CHL Instructor Shoots Aggressor at Gas Station

[Solaris]

The tactics look fine to me. I don't know why CHL went outside to get a tag number. Maybe BG promised to go get his gun and come back and settle things? Would that justify trying to ID the guy?

I think the issue between deadguy and clerk was over, and VicMackey was getting plates to call in drunk driver? That would make sense to me. Unfortunately that set the deadguy off.

[Solaris]

Lots of things we don't know. But some things we do. We do have more than just the non-audio tape. We do have the text of the linked article that states unequivocally, "Ron Ruple, assistant chief of the Mandeville Police Department, said evidence from the scene, including statements from witnesses, video evidence and the shooter’s own account, pointed to a justifiable act of self-defense."

That really does not tell us anything about tactics employed.

Since he was not arrested and not charged it would seem obvious they concluded justifiable act of self-defense. Now had they said what evidence, and posted those statements, that might be useful. But it is really not interesting to me if it was justified or not. 1 less dirtbag on the streets justified or not. I am more interested in the events that led up to the shooting. I would love to have audio. I think that would tell a lot, as it might explain why clerk & Mackey took the action they took.

[Solaris]

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Yeah that goes to the problem of OC, he showed his cards, and thus limited his response choices and perhaps made himself a target. Then he drew, further limiting his choices. dead guy was pushing him around, and he could not fight back, and had trouble maintaining his balance. then he got himself backed into a corner, it looked like he left himself with 2 choices, holster and go hands on or shoot. He chose option 2.

Like I said, I cannot find a single thing he did right.

[mojo84]

The only thing that stands out to me and I am confident I would have done differently is how the license plate was checked. I would have attempted to not be as obvious. However, the way the armed citizen did it does not equal escalation and nullify his right to defend himself.

As far as saying the aggressor didn't have a weapon comments, it appears to me he had at least a couple hundred within arms reach right before he was shot. Once someone continues to attack and backs someone into a corner after being warned, I see nothing wrong with the aggressor being shot to stop the attack.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/43j3lodcca3vn ... 7.png?dl=0

[vjallen75]

Have you ever REALLY PUNCHED someone in a life or death situation? A really hard punch to the head will break the bones in your hand. After your hand breaks, how are you supposed to punch or shoot? Also, it is very difficult even for boxing pros to knock someone out, especially if the person being PUNCHED is hard headed, which the agressor obviously is.

No I never have, nor have I ever been in that situation. I meant before the situation ever got to the point where his life was in danger. The guy is clearly a threat but as I have previously stated you can't tell intent from a video nor can you hear what is being said. Do I think other things could have been done to prevent drawing a firearm? Yes, I do, but that's not fair to me to say because I wasn't in the situation.

I do understand that it is hard to knock someone out and aggressor is CLEARLY hard headed.

EDIT: maybe I'm naïve because I'm young, after reading many post; I should not engage in H2H with anyone while carrying. I just feel like there could've been more done to not be involved. After getting involved, he showed great restraint until he was back into a corner

[Vol Texan]

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Yeah that goes to the problem of OC, he showed his cards, and thus limited his response choices and perhaps made himself a target. Then he drew, further limiting his choices. dead guy was pushing him around, and he could not fight back, and had trouble maintaining his balance. then he got himself backed into a corner, it looked like he left himself with 2 choices, holster and go hands on or shoot. He chose option 2.

Like I said, I cannot find a single thing he did right.

He lived.

Funny thing about jump school: they spent a couple weeks watching us do PLFs (parachute landing falls, in leg-speak), critiquing every one, and making us do it until we got it right. But then jump week came along, and all that mattered was that we could walk off Gowan Field on our own two legs. If we could walk, it was a good PLF. if we got carried, we failed.

Seems similar to this situation, I think. We can Monday-morning quarterback all we want on this forum, but in the end, he went home safely to his family (and he doesn't have to leave them again for a stint in the grey-bar hotel). Seems like a good outcome to me.

[warnmar10]

... I should not engage in H2H with anyone while carrying. ...

Engaging in H2H is always a bad idea. Arm yourself and avoid trouble whenever possible. JMO.

[vjallen75]

Engaging in H2H is always a bad idea. Arm yourself and avoid trouble whenever possible. JMO.

I always carry now but reading opinions on this forum has definitely given me great insight as to what COULD happen at any given time.

[C-dub]

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Yeah that goes to the problem of OC, he showed his cards, and thus limited his response choices and perhaps made himself a target. Then he drew, further limiting his choices. dead guy was pushing him around, and he could not fight back, and had trouble maintaining his balance. then he got himself backed into a corner, it looked like he left himself with 2 choices, holster and go hands on or shoot. He chose option 2.

Like I said, I cannot find a single thing he did right.

He lived.

You win.

[Solaris]

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Yeah that goes to the problem of OC, he showed his cards, and thus limited his response choices and perhaps made himself a target. Then he drew, further limiting his choices. dead guy was pushing him around, and he could not fight back, and had trouble maintaining his balance. then he got himself backed into a corner, it looked like he left himself with 2 choices, holster and go hands on or shoot. He chose option 2.

Like I said, I cannot find a single thing he did right.

He lived.

So did the clerk and he managed to do it without shooting anyone. The clerks tactics were far superior to VicMackeys. The final irony would be confirmation the clerk was armed the entire time. The clerk did EVERYTHING right. VicMackey did EVERYTHING wrong. It is all right there on video to see.

1st rule of a gunfight, do not be in one. The clerk understood the rule, the Instructor did not. his life is forever changed not for the better.

[Vol Texan]

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Yeah that goes to the problem of OC, he showed his cards, and thus limited his response choices and perhaps made himself a target. Then he drew, further limiting his choices. dead guy was pushing him around, and he could not fight back, and had trouble maintaining his balance. then he got himself backed into a corner, it looked like he left himself with 2 choices, holster and go hands on or shoot. He chose option 2.

Like I said, I cannot find a single thing he did right.

He lived.

So did the clerk and he managed to do it without shooting anyone. The clerks tactics were far superior to VicMackeys. The final irony would be confirmation the clerk was armed the entire time. The clerk did EVERYTHING right. VicMackey did EVERYTHING wrong. It is all right there on video to see.

1st rule of a gunfight, do not be in one. The clerk understood the rule, the Instructor did not. his life is forever changed not for the better.

"Anytime somebody is absolutely certain about something, they are almost always absolutely wrong" ― Jeff Lindsay

I am not suggesting that 100% of everything he did is right. That would be an absolute statement, and that would make me look foolish. All someone would have to do is find just one thing he did poorly to prove me wrong.

Your statement was that you couldn't find a single thing he did right. That is also implying an absolute, and it is just as easy to prove you wrong. He survived an attack to live another day. That was something he did right.

I get it. You think he was completely in the wrong, while many of us feel he was mostly in the right. We may not come to an agreement, but absolute statements make it difficult to have a normal conversation and learn from this event. That's what we're here for: to learn. But a constant din of "he's wrong, he's wrong, he's wrong" has hijacked this conversation. I will no longer reply to you on the subject, so we can get back to the learning experience that it was meant to be.

[Vol Texan]

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Yeah that goes to the problem of OC, he showed his cards, and thus limited his response choices and perhaps made himself a target. Then he drew, further limiting his choices. dead guy was pushing him around, and he could not fight back, and had trouble maintaining his balance. then he got himself backed into a corner, it looked like he left himself with 2 choices, holster and go hands on or shoot. He chose option 2.

Like I said, I cannot find a single thing he did right.

He lived.

You win.

Thank you, sir!

[Javier730]

The only one who did something wrong in the video was the drunk guy who got shot. He was drunk in public, decided to be a jerk, attacked an armed man who ended up shooting him. The drunk was wrong and he payed the ultimate price for his wrong doing.

[Solaris]

Your statement was that you couldn't find a single thing he did right. That is also implying an absolute, and it is just as easy to prove you wrong. He survived an attack to live another day. That was something he did right.

You are confusing tactics with results. Surviving is not a tactic, it is a result. We are at 5 pages and nobody has been able to name a single tactic he employed that was right. Because there are none.

It is a good tactic to open carry in a non-retention holster? NO

Is is t a good tactic to be openly armed and turn your back on an argumentative person? NO.

Is it a good tactic to leave an area with 360 degree egress and enter a closed area and allow the aggressor to be between you and the only egress? NO.

Is it a good tactic to allow an aggressor to be within a foot of you when you are openly armed? NO.

Is it a good tactic to NOT call 911 on an aggressive person? NO.

[eta - one more big one. Even after shooting him, he turned his back on him again! and moved past him in a confined area. He is lucky he was not tackled from behind.]

Anyone who cannot see the tactics this guy employed were wrong is sadly likely going to repeat them, and it might not turn out as well.

I will no longer reply to you on the subject, so we can get back to the learning experience that it was meant to be.

Most people run from a thread when they realize they are wrong and no longer want to defend their wrong positions. So I understand you not responding. You clearly do not want to defend all his bad tactics. I get it.

[mojo84]

Your statement was that you couldn't find a single thing he did right. That is also implying an absolute, and it is just as easy to prove you wrong. He survived an attack to live another day. That was something he did right.

You are confusing tactics with results. Surviving is not a tactic, it is a result. We are at 5 pages and nobody has been able to name a single tactic he employed that was right. Because there are none.

It is a good tactic to open carry in a non-retention holster? NO

Is is t a good tactic to be openly armed and turn your back on an argumentative person? NO.

Is it a good tactic to leave an area with 360 degree egress and enter a closed area and allow the aggressor to be between you and the only egress? NO.

Is it a good tactic to allow an aggressor to be within a foot of you when you are openly armed? NO.

Is it a good tactic to NOT call 911 on an aggressive person? NO.

Anyone who cannot see what this guy did wrong is sadly likely going to repeat them, and it might not turn out as well.

I will no longer reply to you on the subject, so we can get back to the learning experience that it was meant to be.

Most people run from a thread when they realize they are wrong and no longer want to defend their wrong positions. So I understand you not responding. You clearly do not want to defend all his bad tactics. I get it.

You seem to be assuming the cops weren't called. The clerk picked the phone up multiple times. Who did he call?

Have you ever been in a similar situation where someone just kept coming at and threatening you?

How do you know the guy didn't say he was going to his car to get a gun?

Who are you to criticize the guy's method of carry. Just because you do not like open carry for yourself, it doesn't mean it is necessarily bad for all in all situations. Note: I have yet to open carry into a public business so I am not a staunch open carry nut.

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions in order to criticize the armed citizen's "tactics".

I think it is a shame some seem to be awfully quick to turn on a good Samaritan for trying to help another. Eating out own every chance we get isn't beneficial.