Police know best

[DucWise]

DENVER – If you were being robbed at gunpoint, should you fight back? That's one of the questions 9NEWS asked on the streets of Denver and at Denver Police headquarters.

Police advise most people to give up their possessions peacefully. That's what the robbery victim in North Carolina was doing, until the robber pulled the trigger.


http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=79298


I've heard this kind of stuff before but I didn't need, or want, to hear it again today.

Just remember to do everything the bad guys say. Don't resist at all. The police will always be there to protect you. Don't make anyone upset...
:nuke:

[MrMischief]

Police don't protect in most cases. They gather evidence.

So the robber pulled the trigger and the shotgun misfired. What happened next? Where's the video?

[GiXXeRChicA]

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=79298


I've heard this kind of stuff before but I didn't need, or want, to hear it again today.

Just remember to do everything the bad guys say. Don't resist at all. The police will always be there to protect you. Don't make anyone upset...
:nuke:

Its clear you missed the whole point of handing things over. Odds are highly likely that when being robbed, they want your possessions and not to put a round in your head. Better to hand it over, and fight only when you have to.

[Raptor]

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=79298


I've heard this kind of stuff before but I didn't need, or want, to hear it again today.

Just remember to do everything the bad guys say. Don't resist at all. The police will always be there to protect you. Don't make anyone upset...
:nuke:

No disrespect to a good cop's advice but when the barrel is pointed in my face, the only 'advice' that matters is my own!

[Raptor]

Odds are highly likely that when being robbed, they want your possessions and not to put a round in your head. Better to hand it over, and fight only when you have to.

Odds are one thing, being psychic is another. If you want to play the odds, you won't know the assailant's intentions until the round is in your head.
When one 'has to' fight is subjective to the individual. Personally, when someone's trying to take what's mine is when it's definitely time to fight. :guns:

[pilot]

Yah, but you got a hand full of spiders you can toss at the bad guy. Sounds like a screenplay to me.

[GiXXeRChicA]

Odds are one thing, being psychic is another. If you want to play the odds, you won't know the assailant's intentions until the round is in your head.
When one 'has to' fight is subjective to the individual. Personally, when someone's trying to take what's mine is when it's definitely time to fight. :guns:


I agree. However its about avenues of escape with criminals. Fighting with them leaves less choices for them.

[jbnwc]

I wish Americans would all carry guns so that if some dumbass pulls a gun on me three passersby will subsequently pull guns on him. It'll never happen, though. Our gov't will gladly take our weapons and make us completely helpless gov't babies.

[DucWise]

I wish Americans would all carry guns so that if some dumbass pulls a gun on me three passersby will subsequently pull guns on him. It'll never happen, though. Our gov't will gladly take our weapons and make us completely helpless gov't babies.

What is it now... something like 45+ states have carry laws that allow your upstanding passersby to carry legally now?? 20 years ago there were almsot no states that allowed such a thing. Interesting trend...

[wulf]

What is it now... something like 45+ states have carry laws that allow your upstanding passersby to carry legally now?? 20 years ago there were almsot no states that allowed such a thing. Interesting trend...
Incorrect on the facts, but the point is a good one.

The simple solution is to give them the money, if i've got a couple of hundred bucks they can have it. It's cheaper than one hour of lawyer fees when their heirs sue you in a civil wrongful death case. Let alone the emotional stuff, the time off work, etc.

If a robber wants my money, car, whatever posession they can have it. If they want something of real value, i will put up a fight to be reckoned with. It's all too easy to be an armchair internet commando, but when you're in the real world, act sensible and leave the macho shit at the keyboard.

[DucWise]

Incorrect on the facts, but the point is a good one.


I said "something like" :o Facts.. everybody wants facts... what is it with you people? :D

Ok so not that I would completely trust the internet for facts... but Mr. Wikipedia claims:

Currently there are 39 states with "shall issue" laws and 9 states with "may issue" laws. So there are technically 48 states where you can get a permit to carry (although you probably won't get them out of all 9 "may issue" states).

20 years ago there were only 9 states with "shall issue" laws and 25 states with "may issue" laws.

There, is that better? And yes my point remains the same :gay:

[wulf]

Better, except you forgot vermont which does not issue any permit, it is the right of all gun owners residing in the state to carry.:alien:

[DucWise]

Better, except you forgot vermont which does not issue any permit, it is the right of all gun owners residing in the state to carry.:alien:

I "think" they included Vermont and Alaska in the "48" number. Maybe... it wasn't all that clear since it also stated that 2 states have no provision for carry permits. :siesta:

[Raptor]

Incorrect on the facts, but the point is a good one.

The simple solution is to give them the money, if i've got a couple of hundred bucks they can have it. It's cheaper than one hour of lawyer fees when their heirs sue you in a civil wrongful death case. Let alone the emotional stuff, the time off work, etc.

If a robber wants my money, car, whatever posession they can have it. If they want something of real value, i will put up a fight to be reckoned with. It's all too easy to be an armchair internet commando, but when you're in the real world, act sensible and leave the macho shit at the keyboard.

I can't help but feel these comments are aimed at me. Regardless, you can take whatever opinions of my personal views in whatever context you choose. I will say, no, it's not easy being a "keyboard commando" or whatever you call it. Mainly because I do not type what I type to feel tougher. I type it because it's how I feel about what's mine and I absolutely will back it up. Real value of something material is subjective to the individual that earned and is holding said goods.
I have heard and actually seen, more than once, senseless violence, pain and even death fall upon meek, humble and passive people. In light of that, it is not about giving something of little value vs. protecting something of greater value. It's about seeing the worst possible outcome, knowing it's a possibility, considering it as an inevitability and protecting myself from the jump.
There was a quote already pointed out about someone giving up what was asked, only to get shot anyway. Only a couple months ago, a victim in one of those light rail robberies did the same. Gave up the goods and was shot anyway...and that wasn't an accidental discharge.
Last year, a man was carjacked in broad daylight across the street from my house. Two men demanded the driver give up his Mustang. He did, willingly. They killed him anyway.
So, if you were addressing my post in particular, have whatever opinion you wish. Doesn't matter to me in the least. I'm not the type who portrays myself as some kind of macho, tough guy. A few people I have met form here can attest to that I'm sure. When it comes to odds, crime, being threatened with deadly weapons, robbery, etc., my life experience dictates, to me, that handing my belongings over, hoping that will make the thug just go away is not a chance worth taking.
Your life experiece may dictate to you, otherwise. Fine. I won't judge your outlook before considering that fact.

[Mental]

I don't think fighting is a matter of courage or machismo. Anyone seen the video of the two tiny ladies working at a liquor store beating the hell out of a would be robber? There are dozen's of stories of peaple doing the unexpected. The convience store clerk who gave up the till, but insisted on seeing ID when the robber wanted a carton of cigarettes.

For every story of a crimed foiled, there are another dozen of them gone wrong. You do not think in those situations, you recat. If you have a predisposition to action, chances are you're gonna fight, regardless of size, skill, or ability.

As far as arming the populace, there are waaaayyy to many peaple I don't want helping me. I eamn seriously, there is a nother thread here about the gross inability of a sizable percentage of the popualtions in abilty to drive. Imagine ass the clueless morons armed and trying to help you. No thanks, I got this one.

While most criminals have a plan and an avenue of escpae is important, other do not think their activity through and are predispostined to violence. That can also be a result of the drug habit that drove them there in the first place. Others it is simply about agression and passive behavior encourages that. Others are scared shitless and you don;t want to make any sudden movements to cause them to react. Then there are the ones that find it easier to kill everyone than cover their tracks. Which one is on the other side of the weapon being held against you.

Better be sure.

Many employees are prohibted by company policy from actively defending themselves for the lawsuits mentioned above. I have had jobs where they tell you not even to look at the person, others where I was obligated to put up some resitance. Depends on who wrote the policy and what state I was in.

But given all of the varibles involved in the myriad of violent, and even potentially crimes across the spectrum of humanity, and thats just in this country, to assume you have the right answer any time, much less every time, is just plain stupid.

The right answer is the one that protects you and your loved ones to the level you are comfortable with, and actually works. So being passive all the time won't work. Arming everyone isn't the ultimate answer. John Wayning it every time is not the answer.

It's a risk. Just like when we're on the bike, we mitigate it as much as possible, we wear out gear, keep a vigilant eye and try to aviod trouble before it starts. You lock your doors, keep an eye on your surroundings, don't keep a lot of money in the till. But ultimatly there is that precentage of risk you cannot control. If the criminal wants what you have and is prepared to risk whatever protective measures are there through bravado or ignorance, then it's just like the semi that comes into your lane, your time has come. Whether or not you live is being decided by forces bigger than you.

[clustermagnet]

man, you people have SHIT on your news stations...

[jbnwc]

Other than cluster(as usual) you all have valid points. I like the idea of allowing more people to carry weapons because I'd like to put the odds a little more in favor of the citizens and not the criminals. Here is how I see it: Right now, if I were to pull a gun on someone, the odds are very much in my favor that they are unarmed along with everyone else around and will be completely helpless to stop me. -Criminal wins.
But what if in the future a lot of poeple carry guns? If I pull a gun on someone in the future, there is then a good chance that they or someone nearby is also carrying and isn't about to put up with my injustice. Now the odds are a little more even. Maybe I, as a criminal, think twice before pulling a gun on anyone.

I'm not macho or anything and I don't think possessions are worth risking my life over(in general), but I hope I would fight back because it is the right thing to do. I would fight back not for the possessions, but because what the criminal is doing is wrong. If they end up killing me, then it was my time. If I don't do anything, I would have to live knowing that I let myself be a victim and didn't do anything about it.

[Monkey]

There are two basic human reactions, even animal reactions if you will when encountering a potentially lethal situation.. and those are 'fight and flight'.. you will either fight, or run.. it's basic human instinct.

[Raptor]

Good thoughts since my last post for sure.

Being predispositioned to react certainly (not in my case at least) does not mean to go full on fire. It means to be composed, be aware and defend accordingly. It should be obvious that if someone has a barrel at the tip of someone's nose, that's not a good time to reach for your own weapon. There would be alternative ways of defending one's self in such a case but as was already pointed out, the individual situation, assailant and all influencing factors determine these things.

[MrMischief]

I "think" they included Vermont and Alaska in the "48" number. Maybe... it wasn't all that clear since it also stated that 2 states have no provision for carry permits. :siesta:

You can not carry a weapon in WI or IL.

Here's a link for the carry history. http://www.handgunlaw.us/right-to-carry-history.gif

[wulf]

I "think" they included Vermont and Alaska in the "48" number. Maybe... it wasn't all that clear since it also stated that 2 states have no provision for carry permits. :siesta:

Vermont has no provisions for any kind of permit, but allows everyone to carry instead. Alaska has both permits and blanket carry.

Personally, when someone's trying to take what's mine is when it's definitely time to fight. :guns:

Yes, my statement was directed at people like you because of such a static decision.

You cannot possibly know each circumstance, and most of the time a fight will benefit no one. Ignoring the option of flight is stupid and macho, a tactful retreat can be the right thing to do.

[Raptor]

Vermont has no provisions for any kind of permit, but allows everyone to carry instead. Alaska has both permits and blanket carry.



Yes, my statement was directed at people like you because of such a static decision.

You cannot possibly know each circumstance, and most of the time a fight will benefit no one. Ignoring the option of flight is stupid and macho, a tactful retreat can be the right thing to do.

The term "fight" has many angles and dynamics. How the hell is somebody going to retreat when they are at gun or knife point?
I never said I will always fight, no matter what, even though that's apparently how you took it. I'm not going to ignore the option of flight if it presents itself. I'm not bent on vigilantism, I'm bent on surviving.
I also never claimed that I would know each circumstance. You really read into my very general comments with far too much literalism. I said that when someone is trying to take what's mine, it's definitely time to fight. To break it down I guess *sigh*, I am not going to stand there and hand over my shit, just get to dropped for it. I am going to await the opportunity to defend myself and what's mine by whatever means and opportunity is provided.
As far as your opinion of me, once again, have it. I do think "stupid and macho" is pretty pointed when you don't know me, where my shoes have taken me, what I have dealt with in the past or what I'm prepared to deal with in the future. I can say with confidence that despite your knee-jerk assessment, in person I am very obviously neither stupid or macho. I have my security and confidence. No need for me to compensate at the keyboard.
You however, seem to be compensating for something by pointing out flaws in the logic of people you don't even know. Perhaps trying to convey that your ideas on the topic are somehow superior? Or at least more intelligent? That's not really fair to say though is it? Being that I don't know you, your experience or basis of your mindset, I would say no. Not fair at all. Besides, I wouldn't want to look foolish by throwing an ignorant opinion at someone.
Have your state of mind all day, Wulf. I could care less about how you choose to handle being assaulted. You don't have to agree with my ideas but save your unfounded judgement. You have next to nothing but some typed comments to ascertain your "clear" picture of me. :roll:

[Raptor]

I refuse to negotiate with the 105.9 management or staff in any way, shape, or form. I can't wait until the first car door opens on a motorcycle in the Denver area --------- a call to Frank Azar would be my first suggestion.

Before or after the glock?


That said, I still think that some of you who are promoting violence or preemptive retaliative action are no better; I appreciate anyone who is actually trying to help by taking steps towards educating the public further.

If you re-read my comment about violence, it is about self defense. If someone has purposely hit a motorcyclist with their car, it is justifiable and legal to defend yourself (or others), before calling a lawyer. I am not promoting violence, or vigilantism.

...But...what about the option of flight?

Interestingly, it seems you made an impression upon someone recently that by your own logic, could be construed as "macho and stupid".
I wouldn't have called it that but ^that^ dialogue sure does seem to fall into the negative light you have attempted to shine on me.

Hmmm... Whatever is whatever I guess.

[DavidofColorado]

I have had a home invasion and I raced to a (unloaded) gun and held 2 crackheads pretending to be cops at bay until the real cops got there. The cop told me I should have shot them and I showed him the gun was unloaded.

I was robbed once by a POS with a gun in a car. I ran and he followed me in reverse until he ran me over. Dragged me 30 feet. One can still see the scars on my head but the road rash and broken leg is gone.

Having said that. From my experience it was better to be armed and defend myself from attacker/s. Your results may vary.

Keyboard commandos rule. But they shouldn't be used as legal advise.

[MrMischief]

I have had a home invasion and I raced to a (unloaded) gun and held 2 crackheads pretending to be cops at bay until the real cops got there. The cop told me I should have shot them and I showed him the gun was unloaded.

I was robbed once by a POS with a gun in a car. I ran and he followed me in reverse until he ran me over. Dragged me 30 feet. One can still see the scars on my head but the road rash and broken leg is gone.

Having said that. From my experience it was better to be armed and defend myself from attacker/s. Your results may vary.

Keyboard commandos rule. But they shouldn't be used as legal advise.

I'm curious to know if you have a CCW now.

[DavidofColorado]

I'm curious to know if you have a CCW now.
I have one now and since my GF was carjacked I carry as much as possible.

[wulf]

...But...what about the option of flight?

Interestingly, it seems you made an impression upon someone recently that by your own logic, could be construed as "macho and stupid".
I wouldn't have called it that but ^that^ dialogue sure does seem to fall into the negative light you have attempted to shine on me.

Hmmm... Whatever is whatever I guess.

In that context the person had already initiated violence, and had the supiorior position (they have a car, you have a wrecked bike) one would have no choice to defend themselves.

If that person had said "give me all your money or i'll run into you with my car" it would be similar to this. Until then it's apples to oranges.

I'm not advocating pacifism at all, just consider the options and situation before you decide. Not decide before you know the situation.

[DavidofColorado]

Take the situation for what it is. If you think you can get away do it. But if your lifes in danger grow a pair and defend yourself. Remember its better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[wulf]

As far as your opinion of me, once again, have it. I do think "stupid and macho" is pretty pointed when you don't know me, where my shoes have taken me, what I have dealt with in the past or what I'm prepared to deal with in the future. I can say with confidence that despite your knee-jerk assessment, in person I am very obviously neither stupid or macho. I have my security and confidence. No need for me to compensate at the keyboard.

You don't have to agree with my ideas but save your unfounded judgement. You have next to nothing but some typed comments to ascertain your "clear" picture of me. :roll:
Quite true.

I've seen far too many gun toting people with the macho attitude and i ASSUMED. My apologizes.

[Knuckle Dragger]

First off you make some good points but allow me to point some things out before you deceide to carry. As a former US Army Ranger and Special Operations Operator I have had expereince in which I have used my weapon to defend myself and others. Before you carry ask yourself do you have it in you to pull the trigger and take a life. It is amazing how many well say they do but when the situation comes they freeze. That slight freeze could very well give your attacker your weapon now you have provided the gun in which to bring harm. You seem like a nice guy so I am willing to bet if you do pull the triger you are going for a chest placement shot are you willing to take more then one pull to stop your attacker? A lot of times a 9mm will not stop on the first shot be aware of this when considering a side arm. It is one thing to have the security of having a side arm on your side as some safety blanket but it goes further to know how to defend yourself. Also remember most attackers would be on some type of mind altering substance that can play with the factor of taking them down. Just a reminder the weapon does not make you safe, your mind and body makes you safe. Sorry so long.

Other than cluster(as usual) you all have valid points. I like the idea of allowing more people to carry weapons because I'd like to put the odds a little more in favor of the citizens and not the criminals. Here is how I see it: Right now, if I were to pull a gun on someone, the odds are very much in my favor that they are unarmed along with everyone else around and will be completely helpless to stop me. -Criminal wins.
But what if in the future a lot of poeple carry guns? If I pull a gun on someone in the future, there is then a good chance that they or someone nearby is also carrying and isn't about to put up with my injustice. Now the odds are a little more even. Maybe I, as a criminal, think twice before pulling a gun on anyone.

I'm not macho or anything and I don't think possessions are worth risking my life over(in general), but I hope I would fight back because it is the right thing to do. I would fight back not for the possessions, but because what the criminal is doing is wrong. If they end up killing me, then it was my time. If I don't do anything, I would have to live knowing that I let myself be a victim and didn't do anything about it.

[DavidofColorado]

You know even the most antigun person who loaths those tools, might say "I've got a gun!" To scare away an criminal, and just hearing that works too.

[Raptor]

In that context the person had already initiated violence, and had the supiorior position (they have a car, you have a wrecked bike) one would have no choice to defend themselves.

If that person had said "give me all your money or i'll run into you with my car" it would be similar to this. Until then it's apples to oranges.

I see where you're coming from on that. I suppose it's a matter of perspective, which is perfectly ok. The bold parts above is where you and I just see it differently. I'm of the mind that once somebody issues a verbal threat, they have already initiated violence, just haven't followed through on their intentions yet. To boil it down, threatening to harm and physically harming are more apples and apples in my view.

I'm not advocating pacifism at all, just consider the options and situation before you decide. Not decide before you know the situation.

Absolutely correct. I wouldn't damn pacifism either. Again, it comes down to perspective. We're mostly on the same page here. Only difference is that to me, considering the options and situation to determine a defense is part of the 'fight'. It's a point of necessary action and a vital part of the defensive process. Hopefully it would lead to flight above fight but is still an element of the engagement.

Quite true.

I've seen far too many gun toting people with the macho attitude and i ASSUMED. My apologizes.

I have too, Wulf. The acknowledgement is very appreciated. :) I just happen to be pretty passionate about our rights to defend ourselves. I'm zealous to speak up about it and am a firm believer that people need to rely at least as much on themselves as they do on the police when it comes to self defense.

Take care dude. :)

Gary