Thursday, August 9, 2012

A Questionable Defensive Gun Use



Disdain for criminals with guns is such that we tend to be very lenient when judging the actions of a lawful gun owner who prevents an armed robbery.

For me, the first criterion has to be the determination of whether there is lethal threat. That's often a difficult call.  I don't subscribe to the overly simplistic view that all criminals with guns pose a lethal threat. But, even if you place the bar that low, once the armed criminals are fleeing, all gun play must cease. Once you've shot or shot at an armed robber and he's running away for his life, you cannot keep shooting.  You cannot pursue and continue shooting. That's criminal behavior.

In addition throughout the action, the defensive shooter must adhere strictly to the 4 Rules of Gun Safety.  You can't shoot at the bad guys in a crowded place while running and expect to comply with Rule Number 4, and that counts even if there is lethal threat.

What's your opinion?  Did the guy in the video seem like a safe and responsible gun owner?

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

18 comments:

  1. "I don't subscribe to the overly simplistic view that all criminals with guns pose a lethal threat."

    Maybe VPC should start keeping track of criminal killers instead of CCW killers and see how those numbers match up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's taken you long enough to get around to this one, Mikeb. We mentioned it a while ago, no? You see it as simplistic that a criminal waving a gun is posing a threat. Fine, when you're in that situation, feel free to do nothing. Actually, you'll have to, if you practice what you preach..

    But consider: What if the armed men--one with a gun and one with a bat--had turned around to resume the fight? The rule is to continue the fight until the threat is over. Here was a seventy-something year old man facing two young punks. The police agreed with his actions.

    You cite Rule #4 as though you were present and know what what was beyond his target. You were not and don't. He was. He did a good job in defending himself and the other innocent people there. You fail once again to make any sense.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I liked how calmly the man removed his finger from the trigger and locked the door after the dipshits had fled.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good Job Greg, that is exactly correct. He didn't continue out of the door and follow them into the street. No, he stopped once the room was clear and the threats were dispatched. Pretty simple really.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The pursuit of fleeing bad guys is not determined by whether he stopped at the door or not. Following them to the door and firing at their fleeing asses is wrong and dangerous.

      Delete
    2. How do you know that what the man did here was wrong and dangerous? You weren't there. He made sure that these two thugs didn't come back to complete the violent felony that they had started.

      As usual, we see your sympathy for thugs and dislike of armed good citizens. Keep it up, Mikeb. Every post like this works for our side.

      Delete
    3. I'm basing my negative opinions about the guy on what I saw in the video. You're basing your support of him on blind allegiance, one gun owner to another.

      Delete
    4. No, I'm using the video and the police reports and news articles. The general agreement is that he acted appropriately. Gun blogs do express a wish that he'd had a more powerful handgun, but that's another question.

      Delete
  5. "I don't subscribe to the overly simplistic view that all criminals with guns pose a lethal threat."

    Three problems MikeB:

    First ...
    An armed criminal announces their intention to do something to a citizen against their will ... and you trust that they are basically nice people who really are not life threatening. And yet you don't trust armed citizens who have neither armed themselves with the intention of forcing other citizens to do something against their will nor announced any intention to make any citizen do anything against their will. That is really, really, really irrational.

    Second ...
    Of course a criminal that is pointing a gun at people is a lethal threat. Even a "nice young man" -- who truly has no intention of shooting anyone and is hoping to intimidate people into compliance -- could accidentally squeeze the trigger while waving a gun around. And what if an unarmed citizen decides to rush the "nice young man" or someone drops something that startles the "nice young man"? In a split second decision the criminal could squeeze the trigger.

    Third ...
    Many murderers who have every intention of killing their victims refrain from immediately killing their victims because it suits them to wait. Scumbags routinely march people to a more strategic location for execution. Some scum want to get something that they cannot get after their victims are dead (sexual assault, draining bank accounts, etc.) -- so they keep their victims alive for a short time before execution.

    An armed criminal who is running away could be simply running to cover so he can continue to attack you. Until a criminal throws away their weapon and lays down on the ground spread-eagle and face down, they are a deadly threat, PERIOD.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First: Not all criminals with guns go on to commit murder and not all lawful gun owners are safe and responsible. It's not a black and white thing.

      Second: It's not limited to criminals pointing guns at people. I agree that can be lethal threat, but you guys also consider the teenager who's climbing in your back window and the junkie who's trying to jimmy the cellar window as lethal threat.

      Third: "Scumbags routinely march people to a more strategic location for execution." Routinely? You've been watching too many movies and reading too many pro-gun blogs. First you tell us the number of people killed with guns is an insignificant percentage of the population, then you tell us scumbags routinely execute people.

      Delete
    2. Mikeb, you have an unrealistic idea of what a danger to one's life is. The junkie who's trying to break in to your house? What if he's high on whatever made that man try to eat off the face of the homeless fellow? What if he's a meth head who's so twitchy that he'll kill you before he realizes what he's done? That teenager breaking in? What if he's coming to get his first kill as a part of a gang initiation?

      These events are not common, but they do happen. And they happen often enough with home invasions that I don't want to risk my life to find out that the invader is just there to sing Kumbaya with me.

      Delete
    3. "What if this," "what if that," you sound like a paranoid nut. You cannot make public policy based on worst-case scenarios dreamed up by the likes of you who has an ax to grind.

      Delete
    4. That's you exactly. You have your particular axe to grind, and you want public policy to be based on it. You're the one who wants radical change. I'm wanting us to stay with the rational idea of self-defense that if someone is an immediate threat to my life, I can respond with deadly force. You're demanding that we ask the thug to fill out a survey or some such.

      Delete
  6. See this is where Mike is shown to be the socialist/marxist idiot that he is....

    Thugs point guns at others in a crowded Internet cafe..... they mean no harm just some dudes out for some Facebook time.

    Grandpa concealed carries and then shoots the same two punks, "OH NOESSSSS!!! BAD GUN OWNER, BAD!!! BAD!!!! BAD!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's bullshit, Thomas. I never said when thugs do that it's OK. But, I don't blindly accept every DGU as a clean and responsible gun action.

      Delete
    2. But no gun owner or white guy is ever presumed innocent, in your view.

      Delete
  7. "Disdain for criminals with guns is such that we tend to be very lenient when judging the actions of a lawful gun owner who prevents an armed robbery."

    I have great contempt for armed, violent criminals and anytime one of them get's shot, we should be very lenient when judging the actions of a lawful gun owner who prevents an armed robbery, or other armed violent behavior. The solution is very simple, if you don't want to get shot, don't do those things that tend to get people shot, like being an armed violent criminal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ray Banのサングラスをかけて、父さんと一緒に釣りに行くことは今だにもよく覚えています。その頃はまだ子供である私はたくさんのものに興味を持っていました。父さんに釣りやレイバン モデルのことについてもよく聞きました。問題の内容は忘れてしまったが、そん時のレイバン RB4105はまだ印象深いです。

    ReplyDelete