TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:

PetrucciFan wrote:Towards the end of the interview, the GG said that the BG asked if he was a cop and the GG said "yes" even though he wasn't. Now, I can see his reasoning for saying yes, but could this get him in hot water for impersonating a LEO[?]

When you've arrested a robber, I think a few white lies are just water under the bridge.

Israel has the right idea, though. The defender probably talked more than he should have. It's too easy to be distracted.

PetrucciFan wrote:Obviously this situation worked out well for this chl'er, and I can't say what I would have done in this situation, and I don't want to say what he did was right or wrong, but I do have a question for you guys after watching his interview.

Towards the end of the interview, the GG said that the BG asked if he was a cop and the GG said "yes" even though he wasn't. Now, I can see his reasoning for saying yes, but could this get him in hot water for impersonating a LEO.

If you had to draw on someone and they asked if you were a LEO, what would you say?

seamusTX wrote:In this case, as Herb pointed out, if the robber actually had a bomb and was willing to blow himself up, he could have taken several innocent people with him.

HerbM wrote:Also note this guy was claiming a BOMB.

This means that either it is likely very much a WORSE idea to intervene or very much more important and urgent to do so.

If the guys hands are both showing and empty -- he needs to be subdued fully or shot in the head.

If he's got a legitimate looking "detonator" in his hand with his finger on the button and it is pressed DOWN, then maybe it's a good time to "run for your life" (or slide away.)

If his finger isn't even on the button, then he REALLY needs to be shot in the head now.

You mileage may vary but the principle is that we must evaluate the threat now and ALSO where the threat is likely to be going in the future.

And we had better be right, or at least right enough.

seamusTX wrote:There's always a conflict between minding one's own business and intervening. I think it's legitimate to ask why, if the bank won't hire armed guards to protect its assets, a customer should provide the service for free.

Obviously, in this case, it went well. I wonder if the bank will reward Mr. Fawzi.

seamusTX wrote:Canton, Michigan (Detroit area): A man allegedly tried to rob a bank, claiming that he had a bomb. A customer who is a Michigan CCW holder drew a 9 mm pistol and told the robber to stop. The robber obviously did not have a plan B (nor a bomb) and was arrested.

The startled [robber] countered with, "but, I have a bomb" -- but Fawzi wasn't impressed. "I don't care. You are not robbing this bank!" was the reply from the other side of the gun.