Pincus on open carry

[Ichiban]

Do you want to be the one who does nothing and the bad guy shoots a person while exiting the store? The decision is yours.

And the other side of the coin is; do you want to be the one that spooks the BG and causes him to open fire on you and everyone else (when he sees you drawing out of the corner of his eye) rather than just leave with his loot?  It is a tough call that is very circumstance driven and each individual will have to use their best judgement when they make that call because they are going to have to live with the results.

[Solus]

This is truly a multi-edged sword. Can we watch someone get threatened and robbed and not do anything?

From a LEO training tape: Off duty cop is in a bank with about a dozen customers. Robber shows up, produces weapon and does his thing. OD cop is standing about 15' from bad guy. They're advice? Do nothing and be a good witness.
If cop or CCW decides to intervene, there is a possibility that BG's unknown partner, who is already in the store/bank, will make himself known in a very bad way.

There is also the possible (probable?) errant shots fllying towards innocents. Unless you clean out his brain pan, he will probably turn to flee while firing until he is out of ammo. After all, we shot him with a 9, 40, 45 popgun, not a 12ga or deer rifle.
How many people are in danger then?

I'm all for doing the right thing. That right thing is going to depend on what the BG does and how I read his intentions. (as mentioned, twitchy or calm pro)
Per the OP, I prefer concealed carry because of the element of surprise. I do OC once is a while but it's usually because I'm coming from a desert session and haven't taken the gun off my hip yet.

you know, when I first read this, I figured it might be sound advice from those who would know.

But after considering it, I have these thoughts.

This is directed at off duty officers.  And what is the difference between an off duty officer and one on duty?
 
They don't get more perceptive or more skillful more anything when they put on a weapon.  What they are saying, if you are an on duty cop and have not been noticed by the robbers, sit tight and made a good witness.

The on duty cop can spook the bad guys into shooting and cause wild shots to be fired..some of his own and all the other bad stuff an off duty cop can...or the armed citizen can.  

I'd guess the only difference is liability.

And, one more time I ask, why does it seem to make a difference if the gun is pointing at you?  If you act to protect yourself you can be spooking the bad guy just as easily than if he has the drop on a clerk.   More so because he will see your move for certain but might not if his attention is on the clerk.

My guess is that you think your life is worth the risks involved but the clerks is not.

[Ichiban]

This is directed at off duty officers.  And what is the difference between an off duty officer and one on duty?

Just off the top of my head; Kevlar vest, radio, likelihood of having backup, odds of going home at the end of the day.  No one wants to commit suicide when it is unnecessary.  When Jeanne Assam took on Mathew Murray she was dealing with an active shooter who's intent was to kill as many people as possible, not breaking up a robbery.  Although, rumor has it, New Life Church does have a butt load of cash on site after services.

And, one more time I ask, why does it seem to make a difference if the gun is pointing at you?  If you act to protect yourself you can be spooking the bad guy just as easily than if he has the drop on a clerk.   More so because he will see your move for certain but might not if his attention is on the clerk.

My guess is that you think your life is worth the risks involved but the clerks is not.

There seems to be a lot of talking past each other on this point.  It is not so much about who the gun is pointed at but rather the arena in which the events unfold.  The BG is not robbing the clerk, he is robbing the store/bank/whatever.  Is the clerk in danger?  Most definitely.  Is it the same level of danger that he would face if the BG was robbing him on the street?  In most cases (not all) I would say no.  By committing a crime in a public place the BG places himself in a high risk position of having a lot of witnesses (and possible surveillance cameras).  Unless he is a twitchy tweeker, he knows the an act of violence will escalate the response to the crime - the police will put a lot more time and resources into finding him if he shoots someone.  He wants to get his big (to him) payoff and get the heck out of there.  If his chances of escape are impeded by a CCWer that draws on him he will, in turn, escalate his response to the threat or do whatever he thinks will increase his odds of getting out of the situation.  So, IMHO, it makes sense to seriously consider the "good witness" role rather than try to intervene.

If he has no witnesses (robbing an individual on the street) the risk to him is less for doing something violent.  And he might see some logic to eliminating the only witness.  So the victim on the street is at a higher risk than someone in a business setting.  In this scenario being the good witness will probably just get you seriously hurt or killed.

These are just my thoughts on it.  YMMV.   

[tombogan03884]

As Ichiban posted, who the gun is pointed at doesn't matter.
Yes, the clerk is in danger, BFD. He hasn't been shot yet, so it is simply intimidation.
Do you even know if it's a real gun ?
Do you actually think the insured money of some company that most likely will not even thank you is worth killing some one ? In my opinion, since the robbers attention is focused on the clerk if you shoot him you're nothing but a murderer.

[MikeBjerum]

As Ichiban posted, who the gun is pointed at doesn't matter.
Yes, the clerk is in danger, BFD. He hasn't been shot yet, so it is simply intimidation.
Do you even know if it's a real gun ?
Do you actually think the insured money of some company that most likely will not even thank you is worth killing some one ? In my opinion, since the robbers attention is focused on the clerk if you shoot him you're nothing but a murderer.

+1

Everyone read the criteria for engaging in the fight in your state or jurisdiction.  In the State of Minnesota the criteria is not met in the C-Store scenario.

[Sponsor]

[kmitch200]

you know, when I first read this, I figured it might be sound advice from those who would know.
But after considering it, I have these thoughts.
This is directed at off duty officers.  And what is the difference between an off duty officer and one on duty?

The obvious uniform, radio for backup and the possible partner. None of which the off duty cop has at his disposal.

What they are saying, if you are an on duty cop and have not been noticed by the robbers, sit tight and made a good witness.

No, they are NOT saying that at all. I'm sorry if I gave that impression.
They are saying that when off duty, in civvy clothes, don't escalate the situation unless absolutely needed.
They, just like us, look like John Q. Public, so act like John Q unless it turns to shit.

The on duty cop can spook the bad guys into shooting and cause wild shots to be fired..some of his own and all the other bad stuff an off duty cop can...or the armed citizen can.  
I'd guess the only difference is liability.

The On Duty cop has the duty to engage felons - that comes with the uniform. (that might be considered an ambush of an OD cop)
The off duty LEO might get a pass for lighting up the place that the CCW might not, due to peoples idea that cops are some superhuman breed not taken from the general population. A fallacy I don't agree with since they are taken from the general population.
 

And, one more time I ask, why does it seem to make a difference if the gun is pointing at you?  If you act to protect yourself you can be spooking the bad guy just as easily than if he has the drop on a clerk.   More so because he will see your move for certain but might not if his attention is on the clerk.
My guess is that you think your life is worth the risks involved but the clerks is not.

In my state there is a laundry list of felonies that reasonable John Q is OK to threaten deadly force or use deadly force to stop.
Armed robbery, rapes, murder, manslaughter, child molestation, kidnapping, burglary (1st & 2nd degree), arson of an occupied structure, Agg. assualt, I may have missed one...  
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00411.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS

It's not a matter of "you think your life is worth the risks involved but the clerks is not". That is an assumption. Of course the clerks life is worth it.
But the devil is in the details of reality.
If I intervene, I have put my freedom, our house, and every penny I have to my name on the line. That will be judged all in the name of "was it reasonable".
A decision that has to made in a split second and will be reviewed ad nauseum by those looking to hang you, and that could all be undone by a slip of the tongue or a mistake in the interpretation of your statement.

When the Monday morning quarterbacks who have never been in that situation come out of the woodwork, you may be homeless and broke for doing the right thing. I may be right but an attorney would drain me dry and that's even if I win the case.
Could I live with that? Probably, yeah.
Could I subject my family to that? I might, but it had better be a damn clear cut situation and the trouble is, they seldom are.
And that doesn't even bring into the scenario someone innocent shot. What a freaking nightmare THAT would add!!

[Solus]

As Ichiban posted, who the gun is pointed at doesn't matter.
Yes, the clerk is in danger, BFD. He hasn't been shot yet, so it is simply intimidation.
Do you even know if it's a real gun ?
Do you actually think the insured money of some company that most likely will not even thank you is worth killing some one ? In my opinion, since the robbers attention is focused on the clerk if you shoot him you're nothing but a murderer.

So, you are saying if someone is pointing a gun at you, you won't react until he shoots you?  And if someone does take out a guy who is pointing a gun at them before they get shot, they are a murderer?

[MikeBjerum]

So, you are saying if someone is pointing a gun at you, you won't react until he shoots you?  And if someone does take out a guy who is pointing a gun at them before they get shot, they are a murderer?

Can't answer for Tom, but as for me - If the gun is pointed at me I can shoot.  However, it must be threatening me, and a general pointing at someone else is not a threat to me.  By law I can not protect others unless on of the others in danger is me.

[tombogan03884]

As Ichiban posted, who the gun is pointed at doesn't matter.
Yes, the clerk is in danger, BFD. He hasn't been shot yet, so it is simply intimidation.
Do you even know if it's a real gun ?
Do you actually think the insured money of some company that most likely will not even thank you is worth killing some one ? In my opinion, since the robbers attention is focused on the clerk if you shoot him you're nothing but a murderer.

So, you are saying if someone is pointing a gun at you, you won't react until he shoots you?  And if someone does take out a guy who is pointing a gun at them before they get shot, they are a murderer?

Solus, your comment has nothing to do with what I posted. You have done this several times during this thread.
I didn't comment on what I'd do if the gun was pointed at me, the subject was a C-store robbery, I don't work in one.

[Solus]

Solus, your comment has nothing to do with what I posted. You have done this several times during this thread.
I didn't comment on what I'd do if the gun was pointed at me, the subject was a C-store robbery, I don't work in one.

Tom, in the post of yours I quoted, you said   "As Ichiban posted, who the gun is pointed at doesn't matter.

So you did bring it up.   It doesn't matter if the gun is pointed at you or the clerk.

Are you not saying it does matter?

That is what I wanted clarified.  

What I am asking is if it is you or a friend or loved one who is threatened, will you respond differently than if it is a stranger?

And actually I don't need an answer.  I understand that each of us will be making the decision that we think is right...and suffer any moral or legal consequences of our actions.

I do wish to be sure the question is asked and directly enough to have folks think about it in this depth....and think about it now, before that situation arises (if it ever does) or after you have acted counter to how you would have wanted.

You can call me "anal" with respect to self examination, and you will be correct.  

My interest in the answers and explanations are only for my understanding and to weigh them against my own thoughts and feelings, but that isn't my objective with these posts.

Take care.

P.S.  That is why I responded to the post about the Peace Officers Guide....it added additional information to be considered.