Engage or not?

[jokerl90]

I'm not sure of the best course of action in the following scenario.

I'm in a store and someone armed with a firearm comes in to rob it.
My first thought is, as long as it doesn't appear he is going to hurt anyone, just let him go. Don't start a gunfight where there is none.
On the other hand, he could hurt someone there at any moment, also he could hurt someone at his next robbery if not stopped.
Opinions? Especially from any LEO's.
Thanks

 

[Inusuit]

I agree with your first statement. As a private citizen, I do not have the obligations that a LEO has. My first responsibility is to go home to my family. Be a good witness, get a license plate number, call 911.

 

[bigwheelzip]

That scenario has played out twice recently at Waffle House restaurants in South Carolina. Turned out bad for the perps.

Robber shot, killed in Spartanburg Waffle House, second suspect - WMBFNews.com, Myrtle Beach/Florence SC, Weather

Would-be Waffle House robber dies after having been shot by customer - Post and Courier

On the other hand, a female working at a local Walmart was stabbed to death in front of a large crowd at the cash registers. My CWP instructor is a Deputy Sheriff, and said seven of the witnesses interviewed were CWP holders with weapons, and did nothing.

Shopping Continues After Woman Is Killed In Walmart | WYFF Home - WYFF Home

In SC, you are legally protected if you intervene, but have no obligation to.

 

[snuffy51]

Deadly force can only be used if you are in fear of death or great harm from an attacker. We can only use a weapon to stop an attack, not enforce the law or stop someone fleeing a crime.

 

[dougb1946]

You are not a cop. Given the option, avoid using your gun. If you have the option to avoid, it is not your life or death moment. If you interfere, you can cause a gun fight to start. That would make you responsible for any injuries. You're duty is to get home.
Most businesses have a policy of giving up the money. It's usually not much, and it is theirs. I personally have no intention of dying for somebody else petty cash.
The gun does not protect you. It is not armor. You engage, you could die. Some bad buys know how to shoot and just don't care.

 

[Hapworth]

Check state and local laws where you live; some places will call you a hero if you open up, others will prosecute you.

Personally, I think it comes down to instincts, which can become incredibly acute under those circumstances -- if you sense the robber wants only money and to flee, let them and give a good statement to the police; if you sense imminent violence irrespective of cooperation with the "cash transaction", defend yourself and others.

Obviously, if they state an intention to commit violence despite cooperation, or initiate it, time to work -- but as a rule I'd argue drawing and firing should be avoided even in this kind of situation unless and until the robber moves from cash-and-run to something worse.

Alas, there's no hard and fast rule for these situations, and no hypothetical or after-the-fact description can adequately account for making a decision based on what's experienced during an actual incident.

 

[Fishinfool]

As others have stated, the gold standard for self defense with a firearm is having reasonable belief you or another innocent party is at imminent risk of death or serious injury.

Your call, as there are so many potential variables that a straight answer is impossible. Most armed robbery suspects grab their loot, and run. Some, for no reason, start shooting people.....

What I will say, is always be observant of your surroundings. Before I enter a stop and rob, I always look in thru the door first. Anything look strange? Always pay attention to what other "customers" are doing. Keep an exit / escape / hide strategy in your head. Playing different scenario's in your head may help someday when something bad happens, and you don't have time to think it thru. Call it mental muscle memory.

If you are unseen, stay out of it, and be a good witness. If some nut starts shooting people, then it is really up to your conscious what you do.

Larry

 

[bigwheelzip]

Deadly force can only be used if you are in fear of death or great harm from an attacker. We can only use a weapon to stop an attack, not enforce the law or stop someone fleeing a crime.

South Carolina Law:

Under the law of self-defense, the defendant may take another's life in the defense of others. The right to intervene to protect another person is subject to the same rights and limitations as the right of self-defense.

The defendant may take the life of person who assaults a friend, relative, or bystander if that friend, relative, or bystander would have had the right of self-defense.

To show that the person being defended had the right of self-defense, it must first be shown that the person begin defended and the defendant were both without fault in bringing on the difficulty. If the conduct of the person defended or the defendant was the type which was reasonably calculated to, and did, provoke a deadly assault, the person would be at fault in bringing on the difficulty and would not have the right of self-defense. Therefore, the defendant would not have the right to use deadly force in defending that person.

The defense of another person is excusable if the defendant had reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith did believe, that the person being defended was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from the victim.

 

[snuffy51]

South Carolina Law:

Under the law of self-defense, the defendant may take another's life in the defense of others. The right to intervene to protect another person is subject to the same rights and limitations as the right of self-defense.

The defendant may take the life of person who assaults a friend, relative, or bystander if that friend, relative, or bystander would have had the right of self-defense.

To show that the person being defended had the right of self-defense, it must first be shown that the person begin defended and the defendant were both without fault in bringing on the difficulty. If the conduct of the person defended or the defendant was the type which was reasonably calculated to, and did, provoke a deadly assault, the person would be at fault in bringing on the difficulty and would not have the right of self-defense. Therefore, the defendant would not have the right to use deadly force in defending that person.

The defense of another person is excusable if the defendant had reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith did believe, that the person being defended was in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from the victim.

Tennessee law reads bout' the same, OP just stated a robbery in progress, no mention of a weapon in use.

 

[Hapworth]

...OP just stated a robbery in progress, no mention of a weapon in use.

OP states armed robbery with firearm.

 

[cgt4570]

Too often now days you hear about armed robbers not leaving any witnesses. If you believe they only want the money or whatever, let them take it. It's not worth any risk. However, any time a perp points a gun at an innocent person, the perp has placed that innocent person under real threat of immediate death or great bodily harm. Engagement would be justifiable even if not always advisable. Again, no way to predict any real life scenarios.

 

[amazingflapjack]

"It depends" and I don't mean the kind you wear.

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing."

 

[Triathloncoach]

If someone pointed a gun in my face I know I would appreciate someone killing him and not waiting for shots fired.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I'm not sure of the best course of action in the following scenario.

I'm in a store and someone armed with a firearm comes in to rob it.
My first thought is, as long as it doesn't appear he is going to hurt anyone, just let him go. Don't start a gunfight where there is none.
On the other hand, he could hurt someone there at any moment, also he could hurt someone at his next robbery if not stopped.
Opinions? Especially from any LEO's.
Thanks

I determine if the fella' with the gun and bad intentions is a threat to me or mine. If so, I engage. If not, I try to evade, escape, and become a very good witness. I have no obligation, legal or moral, to defend third parties. If you're not prepared to defend yourself and yours, that is on you . . .

 

[Retired Chief]

As a retired LEO, I suggest you heed the advice given. Get a good description, hopefully a license plate number and direction of travel. ONLY draw and fire if it appears that the perp is going to shoot. Keep in mind if he shoots the clerk, he will probably shoot any other witness, which means YOU! As a retired attorney and judge, I remind you that self-defense (including the defense of another) is an affirmative defense. That means that AFTER you have been criminally charged, you get the opportunity to prove to the jury (or judge if you elected to have a bench trial) that you shot the so-and-so as the only practical way to save your life or the life of another. That means that you were criminally charged, either posted a bond or stayed in jail, got a lawyer or were assigned and overworked Public Defender, and went through the hassel (and expense) of the publicity and the trial. Your primary job is to go home to your family at the end of the day.
All that said, if you believe he intends to shoot someone, it is always better to be tried by 12 than carried by six. Hopefully, you will never be in that situation, but if you are, you will have to make the decision right now, with no help, and perhaps 3 years from now 9 old men and women will deliberate for 6 months and decide 5 to 4 whether or not you were right.
DO NOT LET THAT REALITY INFLUENCE YOU! Make the call on the best way to stay alive.

 

[DevilDog72]

I have thought of this issue many times, at first I thought I would just wait it out and try to be a good, credible witness..... but, if you wait too long it could cost some innocent their life or you could find yourself under the gun and no longer have the same chance to draw your weapon as before you were covered. I think this is just one of many problems, we as weapon(s) carriers will just have to game out in our head.... and trust we will, when/if, the time comes be able to make the call in time to advert bodily harm to ourselves or others. The last of my worries is a judge and or jury.

 

[Whitwabit]

What the Illinois law says :

(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
(b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.
(Source: P.A. 93-832, eff. 7-28-04.)

 

[1blindref]

IMHO, there is no clear right or wrong answer to the question. So much will depend on many variables such as cover - hard and soft, number of innocent people in the store and exactly where they are positioned in relation to the BG, and if you are alone or with your wife or children.

Much will also depend on your level of training, and what real life experiences you may have had with being faced with a potential life and death situation.

It's very easy to sit at the computer and type out what you should or shouldn't do without the adrenaline dump of being faced with a potential life and death scenario.

What may be the correct course of action for one person could be the worst course of action for another, depending on their different level of training and life experiences.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Just because you "can" do something, doesn't mean you "should" do something.

Or,

Just because they make it in your size doesn't mean it's a good idea for you . . .

 

[JJEH]

Deadly force can only be used if you are in fear of death or great harm from an attacker. We can only use a weapon to stop an attack, not enforce the law or stop someone fleeing a crime.

If I'm in a store that's getting robbed at gunpoint I am in fear of my life and will do something while calling 911.

I won't go further into detail b/c I don't want to get banned again...