Armed Customer Halts Violent Attack in Party Store - Would You Intervene?

[Smoke]

The whole "Sheepdog" concept scares me and it always has. My primary concern is the applied assumption of authority and that's always the part that I have the hardest time putting into words.

I see this underlying theme in most of the sheepdog posts that "I'm going to step in and take charge and save the day." Let me make it clear right now you are not "taking charge" of me or my family and if you try I'm very likely to see it as a direct threat.

I carry a gun for the defense of myself and my family and even that is only if I have no other option. I'm not going to interject myself into your drama just because I have a gun. There's just too much risk involved.

Just a day or so ago a guy was driving down highway 83 (semi rural area) in Colorado when he saw a woman stranded on the side of the road. He stopped to assist and she Tazed him. Her 2 accomplices then beat the **** out of him and robbed him. If some one is stuck on the side of the road the police are in the best position to assist. I call the cops and drive on.

 

[Ozark Marine]

Smoke, would you step in (off duty) to help someone you believe needs your skill?
Or just call 911 and wait so you and your family don't get involved.

I don't have the "i'm here to save the day" mentality that you invoked about folks who would or do step up.
You do what you think is right.
I've lived a long time never second guessing what I have done.

 

[Smoke]

Smoke, would you step in (off duty) to help someone you believe needs your skill?
Or just call 911 and wait so you and your family don't get involved.

OK, So first let's clarify that "my skillz" are long out of date. I have not worked as an EMT or even in the medical field for years. Having said that there's no black and white answer. At work I am surrounded by trained medical professionals and I would get the Hell out of their way and let them do their job.

Away from work I have stepped in (never ended well) and I have called EMS and let them handle it (worked out much better)

I don't have the "i'm here to save the day" mentality that you invoked about folks who would or do step up.
You do what you think is right.
I've lived a long time never second guessing what I have done.

I guess I didn't communicate clearly enough, it's not the "Here I am to save the day" mentality that I object to its the "I'm going to take charge" attitude. Let me say it again you are not "taking charge" of me or mine.

Having said all that let me clarify that this discussion is largely hypothetical to me in any case. Neither myself nor my wife are comfortable around large crowds. So, when I'm not at work I prefer to stay home. So the odds of me running into this situation are pretty close to nil anyway.

 

[steelslaver]

Intervening in a domestic dispute is not a great idea. You may find yourself attacked by the apparent "victim . . . "

My brother once stopped a guy from beating a woman and while he was struggling with him she started smacking my brother on the head with a high heal. Left a bunch of little knots.

But, it depends on a lot of things. If I believed he was doing her some serious bodily harm, I would stop him. Wouldn't shoot unless absolutely no other choice. Way to many variables.

 

[Kanewpadle]

With all the back and forth here..........

I think that we are in agreement that it depends on how the situation unfolds? Our capabilities? Who we do or don't have with us?

That's why I say "my terms". Situational awareness and quick decision making are necessary.

And I also say to "blindly intervene". If you don't quickly assess the situation and run towards the event, you're being foolish.

We can all say what we would or wouldn't do. But if are not capable of the above, step back and call 911.

 

[Protected One]

Well, why would you stay? My rule is that if the incident is not endangering me or mine, I'm out . . .

Simple. Of the available options, you choose one ...I choose the other.

About 15 years ago an old man sitting on a bench down town is attacked and beaten by a 18 year old and 2 around 16.
People watched and did nothing but call 911.
The old man had a broken jaw, cracked eye socket and internal body damage.
Cops caught the 3 a few blocks away 20 minutes later.
They stated that he had called them the "N" word.
He spent the next 3 months in the hospital and died.
The DA said he could not charge any of them with any other charges of homicide since so much time had past.
6 months for assault for the 18 year old and some Juvenal time for the other two....

Wonder how the people who just watched and just called 911 felt.
Oh well, he was old and would have died sometime anyway...

They probably aren't even aware of what the eventual outcome was.
Even if the old man did not die, I still find it reprehensible that so many people will stand by and watch this type of thing happen. To borrow a line from the movie, Open Range... "There are things that eat at a man worse than dyin".

If the message were delivered that "we"- the law abiding public aren't going to stand for it, there might be a reduction in the number of thugs so quickly willing to inflict harm on others.

 

[bigwheelzip]

They probably aren't even aware of what the eventual outcome was.

This attack is one that the deputy who taught my CC class was involved with taking witness statements, and used as an example of the possible levels of involvement and non-involvement. He was not suggesting a course of action, just legal ramifications.

The woman was brutally attacked and killed at the checkout area of a local Walmart during the Christmas shopping rush, in front of a large group of shoppers. The deputy said seven of the witnesses were armed and permitted CC. None of them intervened. Eventually an unarmed shopper ran the killer off, but too late to help the victim.

This was the eventual outcome.

Sheriff's Office found grossly negligent in fatal stabbing in Walmart

 

[Wise_A]

This attack is one that the deputy who taught my CC class was involved with taking witness statements, and used as an example of the possible levels of involvement and non-involvement. He was not suggesting a course of action, just legal ramifications.

The woman was brutally attacked and killed at the checkout area of a local Walmart during the Christmas shopping rush, in front of a large group of shoppers. The deputy said seven of the witnesses were armed and permitted CC. None of them intervened. Eventually an unarmed shopper ran the killer off, but too late to help the victim.

This was the eventual outcome.

Sheriff's Office found grossly negligent in fatal stabbing in Walmart

Again, I don't find that it equates in the slightest. In the situation you list, there's an immediate and unavoidable risk of death or grave injury. It meets reasonable-person standards, and there are multiple witnesses.

I also take a bit of exception to the deputy. Forget which of the witnesses was a CCW holder--how many were actually armed, and of those, how many had anything more substantial than a .380 micro-pistol? How many had their families with them?

Guns aren't bad-guy off switches.

The other thing is, knife attacks are fast. I'd wager that by the time anybody figured out what was going on, the victim's injuries were lethal.

Reading the story, the real problem seems to have been incompetent dispatching and logging. Also:

Lilia Blandin went to work at the bank on the morning of Dec. 10. The lawsuit says despite Avery Blandin calling the bank's phone line 50 times over three hours that morning and co-workers knowledge of the couple's history of violence, the bank did nothing to increase security to protect Lilia Blandin.

Forget security, it's time to gtfo.

 

[LAA]

"Again, I don't find that it equates in the slightest. In the situation you list, there's an immediate and unavoidable risk of death or grave injury. It meets reasonable-person standards, and there are multiple witnesses."

I'd at least of grabbed a chair and beaten the guy over the head unconscious. I'd never be one of seven nearby witnesses who do nothing, while this guy stabs & beats his wife to death. I am who I am. Do as you please.

 

[Wise_A]

I think you misunderstand, LAA. I object not because I feel that the situation did not warrant intervention, I object because I feel that it is not the same as the sort of situation we were describing.

Namely--one meets the imminent/unavoidable standard, and the other one doesn't. Equating the two is a false comparison, and trying to use it in an argument is called "moving the goal posts".

I would further suggest that if one is going to carry, then being able to easily see the difference is kind've key. Although I'd bet a lot of people would be shocked at how many morons out there don't.

But, if you are happy to use a chair to fight a guy with a knife, I'll leave you to it. I am quite happy to dishonor myself by using a firearm, thank you.

 

[LAA]

But, if you are happy to use a chair to fight a guy with a knife, I'll leave you to it. I am quite happy to dishonor myself by using a firearm, thank you."

The description has to do with the guy stabbing his wife, not me. At least not yet. But when you think about it, just imagine someone charging with a knife, from 10 or 15 feet away. Say my firearm is holstered IWB. If a chair was in arms length......I wouldn't hesitate to pull it between us. Would require quick thinking though, wouldn't it? Perhaps to quick, if totally unsuspecting. Other than that, it's like the Indiana Jones sequence, in which the enemy is swirling his knife, as if Indiana will do the same. Of course not, he just simply pulls his pistol out. Oh.............the movies...

In all reality, if someone rushes a knife on one of us, from 10 or 15', without warning, we'll probably feel the result, before we can do much.

 

[Kodiakco]

...In all reality, if someone rushes a knife on one of us, from 10 or 15', without warning, we'll probably feel the result, before we can do much.

A good friend and I watched "Surviving edged weapons". We then proceeded to "test" the 21 foot rule. Boy, did it open our eyes to edged weapon attacks. Pretty much anything less than 21 feet and you can forget your firearm. This was with us KNOWING what we were going to do. I can just imagine how much longer it will take to react to a edged weapon attack. What 21 feet gives you is the chance to move and draw at the same time. Staying static at 21 feet and you may very well still get cut.

As far as impact weapons go, I'll take a knife over a bat, chair, etc. anytime. You may break my bones but I'll be cutting you once we engage. In life or death a broken arm is worth being able to spill you intestines on the floor.

Real fights are brutal, horrible events. No one leaves unscathed. The winner of a street fight is the one that doesn't end up in the morgue.

Sent from my SM-T377V using Tapatalk

 

[dougb1946]

I'd at least of grabbed a chair and beaten the guy over the head unconscious. I'd never be one of seven nearby witnesses who do nothing, while this guy stabs & beats his wife to death. I am who I am. Do as you please.

It's called 'diffusion of responsibility". The more people watching, the less your chances of getting help. Somebody else will take care of it. It's why we need cops, firemen, other trained, uniformed designated responders.
Very few know what they will do when the excrement hits the propeller, unless they have had rigorous training and been through it before.

 

[Smoke]

[ame]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pQyefUxoi_U[/ame]

 

[joeintexas]

It would depend on the situation, if I deemed it life or death then everything changes. If it's a domestic dispute I probably call 911 unless I see a weapon being used by a man on a woman. Bottom line is everyone of us has to look ourselves in the mirror everyday, are you proud or ashamed of what actions you took or didn't take. If I either just stood and watched a man beating a woman or even if I decided to just turn and walk away and cover my own fanny, how good can I possibly feel about myself. Then again, maybe that doesn't matter to some people. Do what you feel is right, I'll do the same.

 

[DD357]

I carry to protect me and mine. If someone else doesn't want to arm themselves to do the same who am I to argue. Hopefully if you intervened it would be in a situation where you end up with no criminal issues but even then expect to be sued. Is the victim going to pay my legal fees for civil court? I care far too much about me and my loved ones to put everyone through that. If there are those are are offended by that - too bad! Oh, oh but what if someone in your family was attacked; changes nothing in my answer.

 

[cmort666]

Intervening in a domestic dispute is not a great idea. You may find yourself attacked by the apparent "victim . . . "

I've known SO many self-destructive women who keep going back to abusive men that the woman would literally have to be unconscious while being beaten in order for me to get involved in anything that even smells like a domestic dispute.

A woman once said to me wistfully, "I wonder what my ex-boyfriend (who used to choke her) is doing now."

My unspoken response, "Probably choking somebody better looking..."

 

[Protected One]

As far as impact weapons go, I'll take a knife over a bat, chair, etc. anytime. You may break my bones but I'll be cutting you once we engage.

CAREFULL. If that person knows how to use a bat you most likely won't get a chance to do anything.

An altercation between adults, without seeing a deadly weapon used. I'm just calling 911.

Umm...hands can be deadly weapons. What if he's choking her to death?

 

[Kid44]

It doesn't take any effort to say "hey... stop doing that". At that point its up to the BG. If he stops.. great. If he turns on me.. he made a bad decision.
This whole incident, over a girlfriend? I do not understand. Even when I was young, and dumb, and full of xxx. I would not have risked anything for a girlfriend.

Why bother with concealed carry if all you have to say is "hey, stop doing that" to a bad guy.

 

[cmort666]

Why bother with concealed carry if all you have to say is "hey, stop doing that" to a bad guy.

1. I'm not a cop.
2. I don't want to be a cop.
3. I don't want other people to think I'm a cop.
4. I don't want to do what cops do... for free.

Police have no legal duty to protect me as an individual.

I certainly have no more duty to protect a total stranger as an individual. I especially have no such duty when there's a non-zero chance that that person may either lie to police and portray ME as the aggressor, or indeed assault ME for my trouble.

Would I go in shooting if somebody shouting "Allahu akhbar!" started shooting up the line to see Santa? Yes.

Would I get involved in a domestic dispute about which I know NOTHING, including the mental health and truthfulness of the apparent victim? Probably not.

If it seems like a domestic dispute and there's no weapon and no OBVIOUS and IMMEDIATE danger of FATALITY, I'm not getting involved beyond dialing 911 and maybe videoing the attack for evidence.

But then I have little expectation that if I shoot a long lost Tsarnaev brother while he's slaughtering toddlers at the mall, that one of the victim's parents will tell the cops that ***I*** started the whole thing, and that Miguelito Tsarnaev was a "good provider" who was "turning his life around".

Women themselves have created the situation where it's safer to leave them to their own devices than to intervene to save them. They're going to have to own that.