Concealed carry weapon discussion

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.

A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.

The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?

No, and quite frankly I can't see why anyone would intervene in this scenario. You shoot him and you open yourself up to all kinds of liability and wrongful death lawsuits.

Now if the guy starts plugging tellers, you are a hero for shooting this bastard but you cannot kill someone for armed robbery. Hell, cops can't even shoot someone unless their life is in danger. The fact that the OP even posed this question makes me seriously doubt his ability to properly deal with a situation like this in real life. Fvck, I'm the one who should be armed...oh, wait...I am armed...I just don't carry since it's pretty much impossible to get a CCW in California.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Pepsi90919

Originally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.

A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.

The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?

this sh1t doesn't even happen where i live, so fvck guns

No kidding. I haven't been inside a bank in years.

Seriously though, who the hell sits around and thinks about stuff like this? Personally, I don't want to live in a society where I need to carry a gun everywhere I go for fear of my family's life. Thank god I don't.

BTW-We have many forum members who are from other countries and many countries have an image of the United States as being a bunch of redneck hillbilly loonies who are armed to the teeth and go around shooting one another. Threads like this do not help with that image.

 

[jlee]

Hell, cops can't even shoot someone unless their life is in danger.

You, my friend, are completely misinformed.
Florida statues

Read up on 'forcible felonies'.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: Arglebargle

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: huberm
I think he would be justified doing this. However, I think a strong verbal warning should be given before shooting. The majority of hostile situations can be resolved by simply putting yourself in control of the situation and neutralizing the bad guy.

A "strong verbal warning" to a man that is holding a firearm is simply an invitation for him to take a shot at you.

I have taken a ton of training with my firearm and everything I have been taught by experts is that if a bad guy EVER sees your weapon its shortly before said bad guy sees two holes in his chest. PERIOD.

If you EVER pull your weapon that means the situation has detiorated into a life or death situation. Shouting a warning simply gives the other guy more time to end your life.

Practically, you are 100% correct. Legally, of course, it varies. Sounds legit for Texas. EXCEPT: If I was a bystander, I would sue like crazy if you didn't put every shot fired into the target you intended.

It's embarrassing how many times you see the 'Police fired 40 shots, hit target 8 times." Learn to use your equipment if you are going to carry.

Absolutely. Which is why in my previous post I advised him I would stay my happy ass on the floor until the guy actually started shooting. The above quote of mine is simply the legal answer to the question.

And I can not concur with you more about the training. If you own a firearm and you intend to use it for self defense, regardless if you carry or not, you should train with it until your fingers bleed... and then train some more.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: meltdown75

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Pepsi90919

Originally posted by: randalee
Here is a situation I pose to you. A bank is busy in the morning, and has a fair queue of people waiting for a cashier. A man at the front of the line approaches the counter, and pulls a pistol and points it at the cashier. The cashier realizes it's a fake plastic gun, and does not fear for her life, but decides to comply with the robber's request for money.

A person in line watches the situation unfold, and is lawfully carrying a concealed weapon. They see the robber with the cashier, and fear that her life could be in jeopardy. They do not see or realize it's a fake plastic gun, even though the cashier KNOWS it's a fake plastic gun, and the robber likely means no harm, other than to fill his pocket with some cash.

The person with the concealed weapon draws and fires 5 shots, striking the robber with two of them. It's enough that the robber ends up dying. Is the shooter justified in their actions? Why or why not?

this sh1t doesn't even happen where i live, so fvck guns

Really?

http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=...io+%2B%22bank+robberies%22&btnG=Search

Looks like it happens quite a bit.

You have no clue what it is like here and you never will so can it. All the Googling in the world will not give you an inkling of what Canadian life is like so don't even bother. Go pack some heat, Google boy.

He claimed bank robberies never happen in Ontario. A quick Google search shows multiple waves of frequent bank robberies there.

Can what? The truth?

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Hell, cops can't even shoot someone unless their life is in danger.

You, my friend, are completely misinformed.
Florida statues

Read up on 'forcible felonies'.

Sorry, you're right...their lives or someone elses life is in danger. The trouble with this scenario is a) the person is not a cop and b) most robberies don't end in a shooting. The guy wants money, he generally doesn't want to kill anyone, he only wants the money. The last thing he wants is a shootout.

No reasonable person would assume that shooting the robber was warranted or that anyone's life was in danger IMO.

Edit-And I'd be willing to bet that I'm more informed on stuff like this than you are.

 

[tomywishbone]

I carried this little guy for a few years, but the downside became too great, so it went bye-bye.

my little friend

 

[Rock Hydra]

This is only legal at the DMV since the DMV already takes forever and nothing interesting happens anyway.

 

[darthsidious]

On the topic, what constitutes a "forcible felony". The florida statues state that the use of deadly force is justifies if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

Is robbing someone a forcible felony?

 

[jlee]

Sorry, you're right...their lives or someone elses life is in danger. The trouble with this scenario is a) the person is not a cop and b) most robberies don't end in a shooting. The guy wants money, he generally doesn't want to kill anyone, he only wants the money. The last thing he wants is a shootout.

No reasonable person would assume that shooting the robber was warranted or that anyone's life was in danger IMO.

Edit-And I'd be willing to bet that I'm more informed on stuff like this than you are.

I was not responding to the entire scenario -- I was responding to your (blatantly) incorrect statement. If that makes you more informed than I, so be it.

As far as the OP, would it be a justifiable shooting? Most likely...but who knows...I wouldn't be surprised if somebody brought a civil suit against someone.

Originally posted by: darthsidious
On the topic, what constitutes a "forcible felony". The florida statues state that the use of deadly force is justifies if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

Is robbing someone a forcible felony?

Read the link - they are listed.

776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

New Hampshire criminal code regarding use of force: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/RSA/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-LXII-627.htm

 

[randay]

plus, who the fvck in their right mind walks into a bank with a concealed weapon.

 

[PAB]

Originally posted by: randay
plus, who the fvck in their right mind walks into a bank with a concealed weapon.

Almost everytime I go to the bank, I do so with a gun.

 

[randalee]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
No reasonable person would assume that shooting the robber was warranted or that anyone's life was in danger IMO.

Edit-And I'd be willing to bet that I'm more informed on stuff like this than you are.

Anyone who points a firearm at another has fulfilled all requirements -- they have intent, ability, and immediacy to end someone's life. I'm talking about LEGAL definition of intent -- the Robber may in his mind, truly not INTEND to hurt anyone, nor use his weapon. (It's plastic, for heck's sake...) By pointing a firearm, everyone legally can assume that they intend to kill or seriously harm the person.

I've gone through this scenario many times. I spent an hour on it in CCW class with a group of individuals and a firearms expert. I've also discussed it several times with close friends. Don't doubt my ability to make decisions in a hot moment. I will do what I will do. And if it ever comes down to myself (or another innocent) going home or a bad guy going home, the good person will go home.

 

[randalee]

Originally posted by: randay
plus, who the fvck in their right mind walks into a bank with a concealed weapon.

Me too. Carry all the time. It's lawful and acceptable in my state. Only 3 places in my state I CAN'T carry lawfully.

The secure zone of the airport beyond the metal detectors.
The courthouse.
Other secure zones -- mental hospital, jail or prison.

 

[adairusmc]

Originally posted by: randalee

Originally posted by: randay
plus, who the fvck in their right mind walks into a bank with a concealed weapon.

Me too. Carry all the time. It's lawful and acceptable in my state. Only 3 places in my state I CAN'T carry lawfully.

The secure zone of the airport beyond the metal detectors.
The courthouse.
Other secure zones -- mental hospital, jail or prison.

Same here.

I carry everywhere that I can, including at work - because I can.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: randalee

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
No reasonable person would assume that shooting the robber was warranted or that anyone's life was in danger IMO.

Edit-And I'd be willing to bet that I'm more informed on stuff like this than you are.

Anyone who points a firearm at another has fulfilled all requirements -- they have intent, ability, and immediacy to end someone's life. I'm talking about LEGAL definition of intent -- the Robber may in his mind, truly not INTEND to hurt anyone, nor use his weapon. (It's plastic, for heck's sake...) By pointing a firearm, everyone legally can assume that they intend to kill or seriously harm the person.

I've gone through this scenario many times. I spent an hour on it in CCW class with a group of individuals and a firearms expert. I've also discussed it several times with close friends. Don't doubt my ability to make decisions in a hot moment. I will do what I will do. And if it ever comes down to myself (or another innocent) going home or a bad guy going home, the good person will go home.

Who taught those classes? Lawyers? Because they'd have a field day with you in a court of law.

 

[Arglebargle]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: Arglebargle

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Originally posted by: huberm
I think he would be justified doing this. However, I think a strong verbal warning should be given before shooting. The majority of hostile situations can be resolved by simply putting yourself in control of the situation and neutralizing the bad guy.

A "strong verbal warning" to a man that is holding a firearm is simply an invitation for him to take a shot at you.

I have taken a ton of training with my firearm and everything I have been taught by experts is that if a bad guy EVER sees your weapon its shortly before said bad guy sees two holes in his chest. PERIOD.

If you EVER pull your weapon that means the situation has detiorated into a life or death situation. Shouting a warning simply gives the other guy more time to end your life.

Practically, you are 100% correct. Legally, of course, it varies. Sounds legit for Texas. EXCEPT: If I was a bystander, I would sue like crazy if you didn't put every shot fired into the target you intended.

It's embarrassing how many times you see the 'Police fired 40 shots, hit target 8 times." Learn to use your equipment if you are going to carry.

Absolutely. Which is why in my previous post I advised him I would stay my happy ass on the floor until the guy actually started shooting. The above quote of mine is simply the legal answer to the question.

And I can not concur with you more about the training. If you own a firearm and you intend to use it for self defense, regardless if you carry or not, you should train with it until your fingers bleed... and then train some more.

Full agreement.....I don't carry, but my mother has a CCW (a nice little titanium 5 shot 38.) and she hits the range regularly...and gets real good groupings. You have to have proper respect for it.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: randalee

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
No reasonable person would assume that shooting the robber was warranted or that anyone's life was in danger IMO.

Edit-And I'd be willing to bet that I'm more informed on stuff like this than you are.

Anyone who points a firearm at another has fulfilled all requirements -- they have intent, ability, and immediacy to end someone's life. I'm talking about LEGAL definition of intent -- the Robber may in his mind, truly not INTEND to hurt anyone, nor use his weapon. (It's plastic, for heck's sake...) By pointing a firearm, everyone legally can assume that they intend to kill or seriously harm the person.

I've gone through this scenario many times. I spent an hour on it in CCW class with a group of individuals and a firearms expert. I've also discussed it several times with close friends. Don't doubt my ability to make decisions in a hot moment. I will do what I will do. And if it ever comes down to myself (or another innocent) going home or a bad guy going home, the good person will go home.

It's this kind of bravado that scares me about letting average citizens carry weapons. You have no idea who would prevail in a shootout with a bad guy. Bad guys can be proficient too you know.

As for your bank scenario. You would be endangering the life of everyone in the bank by pulling out your weapon and shooting, completely unnecessarily if the robber was using a toy gun, and adding an extreme amount of danger if the robber's gun was real.

And this is partly why Utah's current laws need to be challenged in the courts. The bank has to have the right to control what happens on their own premises, which means they have to have the right to keep people from legally carrying weapons into those premises.


The law in Utah is completely backwards in this respect. The way it should be is, if you don't want to go into a bank that won't let you carry a concealed weapon, you are free to not go in. But the bank has the right to keep you from carrying a weapon on their premises, so the Utah law has to be unconstitutional.

I know from the other thread you want to live in the wild west days when shooting each other was the normal course of life, at least in Hollywood's version, but that isn't how everyone in the world wants to live, even in Utah.

 

[Xyo II]

Originally posted by: waggy
i guess it would depend on the laws.

but personally i feel he was justified. he thought the cashiers life was in danger.

What in the hell. You can't forget your gun in your sock drawer, but you can shoot a guy without a warning? This reminds me of that V for Vendetta scene....

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: Tom



And this is partly why Utah's current laws need to be challenged in the courts. The bank has to have the right to control what happens on their own premises, which means they have to have the right to keep people from legally carrying weapons into those premises.


The law in Utah is completely backwards in this respect. The way it should be is, if you don't want to go into a bank that won't let you carry a concealed weapon, you are free to not go in. But the bank has the right to keep you from carrying a weapon on their premises, so the Utah law has to be unconstitutional.

I know from the other thread you want to live in the wild west days when shooting each other was the normal course of life, at least in Hollywood's version, but that isn't how everyone in the world wants to live, even in Utah.

The bank works in a public setting. If they want to work with the public they have to follow rules... Just like discrimination, equal rights, sexual harassment laws, minimum wage laws, etc... and conceal carry laws - laws must be followed..

If they don't like it, don't be a "public" company...

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: Xyo II

Originally posted by: waggy
i guess it would depend on the laws.

but personally i feel he was justified. he thought the cashiers life was in danger.

What in the hell. You can't forget your gun in your sock drawer, but you can shoot a guy without a warning? This reminds me of that V for Vendetta scene....

Read my previous post. A "warning" is simply an invitation for the bad guy to take a shot or two at you. The element of surprise is HUGE in a deadly situation. It would be foolish to trade that and severely endanger your own life simply to give an armed robber a "warning".

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Tom



And this is partly why Utah's current laws need to be challenged in the courts. The bank has to have the right to control what happens on their own premises, which means they have to have the right to keep people from legally carrying weapons into those premises.


The law in Utah is completely backwards in this respect. The way it should be is, if you don't want to go into a bank that won't let you carry a concealed weapon, you are free to not go in. But the bank has the right to keep you from carrying a weapon on their premises, so the Utah law has to be unconstitutional.

I know from the other thread you want to live in the wild west days when shooting each other was the normal course of life, at least in Hollywood's version, but that isn't how everyone in the world wants to live, even in Utah.

The bank works in a public setting. If they want to work with the public they have to follow rules... Just like discrimination, equal rights, sexual harassment laws, minimum wage laws, etc... and conceal carry laws - laws must be followed..

If they don't like it, don't be a "public" company...

None of the items you mention are the same as concealed carry laws. There is no constitutional right to carry a concealed weapon. And the 2nd amendment doesn't supercede all the other constitutional rights, like the right to own property. owning property includes the right to control that property.

And stores aren't "public", they have the right to refuse entry for lots of reasons.

Discrimination against a person isn't the same thing as discriminating against an object. a weapon is not a person you know.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Tom

Originally posted by: randalee

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
No reasonable person would assume that shooting the robber was warranted or that anyone's life was in danger IMO.

Edit-And I'd be willing to bet that I'm more informed on stuff like this than you are.

Anyone who points a firearm at another has fulfilled all requirements -- they have intent, ability, and immediacy to end someone's life. I'm talking about LEGAL definition of intent -- the Robber may in his mind, truly not INTEND to hurt anyone, nor use his weapon. (It's plastic, for heck's sake...) By pointing a firearm, everyone legally can assume that they intend to kill or seriously harm the person.

I've gone through this scenario many times. I spent an hour on it in CCW class with a group of individuals and a firearms expert. I've also discussed it several times with close friends. Don't doubt my ability to make decisions in a hot moment. I will do what I will do. And if it ever comes down to myself (or another innocent) going home or a bad guy going home, the good person will go home.

It's this kind of bravado that scares me about letting average citizens carry weapons. You have no idea who would prevail in a shootout with a bad guy. Bad guys can be proficient too you know.

As for your bank scenario. You would be endangering the life of everyone in the bank by pulling out your weapon and shooting, completely unnecessarily if the robber was using a toy gun, and adding an extreme amount of danger if the robber's gun was real.

And this is partly why Utah's current laws need to be challenged in the courts. The bank has to have the right to control what happens on their own premises, which means they have to have the right to keep people from legally carrying weapons into those premises.


The law in Utah is completely backwards in this respect. The way it should be is, if you don't want to go into a bank that won't let you carry a concealed weapon, you are free to not go in. But the bank has the right to keep you from carrying a weapon on their premises, so the Utah law has to be unconstitutional.

I know from the other thread you want to live in the wild west days when shooting each other was the normal course of life, at least in Hollywood's version, but that isn't how everyone in the world wants to live, even in Utah.

sorry, but where in any of his posts did he say he wants to go around shooting people like in the wild west. he said he doesn't want to shoot someone but would if he had to.
why do the anti-gun freaks always say something like that. they all say that someone who wants to carry a gun only wants it so he can go around shooting people all the time. grow the fvck up and get a clue

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: PaperclipGod
No. In my state (MA) at least, you need to give the guy a chance to put his gun down. i.e. "DROP YOUR WEAPON". If he doesn't, and he makes any threatening movements, then you shoot. Although you'd be stupid to start a firefight in the middle of a crowded bank, anyway.

And for the record, im pro gun.

*BANG* DROP *BANG BANG BANG* YOUR WEAPON *BANG BANG BANG*

Good enough for me.



To answer the original question, it depends on the laws of the state your in. In some states you would have no charges filed, in some states you'd end up in jail. Just depends.

Which is why its so important to KNOW your states CCW laws as well as the laws of states you plan to visit.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: randay
plus, who the fvck in their right mind walks into a bank with a concealed weapon.

Good point, because you know crime NEVER happens in a bank.......