Self defense sense... you are carrying and...

[45collector]

sometimes you gotta wonder with this crowd. They're so afraid of MA that they'd never use their gun yet for some reason carry anyway. I think the gun might be like fashion accessory to them or something that just makes them feel cool.

Assuming no crazy extenuating circumstances in the OP, it's a clean shot on the robber. You'd probably be arrested, detained, and then released. People think in MA you're ALWAYS going to get charged if you ever use your gun in self defense or defense of another and it's just plain untrue. Hell, if I really believed that I'd never have gotten a license to carry.

Or in other words: I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried out by 6. Pretty simple really, carry it and hope you never have to use it, or don't carry and hope you never wish you had it.

 

[Brin747]

Who here carries? Guns are for cowards. All you need is to master your HARD BLOCK.

I used to carry until the boating accident...

 

[BattleSnail]

You either believe someone is imminent danger or you don't. I know I would not want to get in a shootout with anyone to save some convenient store owner $150.

I agree with this.. I have no interest in protecting anyone else's money whether it's a couple hundred or a couple million dollars. However, I believe any time someone is sticking a gun in someone's face that the person on the business end of the gun is in imminent danger of loss of life or grave bodily harm.

I know I couldn't live with myself if I just took care of myself/hid/cowered in place and the clerk got killed.

- - - Updated - - -

Or in other words: I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried out by 6. Pretty simple really, carry it and hope you never have to use it, or don't carry and hope you never wish you had it.

That's exactly how I see it.

 

[fbirdquik6]

Revert back to your training and call your mother...

 

[mbullism]

I know I couldn't live with myself if I just took care of myself/hid/cowered in place and the clerk got killed.

Obviously a noble thought, though I take exception to the connotation of "hid" or "cowered"...

 

[BattleSnail]

Obviously a noble thought, though I take exception to the connotation of "hid" or "cowered"...

oh, sorry, hiding behind cover isn't hiding. Ok got it.

 

[Serapis]

Shoot the hostage.

Haha. Pop quiz hot shot.

 

[M1911]

sometimes you gotta wonder with this crowd. They're so afraid of MA that they'd never use their gun yet for some reason carry anyway. I think the gun might be like fashion accessory to them or something that just makes them feel cool.

Assuming no crazy extenuating circumstances in the OP, it's a clean shot on the robber. You'd probably be arrested, detained, and then released. People think in MA you're ALWAYS going to get charged if you ever use your gun in self defense or defense of another and it's just plain untrue. Hell, if I really believed that I'd never have gotten a license to carry.

What happens in 999/1000 such robberies? The robber gets away with a couple hundred bucks.

Some years back, a woman in Arlington was in her home when she heard noises on her enclosed front porch. She opened her front door to find an intruder on the porch. He walked towards her, through her open front door. She drew her gun (she was properly licensed) and ordered him to leave. He laughed and advanced on her. She shot once, hitting him in the neck. He fled and was apprehended shortly thereafter.

Her LTC was suspended and her guns and ammo confiscated. After about six months, the DA decided it was a good shoot. At that point, the chief was going to permanently revoke her LTC. Her attorney was able to convince him otherwise. This was a black-and-white good shoot in her own home. Even though she was never charged, she was still dragged through a legal wringer that cost her thousands of dollars and untold emotional trauma.

In 2009, a psychiatric patient attacked Dr. Astrid Desrosiers. He was on top of her, stabbing her, when an LTC holder who heard the screams ran into the room. He ordered the attacker to drop the knife, and when the attacker didn't comply, he fired, killing the attacker. This was another completely clean shoot. The man was hailed as heroic in the Boston Globe. And yet it took the DA 6 months to clear the case and during that time he was unable to work.

If you think a situation like this would be cleared up quickly in MA, you are very mistaken. It will take months and cost thousands of dollars, provided it is an open-and-shut case -- if not, it will be much, much worse.

Back when I took LFI-1, Ayoob said that surviving a gunfight is the second worst thing in the world that can happen to you, and he's spoken to many such survivors.

If I use my gun to protect the clerk, he isn't going to pay my legal fees. If I'm an emotional wreck as a result of the press coverage and potential jail time (like the Zimmerman fiasco), the clerk isn't going to pay my salary. If I get shot in the process, the clerk isn't going to pay my medical bills. If I lose my job because my employer gets freaked out that I was carrying a gun, the clerk won't find me a job.

As I said above, I carry a gun to protect me and mine. I'm not a cop and intervening in third-party situations is a recipe for disaster. I'm not saying that I wouldn't ever intervene, but intervening would certainly not be my default choice.

 

[xero2099]

Shoot the hostage.

if your aim is anything like the NYC cops you would miss the perp anyways

 

[mbullism]

oh, sorry, hiding behind cover isn't hiding. Ok got it.

Your quest to be a hero is noble, but there are so many, many more bad outcomes to the OP's scenario than there are good ones once you pull the trigger... So what you're saying is that before you line this POS up in your sights, you'll first step from behind cover to complete the delusion?

 

[BattleSnail]

Your quest to be a hero is noble, but there are so many, many more bad outcomes to the OP's scenario than there are good ones once you pull the trigger... So what you're saying is that before you line this POS up in your sights, you'll first step from behind cover to complete the delusion?

 

[noxin]

if your aim is anything like the NYC cops you would miss the perp anyways

And probably hit the clerk.

 

[Terminator03]

What happens in 999/1000 such robberies? The robber gets away with a couple hundred bucks.

Some years back, a woman in Arlington was in her home when she heard noises on her enclosed front porch. She opened her front door to find an intruder on the porch. He walked towards her, through her open front door. She drew her gun (she was properly licensed) and ordered him to leave. He laughed and advanced on her. She shot once, hitting him in the neck. He fled and was apprehended shortly thereafter.

Her LTC was suspended and her guns and ammo confiscated. After about six months, the DA decided it was a good shoot. At that point, the chief was going to permanently revoke her LTC. Her attorney was able to convince him otherwise. This was a black-and-white good shoot in her own home. Even though she was never charged, she was still dragged through a legal wringer that cost her thousands of dollars and untold emotional trauma.

In 2009, a psychiatric patient attacked Dr. Astrid Desrosiers. He was on top of her, stabbing her, when an LTC holder who heard the screams ran into the room. He ordered the attacker to drop the knife, and when the attacker didn't comply, he fired, killing the attacker. This was another completely clean shoot. The man was hailed as heroic in the Boston Globe. And yet it took the DA 6 months to clear the case and during that time he was unable to work.

If you think a situation like this would be cleared up quickly in MA, you are very mistaken. It will take months and cost thousands of dollars, provided it is an open-and-shut case -- if not, it will be much, much worse.

Back when I took LFI-1, Ayoob said that surviving a gunfight is the second worst thing in the world that can happen to you, and he's spoken to many such survivors.

If I use my gun to protect the clerk, he isn't going to pay my legal fees. If I'm an emotional wreck as a result of the press coverage and potential jail time (like the Zimmerman fiasco), the clerk isn't going to pay my salary. If I get shot in the process, the clerk isn't going to pay my medical bills. If I lose my job because my employer gets freaked out that I was carrying a gun, the clerk won't find me a job.

As I said above, I carry a gun to protect me and mine. I'm not a cop and intervening in third-party situations is a recipe for disaster. I'm not saying that I wouldn't ever intervene, but intervening would certainly not be my default choice.

Awesome summary of my own thoughts!

 

[drgrant]

sometimes you gotta wonder with this crowd. They're so afraid of MA that they'd never use their gun yet for some reason carry anyway. I think the gun might be like fashion accessory to them or something that just makes them feel cool.

Assuming no crazy extenuating circumstances in the OP, it's a clean shot on the robber. You'd probably be arrested, detained, and then released. People think in MA you're ALWAYS going to get charged if you ever use your gun in self defense or defense of another and it's just plain untrue. Hell, if I really believed that I'd never have gotten a license to carry.

It has nothing to do with "massism" at all. It has to do with the reality that dispensing bullets into a bad guy will probably cost you (at a minimum) thousands of dollars (that you'll never be compensated for, ever) so you'd better be sure its worth it. Obviously everyone's "bar" on this is different. The other way of looking at it though, is if you have this much time to think about whether or not to react, then it's probably not worth reacting over. When something requiring deadly force happens it just happens, and you're going to react in the moment with the information given based off your thought process of these situations.

-Mike

 

[mbullism]

Something on the ceiling? How come when I'm behind cover prepared to defend myself I'm hiding and cowering, and when you're behind cover getting ready to shoot the clerk, or cripple the lady outside pumping her gas, or possibly hit nobody at all (inviting the BG to return fire) it's something else?

 

[Terminator03]

Something on the ceiling? How come when I'm behind cover prepared to defend myself I'm hiding and cowering, and when you're behind cover getting ready to shoot the clerk, or cripple the lady outside pumping her gas, or possibly hit nobody at all (inviting the BG to return fire) it's something else?

Maybe because he incorporates a tactical roll before getting behind cover, and you are just crouching down and cowering (supposedly).

 

[BattleSnail]

It has nothing to do with "massism" at all. It has to do with the reality that dispensing bullets into a bad guy will probably cost you (at a minimum) thousands of dollars (that you'll never be compensated for, ever) so you'd better be sure its worth it. Obviously everyone's "bar" on this is different. The other way of looking at it though, is if you have this much time to think about whether or not to react, then it's probably not worth reacting over. When something requiring deadly force happens it just happens, and you're going to react in the moment with the information given based off your thought process of these situations.

-Mike

I don't disagree with what you say here, but in all honestly, from a purely moral perspective I think anyone who sits there and watches someone get executed when they could have acted to stop it is morally culpable, and frankly a coward. Especially if their motivation for doing nothing is to save money. If one can't afford to hire a lawyer after a shoot, then, while one certainly has the right to carry, one might want to reconsider if they ought to.

That doesn't mean I support good samaritan laws, but I think you have a moral obligation to help someone in danger when you can do so without putting yourself or others in undue danger. The situation changes if mbullism's imaginary lady at the gas pump is the backstop, or there's not a clear shot at the BG. In the OP, the picture is presented as we have a good clean shot at a BG pointing a gun in someone's face and MGL's stating you can use deadly force to protect yourself or others when faced with death or grave bodily harm. This, without all the other imagined variables is a good shoot IMO.


ETA: this is why these threads are so gay. We all acklowledge from the outset that there are tons of variables IRL and that we're going to discuss based on just what's in the OP...then a few pages in you've got mbullism's imaginary crippled clerks and gas pump lady backstops.

 

[M1911]

Stop the bickering.

 

[CCW]

I agree with this.. I have no interest in protecting anyone else's money whether it's a couple hundred or a couple million dollars. However, I believe any time someone is sticking a gun in someone's face that the person on the business end of the gun is in imminent danger of loss of life or grave bodily harm.

I know I couldn't live with myself if I just took care of myself/hid/cowered in place and the clerk got killed.

- - - Updated - - -



That's exactly how I see it.

How would you feel if you wounded the perp and that caused him to open fire and kill the clerk?

 

[BattleSnail]

How would you feel if you wounded the perp and that caused him to open fire and kill the clerk?

fantastic. I'd take a selfie and post it on instatwitterbook #quickstopmassacre.

 

[Terminator03]

How would you feel if you wounded the perp and that caused him to open fire and kill the clerk?

fantastic. I'd take a selfie and post it on instatwitterbook #quickstopmassacre.

That was obviously a sarcastic response BattleSnail, but that is a very valid question, and is yet another variable to consider.

I wonder if that scenario would alter the situation for you personally from a legal prosecution/charges standpoint? They could obviously say that if you hadn't intervened, the perp may not have shot anyone, so at that point YOU were the escalating factor. Definitely something else to think about.

 

[Blitz1]

"Shake a soda can and slide it towards a vacant corner) I would. Then order him to drop the weapon, if he doesn't I'd shoot him."
Are you Steven Segal in real life?

Better yet, a pack of mentos, a 2 liter bottle of coke and dowse the mf'er. Of course I would pay for it afterwords.

 

[Glockfan71]

Logical a land sound advice to me...+1

This. +1

Sent from my HTC One X+ using Tapatalk

 

[Glockfan71]

Hit the deck as stated above and draw. Shoot if you are shot at.


Sent from my HTC One X+ using Tapatalk

 

[CCW]

fantastic. I'd take a selfie and post it on instatwitterbook #quickstopmassacre.

Outstanding. Hopefully the prison where you'll be serving your life sentence will have internet access so you can respond to your BFFs who give you props for those posts.

 

[Rider]

sometimes you gotta wonder with this crowd. They're so afraid of MA that they'd never use their gun yet for some reason carry anyway. I think the gun might be like fashion accessory to them or something that just makes them feel cool.

this wasn't the post I really wanted to reply to, but...

The OP's scenario as by no means clear, as evidenced by the backlash he received for asking for a decisive answer. There is a huge - infinitely huge - difference between carrying a gun to protect your family if someone attacks you and you thinking that having a gun gives you the imperative to intervene in a crime taking place. In fact, this is exactly why many people are against people carrying guns. They think we're all a bunch of wannabe cops looking for trouble, and you are encouraging that behavior and viewpoint.

With respect to 'mass-ism': I challenge you to tell me of you feel the same way when an incapacitated family member names you as their conservator, you diligently manage their funds and follow their lawyer's directions, then, when they get a new lawyer, you end up spending $100,000 of your own money defending yourself and proving that not only did you manage their affairs and net a reasonable return for them, but that you charged them nothing for your time and effort. end result: they admit you did nothing wrong, the lawyer gets 1/3(these are govt funded groups that work in association with private firms in xchange for kickbacks), and you are out 10 years and all your money.

No, friend, MA has institutionalized the art of f***** the righteous, and if you discount that or underestimate it, you do so at your own peril. The legal system here exists to squeeze your money and your life away, and for no other reason.

The only truly free man is the man with nothing. He has nothing they can take; he has nothing he can lose except his life, which he can spend as he sees fit.

I think I have to watch Fight Club and get drunk tonight.

 

[ccm75]

this wasn't the post I really wanted to reply to, but...

The OP's scenario as by no means clear, as evidenced by the backlash he received for asking for a decisive answer. There is a huge - infinitely huge - difference between carrying a gun to protect your family if someone attacks you and you thinking that having a gun gives you the imperative to intervene in a crime taking place. In fact, this is exactly why many people are against people carrying guns. They think we're all a bunch of wannabe cops looking for trouble, and you are encouraging that behavior and viewpoint.

With respect to 'mass-ism': I challenge you to tell me of you feel the same way when an incapacitated family member names you as their conservator, you diligently manage their funds and follow their lawyer's directions, then, when they get a new lawyer, you end up spending $100,000 of your own money defending yourself and proving that not only did you manage their affairs and net a reasonable return for them, but that you charged them nothing for your time and effort. end result: they admit you did nothing wrong, the lawyer gets 1/3(these are govt funded groups that work in association with private firms in xchange for kickbacks), and you are out 10 years and all your money.

No, friend, MA has institutionalized the art of f***** the righteous, and if you discount that or underestimate it, you do so at your own peril. The legal system here exists to squeeze your money and your life away, and for no other reason.

The only truly free man is the man with nothing. He has nothing they can take; he has nothing he can lose except his life, which he can spend as he sees fit.

I think I have to watch Fight Club and get drunk tonight.

I feel slightly confused, but reading between the lines I am sorry you got screwed over by the courts and some greedy family members.......but then again maybe I'm wrong and if so disregard and carry on.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

If this video had aisles of snacks and convenience items, it would be an accurate representation of how I would roll.

 

[Rider]

I feel slightly confused, but reading between the lines I am sorry you got screwed over by the courts and some greedy family members.......but then again maybe I'm wrong and if so disregard and carry on.

I was responding to BattleSnail's belittling those of us who do not underestimate the likely consequences of taking action on someone's behalf in MA. The moral of the story is that someone can ask you for help. You can provide them with help as they request it. You can consult an attorney and act in good faith. And still get sued. The other moral of the story is that 'winning' in this context means losing almost everything you have while the person suing you concedes that they were lying.

If you shoot someone, and you think that you won't get sued, you are probably high. Someone will sue you. It will cost you money. It will cost you stress and quality of life. Even if you go free, you will be affected, and not in a good way.

 

[josh2600]

Grab a bag of chips. Press check. Make sure I have business socks on. Operate.