What would you do?

Capt.Jim · #51 03-20-2014, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoke

The thing that bothers me about these "what if" scenarios is that someone invariably jumps in and tells me that the fact that I am armed invests me with some moral “duty to respond”.

I’m more likely to win the lottery 6 times than I am to come upon something as clear cut as mad man stabbing school children to death.

Well the first issue is, nobody told you that you have a duty and moral obligation to defend the third parties because you are armed.

It was posed as a question to clarify why a CCW would ever consider to respond in defense of third parties when their livelihood is not at risk?

Is it because they feel they are in a position to be able to stop the BG therefore they need to act or is it because it sounds like morally and ethically right thing to do?

If your choice is running away like Roadrunner in any situation where you and your loved ones are not in 100% life or death situation, by all means, run!
That is an excellent answer by the way!
I respect your choice of action.
You don't have to explain your reasons or which past bad experiences may cause you to act that way!

What bothers me is people being dismissive towards a question and responding with "Nah, it won't ever happen" instead of answering the posed question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoke

odds of you ever being in a situation that clear are still extremely rare, that’s one of the reasons that you almost never hear about permit holders intervening.

Are you 100% sure about that? Also, could the reason may be because ,there is not enough CCW out there and therefore odds to find a CCW in close vicinity of every bad incident is still rare.

Also it could very well be; the incident was clear to a CCW in the immediate area but he/she chose not to intervene.

I'm sure you've heard or saw on the TV News a gentleman with CCW reaching over the counter and shooting the guy who was stabbing his ex-wife who was working behind the counter in a supermarket.

Now please, without any gimmick or excuse like "it won't happen to me in a million years" or "I have a better chance to get hit by lightning two days in a row at exactly 4:03 pm" kind of answers, simply can you answer if you do the same thing or just walk outside of that supermarket, since the escape route is open to you and you are not in any immediate danger ?

Also, "I'll have a problem with recognizing the clarity of that situation so I won't intervene" is a perfectly reasonable answer too.

I am not saying that CCW did the right thing or wrong thing.
He just reacted that way.
I am just asking what would your reaction be in that situation?
It is as simple as that...

Squarebutt · #52 03-20-2014, 08:43 PM

Fifty years ago last week, Kitty Genovese was murdered on a NYC street in an attack that lasted half an hour. Three dozen witnesses "didn't want to get involved."
An extreme example for sure, but what should they have done, besides calling the cops?
Nicholas Lemann: What the Kitty Genovese Story Really Means : The New Yorker

Smoke · #53 03-20-2014, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squarebutt

Fifty years ago last week, Kitty Genovese was murdered on a NYC street in an attack that lasted half an hour. Three dozen witnesses "didn't want to get involved."
An extreme example for sure, but what should they have done, besides calling the cops?
Nicholas Lemann: What the Kitty Genovese Story Really Means : The New Yorker

Did you actually read the story you link to? Because it calls the 38 witnesses thing a myth

Rastoff · #54 03-20-2014, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capt.Jim

...simply can you answer if you do the same thing or just walk outside of that supermarket, since the escape route is open to you and you are not in any immediate danger?

I'm not sure which "same thing" you're referring to, but I can answer this with two statements.

If I have my family with me, and there is an escape route, I'm herding my family out.

If I'm by myself, I would only intervene if I knew the whole of the situation and the innocent was clearly out classed.

In the case of the op, with cops on scene, I see no reason to do anything but get out or get behind cover.

Yiogo · #55 03-20-2014, 09:33 PM

Whether you are carrying or not does not matter. Get out of there. I choose C.
Even if you did not have your daughter with you. Get out of there. Never to return.
You did the right thing by bringing your daughter to safety.
Yiogo

ChattanoogaPhil · #56 03-20-2014, 09:47 PM

Be very cautious about having a gun in your hand when there are already police at the scene. You may get yourself shot by the good guys.

Capt.Jim · #57 03-20-2014, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rastoff

I'm not sure which "same thing" you're referring to, but I can answer this with two statements.

If I have my family with me, and there is an escape route, I'm herding my family out.

If I'm by myself, I would only intervene if I knew the whole of the situation and the innocent was clearly out classed.

In the case of the op, with cops on scene, I see no reason to do anything but get out or get behind cover.

I will do 100% the same!

AGoyette · #58 03-21-2014, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoke

The odds ambiguous you ever being in a situation that clear are still extremely rare, that’s one of the reasons that you almost never hear about permit holders intervening.

What I don’t like about these posts is that the OP posted a pretty ambiguous scenario and when people responded that they’d be hesitant to respond to something that ambiguous people (you among them) posit some pretty clear scenarios and conflate the two postulating a moral obligation to respond.

Even the examples you used require some thought, there’s no way I’m going to bail out of my car and start shooting at a moving target, especially not a car where the vehicle is going to soak up a lot of my rounds and still shield the occupant, on a residential street unless I have absolutely no other option.

In the robbery scenario, the actor has demonstrated an absolute willingness to kill; he is a direct threat to everyone in the room (except his compadres). When you look at it like that the response becomes self evident.

I have seen exactly one robbery in my life and it was over before I realized what I was seeing.

I don't see how the situation is ambiguous. It really happened. The idiot did decide to work out his differences with others with a gun. A Kansas City cop was jumped. There were swarms of people running up and down the hills fighting. If I had carried that day and hadn't used the rest room right before we left we would have been in the middle of it instead of the end.

Smoke · #59 03-21-2014, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGoyette

I don't see how the situation is ambiguous. It really happened .

Wasn’t trying to imply in any way that your situation didn’t happen

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGoyette

The idiot did decide to work out his differences with others with a gun. A Kansas City cop was jumped.

Therein lies the ambiguity, two (or more) guys fighting you just stumble into it who (if anyone) do you help? Not nearly the same thing as some nut stabbing little kids to death is it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGoyette

There were swarms of people running up and down the hills fighting. If I had carried that day and hadn't used the rest room right before we left we would have been in the middle of it instead of the end.

Again, not questioning your veracity in the slightest.

Smoke · #60 03-21-2014, 06:53 AM

I’ve said this before but I’ve witnessed one robbery in my life and it was over before I even knew what was happening.

Until I’m in the middle of something like that I can’t say what I’m going to do because I don’t know what facts I’m going to have.

I can tell you generally that as I said before getting my family to safety is my first priority until I solve that problem I’m not doing anything else.

I also stated before that once the criminal attacks he becomes a threat to everyone in the store. I can’t say for sure that I’d be able to overcome inertia fast enough to do anything but I’d like to hope so.

Five or so years ago there was a robbery in a Burger King in Miami. A permit holder named John Landers jumped in and tried to apprehend the robber. Mr. Landers drew his gun and order the robber to drop his, the robber turned around and shot him.

They exchanged gun fire in the middle of a crowded restaurant lobby and I think the robber was killed.

Burger King disavowed his actions entirely and did nothing to compensate him for his medical bills.

Protected One · #61 03-21-2014, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smoke

I’ve said this before but I’ve witnessed one robbery in my life and it was over before I even knew what was happening.

Until I’m in the middle of something like that I can’t say what I’m going to do because I don’t know what facts I’m going to have.

I can tell you generally that as I said before getting my family to safety is my first priority until I solve that problem I’m not doing anything else.

I also stated before that once the criminal attacks he becomes a threat to everyone in the store. I can’t say for sure that I’d be able to overcome inertia fast enough to do anything but I’d like to hope so.

Five or so years ago there was a robbery in a Burger King in Miami. A permit holder named John Landers jumped in and tried to apprehend the robber. Mr. Landers drew his gun and order the robber to drop his, the robber turned around and shot him.

They exchanged gun fire in the middle of a crowded restaurant lobby and I think the robber was killed.

Burger King disavowed his actions entirely and did nothing to compensate him for his medical bills.

That is why the best thing to have in such a situation is a "cool head": trying to remain calm and THINK...rather than reacting just because you perceive yourself as "being able to help".
I'm sure Mr. Landers wishes he'd just let the thief TAKE Burger Kings (insured) money. Not until someones life was threatened would I want to respond in such a way.

walkin' trails · #62 03-21-2014, 07:58 AM

Self defense was the rational cited in most states where concealed carry laws were enacted. I don't know very many people in my area who have permits, but two are former military. Neverthless, they don't go out and shoot or train that much. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that there are not very many permit holders that do much more than take the class and shoot s box or two once in a while. Police have had a lot more training, at least at the academy in dealing with deadly force situations. To anyone faces with a situation where loss of life or serious bodily harm is eminent, you have the obligation to defend yourself and loved ones. For everything else, ask yourself if you have the skill to make a positive difference or will you cause an already bad situation to become worse? Use common sense! There was another incident in KC a while back involving a cop who was getting pounded on the ground and ended up using deadly force to save his life. He suffered a serious injury in the process. Meanwhile, another practioner of CCW - "cell phone camera wielder" filmed the attack, offered commentary, and never once thought to instead apply the toe of his shoe to the face of the thug who was beating the officer to death. Holding a CCW doesn't make one any more obligated to run tiwardvthe sound of gunfire any more than a cell phone camera makes a person an award-winning photo journalist. Use common sense!

BigCityChief · #63 03-21-2014, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChattanoogaPhil

Be very cautious about having a gun in your hand when there are already police at the scene. You may get yourself shot by the good guys.

Very sound advice.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

vito · #64 03-21-2014, 09:05 AM

Not only is it impossible to be sure to get the "right" answer to the hypothetical scenarios, what is discussed here on the forum might have no bearing on how one of us would actually behave in the real-life situation. Things can happen so fast that it is probably more likely that any one of us would sort of freeze and then realize the situation is over than to act in a timely and appropriate manner. In some ways life is simpler if you do NOT carry, since then your choices are clearer. Of course the problem is that if you have no good choices, its not ideal to be stuck there without the means to defend yourself and your family. All of this discussion is just speculation. I would HOPE that I could think clearly enough to make a good choice if ever faced with any of the above scenarios, but who really knows what would happen?

Don 73 · #65 03-21-2014, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sac-gunslinger

Under the law, we do not have an obligation to rush to the defense of others (neither do police officers!)

Not to add even more to the debate, but police officers DO have an obligation/duty/responsibility to go to the defense of others. To NOT do so is called "Dereliction of Duty."

Smoke · #66 03-21-2014, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don 73

Not to add even more to the debate, but police officers DO have an obligation/duty/responsibility to go to the defense of others. To NOT do so is called "Dereliction of Duty."

May I suggest you Google Castle Rock V. Gonzales ?

kip_j · #67 03-21-2014, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Protected One

Even better...fight like an angry SPARTAN!

Ah...Michigan VS. MSU...another whole can of worms!

Springfeildkid585 · #68 03-21-2014, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGoyette

I went to the Kansas City Zoo yesterday with my youngest daughter (she is 18 years old). I do have my CCW, but chose not to carry in the zoo because I did not know if it was allowed. It was a free day at the zoo, so there were tons of people there. I asked a couple of cops in the zoo if I was allowed to carry in the zoo. They did not know, but said that it would be a good day to carry.

At the end of the day, while we were leaving, zoo employees were pushing people back in the zoo and encouraging them to go in a building right by the exit. We had just left this building since I wanted to use the rest room before we left. It ends up, some stupid idiot decided that a family fun day at the zoo was a good time to work out some issues with other idiots using a gun. A cop got jumped and there were fights all around us. Supposedly nobody was hurt, though we did see an ambulance with its lights on trying to get to the zoo when we were trying to get to our car. If I had not stopped to use the rest room, we would have been right in the middle of the gun play.
If I had carried and did not stop to use the rest room, should I have A: exchanged gunfire with the idiot to stop him from hurting me or others, B: taken cover, hand on my gun, only drawing if he was aiming at me or my daughter, or C: just run like heck to get out of there. The husband says #B, I am inclined to agree. I just wanted others opinions.
This is a real life situation. Talking to the Kansas City PD they said that they wish more people who knew what they were doing, (aka had their CCW's and were not stupid) carried. I now know that I am allowed to carry at the zoo, and I will next time we go.

I'd say a variant on B. Take cover gun out and up.

Doug M. · #69 03-21-2014, 02:17 PM

Castle Rock v. Gonzales is an application of the public duty doctrine, and has to do with civil litigation, essentially. Violation of department rules about dereliction, cowardice, etc, is a completely different analysis.

I would not advocate getting involved in most cases, because they do tend to be ambiguous and one could be wrong. Your obligation is to yourself and your family. That said - if I see someone fighting a person I know to be LE, whether by uniform or personal knowledge, the odds are going to change real fast. The offender might not get shot, if there is a risk to the officer because they are too close or something, but I might take off the dog's muzzle and deploy him, or apply my foot with real vigor. That's a pretty narrow circumstance, though.

Smoke · #70 03-21-2014, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug M.

Castle Rock v. Gonzales is an application of the public duty doctrine, and has to do with civil litigation, essentially. Violation of department rules about dereliction, cowardice, etc, is a completely different analysis.

Ok.............

shouldazagged · #71 03-21-2014, 03:11 PM

One of my favorite T-shirt mottos: "What if there were no hypotheticals?"

cantelmo · #72 03-21-2014, 03:57 PM

Best advice I can give you is NEVER EVER go to any zoo or amusement park or anywhere else on free day.

jdyer225 · #73 03-21-2014, 03:59 PM

B for sure.

Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

Smoke · #74 03-22-2014, 12:37 AM

Shots fired, large fights terrorize Kansas City Zoo goers - CBS 5 - KPHO

Quote:

KANSAS CITY, MO (KCTV) - As police continue on Wednesday to investigate Tuesday's violence at the Kansas City Zoo, city leaders are looking at changes to the zoo's free admission days for residents of Jackson and Clay counties.

Kansas City Zoo goers described Tuesday afternoon running for their lives after hundreds of teens were involved in fights inside the zoo and shots were fired in a zoo parking lot.

Apparently there was more to the OP's story than just a couple of guys fighting in the parking lot. Hundreds of teens sounds like a riot to me