What do you do?

I see both sides of the coin. I did kinda expect the "Stay out it" from the LEOs as 98% of them will tell you that. I'm ok with that. I'm not LE or Military trained. However I do have a private range and do a lot drills(shooting from cover, on the move, and so on). I don't consider myself a marksmen or anything, just a pretty good shot.

Like I said I hope I never have to draw on anyone, and if a situation did present itself. I hope I would make the right choice with a clear mind.
 
J Rich i agree with you. I don't believe my conscience would allow me to "stay out of it" as some LEO's on here have advised. As even they know the nearest responder could be miles away and i'm gonna help those who need it if i can. No, i don't have a chip on my shoulder nor am i a wannabe cop. But i don't believe "being a good witness" is the answer either. Who's to say when or if at all the perp/perps will be caught? What if after their robbery of said convience store they get
the attitude that "hey we did it that was easy", and continue. Maybe a bank is next where my wife or kids are standing in line and one of them we're to get shot and killed. No i don't believe waiting on the
proper authorities to catch them is the right way to go for me. I'll gladly take my chances in court over doing nothing and not being able to look myself in the mirror the next day.
As for the Pharmicist he went beyond self defense as the prosecutor pointed out. The first shots we're justifiable,
coming back to cap the guy off while unconscious crossed the line. I've got no problem with his prosecution.


chuck

And while your in court defending yourself exhausting every dime you and your family have, then what?

Or you find yourself crippled for life by the bad guys bullet and can't provide for your family, then what?

Nobody is saying to look the other way. I, as most of us would, defend those that can't defend themselves. But we do so cautiously on our terms.

As far as those sheep who won't defend themselves, they're on thier own.

When your out on the street about to make a split second decision, that decision not only affects you but your family also.

As far as conscience, you may have to look at yourself in the mirror as well as look your family in the face and explain your actions.

There is no right or wrong here so long as you make a decision and live with it.
 
I see both sides of the coin. I did kinda expect the "Stay out it" from the LEOs as 98% of them will tell you that. I'm ok with that. I'm not LE or Military trained. However I do have a private range and do a lot drills(shooting from cover, on the move, and so on). I don't consider myself a marksmen or anything, just a pretty good shot.

Like I said I hope I never have to draw on anyone, and if a situation did present itself. I hope I would make the right choice with a clear mind.

But that is really the issue here (in bold above). Like I mentioned in my first reply to this thread, "what if" scenarios always lead to more "what if's". How do you know if intervening is the right choice, no matter how clear your head is at the time?

"What if", in your attempt to intervene, you make the situation worse?

"What if", in your attempt to intervene, you inadvertently hurt/injure/kill an innocent bystander?

"What if", in your attempt to intervene, you end up getting hurt/injured/killed yourself?

See, this can go on all day. The bottom line is, everything is an unknown until that moment of truth arrives. While it NEVER hurts to use visualization training to go over different, plausible and possible scenarios in our minds, it is ALWAYS, IMHO, a mistake to lock ourselves in to any single response. In other words, the idea that, "I am a good citizen and I must always intervene", while a noble concept, is not something we want to condition ourselves to always doing when we practice our visualization training. We must allow ourselves to have options. We must allow for the fact that sometimes even our best laid plans can go wrong. We must allow for the fact that situations such as the one you described in your original post are dynamic and fluid, and can change from one second to the next, and so too must our response(s) for dealing with them. And finally, we must allow ourselves to understand that NOT intervening could possibly be the best course of action on our part in any given third-party situation.

IMO, an outcome that allows you and your family to remain unharmed without any shots being fired, is always preferable to an outcome that allows you and your family to remain unharmed WITH shots being fired. It makes no tactical sense to lock ourselves into one option, and one option only (such as having the mindset that we will "be a good citizen and always intervene") . We should have a contingency of responses ready to address any escalation in the threat level. That doesn't mean that in some cases attempting to engage the "bad guy" the first chance we get isn't the best method of handling that particular threat, but it also doesn't mean that is the best way to handle a potential threat in every situation.
 
I didn't see this answer yet but I would take cover, draw my weapon if I had one, and then call 911. At least having my weapon out and being out of the line of fire would prepare me for what would happen next. You don't know how long the police will take to respond. If he starts shooting you have cover. If he becomes a direct lethal threat than you can use your weapon.
 
And while your in court defending yourself exhausting every dime you and your family have, then what?

Or you find yourself crippled for life by the bad guys bullet and can't provide for your family, then what?

Nobody is saying to look the other way. I, as most of us would, defend those that can't defend themselves. But we do so cautiously on our terms.

As far as those sheep who won't defend themselves, they're on thier own.

When your out on the street about to make a split second decision, that decision not only affects you but your family also.

As far as conscience, you may have to look at yourself in the mirror as well as look your family in the face and explain your actions.

There is no right or wrong here so long as you make a decision and live with it.
Sir, I agree with you wholeheartedly. To each his own. I will chose to defend the innocent regardless of my situation. That's all i'm saying. If it costs me in court costs so be it. You can't get blood from a turnip. I will "always"try and do the right thing. If the situation arises and i hope it does not, i will stop a "Violent" crime in commission and worry about the consequences later. Too many "sheep" as you say in the world who just worry about themselves. I've always been taught to help those in need and those who cannot defend themselves. Some will not. That's OK too. Personal choice.
Please go back and read ALL posts and you will clearly see some have said "do nothing" or "don't get involved".
Not "MY" choice in this instance.


chuck
I can only speak for myself and MY conscience.
 
Good Point

In the moment if there were other people I would try to get them to take cover as well. It is hard to exactly know what to do in the moment.
 
cshoff

What I meant by the highlighted part was. To make the right choice whether that be to intervene, or to stay out of it. It just didn't come out that way.

I'm with sirrduke that maybe the best answer, and was thinking the very same thing.
 
What I will do...?

It's called "flight or fight," and I guarentee you, whoever you may be, that you can not definitively tell what you will or won't do in a given situation-even if you have been in basically the same situation before-even multiple times. Most of the factors that determine reaction are inside the reacter-it's an inside deal-and personality type is a large factor, but there are many other things going on in the person that affect how he/she reacts. I mean no disrespect, but these discussions, for the most part, sound very accademic, because they are. One of the chief ways to "get a handle" on what happens inside of you when in one of these scenarios is to have someone shoot at you who really wants to kill you, real bad. Now, I know most of you on here haven't had that dubious distinction, but some of us have, and while I can't even begin to speak for the others, I can tell you that most of what is said, in my view, is well meant conjecture, and some is just alchol fuled bovine scathology, whether it is intended to be or not. When a human being "finds themselves" in one of these deals, what is going to happen as far as their interaction. or lack thereof, has already happened, very quickly, in their inner man/woman, and there bodys chemical factory has already supplied them with whatever is necessary to carry that out, almost instantaneously, and "all bets are off" until that stuff is "used up" . There are folks that don't "get scared" the way most of us understand that, and there are even those who, you can tell, like flying while on the ground, but they are a very small percentage, and have personality traits that enable them to "be that way" in a manner that few of us have (or want?) As for me, I have some ideas about some things that I could not ignore and still be able to live with myself. I belong to the Lord, and it has been demonstrated to me that there are worse things than a violent exit from this world, and I am at peace with these limitations. I have been so scared that my sphincter was so tight that my legs wouldn't move, even when I willed them to, only after repeated efforts. I remember a situation that, many years ago, finally gave me the calm I needed about always being armed. It was an account of a child abduction somewhere in Texas. The man reporting it had witnessed a pick up truck pull along side of a little girl of 3-4 in an area across from where he was standing. There were several formidable obsticles that kept him from being able to phisically respond, but the distance was not otherwise that great; but he had no weapon, so he had to stand there and watch, completely powerless to change what was happening right in front of his face, so to speak. The guy was eaten up by it, and so was I. Given the oppurtunity, "I think" I would have expended what ever I had on this dude and his truck, even at the risk of hitting that inocent little soul that had been dragged away and killed shortly afterward. The law, and all the rest of that would NOT have been a consideration for me then, or later, and if necessary, I would have slept with a free heart in a Texas prison. Flapjack.
 
Amazingflapjack, Kudos to you and your statements. This is exactly what the world needs. Selfless folks who are'nt going to be thinking about the "lawyers and lawsuits" when such a situation arises. I am one of those who have never been in that situation and Lord willing, hope i never am. Now i'm not some, "Shoot em' all and let God sort them out" type either. As you have stated all one can hope to do is be, strong and courageous enough at the moment of truth if his convictions are to intervene in a moment of crisis such as this. Some will. And some will chose another path and that's perfectly OK if that is your choice. Only when confronted with said situations will we learn about our true reactions and actions. I hope to be clear headed and do the right thing. The Lord and the Lord alone will judge me one day.


Chuck
 
I see both sides of the coin. I did kinda expect the "Stay out it" from the LEOs as 98% of them will tell you that. I'm ok with that. I'm not LE or Military trained. However I do have a private range and do a lot drills(shooting from cover, on the move, and so on). I don't consider myself a marksmen or anything, just a pretty good shot.

Like I said I hope I never have to draw on anyone, and if a situation did present itself. I hope I would make the right choice with a clear mind.

I like the way you stated your feelings. I just want to remind you that drills, movement and such do not go as your drills do. There are always other factors that come up and your drill targets are not shooting at you.

Tossing this out for your consideration, suppose the robber has a non visual accomplice that is already in the store to cover his back. You shoot the main actor, the accomplice begins to shoot you and others. Then your drills just went out the door and you got yourself or others hurt or killed. Robbers seldom act alone. Sometimes the accomplice is the getaway driver, front man or cover. Are you prepared for that?
 
Last edited:
Here's the video of Jerome Ersland the Phamacist. Jerome comes back into the store, he walks by the perp laying on the floor (shot in head), then goes to get another gun, walks back to the perp lying on the floor and unloads 6rds in him. Self defense?


Phil, your post has some errors. Have you read the transcripts? Did you see what the perp was doing on the floor? Testimony showed the Pharamicist did get another gun and shot five times, not six. It showed he emptied his primary gun and needed the backup. This is a good example of what I often speak of about carrying a lot of ammo. In the heat of anger, passion, emotions or such, there is no way of controlling the times you shoot and memory will not recall the times you shot. Most shoot til their gun is empty.

As to the case of the pharmacist, there was medical testimony the perp was likely still moving about, be it nerve damage, contractions or attempted continued aggression. Have you ever said, "Shoot til the threat is over?' The video does not shot what the perp was doing. Clerks, pharamcist and medical testimony said the man was moving.

We have the pharamcist being robbed at gun point. We have a clerk being threatened. We have two subjects and others waiting in a getaway car.

My issue with the pharmacist is his chasing the other out of the store and shooting at a moving vehicle.

I sent you a PM giving the reason the Judge found him guilty and it is on the internet in several places but not allowed to be mentioned here.
 
I didn't see this answer yet but I would take cover, draw my weapon if I had one, and then call 911. At least having my weapon out and being out of the line of fire would prepare me for what would happen next. You don't know how long the police will take to respond. If he starts shooting you have cover. If he becomes a direct lethal threat than you can use your weapon.

Out of the line of fire of who? The robber might have an accomplice in the back of the store to watch for him. Your drawing and seeking cover just got you and possibly others shot. It also likely put the perp in a direct line between you and the clerk.

BTW: If you could see the main perp, he can see you. Any movement is noticed in outer vision. Movement creates fear. Fear creates reaction.
 
I didn't see this answer yet but I would take cover, draw my weapon if I had one, and then call 911. At least having my weapon out and being out of the line of fire would prepare me for what would happen next. You don't know how long the police will take to respond. If he starts shooting you have cover. If he becomes a direct lethal threat than you can use your weapon.
Your scenario has you inside a local gas station store with a guy waving a weapon and robbing the place. Where do you think you're going to go to make that call that your not going to be seen pulling your gun and talking on the phone?

You can make up scenarios and you can "what if" things til the cows come home but what it comes down to is whether you're going to act or you're not going to act. If you're not going to act you should shut up, hide if you can, and be prepared to comply if you can't, because chances are you've lost the element of surprise and maybe your best opportunity to end the situation. On the other hand, if you choose to act then do so swiftly and decisively. Don't fool around trying to "talk him down" or see if your gerbil voodoo really works, that's a good way to get yourself killed.
 
Last edited:
Am I safe to assume that those with the police badges in their headers are LEOs?

Interesting thread here.
 
If you're not going to act you should shut up, hide if you can, and be prepared to comply if you can't, because chances are you've lost the element of surprise and maybe your best opportunity to end the situation. .

Exactly. I went through two days of re-training in Feb 2010. It was stressed, using such an example above, to first seek cover, not concealment (ex: a stocked counter vs a rack of potato chip bags). Then assess the situation and plan a course of action. Most often that would be allowing the perp to leave the building so a confrontation would not endanger other shoppers. If a civilian were to confront the perp outside, then there may be laws broken.
 
Nothing unless I thought he was going to hurt someone.
^ This. Why risk getting stabbed or shot for someone elses money . Your life is worth a hell of alot more than that . Now if it looks like he's going to hurt myself or someone else then I'd have no trouble dropping the scum .
Here in Florida we have the "Stand Your Ground " law .
 
Phil, your post has some errors. Have you read the transcripts? Did you see what the perp was doing on the floor? Testimony showed the Pharamicist did get another gun and shot five times, not six. It showed he emptied his primary gun and needed the backup. This is a good example of what I often speak of about carrying a lot of ammo. In the heat of anger, passion, emotions or such, there is no way of controlling the times you shoot and memory will not recall the times you shot. Most shoot til their gun is empty.

As to the case of the pharmacist, there was medical testimony the perp was likely still moving about, be it nerve damage, contractions or attempted continued aggression. Have you ever said, "Shoot til the threat is over?' The video does not shot what the perp was doing. Clerks, pharamcist and medical testimony said the man was moving.

We have the pharamcist being robbed at gun point. We have a clerk being threatened. We have two subjects and others waiting in a getaway car.

My issue with the pharmacist is his chasing the other out of the store and shooting at a moving vehicle.

I sent you a PM giving the reason the Judge found him guilty and it is on the internet in several places but not allowed to be mentioned here.

Sorry for the error. Yes, 5rd not 6rd.

I believe the pharmacist committed a crime, not an act of self defense. I do not believe the perp lying unconscious and unarmed (according to the DA) with a gunshot to the head, might have had an involuntary twitch worthy of responding with lethal force in self defense, whether it be with one shot, five or six. While I have not read the testimony, after seeing the video there is no twitching testimony that could convince me otherwise.

Of course the pharmacist was wrong to chase the other perp down the street shooting. Though, I'm more apt to put that in the category of 'the heat of the moment' than I am what he did with the perp lying on the floor.
 
Last edited:
It seems the threat was stopped and any continued shooting constituted a new crime, the pharmacist himself.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top