It sounded to me from the original post that the management actually escorted the guy out. That would have been the time to hold him and call the police. Not really your responsibility, or the store's, but you might have been able to save his next victim.
That's exactly what I've been saying to dh. We're still discussing calling the police. He says that there would have been no problem shooting the bad guy, he just wants to forget altogether anything to do with shooting anyone, because of his Viet Nam daize. I would like to balance dh or others from being hurt and helping dh heal from his anguish, albeit these many years ago.
Ideas? Suggestions?
I think the police should be called, but I think WalMart should be the ones to do it since it happened in their store. Your husband should have just had to hang around to provide a description.
But it sounds to me like he handled himself just right.
I second that. If I've stopped the threat, I'm good to go.
I'm not sure about all this "be the first to call" stuff. Yeah, it's sounds good and I suppose it MIGHT save some legal hassle, but why is the onus on us, as law-abiding citizens, to prove our innocence? We have undergone background checks, hold down jobs, raise families, support our church, whatever. Anytime they want to put my personal record up against some dipshit who's tried to hijack my wallet in a restroom, feel free.
Again, before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but I'm not gonna overreact to it, personally. Must be the stubborn Irish in me.
Seems to me your first allegiance is to dh. He was the one involved, so I think it's his decision to make and yours to respect.
I would say the same if it had been YOU who had dealt with the BG, just so you know.
Others may disagree with me but it seems to me that pulling your firearm, aiming and firing should be one action as quickly and as accurately as you can do it. The gun shouldn't clear leather unless you plan to fire it. .
I too would disagree. That argument is akin to saying that we cannot legally bring a gun to a knife fight. In most cases, assuming a knife wielding BG isn't completely psycho, staring down the business end of the peace-maker is enough to neutralize the threat. That is always the primary objective in self-defense.Others may disagree with me but it seems to me that pulling your firearm, aiming and firing should be one action as quickly and as accurately as you can do it. The gun shouldn't clear leather unless you plan to fire it. Otherwise, in your own mind, you did not fear imminent bodily injury or death to yourself or others. If I were the prosecutor trying to put you away for brandishing that's how I'd argue the case. That's pretty much what I was taught at my concealed carry class as well.
No argument there, and shooting someone in close proximity wielding a knife would be justified. But my point still stands that it is not necessarily required that you pull the trigger once you "clear leather". If the knife wielding (or in this case, bar, pipe, club, whatever) BG backs off at the sight of your firearm, mission accomplished.A knife is a lethal weapon and you can meet force with force.
JJFlash, I understand what you are saying, yet can we agree to disagree? Yes, he was the one involved, but he's not a hermit and we all affect each other in the public arena. The incident happened in a store, in public, so the store was involved. He's my hubby so I'm involved. Finally, the fellow is still roaming the streets so public safety is involved. I do believe that we are strictly and solely responsible for our immediate safety as most LEO forces cannot protect us nor keep us safe 24/7/365, leading to my belief that the public safety is also my concern. If this fellow commits a crime against someone else then I've not done my due diligence in keeping the public at large safe. There are people who probably don't agree with that concept but that's the way I think about it. I don't know if it's been too long since the incident so that Wal*Mart tape might not be around anymore, but I can certainly notify the Sheriff's deputies about the incident, and that's something that everyone has the right, or maybe I should say the ability, to do if they so desire.
Thanks, everyone, for your input. You've all given me so much to consider. :biggrin:
Ok, 6SC, I'll concede. There are two many factors in play, here, so best to contact LE. (Hey, I'm old and stubborn, but I can be swayed by good argument.) Hats off to ya on this "what if". I still don't care for this "call LEO before the BG does" stuff, tho. Yeah, I guess if I display my weapon, it'd probably be a reason to contact LE, but I hate to think they get the benefit of the doubt if they call first. But I get the logic.
Others may disagree with me but it seems to me that pulling your firearm, aiming and firing should be one action as quickly and as accurately as you can do it. The gun shouldn't clear leather unless you plan to fire it. Otherwise, in your own mind, you did not fear imminent bodily injury or death to yourself or others. If I were the prosecutor trying to put you away for brandishing that's how I'd argue the case. That's pretty much what I was taught at my concealed carry class as well.
That's exactly what I've been saying to dh. We're still discussing calling the police. He says that there would have been no problem shooting the bad guy, he just wants to forget altogether anything to do with shooting anyone, because of his Viet Nam daize. I would like to balance dh or others from being hurt and helping dh heal from his anguish, albeit these many years ago.
Ideas? Suggestions?
Chances are if he tried it on you he may try it on another. Perhaps he tried the same stunt on some poor old man that was unable to defend himself and he was lucky and got the guys cash. In that case I would like to think that maybe getting the scumbag cuffed and stuffed avenged the old man. I root for the underdog and hate bullies.
I would almost guarantee that he made a similar attempt within an hour.
Being confronted by an armed citizen and ejected from WalMart was just a minor inconvenience in what is probably his daily routine.
bill
Wow! Sounds like a problem that could have been avoided entirely... if he was carrying openly.What would you do?
Scenario: Dh (dear husband) is still recovering from an automobile accident, he moves quite slowly, walks with a cane, etc. Shopping in Wal*Mart recently, he needed a pit stop. A fellow followed him into the restroom and never entered a stall, he just stood by the sinks waiting for dh to emerge from his stall. First clue to dh that something was amis! Dh emerged from his stall with his hand on the handle of his pistol. The fellow asked, stated, "I bet you have money in that pouch?! I could hurt you," showing his hand and the weapon he had concealed in it. It was some kind of bar the fellow had palmed, but not brass knuckles. Dh said there was more in his pouch than money and if someone was going to be hurt well it wouldn't be him (dh)! He began pulling out the pistol. The fellow backed off immediately and left the restroom. He was later escorted from the store after dh alerted the front manager!
I tried talking dh into alerting the police but he wouldn't, saying the problem was taken care of. I disagree. The fellow is still freely walking the streets.
What are you thoughts, ideas? What would you do?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?