Plainclothes/Concealed Carry: Worst Possible Outcome

[Manco]

Originally Posted by rburch

From the witnesses quoted in the article, it seems like the plain clothed officer for some reason (fearing for his safety or because he thought someone in the crowd was trying to take his gun) fired at someone in the crowd.

He may also have been "maced," at least according to one witness.

Originally Posted by rburch

The uniformed officers were just arriving and see a man in civilian clothes fire at the crowd, and react by drawing and shooting him.

But then there's the issue of perforating him while he was on the ground. There certainly are no shortage of questions regarding this incident. I wonder who shot the other officer in the foot--was it a civilian, the officer who died, or perhaps himself, and might that have been a factor in the volume of fire involved?

Originally Posted by rburch

Not really sure how you could go about completely eliminating this type of incident but maybe if departments issued those safety sash things. Forget what they're called, but look like the sashes beauty pagent contestants were, only they say Police, or Security or something like that.

You could still get shot while trying to identify yourself with equipment that is not in plain sight at all times. It would be safer to not involve plainclothes officers in situations such as these (unless everybody is identified ahead of time), and if that is not avoidable in certain instances, then those who are not in uniform should behave as civilians would in the presence of uniformed officers.

Originally Posted by FireForged

I think just saying Citizen is much better than trying to use Civilain. I am well past middle age and Civilian to me mean (someone not in the Military)

That's what "civilian" used to mean, strictly, but for lack of a better term it has come to mean anybody besides those serving in the armed forces OR law enforcement; while the latter are technically civilians, when on duty they have legal authority that other civilians do not, so it makes some sense.

The term "citizen" is no better because although it has undergone a similar evolution in meaning, its original, strict definition is very broad--in my opinion, this actually makes it worse because both soldiers and cops can be "citizens" and not "citizens" all at once.

On top of that, the distinction that we're really trying to make is between cops and non-cops, with the latter term including soldiers who are neither on deployment nor on base. Maybe we should use "non-cop" or "non-LEO" or something similar but better if we're going to argue over "civilian" versus "citizen"--either that or we should make sure that the context is always clear, use either existing term, and just let it slide.

[Sleuth]

This remains a problem for me - my LE career was 100% plain clothes.
And it is a bigger problem than some think. Right now, in any city or town, you can have plain clothes local cops, sheriffs, Marshals/Constables, State Troopers, State Liquor, drug, vehicle, etc. etc. officers, and the entire alphabet soup of Feds: FBI, DEA, ATFE, ICE, IRS, and on and on, plus all their Inspector Generals, all armed.

As for badges, you can buy "Concealed Weapon Carrier" badges on the net, or at the flea market - a bad idea in my mind.

So, how do you sort them out? As already noted, put your gun down and play 'kiss the concrete' until things settle down.

NOTE: I do not use the phrase 'drop the gun' - dropped guns can go off, and if it is mine, I usually carry a custom made gun that I don't want damaged. I will put the gun down in a manner that makes it clear I am complying with orders.

[MikeNice81]

I think Sarge pretty much nailed it in post 48. Fade out, don't get involved unless you have to. Nobody is going to think less of you because you didn't jump in to a writhing melee and try to end it. Nobody is going to think less of you for not trying to shoot it out with some guy shooting up a crowd.

Your CCH permit does not make you a cop. It does not make you bullet proof. What it does is let you carry a gun in public. That is all it does. Unless yo are a LEO don't try to play the role. They get paid for it, they have the training for it, they have balistic vests, and they have a lot more lawyers to back them in whatever happens.

Survive. Then you can go home and kiss your family or pet your dog. Becoming a dead hero does nobody any good.

[mnero]

Live by the sword; die by the sword. Works for pistols too.

[MikeNice81]

One more thing to remember. In some states you can not use force to stop a person if they are not the instigator of the fight. If that 260 pound guy beating on a 175 pound guy didn't start it, you get charged.

Some states are also duty to retreat states. That means if the threat to your life or the life of your loved one can be avoid by leaving, you better leave. If you decide to jump in to the firestorm instead of cut out the fire exit, with your kid under your arm, you can be charged. Keep up with your laws as they are constantly changing.

If a cop shows up, put the gun on the ground. Get on your knees with your hands behind your head. If the situation is still active, get prone. Don't try to argue your case or tell your story right then. They do not care. They will ask you when they feel safe conducting interviews. Let them secure the scene before you get talkative. An extra voice in the chaos can be a deadly distraction.

Remember even criminals say, "yes sir" and act polite. Do not expect that to get you released or to help validate your story. Be polite as a matter of course, just don't think, "why are they being so mean when I'm being so nice." Cops deal with all types and chances are they aren't going to believe any one story untill they get multiple statements from you and other witnesses. Yes they will ask you for multiple statements. A lot of people get tripped up when they try to lie. So, if they have to try multiple times it is easier to catch them. The advantage is that it also helps witnesses remember more information. So, there are reasons you need to give multiple statements to multiple officers.

Okay, I'm getting off topic. I just want everybody to stay safe and understand some of what is coming their way. I have dealt with police after a SD situation. I also work around police. So, I have seen how they handle situations from both sides.

[Seaman]

Was told of an off-duty cop (with gun out) who was chasing a BG and was himself gunned down by a uniform. Recall seeing a uniform gun down some supposed perps running from an establishment...turned out they were hostages...friendly fire happens.

During CCW training (Detroit area) was taught that before drawing in any situation to be 100% certain that situation warranted it, to NEVER draw in the middle of a situation when I may not fully know what is going down, and if the cavalry arrives to hit the ground spread eagle.

"If the perp won't get down I put him down," is what a cop told me.

[Sleuth]

MikeNIce, can you identify a state that has a rule as you describe? All the states I know of follow a 'disparity of force' rule. If the little guy started it, the 'heavier' guy can only use the necessary force to subdue the attacker. Once he has been subdued, if the bigger guy continues, he becomes the aggressor.

[MikeNice81]

Sleuth,
In NC if a person instigates a fight they lose the right to defense by lethal force. Even if they are on the losing end of things in a bad way, they have no right to lethal force. The big guy might get charged with murder or manslaughter. However, if the little guy shoots the big guy he will get charged.

The big guy does become the agressor. However, that is legally different than the instigator.

That is how it is trained in CCH permit classes. That is also what I have been told by a police officer that is certified to instruct "civilians" (read armed guards and cch permit classes) on firearms and use of force.

[Sleuth]

Mike, I would bet the law requires the "defender" to stop when the threat is neutralized. Being attacked is not a license to 'punish' your attacker, only to defend yourself. Otherwise, someone could claim he was attacked so he could beat the snot out of someone he did not like. At some point, "defense" becomes "assault".

In rereading your post, it would seem that the instigator gives up his right to life by instigating the assault. True? Not all assaults justify the use of deadly force.

But then, I do not know your state laws. And I can recall when it was still illegal to drive a car in Massachusetts without a flag man on foot 50' in front, to keep the horses from being scared. So there are a lot of strange laws still on the books.

[MikeNice81]

You are right in that the "defender" can still be charged. However, as weird as it is, the instigator does give up the right to lethal force.

The only exception is if he verbally and visually attempts to retreat from the fight. However, you won't always get the chance to do that. Many people that instigate fights probably aren't going to do it untill they have been smashed up pretty bad. So, it really becomes a bit of a mute point.

That is why if things look liking they are escelating I will say, "I don't want a fight tonight, I apologize." Then I leave. It becomes obvious to those watching and any cameras that I was not instigating and that I filled NC's duty to retreat.

I think I'm hijacking the thread, so I will stop at this point.