Threatening incident last Sunday night (Forest/Marsh)

[GrayGhost]

This incident could have easily been second guessed by some. I'm glad to see support for the OP's decision. A dicey situation at best. There is just no way to read what the original intention could have been. Whether innocent or ill intention, the OP was able to go home at the end of the night and nobody on either side was hurt. I consider that a good outcome.

[ClarkLZeuss]

...
The tactic the guy who confronted the OP used was a good one for a strong arm robbery.
...
The "Can I talk to you" line was similar to the "What time is it?" - a distractor intended to divert the intended victim's attention for a second or so and cause him to hesitate in place as the final approach is made. The clincher that this was not intended to be a conversational exchange was the raising and extension of the hands as the passenger closed in.

According to the account, the OP was in reasonable fear of an imminent robbery or attack on his person and in a disparity of force situation due to the size of the person who approached him. He used the threat of force to end the threat to himself.

Wow! Excaliber I think you are dead-on, as always. The scary thing about the OP's situation is that it was so hard to truly know what was about to happen, until it was too late, and everything happened so fast. This is like that ATM scenario you threw out a while back. The really menacing BGs are going to put on sheep's clothing to make you doubt, and then without warning they attack, while you're still trying to figure out what's going on. There have been a few situations where I was very nearly conned, and a few others where I think I was about to be robbed, and there is this eerie kind of "fog" that comes over your thinking. One thing I've learned over the years is like how C.S. Lewis said, there is the animalistic side of man, and then there is the diabolical side, which is far worse. There are obviously violent people who you can more or less easily avoid. But the truly evil ones will be hard to discern, because they are not only violent but skilled deceivers.

To the OP, very clear, quick thinking!

[samobius]

Even IF the guy's question was just "Have you accepted Jesus into your heart?", you just don't approach someone like that this day in age.

Reading that gave me the heebie jeebies and reinforces my decision to carry.

[shortysboy09]

you just don't approach someone like that this day in age.

Your'e exactly right. I would never approach anyone in the manner this guy did. As CHL holders we really can't take that chance. If the guy would have grabbed hold of him he could have easily got to his weapon since the guy was so much bigger then the OP. I think he reacted right. The gentleman was already too close for comfort to begin with. Then he starts to reach towards him, you just don't act that way to anyone unless you know them on a personal basis.

[TheReverend]

I'm not going to criticize. I wasn't there, and I might very well have reacted the same way you did. But, several thoughts do occur to me.

The first is that, if they really intended harm, it seems that their best tactic would have been to pull up behind your car, blocking you in. Pulling into the space next to yours, particularly since the driver never got out, but only the passenger, seems counter-intuitive for a developing assault. It would make it more difficult for them to get out of their vehicle to attack you, and it would make them as much trapped by narrow spaces as it did to you. OTH, if they stop across the back of your car, they have you boxed in; they enjoy the tactical advantage; and they are better situated for a quick getaway.

For those reasons, it seems purely in hindsight that the passenger was more likely going to try to hit you up for some money for gas or some other nonsense. You point out that both men were african-americans, but the intimidating factor seems to to be the sheer size of the passenger, rather than his race (hopefully).

Hindsight being 20/20, is it at all possible that the intimidation was due more to the passenger's size than to any purposefully threatening action on his part?

you make an assumption here that the BGs are smart enough to realize the tactical advantage they would gain by positioning their van behind his car. Not all BGs are sophisticated, many of them are just plain dumb.

Or not so dumb. Here's how I read the situation from the details given here:

The tactic the guy who confronted the OP used was a good one for a strong arm robbery. It positioned the potential victim within a step or two of the approach guy in a location with very little maneuverability (except directly to the victim's rear), with non participant visibility of what was about to happen restricted to only the very narrow sight lines in direct alignment with the space between the two vehicles, effectively precluding witness worries.

The driver stayed in his seat to facilitate a quick getaway, and because the passenger's size gave these folks the confidence that a second set of hands wasn't needed outside the vehicle. The "Can I talk to you" line was similar to the "What time is it?" - a distractor intended to divert the intended victim's attention for a second or so and cause him to hesitate in place as the final approach is made. The clincher that this was not intended to be a conversational exchange was the raising and extension of the hands as the passenger closed in.

According to the account, the OP was in reasonable fear of an imminent robbery or attack on his person and in a disparity of force situation due to the size of the person who approached him. He used the threat of force to end the threat to himself.

Calling 911 with the tag number of the vehicle and the description of the subjects would have been a better move than calling the store manager because it may well have resulted in the arrest of persons wanted for other completed crimes (like eating potato chips, these guys never stop at just one). It also would have protected the OP against a cagey move by the suspects if they had called 911 to report that a crazy guy with a gun confronted them in the parking lot. Consider how you'd explain that you felt endangered to the point where the threat of deadly force was needed to resolve the situation, but it wasn't bad enough to report to the police.

More bad guys are becoming aware of this option, and it can get costly when they call 911 and you don't. Police figure the real victim will call to make a complaint, and will usually arrest the guy who didn't.

I never said these were not bad guys, I just said they might not think tactical as The Annoyed Man thought they should be.

you do bring up an interesting point. We always say that you pull your gun when you fear for your life and I have heard some that say don't pull it if you are not going to shoot it.

How will the LEO respond when you tell them that you pulled your gun, in public and threatened the BGs. You have NO PROOF that you were in any danger and if a LEO shows up and they happen to be around it's your story vs. their story of "we wanted to ask him if he heard the good news and he pulled a gun on us" (told with the most face they can put together).

What does the law say about that?

[KD5NRH]

The first is that, if they really intended harm, it seems that their best tactic would have been to pull up behind your car, blocking you in.

Actually, their best tactic would have been to have a sniper on the roof of the store with a suppressed PSG-1 and subsonic ammo to drop him quickly and quietly just as soon as he was close enough for the ground team to grab his stuff and leave.

You see, if BGs used the best tactics, we wouldn't bother carrying because we'd never have a chance to get a concealed weapon into action. Since they screw up on a pretty regular basis in planning as well as execution, the good guys can often win when properly prepared.

[shortysboy09]

I never said these were not bad guys, I just said they might not think tactical as The Annoyed Man thought they should be.

you do bring up an interesting point. We always say that you pull your gun when you fear for your life and I have heard some that say don't pull it if you are not going to shoot it.

How will the LEO respond when you tell them that you pulled your gun, in public and threatened the BGs. You have NO PROOF that you were in any danger and if a LEO shows up and they happen to be around it's your story vs. their story of "we wanted to ask him if he heard the good news and he pulled a gun on us" (told with the most face they can put together).

What does the law say about that?

I believe that all goes back to what Excaliber said about calling 911. If your'e the one to call and make the complaint it will more likely break down in his favor that the OP was the victim, not the two men in the truck.

[Excaliber]

...
The tactic the guy who confronted the OP used was a good one for a strong arm robbery.
...
The "Can I talk to you" line was similar to the "What time is it?" - a distractor intended to divert the intended victim's attention for a second or so and cause him to hesitate in place as the final approach is made. The clincher that this was not intended to be a conversational exchange was the raising and extension of the hands as the passenger closed in.

According to the account, the OP was in reasonable fear of an imminent robbery or attack on his person and in a disparity of force situation due to the size of the person who approached him. He used the threat of force to end the threat to himself.

Wow! Excaliber I think you are dead-on, as always. The scary thing about the OP's situation is that it was so hard to truly know what was about to happen, until it was too late, and everything happened so fast. This is like that ATM scenario you threw out a while back. The really menacing BGs are going to put on sheep's clothing to make you doubt, and then without warning they attack, while you're still trying to figure out what's going on. There have been a few situations where I was very nearly conned, and a few others where I think I was about to be robbed, and there is this eerie kind of "fog" that comes over your thinking. One thing I've learned over the years is like how C.S. Lewis said, there is the animalistic side of man, and then there is the diabolical side, which is far worse. There are obviously violent people who you can more or less easily avoid. But the truly evil ones will be hard to discern, because they are not only violent but skilled deceivers.

To the OP, very clear, quick thinking!

The "fog" you describe is a neurophysiological effect that stems from a rapidly escalating heart rate and the stress hormones that are being dumped into your system. The higher your heart rate goes, the greater the impairment to your ability to think your way out of the situation. In these circumstances, your brain will "default" to what you have trained yourself to do - if you have trained yourself to do anything specific. If you haven't it will come up with the equivalent of a "404 - page not found" error when it looks for the "program". In that case chances are excellent that rapidly occurring events will overwhelm you before you can recover and react.

The importance of having pre thought out reactive sequences for various situations is obvious. They probably won't exactly fit the circumstances you confront due to the number of possible variables, but if you have the major elements under control, you can successfully fill in the blanks, even under stress. There are also breathing techniques that can reduce this effect and are well worth learning.

[The Annoyed Man]

The first is that, if they really intended harm, it seems that their best tactic would have been to pull up behind your car, blocking you in.

Actually, their best tactic would have been to have a sniper on the roof of the store with a suppressed PSG-1 and subsonic ammo to drop him quickly and quietly just as soon as he was close enough for the ground team to grab his stuff and leave.

You see, if BGs used the best tactics, we wouldn't bother carrying because we'd never have a chance to get a concealed weapon into action. Since they screw up on a pretty regular basis in planning as well as execution, the good guys can often win when properly prepared.

Good one!

Of course, you're correct. I was merely trying to make the mental connection between the idea of two guys, cruising a parking lot looking for a victim, which is a planned thing, and the way they carried it out, which seems like they didn't give much thought to what it would take to get the best results. I wasn't saying they weren't intending harm. I was saying that it seemed like there would have been a better tactical approach for them to take if they were intending harm.

However, I think that Excaliber pointed out rather successfully that what they actually did might have been pretty smart for what they were trying to accomplish... ...smarter than what I thought of (which means that I don't make a very good criminal predator), and certainly within the means of a couple of guys who happened not to be in possession of a suppressed PSG-1 at the moment.

BTW, even if bad guys always used the best tactics, I would still carry because it would give me more options than being disarmed would offer. I don't give up just because the other guy is well prepared.

[Keith B]

The "fog" you describe is a neurophysiological effect that stems from a rapidly escalating heart rate and the stress hormones that are being dumped into your system. The higher your heart rate goes, the greater the impairment to your ability to think your way out of the situation. In these circumstances, your brain will "default" to what you have trained yourself to do - if you have trained yourself to do anything specific. If you haven't it will come up with the equivalent of a "404 - page not found" error when it looks for the "program". In that case chances are excellent that rapidly occurring events will overwhelm you before you can recover and react.

The importance of having pre thought out reactive sequences for various situations is obvious. They probably won't exactly fit the circumstances you confront due to the number of possible variables, but if you have the major elements under control, you can successfully fill in the blanks, even under stress. There are also breathing techniques that can reduce this effect and are well worth learning.

Excaliber once again posts some really great info. Any one who has been trained for combat-type situations will tell you that you almost go into auto-pilot if everything works right.

In the two shooting events I was involved in as a LEO (not the shooter, but one of the group engaged), as well as a couple of other high-stress emergency type situations with guns going, I literally had to go back during debriefing and step by step rebuild the event in my mind to recall exactly how I reacted and what transpired. I had the steps there in my head and could recall them all one by one, but until I sat down and really thought about how they played out, it was almost nothing but a blur. It is kinda like the Chesly Sullenberger landing on the Hudson; you have been trained well, and your experience puts you through the right steps to quickly do what you need and react properly, all the time almost subconsciously doing them like a robot or on autopilot. At least that is the way it hopefully happens!!

[cougartex]

Even IF the guy's question was just "Have you accepted Jesus into your heart?", you just don't approach someone like that this day in age.

Reading that gave me the heebie jeebies and reinforces my decision to carry.

IMO, kestrel acted in an appropriate manner. The good thing is no one was hurt or worse.

[karder]

You did good kestrel. A normal person would not close distance on a stranger like that if they "just want to ask you something". When something like this happens, we have to trust our instinct, and I think you handled it wisely.

[Beiruty]

Go file report at the Dallas police Department. It is worth it.

[Excaliber]

The "fog" you describe is a neurophysiological effect that stems from a rapidly escalating heart rate and the stress hormones that are being dumped into your system. The higher your heart rate goes, the greater the impairment to your ability to think your way out of the situation. In these circumstances, your brain will "default" to what you have trained yourself to do - if you have trained yourself to do anything specific. If you haven't it will come up with the equivalent of a "404 - page not found" error when it looks for the "program". In that case chances are excellent that rapidly occurring events will overwhelm you before you can recover and react.

The importance of having pre thought out reactive sequences for various situations is obvious. They probably won't exactly fit the circumstances you confront due to the number of possible variables, but if you have the major elements under control, you can successfully fill in the blanks, even under stress. There are also breathing techniques that can reduce this effect and are well worth learning.

Excaliber once again posts some really great info. Any one who has been trained for combat-type situations will tell you that you almost go into auto-pilot if everything works right.

In the two shooting events I was involved in as a LEO (not the shooter, but one of the group engaged), as well as a couple of other high-stress emergency type situations with guns going, I literally had to go back during debriefing and step by step rebuild the event in my mind to recall exactly how I reacted and what transpired. I had the steps there in my head and could recall them all one by one, but until I sat down and really thought about how they played out, it was almost nothing but a blur. It is kinda like the Chesly Sullenberger landing on the Hudson; you have been trained well, and your experience puts you through the right steps to quickly do what you need and react properly, all the time almost subconsciously doing them like a robot or on autopilot. At least that is the way it hopefully happens!!

The "auto pilot effect" is what happens when the brain tries to retrieve the relevant "program" and successfully finds one. Some folks describe the experience as "it was just like we did it in training, it all came back to me". Others describe it as watching themselves do things almost as if they were an observer. Others, especially in extremely quick situations, sometimes aren't aware of what they did until afterwards.

A friend of mine (retired NYC police sergeant) was an example of this phenomenon when he described a situation where he encountered a subject who fired a handgun at him at close range, then heard a couple of shots of return fire and saw the subject fall. He remembered thinking, "Thank goodness someone shot him - he coulda killed me!" When he looked around to thank his rescuer, he found he was alone. That's when he looked down to see the smoking revolver in his hand. When he opened the cylinder, he found all 6 rounds had been fired.

Recent research has shown that memories of traumatic events are more accurate and complete if the debrief is held 24 - 48 hours after the incident and after the involved people have had an opportunity to get adequate sleep. The memories which seem disjointed and hard to put together immediately after the incident are much smoother and more accessible after this period.

[MojoTexas]

I don't know for sure, of course, and I don't intend to judge, but the guy was probably just going to give the OP a song and dance about "I need gas money to go visit my sick Momma." Or since he was raising his hands, maybe he DID intend violence....dunno. I don't judge you for drawing on him. I'm just glad it ended with nobody being hurt.

I'm still waiting for my plastic to arrive. I have been carrying in my vehicle for the past year, but of course without a CHL I can't carry on my person. If someone accosts me while I'm in my vehicle, I have "resources" available. In the OP's situation, I would not have.

My plastic cannot arrive too soon to suit me. It's a crazy world out there...

MojoTexas