Let this be a lesson...

John R. Fuller · #1

I am posting this so we all may glean a lesson from the recent incident on board a commercial airliner. A man claiming he had a bomb in his carry on baggage ran from several Air Marshalls off of the plane. Many opened fire and killed the man. I am not faulting these agents because I had to make snap decisions about these types of things over twenty years ago while stationed in West Germany.

The lesson to be learned here for CHL is not to shoot at someone that is not posing a threat to you directly. Again, I was not there on board that airplane, but I think that maybe they did not have to shoot. I do know, however that CHL folks should not fire on a fleeing crimminal.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177996,00.html

BlakeTyner · #2

I have to respectfully disagree here.

Regardless of whether the man was running away from the FAMs or toward them, he refused to follow their orders and when he reached into the bag, signed his own death warrant. The FAMs reacted by the book. It's sad that this man was possibly mentally ill, but the real lesson to be learned involves always taking your medication (or making sure that your loved one does so) and not putting the agents in this position in the first place. Certainly do not claim to be holding a bomb and then reach into your knapsack.

Also, as a CHL holder (well, when the card gets here anyway) I'm fully within my rights to shoot someone posing a serious and immediate threat of bodily harm to a fellow citizen. Circumstances, obviously, would dictate whether to take the shot, and I don't think that we should adopt a hero mentality, but if possible I would certainly pull my weapon for another person's safety.

Not flaming, just discussing. I think you're right on the money that there are lessons to be learned from the incident.

HighVelocity · #3

In this situation, having a CHL means absolutely ZERO. You are not allowed to carry a weapon into the secured area of any airport.
Of course you could have used your license as a weapon I suppose.

The facts are still developing on this one. It's way too soon to make judgements.

BlakeTyner · #4

Well, obviously an airport is different territory.

What I was saying was that in a situation where a person has a CHL and a weapon, the threat to someone else's life justifies using it, even when your own life is not in immediate danger. Mark Wilson comes to mind because it's so recent.

As far as Miami goes, it is a little early, but given what the people who were there are saying, as well as the spokesman for the FAM service, it certainly sounds like a good shoot.

*Edited to add* Also, I agree with the OP that a CHL holder shooting a fleeing suspect is a no-go. Never meant to imply otherwise.

#5

Just as a learning exercise, let's change the setting to a mall or a grocery store. As a CHL, we're armed, but we didn't have the benefit of hearing the suspect say he had a bomb. All we see is some fellow running from two guys with guns, neither of whom are in uniform or have badges visible. It would be very easy to mistakenly believe the suspect was actually a victim, especially if we were to see the two guys taking a sight picture on him and he didn't have a gun visible.

So what do we do? Nothing. There is absolutely no way for us to know what's going on under these circumstances. If none of the players pointed a gun at me, I'm not going to do anything.

To really put this in perspective, remember we'll have only a split second to a few seconds to evaluate what's going on, decide whether to act, and if so, how to respond. That's why it's a good idea to consider some of these potential scenarios ahead of time so we can avoid the natural instinct to get involved without truly knowing what is going on, possibly with tragic results.

Please recognize my hypothetical situation involves a very ambiguous scenario. I am not saying we should never come to the aid of a third party, but we have to remember that things may not be as they appear! It would be bad enough to allow an innocent person to be harmed or killed by our inaction, but it would be far worse to wound or kill an innocent person, because we acted without sufficient knowledge or information. The BGâ€™s have it easy; they just shoot anyone they want. We have to be a bit more discerning.

Regards,
Chas.

BlakeTyner · #6

Chas, I'm in total agreement with you.

I didn't mean to be ambiguous with what I was saying. It was really unrelated to the Miami incident; I was just trying to articulate the argument that sometimes a CHL holder would be justified in defending a third party (when the situation was clear and the third party would be justified for use of deadly force.)

I probably shouldn't post on boards at semester finals time...my brain is likely not working properly!

onerifle · #7

Charles L. Cotton wrote:...So what do we do? Nothing. There is absolutely no way for us to know what's going on under these circumstances. If none of the players pointed a gun at me, I'm not going to do anything....I am not saying we should never come to the aid of a third party, but we have to remember that things may not be as they appear! It would be bad enough to allow an innocent person to be harmed or killed by our inaction, but it would be far worse to wound or kill an innocent person, because we acted without sufficient knowledge or information.

+1000

As always, well said Chas.

#8

Blake:
I didn't take it that way at all. My hypothetical was in no way related to your response. I think John started a really good thread that can be very useful in playing "what if" in real world settings. In fact, the "man with a gun" in a mall or store scenario is one I often use in my classes to get people thinking about how difficult it can be to determine what is really happening.

Regards,
Chas.

txinvestigator · #9

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Blake:
I didn't take it that way at all. My hypothetical was in no way related to your response. I think John started a really good thread that can be very useful in playing "what if" in real world settings. In fact, the "man with a gun" in a mall or store scenario is one I often use in my classes to get people thinking about how difficult it can be to determine what is really happening.

Regards,
Chas.

I really wish you would do a class up this way. I would enjoy meeting you, and I would love to study under you.

hint, hint

#10

txinvestigator wrote:I really wish you would do a class up this way. I would enjoy meeting you, and I would love to study under you.

hint, hint

Wow, that's quite a compliment!

Maybe I can try to put something together for the DFW area.

Regards,
Chas.

Milorider · #11

txinvestigator wrote:
I really wish you would do a class up this way. I would enjoy meeting you, and I would love to study under you.

hint, hint

Never have taken any other training other than what was required to
obtain a CHL and praticing on my own property every other weekend.

Think that would be cool!

wrt45 · #12

txinvestigator wrote:
I really wish you would do a class up this way. I would enjoy meeting you, and I would love to study under you.

Second that........DFW, at 6 hours driving time, is a lot more do-able than Houston. I would sure be interested.........

stevie_d_64 · #13

I bet a "third party" intervention class would be a short one, with zero range time...

It would be great to review what the law says about it...Don't get me wrong...And I think it would be a great thing to line up...

What was it that Sheriff Beuford T. Justice, from Texarkana said once?

"You can think about it, but don't do it!"

Bubba · #14

[quote="Milorider"]txinvestigator wrote:
I really wish you would do a class up this way. I would enjoy meeting you, and I would love to study under you.

hint, hint
+1 Mr. Cotton

Milorider, I'm about 12 miles southwest of you. Howdy neighbor :)

txinvestigator · #15

Mr Cotton,

I am the Director of Training at a range in Dallas. We have classrooms and plenty of room. If you would invest the time, I will cover the classroom.