How to handle an active shooter from in my book the top trainer in the country Great
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: How to handle an active shooter from in my book the top trainer in the country Great

  1. #1

    How to handle an active shooter from in my book the top trainer in the country Great


  2.   
  3. #2
    Would I do what the author suggests, I don't know, I've never been in that situation and couldn't say for sure.

    I have some questions though.

    How do you know the intent of the shooter? Do you know he/she will continue shooting once in the IHOP?

    What was the background of the shot from the BBQ store owner? Was it the IHOP where, at 100 yards, a stray bullet could kill someone inside?

    Running, even at full speed, to close the gap of the shot still takes time. The active shooter has no regard for the shots that miss his target (you) and can get them off more quickly than you.

    In my CCW class I was told that I only have a legal right to shoot if I or someone I'm with is in eminent danger. Fleeing should be first. I would certainly hope that a jury wouldn't convict the BBQ owner for shooting the active shooter but that is a possibility. Even if you weren't convicted there's a cost, financial and emotional, to your family.

    Without knowing the exact circumstances of the situation I am not ready to speak about what the BBQ owner did and whether it was right or wrong. I just think there are some points that aren't addressed in the article.

  4. #3
    I read the article. And I'm not terribly fond of the hot air this guy is blowing. He stops just short of accusing the guy across the street of being a coward for calling the police rather than trying a 100 yard shot with his pistol (at a guy with an AK-47), or closing the gap to get a better shot. I don't care if he is supposed to be one of the "best instructors in the country," I call "SHEEP DOG" on this article.

    Here's my position. (Copied and pasted from another thread.)


    I cannot emphasize enough. It boils down to situational awareness.

    In most states, the standard for defending oneself is the "reasonable person" standard: If you reasonably believe you are in danger and defend yourself, your actions are covered under the law in most states. (Even if there was a misunderstanding of the alleged assailant's intent.)

    However - when intervening on behalf of another, in most states the "reasonable person" standard does not apply, and your actions are weighed against the facts in evidence.

    For example - you come across one person holding another at gunpoint. You draw and order him to put down his weapon...then when he refuses and the situation seems to escalate, you fire and the shot is lethal. If it turns out that the armed person was the assailant (a robber for example), then you're covered. If it turns out that the armed person was a homeowner, and the person being held at gunpoint was a would-be burglar who had been chased out of the home - then you ARE GUILTY of manslaughter at very least because your actions are weighed against facts...not against the "reasonable person" standard. (If you don't believe me - ask an attorney. I'm not going to engage in debate on this example.)

    This is why it is CRITICAL to know what you're getting into. Is that woman screaming in the alley a victim? Or a prostitute? Or a robber? Or a drug addict/dealer? Is that guy a thug beating up on her? Or an undercover cop trying to make an arrest? Or a robbery victim trying to get away?

    Extreme examples? Unlikely scenarios? Maybe, maybe not. But that's why I'm emphasizing that you have to BE AWARE of what you're getting into, and what the risks are, before you decide to intervene on behalf of a stranger.

    S&W M&P 45; Ruger GP100 .357 Magnum; Charter Arms .38 Undercover
    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/members/phillip-gain-albums-phil-s-photos-picture3828-reciprocity-map-29jun11.JPG

  5. That guy is a moron. So much easier said than done. That 100 yard shot could very likely could have strayed, making you a moron and a murderer. Secondly the man with the AK is not afraid to die, obviously, which means if you go running at him and he sees you, you are his primary Target. Bob and weave all you want, he's gonna be right there with you. There's a reason why this happens CONSTANTLY and the end result is always the cops showing up. Reason 1 being our gun laws are a joke and unless we are staring down the barrel of a gun the d.a will prosecute us, hero or not. Reason 2, your family is with you and your first reaction is to get them the heck outta there.

    If the armed man was inside the ihop, had a clear shot and was in danger then yes please shoot, that's a different story. Calling someone a sissy for not charging a man with an AK who's looking to die? Give me a break. Not every American is a marine

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by ben_p View Post
    Would I do what the author suggests, I don't know, I've never been in that situation and couldn't say for sure.

    I have some questions though.

    How do you know the intent of the shooter? Do you know he/she will continue shooting once in the IHOP?

    What was the background of the shot from the BBQ store owner? Was it the IHOP where, at 100 yards, a stray bullet could kill someone inside?

    Running, even at full speed, to close the gap of the shot still takes time. The active shooter has no regard for the shots that miss his target (you) and can get them off more quickly than you.

    In my CCW class I was told that I only have a legal right to shoot if I or someone I'm with is in eminent danger. Fleeing should be first. I would certainly hope that a jury wouldn't convict the BBQ owner for shooting the active shooter but that is a possibility. Even if you weren't convicted there's a cost, financial and emotional, to your family.

    Without knowing the exact circumstances of the situation I am not ready to speak about what the BBQ owner did and whether it was right or wrong. I just think there are some points that aren't addressed in the article.
    I'm with you on that. If I didn't take the shot I could never look into a mirror or get a good nite sleep again. Really if you do allot of drills a 100 yard torso shot isn't all that hard nor is a 50 yard head shot. I've trained at gunsite I'm less then 2 hr for their and I've also trained with Gabe and his instructors at different times. I have no doubt that Gabe or any of his instructors would have taken the shot. I also have no doubt that they would hit their mark.

  7. #6
    I hope there isn't a jury out there that would convict a citizen for taking action in a situation like this. I could not just watch and wait. I also wouldn't have tried to hit him at hundred yards, I carry a Glock 26 and have yet to posess that skill. Closing the gap while he is focused on the restuarnt then firing from cover would be my vote. Might buy some time till the LEOs get there.

  8. Many options none wrong

    I wanted to respond to this thread because my wife and I had a debate of what to do in the Ihop situation.

    My first reaction was if I was inside the restuarant I would take cover and take the shot defending myself and others pretty clear cut call on that. (On a side note I have been carrying a pretty comfy Smith 642 5 shot revolver. After going through the situation in my head several times I now carry my G19 no much more diffictult to conceal but more rounds, longer sight radius I dont feel out gunned at all.)

    Now with all the info given in the article if the BBQ owner saw the bad guy shoot the woman in the parking lot that was green light if he were to take action. Even if wrong I belive seeing someone shot by an obvious bad guy you are in the clear.

    Now what are the options?

    1. Take a shot from 100 yards at the bad guy.

    2. Mount an attack and rush in closing the gap to take a better shot.

    3. Call 911

    4. Wait for the bad guy outside the IHOP take the shot then.

    I read the responses on the writers article they are all heroes not one said they were not sure what they would do they all either took the shot or rushed in to save the day. REALLY?

    I can say that after almost 20 years as a Police Officer and dealing with people everyday of my career, I find it hard to believe that anyone unless faced with that situation can honestly say what they would have done. I have seen trained Police Officers react opposite of training in very critical situation. I have been around many shooting situation both civilian and offficer involved and there were no heroes in any of the incidents.

    It is impossible to say and anyone who tries to say what they would do is absent of reality. The best a person can do is be prepared for what might happen by mentally preparing for the worst and hope they react in the best interest of everyone.

    The author if this article seems to hold a civilian with maybe no combat or active shooter training responsible for not taking a 100 yard shot at a armed man. REALLY?

    I will be honest and say this about myself.
    Even as a trained first responder and a active shooter trained retried poice officer I have no clue how I would have reacted if I were the BBQ guy. I am not the BBQ guy and would never accuse anyone of making a wrong descision in this type of critical incident. Would my thoughts be different if my family would have been a victim in the IHOP, maybe, but would have could have should have does not work in the real world.

    I will never be an arm chair quarter back but will learn what I can from each incident I study, in hope that I am better prepared for what ever may come my way.

    It is not contriversial at all it is an impossible question to answer as wer are all not robots, each individual is differnet and the outcomes can be a million differnt considering the variables.

    One last note I noticed the author put some red dot sight on this gun pictured n his article as if this would make that 100 yard shot with a handgun possible and then I see an ad on the left for people to obtian that red dot sight. Is it by chance that this ad showed up there? you be the judge.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Off of I-80 between Des Moines and Cheyenne
    Posts
    1,207
    Blog Entries
    1
    I find it difficult to understand how guys (nobody in particular here so don't anyone get panty-twisted) will poo-poo tactical considerations presented by the likes of Gabe Suarez. Having said that I don't know how I'd react if at a IHOP like situation, honestly, until I'm in that situation.

    For one thing I do not have the upgraded trigger connector, slide/sight arrangement he touts at his online store, etc. Makes me wanna re-think my handgun choice! So, I'm gunna crack open a cold one and, yes, think... ;-)
    1)"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty." -Thomas Jefferson.
    2)"Imagine how gun control might be stomped if GOA or SAF had the (compromising) NRA's 4 million members!" -Me. http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/nraletter.htm

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    St. Louis County, MO
    Posts
    3,445
    Quote Originally Posted by tuts40 View Post
    I find it difficult to understand how guys (nobody in particular here so don't anyone get panty-twisted) will poo-poo tactical considerations presented by the likes of Gabe Suarez. Having said that I don't know how I'd react if at a IHOP like situation, honestly, until I'm in that situation.

    For one thing I do not have the upgraded trigger connector, slide/sight arrangement he touts at his online store, etc. Makes me wanna re-think my handgun choice! So, I'm gunna crack open a cold one and, yes, think... ;-)
    I'll take care of the ribs. Move over...there's more beer in the fridge. LOL
    "Don't let the door hit ya where the dawg shudda bit ya!"
    G'day and Glock
    GATEWAY SWIFT WING ST. LOUIS

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Thank you Phillip Gain. Every comment right on and to the point. SA all the way! You stay out of trouble you will not get in any trouble. If the scenario does not include you as the potential victim, you had better be 100% certain before you get into the middle of things. In SC we have the alter ego rule, which allows you to act in a situation that does not involve you--sounds great but if you are wrong in your assumptions and presumptions, you have a very big problem--probably legally, but certainly civilly.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast