Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This is merely after-action observation/discussion about the senior citizen drew his concealed weapon and foiled an attempted robbery in an Internet Café in Florida.

I watched the security video clip of the shooting several times and felt the senior shooter was rather close to the robber who was wielding the gun, even from his computer terminal (about 4 meters if using a nearby bystander as scale). From that distance, the senior should be able to incapacitate that robber with a snap-shot or instinctive shot to the head or brain assuming the target area is about half a soccer ball. While the idea of shoot-to-kill is difficult to accept, considering there are two robbers and at least one has a firearm, immediate incapacitation/ instant kill may be necessary less the gun-wielding robber who was hit first, instead of fleeing, chose to fight it out with the senior citizen, regardless whether his gun was working or not.

So my question is what happened? Did the senior citizen flinched, or was did he hesitated because the possibility of taking a life?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Having revealed a profound lack of understanding of how things happen in the real world, perhaps you need to refrain from monday morning quarterbacking.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
IrishCop; all

i was just sorry that he FAILED to end the career of BOTH thugs. ====> i'm COLD-bloodied after seeing far too many INNOCENTS being preyed-upon by FILTH for 6 decades (including @ 30 "pinned to the badge") & want more of the THUGS shot, when it is LAWFUL to do so.

fyi, i used to KNOW "Mad Dog" (he of "DCSO shotgun squad" with "Jake the Snake" & the QUICK fire with many loads of 00 Buckshot.) & KNOW that neither of those gentlemen ever said "I'm sorry" (or probably "lost sleep" over shooting KILLERS & ARMED ROBBERS/SEX CRIMINALS.) for KILLING any number of armed predators, after yelling "THROW DOWN YOU GUN" & then SHOOTING.

yours sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,168 Posts
My take on what William and Terry were referring to was the OP's assumption that K-kill shots are easy against a mobile opponent. My impression was that the citizen was doing the best he could, given the stress of the incident.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Exactly, Pete. I have never had to fire a shot in anger. But I know damned well it's nothing like a square range.

SEALS and DELTA may be able to take head shots consistently in a combat situation. Most of us don't have the benefit of hundreds of thousands of rounds downrange and the reflexes those guys have. The rest of us are better off aiming for center mass.

That old gentleman charged into the fray and sent those two thugs running off and wounded. I only hope I can react as well as he should the situation arise.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
I always hate the typical "why didn't you" questions from the media about a shooting like, "why didn't he shoot the gun out of his hand"?

But the tape really does provide an opportunity to ask a couple of tactical/legal questions.

1. was the citizen justified in the use of deadly force?
2. If so does that justification disappear at any time during the event?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Tactically? Well shooting from cover is always best when you can, Charlie.

Legally? Some gung-ho prosecutor might say he should have disengaged when the bad guys were scrambling to leave the establishment. But if it were MY case, I wouldn't. :D

Since I really have no idea as to what kind of training, if any, he had or how long ago...

Wonder if he is going to start carrying a reload?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
One of the most instructive parts of the tape was the lady in the light dress who (apparently) bumbled right between the old gent and one of the gun men without recognizing what was about. You can't see what happened, but it appears he had to lower his weapon so as to not muzzle her.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Having revealed a profound lack of understanding of how things happen in the real world, perhaps you need to refrain from monday morning quarterbacking.
I may lack understanding of how real world works, but I would also like to do what I can so not to be caught completely with my pants down if at all possible.

That old gentleman charged into the fray and sent those two thugs running off and wounded. I only hope I can react as well as he should the situation arise.
I started this thread for the sole purpose of analyze and discuss what transpired in that café and if there is room for improvement, so if I do have the misfortune of finding myself in the old man's shoes least I have a fleeting chance of performing a little better as oppose to simply rolling-the-dice.

And yes, I considered what the senior citizen did equivalent to rolling-the-dice. He may have the sense to bring a gun to an attempted robbery, but after watching the video, I do not feel he knows how to best utilize it (the only silver lining is the robbers being inept).

From the surveillance video (they are all over the Internet by the way) at on point the senior citizen could simply stand up from where he is seated and 'point' his weapon at the robber with the gun (hence forward shall be referred as R1 for simplicity) and the shot should connect with either R1's head, neck, or the base of the neck, if done right. That was how close they are to each other when R1 passed in front of him and began walking away in a more-or-less straight line. During that period I feel the citizen had a brief opportunity to quickly acquire a useful (if not an Olympic competition quality) sight-picture and incapacitate R1 while his back is still toward him. Instead for whatever reasons he opted to approach R1, sacrificing his stability while exposing himself in doing so. Then the citizen dropped into a semi crouch and brought his weapon up before firing, which I thought it was superfluous the way he deliberately, and almost theatrically, brought himself into a shooting posture. It reminded me of some Second World War American training films showing GIs low crouch with their knees bend and shooting the gun from chest/waist height.

Wouldn't it have been safer if the citizen simply stop and aim instead of walking up to R1? Or if he felt he needed to close the distance, at least have his shooting arm extended with weapon at ready as he approaches his target. Instead he waited until R1 turned back toward him with weapon pointed in his direction before he deliberately aim and shoot. If R1 had a working firearm and fire it due to reflex or he decided to shoot it out with the citizen, I am hesitant to imagine the end result.

Perhaps it would have been even better if he had aim and shoot R1 while still in his seat. After he got up, instead of approaching R1, he moves to the right behind the building support column to shield himself from potential return fire from either R1 or his partner. I know some civilian self-defence/ firearm instructors have drill their students practice engaging potential threats from seated position or down on their back to simulate real world situation.

To quote a time-tested motto: "if you want to carry a gun, then learn to use it!" Why get into a gunfight only to get yourself killed. I think George Patton said it best: "[no one] ever won a war by dying for his country…he won it by making [his opposite] dying for his country." And maybe my perception is demented, but I came from a place and time where bad-guys more often stand and fight instead of roll-over when confronted by the law, and gunfights seem to be a weekly occurrence.

And for the record I feel the base of the neck (just above the sternum) to be a better target than center-mass. If on target, one can hit the vertebral column and damage the spinal cord. Assuming the margin of error is around an Inch, a near-miss can still nick the artery or neck muscle and tissues if it went high. Dropped low it hit the sternum or other bones and creates secondary fragments. Drifted either left or right means muscle and/or bones, limiting the function of the arms at the least. Besides the base of the neck is less likely to move and presents a more static target as oppose to the head.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
:poke::cluebat:

"CENTER OF MASS."​

It's one thing to think you can pull off an Annie Oakley shot on an internet forum, but it's another matter entirely when the badguys are moving, armed, and fighting back. Your odds of being in a shooting where the dynamics are the same as in this related story are absurdly ridiculously negligible.
It's one thing to calmly shoot black circles on a range but in a real fight you're gonna have an adrenaline rush and that is going to make your reflexes much cruder and more uncertain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Mr. Coltlin,

I expect we're all very glad to see that you've progressed to mentioning aiming. However, you keep coming back to "pointing" and other grave errors. This is most dangerous with innocents in the same space as the bad guys. Your assumption of a one inch variance from point of (what we devoutly hope is) aim while in a real world shooting is in gross error in most cases.

Seek out hands on training from a good source. I'd suggest Mas Ayoob or some local trainer of good quality. I'll also suggest visiting Evan Marshalls website and reading "The Dangers of Intervention" and possibly some other material. One learns a lot more with their mouth closed/without posting privileges.

The highest form of any martial art is being sufficiently aware of ones surroundings that one leaves the area before bad things happen.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
coltlin; Irish Cop; TommyGunn, et.al,

fwiw, i'm "more than a bit bothered" that at less than 10 FEET that the gentleman at the internet cafe could NOT put BOTH robbers DOWN/OUT, with EVERY shot.

MOST police shootouts, where SOMEBODY got HIT is 7 meters or MUCH less (MANY are literally within ARM's reach!) & i'm a BIT "nervous about" of ANY armed person who cannot EVEN UNDER GREAT STRESS, empty his/her handgun into the K-5 area, every time from the 7M line.
(i firmly believe that my 23YO niece, who has had her LA/TX CCW for less than a year, could do that IN that crowded internet cafe, UNDER STRESS & W/O hitting an innocent person. - IF she can to that rather simple task, i believe that EVERY CCW should be able to do the same! period. end of story.)

IF my lady, my daughter & I are eating dinner in a restuarant, & a CLEAN shooting opportunity to shoot a ARMED ROBBER (or worse, a serial killer) presents itself, i want EVERY person, who is a CCW holder, to hit the CRIMINAL rather than an INNOCENT person.

That's WHY i'm a fan of BETTER "shooting qualification requirements" for licensure of CCW persons.
(imVho, EVERY CCW holder should be WELCOMED at every police range. - it would be in EVERYONE's interest for every PD/SD/CD to DO that & to make friends with the local CCW folks!)

just my HUMBLE opinion, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
...you keep coming back to "pointing" and other grave errors. This is most dangerous with innocents in the same space as the bad guys. Your assumption of a one inch variance from point of (what we devoutly hope is) aim while in a real world shooting is in gross error in most cases.
When I said 'pointing', I meant bring the weapon to eye-level with arm extended as oppose to shooting from the hip or so (I may be clueless, but I'm not that clueless). My one inch error means one inch from point-of-aim in any direction, so the spread group will be about two inches in diameter. I guess a different terminology is used for handgun world.

It's one thing to think you can pull off an Annie Oakley shot on an internet forum, but it's another matter entirely when the badguys are moving, armed, and fighting back....It's one thing to calmly shoot black circles on a range but in a real fight you're gonna have an adrenaline rush and that is going to make your reflexes much cruder and more uncertain.
I thought R1 was not moving very much from the video. He was walking rather slowly/leisurely away from the senior citizen for a few moments before moving sideways (At one point near the beginning if the citizen were to stand up sooner and extend his shooting arm, the muzzle would be about a meter, a meter and a half away from the back of R1's head). Under such condition, a spread-group about two inches in diameter at about ten feet (3 meters) should be reasonable. My primary argument is the citizen had a window but he almost squander it and exposing himself to even more danger in doing so.

Seek out hands on training from a good source. I'd suggest Mas Ayoob or some local trainer of good quality. I'll also suggest visiting Evan Marshalls website and reading "The Dangers of Intervention" and possibly some other material. One learns a lot more with their mouth closed/without posting privileges. The highest form of any martial art is being sufficiently aware of ones surroundings that one leaves the area before bad things happen.
Your odds of being in a shooting where the dynamics are the same as in this related story are absurdly ridiculously negligible.
While I have not attended a real class, I have read up articles from Ayoob and other instructors which discusses real-world incidents and how one could do better/ differently. And I personally do not believe it is neglect or armchair generalship, to learn to recognize a potential tactical opening and how to milk it to the max. After all, how many times have we heard of stories where people came across opportunities for a decisive outcome only to have them slipped away due to hesitation and self-doubt?

"Sweat saves blood. Blood saves lives. Brain saves both." Erwin Rommel

"You look, but you don't see. You listen, but you don't hear." [don't remember who said this one]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
coltlin; Irish Cop; TommyGunn, et.al,

fwiw, i'm "more than a bit bothered" that at less than 10 FEET that the gentleman at the internet cafe could NOT put BOTH robbers DOWN/OUT, with EVERY shot.

MOST police shootouts, where SOMEBODY got HIT is 7 meters or MUCH less (MANY are literally within ARM's reach!) & i'm a BIT "nervous about" of ANY armed person who cannot EVEN UNDER GREAT STRESS, empty his/her handgun into the K-5 area, every time from the 7M line.
(i firmly believe that my 23YO niece, who has had her LA/TX CCW for less than a year, could do that IN that crowded internet cafe, UNDER STRESS & W/O hitting an innocent person. - IF she can to that rather simple task, i believe that EVERY CCW should be able to do the same! period. end of story.)

IF my lady, my daughter & I are eating dinner in a restuarant, & a CLEAN shooting opportunity to shoot a ARMED ROBBER (or worse, a serial killer) presents itself, i want EVERY person, who is a CCW holder, to hit the CRIMINAL rather than an INNOCENT person..........
Yes .... however, if one fires "center of mass" it ought to provide one with the best chance of ending the event. Trying to hit the "head, neck, or the base of the neck, if done right," simply compounds the difficulty in needlessly dangerous manner, IMHO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
When I said 'pointing', I meant bring the weapon to eye-level with arm extended .......

Under such condition, a spread-group about two inches in diameter at about ten feet (3 meters) should be reasonable. ....................
They put sights on handguns for a reason. At the distance in question, the use of the sights, as well as a controlled trigger stroke is still necessary-particularly since the target was essentially being ambushed. "Reasonable" is a variable concept under stress, I've witnessed complete misses at the stated ten feet.

"Center of mass" is also a variable concept and done by the original meaning is best suited for the military who typically engage at longer distances. After many years, I believe the Primary Neutralization Target area is a better primary target. From the front, this is essentially the base of the throat to a line between the nipples. LE Targets has one, their DST-1A that illustrates the concept. Since most folks exert some ferocious trigger pressure under stress, this actually provides the best aiming point, as a round pulled low/wide still has the potential to strike vital areas rather than the gut. I've been an instructor for 30 years and see far more low shots than high.

The head is a really, really poor target for most handguns for most people. I'm personally aware to two failures to penetrate. While both resulted in instant one shot stops, one can't count on concussions as a neutralizing factor.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
TommyGunn,et.al.,

"Center mass" is where it is at, imVho. and in the days when i went to the academy, we were taught to make ONE center of mass shot from, if possible, a covered & concealed supported position.
(fyi, i see NO reason to have a "fair fight" against a CRIMINAL, especially at my age.- can you say, "9mm flying ashtray to the K5, children? Sure you can!")

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
They put sights on handguns for a reason. At the distance in question, the use of the sights, as well as a controlled trigger stroke is still necessary-particularly since the target was essentially being ambushed. "Reasonable" is a variable concept under stress, I've witnessed complete misses at the stated ten feet.

"Center of mass" is also a variable concept and done by the original meaning is best suited for the military who typically engage at longer distances. After many years, I believe the Primary Neutralization Target area is a better primary target. From the front, this is essentially the base of the throat to a line between the nipples. LE Targets has one, their DST-1A that illustrates the concept. Since most folks exert some ferocious trigger pressure under stress, this actually provides the best aiming point, as a round pulled low/wide still has the potential to strike vital areas rather than the gut. I've been an instructor for 30 years and see far more low shots than high.

The head is a really, really poor target for most handguns for most people. I'm personally aware to two failures to penetrate. While both resulted in instant one shot stops, one can't count on concussions as a neutralizing factor.
I need to quit using "old" terms like COM. Bad habit, and confusing to boot.

You are absolutely correct, Mr. Moore. Current teaching and doctrine is a what I call a "High Chest" point of aim, for the reasons you describe. It's what we're taught at the academy (or at least were way back in the 90's when I went).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
IrishCop,

pardon me, but the "name changers" are the ones who CAUSED the problem. - had NOBODY changed the "terminology", which came out of the US Marshal's & FBI academies, we wouldn't be talking about "confusing" or "old terms".

fwiw, i was FIRST sworn in in Clark County AR, when there was NO academy for county officers in 1966. instead the sheriff handed me a tin star, a copy of the AR Penal Code & Code of Criminal Procedure, a county credit card & told me to "be safe out there, boy". - i was still 18YO, then. = it was, in those long ago days/DAZE, called, "learning by doing".
when a state-wide academy was finally instituted, we "old guys" were given essentially the same training in 2-week bits & pieces. - as i was OCONUS in the army during that period, i did a lot of my "updates" by receiving the lesson plans & taking a test on them by mail.
(fyi, i still have my AR PO License, because until @1970, the licenses were issued for LIFE.)

when i returned to TX in 1976 to attend grad school, i went to the police academy & ended up on the NCTRPA weapons committee, as they decided that it was SILLY to have me "sit through" the "rookie school", just because the state law said that EVERYBODY had to.
(i ended up teaching several of "my class members" to shoot & got them all qualified.- being "in the rookie class" & being "on staff" at the same time was "just a bit odd".)

through all that time, including 20+ years as a AD/ARNGUS/USAR officer, USACIDC Supervising Agent & 3 years as a DUSM, i've seem LOTS of "needless changes" in terminology, but DAMNED LITTLE really meaningful change.

just my opinion, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
IrishCop,

pardon me, but the "name changers" are the ones who CAUSED the problem. - had NOBODY changed the "terminology", which came out of the US Marshal's & FBI academies, we wouldn't be talking about "confusing" or "old terms".

fwiw, i was FIRST sworn in in Clark County AR, when there was NO academy for county officers in 1966. instead the sheriff handed me a tin star, a copy of the AR Penal Code & Code of Criminal Procedure, a county credit card & told me to "be safe out there, boy". - i was still 18YO, then. = it was, in those long ago days/DAZE, called, "learning by doing".
when a state-wide academy was finally instituted, we "old guys" were given essentially the same training in 2-week bits & pieces. - as i was OCONUS in the army during that period, i did a lot of my "updates" by receiving the lesson plans & taking a test on them by mail.
(fyi, i still have my AR PO License, because until @1970, the licenses were issued for LIFE.)

when i returned to TX in 1976 to attend grad school, i went to the police academy & ended up on the NCTRPA weapons committee, as they decided that it was SILLY to have me "sit through" the "rookie school", just because the state law said that EVERYBODY had to.
(i ended up teaching several of "my class members" to shoot & got them all qualified.- being "in the rookie class" & being "on staff" at the same time was "just a bit odd".)

through all that time, including 20+ years as a AD/ARNGUS/USAR officer, USACIDC Supervising Agent & 3 years as a DUSM, i've seem LOTS of "needless changes" in terminology, but DAMNED LITTLE really meaningful change.

just my opinion, sw
No pardon necessary, SW. I just remember being taught in the USAF to shoot "center mass", and that was demonstrated on the old B-27 targets where the "10" ring was about at the solar plexus.

In 1995 when I went to the academy in Selma, AL, we were using B-27's there. The high chest POA has been around a few years now, and I must admit it makes sense insofar as human anatomy is concerned. I just never have gotten around to refitting my vocabulary. :rolleyes:

Now there are a few "new" things I simply refuse to adopt...like laying the pistol against your off hand close to the chest while pointing it at your feet when on the move. That, and the extend the gun in both hands, fire, bring it back in both hands to your chest, then keeping the offhand against your chest while you holster. See a lot of that in video's of supposedly high speed low drag guys. Can't wrap my head around those tactics though. My ignorance I guess, but it just seems so...unnatural.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top