My friend was mugged

[bayouhazard]

I'm also struck by the question that Washington Post columnist raises in his really great article (cited in this thread) about becoming a new gun owner: "Does the gun indeed provide a much-needed layer of security in a dangerous city, or does it merely provide the perception of security?"

So, fellow CHLers, what are some of your tactical thoughts on this situation?

Carrying a handgun is like having a fire extinguisher in your kitchen. You may never need it. It doesn't solve every problem. But if you need it, you need it NOW, and a quick response can prevent a much bigger problem.

[blackdragon1212]

As a cop I hear this type of thing all too often. There is a lesson to be learned, one that I attempt to teach to my students at every opportunity. There is 99% of the time signals that where missed by the victims of a crime. When viewed from dash cams, or video cameras on businesses overlooking the crime scene they stick out like sore thumbs. We get too wrapped up in our comings and goings. That is a tactical mistake!

Too often a person obtains a carry permit, and there it ends. That is only the beginning, we should be the best we can be by seeking out training in both armed tactical, and unarmed tactical. One can give you the advantage to get to the other, and I can tell you that for a fact from experience.

No doubt about it, bad things happen to good people. Bad things happend to armed people, and bad things will happen to people who don't pay attention for sure. Scanning is the number one give away when subjects are getting ready to pounce on a victim. Fidgeting is the next, hiding of hands, improper clothing for the weather is another. Lottering is also one that can go hand and hand with the previously stated ones.

There are a number of ways of avoiding bad times when you know it is coming. The fight you don't have to fight is the sweetest victory by far. While this may not have saved the friend at the beginning of this thread, it has saved, and will save others.

Part of our program is a "street smart" course we provide for CHL holders. It is a crime prevention program, with basic defensive tactics. We are not trying to make you "commandos" but a crooks worst nightmare should he pick you. We call it "Practical Tactical". Our belief is that getting all of the firearms training you can get is good, but defensive tactics, and making your home, place of work, or business a "Hard Target" should be a part of that too!

Tactical Training is not just what you do with your weapon, or using cover/concealment. It is about the way you think, observe, as well as a winning mindset. A way of life, not being paranoid, but prepared. Like our motto says, "When running is not an option!"

Scott
http://www.blackdragonpersonalprotection.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[boomerang]

If you have good situational awareness, running can be a valid option. But you have to see the threat while there's still time to flee.

[ClarkLZeuss]

Thanks for all the insight so far. Keep it coming!

To answer some questions, my friend was unarmed due to his personal philosophy, but more importantly his ineligibility (immigration status). The robbery happened in Houston near Reliant Stadium at night.

I keep thinking about the tactic of throwing the wallet on the ground as a diversionary tactic (cause that was one of my first ideas). The Achilles Heel of that strategy, however, would be if the robber then said, "Pick it up," instead of getting it himself.

[BobCat]

My neighbor two houses down, where I used to live before we moved here, was a retired police officer.

He proved to me with toy guns (water pistols) that even if I knew what he was going to do, was prepared and watching, that starting with me "holding him at gun point" he could draw and "shoot" me before I could press the trigger. Action does indeed beat reaction. We tried this a number of times and he "got" me each time.

His point was that the most dangerous time for the officer is when he has a suspect at gun point but not handcuffed. At that point, the suspect can draw and shoot him before he can react, if the suspect is brave and well-practiced.

I am not suggesting that it is wise to draw against a drawn weapon. I am not suggesting that I would be brave and fast enough to do it. But I've had it demonstrated to me, when I was younger and faster, that if I were the one with the drawn and pointed "weapon", my adversary could draw and "shoot" me any time, and I could not react fast enough to prevent it.

I think he was asserting that he would not hold a suspect at gun point - if he had to draw, he would draw and fire in one motion. This was probably not official policy, but he convinced me it was his personal policy.

Not being there, or being aware enough to leave before things got ugly, would have been better.

[Fangs]

Four guys had been walking behind them... holding them by gunpoint at very close range.

The first sentence begs for better situational awareness... the second could have been very bad for the BG against a trained martial artist. At "very close range" almost anyone could have grabbed the gun / knocked it to the side as they drew and fired in defense as well.

You never said if the other 3 were armed, but a good head shot on the first guy could have left you with a meat shield as you take aim on the others.

This reminds me of the elderly man who went to fix up a rental property he owned on the same day he collected rent from other tenants. He was stormed by two thugs, one of them carrying an uzi-type gun. The older gentleman faked a heart attack, knocked the assailant's gun up as he drew and fired. Old guy 2, BGs 0.

[Y2bad4u]

If I am walking around a city at night, assuming not a crowded area, I will stop or change direction or whatev to not have people behind me, especially a group. Like others say, scan, awareness and practice.

[WarHawk-AVG]

People can, and have, drawn on a drawn gun and won the encounter.

Never said it was unheard of..just incredibly rare

Pyrrhic victory when you both bleed out over a wallet with $14 in it. (best case scenario you walk with a limp for the rest of your life, badguy goes 6 feet under..but still..some win huh?)

In my Citizens Police Academy class in Baytown, two officers side by side, one pistol drawn, the other holstered, the guy holstered is a tactical trainer all over the country...guy is SMART and FAST! The girl would shoot when she would detect motion, every time....she got off a shot just a millisecond before his shot, both would hit within an inch of the target almost at the exact same time.

Depending on how much fight you have in you...you could "win" the fight...but taking one center torso to prove a point is NOT a good thing...

Yes your buddy LOST the fight when he failed to realize his surroundings and let those scum bags (who are GREAT at sneaking up on their prey [because they are predators]) get within attack range

Its not your buddies fault other than not having the training to know when a situation is building to that point..its always good to have situational awareness and have training to know when something "just don't feel right"

The good thing is the guy lived to learn from his mistake...with some training I guarantee with this "training exercise" on his mind he will be less likely to let those guys get within range w/o 1st reacting in his defense.

A smart man learns from his mistakes
A wise man learns from others mistakes

[ClarkLZeuss]

People can, and have, drawn on a drawn gun and won the encounter.

Never said it was unheard of..just incredibly rare

Pyrrhic victory when you both bleed out over a wallet with $14 in it. (best case scenario you walk with a limp for the rest of your life, badguy goes 6 feet under..but still..some win huh?)

I'm kind of arriving at the same conclusion, now. Basically: you win some, you lose some. The bad guy wins in a situation like this, so just call it a day.

[PUCKER]

This is pretty much a cold-weather only thing...but that's when I tend to be in a downtown-type of environment (otherwise I'm at the lake!)...I wear a jacket and my revolver is in my right front jacket pocket...and so is my right hand...and it's ready to go...it's cheap/easy to patch a jacket if need be.

[dicion]

In my Citizens Police Academy class in Baytown, two officers side by side, one pistol drawn, the other holstered, the guy holstered is a tactical trainer all over the country...guy is SMART and FAST! The girl would shoot when she would detect motion, every time....she got off a shot just a millisecond before his shot, both would hit within an inch of the target almost at the exact same time.

If a BG shot their victim every time they 'detected motion', we wouldn't have any surviving victims, ever.

What they should have done for this class to have it be more realistic, were to have the person choose either to pull out their wallet, or draw their gun, random choice each time. The person holding them at gunpoint can't shoot unless they see a gun, and they have to be constantly checking over their shoulder every 2 seconds to see if anyone else sees them.

Distraction and misdirection is KEY in a situation like this.

As you will be asked to pull out your wallet, You're going to be reaching back around that area anyways. By the time you get the gun out and pointed generally at the BG, it could even still be under whatever garment you're wearing.. shirt, coat, whatever, plus if it's dark out (criminals love the nighttime) you can start firing before they even know you have a gun in hand. Might put a few holes in your shirt or coat, but whatever.

Or, you can do the One-Two Combo. Toss your wallet on the ground, tell them that you're getting your cell phone as well, so as theyre bending over to get your wallet, you're reaching for your 'cell phone'..

Or, look just past them, over their shoulder, and in the MOST SINCERE LOOKING FACE you could ever muster, shout "POLICE!!!!"
I GUARANTEE the BG will at LEAST Spin their head around and look at what you are pretending to stare at, as you have just completely derailed their OODA Loop. This should give you enough time to Move to the side, away from the gun pointing at you, draw, and fire. (The yell is Best done in combination with the 'Wallet Reach')

Point is, there's almost ALWAYS a way to divert their attention away from you long enough for you to step to the side, draw, and fire.

Now, Multiple gunmen is a different scenario, but if you can get them ALL to divert their attention (The Police! yell will probably work well here), then it's only a matter of how fast you can shoot and move.

[Purplehood]

I have considered the same and determined the following:
1. I won't shoot someone to retain personal property (though I may threaten)
2. I won't draw on someone who is holding a gun on me, ever.

If I am absolutely convinced that the person holding a gun on me intends to use it, what do I have to lose by drawing?

[cdc101]

I have considered the same and determined the following:
1. I won't shoot someone to retain personal property (though I may threaten)
2. I won't draw on someone who is holding a gun on me, ever.

If I am absolutely convinced that the person holding a gun on me intends to use it, what do I have to lose by drawing?

Took the words right out of my mouth, brother.

[lonewolf]

You always have something to lose. Your life. Sometimes my talk is bigger than my actions (got me in trouble a few times, too), but if someone were holding a gun on me, my presumption is that they are prepared to use it. I will make EVERY effort to protect my family and myself. I will be taking charge of the situation. I will be acting, thus making him react. I may not win, but by goodness, I will try. I will jump diagonally toward whatever cover I can find while drawing and firing. How dare he hold a gun on me!!

Just my thoughts......after all, this is MY life. Not his to decide the fate thereof.

[Kythas]

I think this situation has several considerations:

1) You need to be aware of the situation around you. What we don't know is how the guys that were following your friend were acting prior to the attack. In my opinion you can usually pick up on someone acting in a way they are a potential threat.

2) Shooting someone for just taking property is a real judgment call. If I understand the Texas law correctly that is one of the things you can draw your gun for. However, shooting someone as they flee seems like it can have legal ramifications.

3) I bet the odds are against you for drawing on someone who already had the "drop on you".

In my opinion, if you didn't pick up on my first point, using your weapon in this situation is kinda remote. That said if the BG with the gun came after you shooting and missed...............then it becomes a different situation completly.

Just my opinion.

In Texas you can use deadly force while someone is fleeing after stealing property, as long as it's at night, and you reasonably believe it's the only way to recover the property. However, this was a robbery, so the nighttime prohibition would not apply, IMO. However, I am not a lawyer, etc., etc.


§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

Just for reference, since it's mentioned in the above statute, here is 9.41:

§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in
lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.