The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old February 12, 2009, 01:12 PM   #1
brentfoto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 347
Video of robber killed in Pharmacy holdup - One-shot stop? Caliber?

http://www.wftv.com/video/18676583/index.html


This should generate some interesting discussion. It's one of the most graphic videos of actual CQC I've seen.

Someone else posted this video on S&W forum.

Comments?
brentfoto is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:10 PM   #2
Sparks2112
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2008
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 479
Hard to say how many shots were fired. Looks like 1, but could possibly be 2 (or 3).

I did notice however that the robber did not stop to ask the guy who shot him, what caliber he was planning on shooting him with so he could plan his actions accordingly. Almost makes me think that placement is kind of important.
__________________
--
Sparks
AKA
J.M. Johnston
Sparks2112 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:13 PM   #3
Cerick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 13, 2008
Location: 973, NJ
Posts: 331
dropping like that, he may have been hit in the spine.
Cerick is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:17 PM   #4
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Excellent example of a SD shooting. The guard waited for his moment and then acted quickly and decisively. He protected both himself and the employees in a way as to not further endanger them. After the shooting compassion was shown for the fallen assailant in the fact they were trying to get him medical aid as quickly as possible. People often forget you use your gun to stop a threat, not to kill a person. You do not have to lower yourself to their level by hoping they die or saying "they got what they deserve."
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:20 PM   #5
Sparks2112
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2008
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 479
Cerick
Quote:
Dropping like that, he may have been hit in the spine.
Seems to me that his feet were kicking around a bit too much for that to have hit his spine.

Out of curiosity, at the end of the video when the frame is frozen it looks like he might be using a shrouded revolver? Perhaps a .357 or .38 +P?
__________________
--
Sparks
AKA
J.M. Johnston
Sparks2112 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:20 PM   #6
brentfoto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 20, 2007
Location: SoCal
Posts: 347
That was a justifiable shoot judging from the video. Slam-dunk. I don't see how the guard could've acted more valiantly.

It bothered me a little bit that the owner had apparently stated he had to hire the guard. I'm curious about the hx of this store re robberies, and if this particular robber had any contact with the store before.

Unfortunate incident. I feel sorry for the guard that he had to do what he had to do.

Was there a sight picture? Was there a variation of 'point-shooting'? Was it a one-shot stop?

Gosh, another split second and the robber would have shot the guard-did you see robber point the gun at guard after he saw him? That was really frightening.

I hope it (guard's gun) wasn't a .45.

Last edited by brentfoto; February 12, 2009 at 02:30 PM.
brentfoto is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:31 PM   #7
ZeSpectre
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,276
From the way the thug was squirming on the ground I suspect what you see is a classic example of the "oh no I've been SHOT" mentality. Then again it could have simply been a good hit in a disabling area.
ZeSpectre is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 02:35 PM   #8
Sparks2112
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2008
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 479
ZeSpectre
Quote:
From the way the thug was squirming on the ground I suspect what you see is a classic example of the "oh no I've been SHOT" mentality. Then again it could have simply been a good hit in a disabling area.
That was my feeling too. He was expecting to walk in, grab drugs, walk out. Probably never even occured to him that he could be hurt, let alone killed.
__________________
--
Sparks
AKA
J.M. Johnston
Sparks2112 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:05 PM   #9
jg0001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
Is there a legal requirement to have a reason to believe the gunman would actually shoot (assuming he wasn't further provoked) rather than take the drugs and leave? {We can assume he turned his attention and gun to the security guard b/c the security guard moved rapidly from his original position.}

Would this be the equivalent to shooting someone who is in your house without making any attempt to avoid shooting? i.e. You see someone in your house, "see" (or believe you see) a gun, and just shoot them with no hesitation.

The videotape in this question seems like it could be a liability, no?

[I'll agree that once the guard began to act, the risk to everyone went up quickly and shooting without hesitation was probably a good idea. However, I can see a liberal prosecutor trying to find a way to blame the security guard for the death, saying perhaps that he himself raised the stakes by making a move. Now, I couldn't tell if there was audio on that security tape to hear what was said which may influence the judgement.]
jg0001 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:10 PM   #10
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
This situation is not at all similar to finding someone in your home and shooting without seeing a weapon. The assailant had a weapon drawn and actively threatening them.

I do agree that if they had complied, the assailant would have most likely left without firing. He was most likely after the drugs, not out to kill someone. His crime had a goal. If it had just been the employees they would have been best served to just turn over the drugs since the assailant was very focused on them and pulling a weapon or resisting would have most likely ended in injury or death if the assailant was willing to pull the trigger.

Luckily for the store owner, he had taken extra precautions by hiring a security guard. The guard was able to be outside of the actual confrontation and was able to act with less scrutiny from the assailant since he was existing outside of the assailants area of focus.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:14 PM   #11
Hornett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2006
Posts: 569
Quote:
I can see a liberal prosecutor trying to find a way to blame the security guard for the death, saying perhaps that he himself raised the stakes by making a move.
When are we going to quit making excuses for people who use firearms in robberies?
Once a firearm is used in a robbery and actually pointed at a victim, the 'stakes' are already as high as they get.
Life or death.
One split second squeeze of the trigger and that pharmacist is dead.
Permanently.
When someone runs into anywhere waving a gun around they become the instigator.
They bring the violence.
This is all just IMHO of course, but I can tell you that, here in Indiana, they have increased the sentencing alot for guns used while in the commission of a crime.

Also the guard did not fire until the robber pointed the gun at him.
Do you have to wait until the robber shoots you?
__________________
Guns don't kill people, Jack Bauer kills people.

Last edited by Hornett; February 12, 2009 at 03:26 PM.
Hornett is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:15 PM   #12
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,738
Quote:
Is there a legal requirement to have a reason to believe the gunman would actually shoot (assuming he wasn't further provoked) rather than take the drugs and leave?

No. Presentation of a gun is reason to believe the gun will be used. In some places nothing more than attempted robbery is sufficient reason to shoot, regardless of weapons presented. Once a gun is pointed at someone there is not a law I know of prohibiting defense of that person.

If someone robs my store with a gun then they're getting shot if I have a chance. A knife or simply the threat of a weapon is different. If I get the drop on a guy with a gun I'm gonna shoot, just like this guy.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:15 PM   #13
Para Bellum
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2005
Location: right there
Posts: 1,847
Quote:
I hope it (guard's gun) wasn't a .45.

me too. must have been a nine.
__________________
Si vis pacem - para bellum
If you want peace - prepare for war
Para Bellum is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:26 PM   #14
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Quote:
me too. must have been a nine.
Maybe it was a Sig with a .22 conversion.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:29 PM   #15
Sparks2112
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2008
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 479
It's interesting to think about what the anti's perspective would be here.

"If you had just given him what he wanted, he wouldn't be dead right now. Introducing a gun into the situation got someone killed..."

The obvious response being:

"But the robber was the only one who had a gun that didn't have a legal reason to be in the Pharmacy. So doesn't that mean the robber got himself killed?"

Sadly they can't seem to think this through on their own.
__________________
--
Sparks
AKA
J.M. Johnston
Sparks2112 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:47 PM   #16
Lavid2002
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2007
Posts: 2,568
e-z

heres an easy way to think of it.....If a cop was there would he have shot em? I dont think the cop would look at a man who has a bead on the clerk and say DROP IT DROP IT! He swung his gun to the security guard and obviously had intentions of shooting. The man was right in shooting him. It has to be done its a shame it happened but this man made the decision to end his life long before he pulled the gun on the clerk. PLay with fire...
__________________
Math>Grammar
Lavid2002 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 03:59 PM   #17
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,423
The security guard was a retired cop. He fired one shot according to witnesses.

So this is a one shot stop, one shot drop, one shot kill. The guard drew from concealment and shot while on the move, while advancing toward the bad guy.

http://www.palmettocops.com/forum/fo...44499&get=last
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 04:19 PM   #18
jg0001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
I guess the real legal sticky would have been if the guard drew, the assailant shot the pharmacist, and then the guard dropped the assailant.

I'm not at all trying to defend the bad guy; even just in the few traffic incidents I've taken to court, I've seen how little the prosecutor cares about what actually happened, or whether or was legal or not.

I suppose the end result is this -- if this was your home, would you want a video tape of an incident like this or not? Take away the video tape and there's very little to play Monday morning quarterback with. In this case, the video seems like it could be used as evidence against the guard more than anything else.
jg0001 is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 04:40 PM   #19
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,071
BAD SHOOT BAD SHOOT BAD SHOOT
That guy wasn't really gonna shoot no one... The gun was just for added affect! He just needed the drugs to sell to feed his children who were at home...
hogdogs is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 04:42 PM   #20
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,738
Quote:
In this case, the video seems like it could be used as evidence against the guard more than anything else.
There is NOTHING to use against the guard. By all accounts the BG presented a gun, which is an explicit threat and demanded property- which is a shoot scenario in itself in many places. There is NO case to be made against the guard. This is 100% justifiable. Even the most liberal anti-gun DA would have major trouble prosecuting this one.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 06:03 PM   #21
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,423
I think 100% would be an underestimate.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 09:00 PM   #22
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,738
Security guys gun looks Glock-ish to me, if I had to guess.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 09:23 PM   #23
supergas452M
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 7, 2008
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 309
Quote:
Is there a legal requirement to have a reason to believe the gunman would actually shoot (assuming he wasn't further provoked) rather than take the drugs and leave? {We can assume he turned his attention and gun to the security guard b/c the security guard moved rapidly from his original position.}

Would this be the equivalent to shooting someone who is in your house without making any attempt to avoid shooting? i.e. You see someone in your house, "see" (or believe you see) a gun, and just shoot them with no hesitation.

The videotape in this question seems like it could be a liability, no?

[I'll agree that once the guard began to act, the risk to everyone went up quickly and shooting without hesitation was probably a good idea. However, I can see a liberal prosecutor trying to find a way to blame the security guard for the death, saying perhaps that he himself raised the stakes by making a move. Now, I couldn't tell if there was audio on that security tape to hear what was said which may influence the judgement.]

What may happen to you my friend is, because you are so worried about being prosecuted, you may freeze when you need to shoot and instead of being prosecuted you will be dead.
supergas452M is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 09:44 PM   #24
Marred
Member
 
Join Date: December 7, 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 82
The security guard showed amazing restraint. He didn't shoot until the gun was pointed directly at him I don't think I would wait that long. Hooray for the good guys
__________________
Guns don't kill people, the bullets do.
Marred is offline  
Old February 12, 2009, 10:50 PM   #25
jg0001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
Quote:
What may happen to you my friend is, because you are so worried about being prosecuted, you may freeze when you need to shoot and instead of being prosecuted you will be dead.
I think my position would be to not be too open to discuss what happened with the cops until I had secured my own legal defense, regardless of how sure I was about my actions.

Now, in NJ, where I'm at, the only place I'd ever have my gun handy would be at home or the range. At home, I'm not going to have any security cams inside my house, so that's not an issue.

Just take a peek over at the other thread regarding whether or not to try and hold someone at gunpoint (in your house for example). There is too much legal gray area to be open with anyone who could use that info against you.

Read a little Ayoob if you think you know it all on what a good shoot would be. The law is a be-otch. Defending yourself (legally) after the shooting is over should not be forgotten.
jg0001 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12788 seconds with 7 queries