

I beat it 2 times as a big city cop. Both times the actor received a broken arm.

Again, how many convenience store employees of ALL the convenience stores we have are going to have "Training,training,training" as you put it? Chances are that if they can afford Training,training,training, then they aren't working in a convenience store.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

While I agree that training all convenience store employees to our superninja level probably won't happen - the OP has mentioned that he wants to ascend to at least SuperSayian 3 in the gun world.

Thus, if the question is asked in that context - the comments that the OP should seek out Masters Yoda or Roshi make sense.

Once you can use the force or ki with sufficient intensity, resistance may not futile.

I apologize for the Big Bang level of analysis but guns do make a Big Bang.

[MTT TL]

Once you can use the force or ki with sufficient intensity, resistance may not futile.

As I noted earlier; however your odds are still not good. Even the worst chance is better than no chance.

[Slopemeno]

Of the three store robberies friends of mine went through:

1) All the robbers had them lay down- two were tied up.
2) None of the victims were shot
3) I asked- and none of them though they could have beaten the robber to the "punch" so to speak.

IMHO- TenRing has it right. Avoid those work environments. Why put yourself at risk?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Not to divert but for new immigrants or victims of the economy, that's what they can get. Starting up a small store is a good entry to the American Way.

We had a horrific killing of a couple running a decent mom and pop Asian restaurant near where we live.

We shouldn't really blame the victims for having a job. Not being preachy and I would avoid such but my animus is towards the killers.

Back to tactics and off moral philosophy?

[TXAZ]

Glenn concluded:

Back to tactics and off moral philosophy?

There is another defense that seems to becoming more prevalent, the sequestering of the clerk behind 2" of "bullet proof" material.
Ironically, shoplifting often rises in some of these stores according to an acquaintance in the biz.

That may be the wave of the future in high crime areas.

[Tinner666]

While wroking at a 7-11, my ex had to stand there waiting for the 'bank' to kick out $$ at 5 minute intervals at gunpoint. She started talking the guy up about his 'cool' handgun. As he was handing it to her so she could look it over, he came to his senses at that moment and grabbed the money he had and ran out.
She said he was 1/2 second from meeting his maker. YMMV.

[Tactical Jackalope]

he came to his senses at that moment

Don't be silly, he never had his "senses".

[TenRing]

I think self defense tactics are important. Defending the building is equally important. For example, in order for the employees to have time to spot a thug walking in with a gun, there needs to be plenty of bright light at the entrance, cameras at all ingress points and monitors displayed in the store at easy to see positions. Employees need to see who is coming in before they actually get in.

It would also be good to use a double door entrance where there are two glass doors and a distance of about three or four feet between them. The person walks through the first door and but the last door must be buzzed by employees in order for anyone to enter. This setup is seen in major cities but not so much in suburban areas.

There was video circulating of a bank robbery where the robber was trapped between the doors after robbing the bank. He tried to kick through the glass, but he couldn't. He was arrested.

[TailGator]

he would not act in a armed robbery event unless the crooks were starting to put victims(bystanders) on the ground or told them to lay down.

Forgive me for not recalling the source, but I recall reading that around 1/3 of the time that an assailant relocates a victim - to another room, a car, whatever - that they will kill. The article recommended the strongest possible resistance to being removed from the initial scene.

[zombietactics]

* The classic one-on-one "cowboy-quick-draw duel" occurred as early as 1865, Hickok vs. Tutt. ...

The entire Hickock vs. Tutt story is based upon a second-or-third-hand story told to a Harper's Bizarre writer named George Nichols, by a well-known fabulist, who called himself "Captain Honesty" (real name was Richard Bently Owen). Whether the fault of Owens or Nichols, Hickock's name became "Hitchcock" in the published article ... apparently details like getting the name right were as unimportant as the facts themselves.

Owen's story, as told later, changed several times. In one version the men counted off 50-paces in classic old-world dueling style, turned and fired. In another version the men saw each other on a crowded street and opened fire at 50 yards. The "crowd" sometimes became only the two men themselves on a lonely dust-blown street. In some versions, it was a fight over a watch lost in a poker game, other times over a woman.

The Harper's story was one of the first which cemented the idea of the "cowboy duel" in the minds of the reading public.

Hickock was tried for murder, but the only 4 people (no "crowd" present) who were a witness to the event (not one of them "Captain Honesty") testified that Tutt began shooting at Hickock without warning, missed and then Hickock returned fire ... from cover according to one witness.

Even that is debatable, as the witnesses were not considered the most reliable sorts.

I cannot find a single, verifiable report of a "cowboy quick-draw" duel occurring even once once in the old west.

I appreciate the fact that this is a cherished notion, and I am taking on the role of the guy telling everyone that "there is no Santa Claus". If someone can point me to actual evidence from reliable sources stating otherwise, I'd be happy to see it.


Does it ever happen? Perhaps. It just appears to be in the Bigfoot/Unicorn realm. This is no excuse for poor basic skills, or being "just plain slow".