What to do in a "Hold Up"

[Ma$$hole]

If someone were to walk into my family owned business and demand money (maybe wielding a weapon) at which point would it be lawful to neutralize him in Massachusetts? I really would have to hate to resort to that in result of living with the aftermath, courts, and the withdrawal of my weapon for evidence. I figured ignorance is one's worst enemy in these cases so I really would like to know fact and not opinion. Thanks

 

[Scrivener]

The point at which a reasonable person would feel in fear for his/her life in that situtation and you actually felt such fear.

 

[swatmedic]

we don't neutralize people, we kill them.
we don't shoot to wound, or to scare some one off, we shoot to stop the threat.
we do not draw a weapon to scare people away, we draw in response to a threat against our lives.

 

[Raoul Duke]

If someone were to walk into my family owned business and demand money (maybe wielding a weapon) at which point would it be lawful to neutralize him in Massachusetts? I really would have to hate to resort to that in result of living with the aftermath, courts, and the withdrawal of my weapon for evidence. I figured ignorance is one's worst enemy in these cases so I really would like to know fact and not opinion. Thanks

What you've asked is really several questions, the nuances of which have been discussed here at length. The answers to your questions can best be found using the search feature (fifth option from the left on the red bar midway up you screen).

Scrivener's answer is concise, but you may mistake it for being glib. As soon as you study up on this question and learn about the various legal components of this "central question" that every gun owner faces, you'll quickly see why he answered your question completely.

There is no substitute for tackling the MGL concerning your firearms questions. If, as you study the law, you pose specific questions along the way, you'll probably get much, much better (and friendlier) answers.

I found a book that I thought really explained the legal issues involved in purchasing, owning, carrying and deploying a firearm. The book is called Armed Response and the author, whom I think is a member of this board (no I'm not getting paid to shill his book) is David Kenik.

So, read a book and do some searching and you'll quickly see that what your asking is more or less "when can I shoot someone legally?" This, frankly, is something the courts wrestle with every day- there is no simply answer- other than the one Scrivener gave you and despite the fact that he "shits on newbies" he did just poop a nugget of truth on ya.

 

[M1911]

Ma**h***: You really need to get some training. I suggest LFI-1.

A shorter term, cheaper possibility is going to the seminar shown on this page: http://www.aware.org/

 

[Mikey]

Or check out the classes GOAL has to offer.

 

[Cross-X]

You might also consider whether less than lethal force tools have a place in your defensive toolkit.

 

[MaverickNH]

There are many don'ts you will hear:

- Don't hand them the cash and, when they open the door and walk out, shoot them in the back.

- Don't chase them down in the street and shoot them.

- And so on...

But also:

- Don't get shot or stabbed wondering if you should defend your life with a firearm.

Get this figured out well in advance by reading up and taking one of several courses suggested. Think of owning a gun like owning an airplane. Just because you can buy one, doesn't mean you can fly an airplane - or survive trying to fly one, that is. Just the same, just because you can own/carry a gun doesn't mean you know it's role in self-defense - and that means when and why as well as how to shoot.

You wouldn't think of cash spent on flying lessons as a waste - but many think of paying for lessons on use of deadly force as cash out for no hard property in hand.

While better to be judged by 12 than carried by six, the easy alternative is to avoid both. While you might hear a lot of cheers here for stories of those that use firearms in self-defense, the vast majority of us count on smarts rather than guns to avoid harm.

A gun may be an essential part of your business security plan, but if the only part, then you have no plan but a last-ditch do-or-die chance. Lighting, visibility, security mirrors/cameras, etc., all factor into reducing the odds of that someone walking into your family business with an intent of armed robbery and you being there in front of a pointed gun/knife when they walk in.

 

[Half Cocked]

If someone were to walk into my family owned business and demand money (maybe wielding a weapon) at which point would it be lawful to neutralize him in Massachusetts? I really would have to hate to resort to that in result of living with the aftermath, courts, and the withdrawal of my weapon for evidence. I figured ignorance is one's worst enemy in these cases so I really would like to know fact and not opinion. Thanks

Although no ones knows what they would in fact do until they are in the situation you have to remember that no two situations are the same and no easy way to answer the question.

You stated that they "demand money (maybe wielding a weapon)"

You would have a hard time convincing someone that demanding money would justify deadly force If they do not have a weapon or give the indication that they have a weapon.

The type of weapon, the distance away that they are as well as the layout of the store (i.e. physical barriers etc..) would have an impact on the decision as well.

Your question contained part of the answer. Is the result of living with the aftermath, courts, lawsuits, scrutiny etc...worth the couple of hundred bucks in the register. Sometimes it is better to just give them the money and be the best witness you can be to help get them apprehended later on. Yes, there is a possibility that they still shoot you...Yes, there is also the possibility that the gun is a replica also, which is why you have to judge each situation seperately.

Invest in the best crime prevention methods that you can to help prevent being put into the situation in the first place (surveillence equip etc...). Invest in some firearms training that includes legal training on the use of force and remember that you must ACTUALLY feel that your life is in danger and a reasonable person would also feel the same to be justified in the use of deadly force.

Cross-X also made a good point about less than lethal options as well.

These questions are not easy to answer. No one should be a victim but everyone should know the consequences of what they do before they do it.

just my $.02

 

[Half Cocked]

Maverick NH..Good post!

 

[Ma$$hole]

Actually I may be a "newbie" on this forum but im sure as shit not a newbie to carrying or to forums alone. I've been on other forums for quite some time. However, I did realize that there isn't a need to ask this question in other forums because if you asked a texan what to do they'd probably tell me to cut them in half w/ a .50 cal if someone even looked at me funny. Massachusetts being a very unfriendly gun state, I figured I'd get a decent answer here. Fortunately there were some good references I recieved here on this post. Unfortunately I wasn't expecting a hazing. I'd like to think guys who "shit on newbies" don't do the same @ their local shooting ranges for a lot of the same reasons. As for the good and reasonable advice... keep it coming and thanks.

 

[jamz]

There are a million different things that can happen in such a situation- millions of parameters, all fluid, highly dynamic and impossible to predict. Therefore, one really can't say exactly what one would do in a static snapshot like that.

Only thing I would say is do whatever you want to do, and draw and stop the threat as best you can ONLY IF you are fully 100% convinced you will be dead in the next 5 seconds, if you don't.

Welcome to NES!

 

[dwarven1]

I'd like to think guys who "shit on newbies" don't do the same @ their local shooting ranges for a lot of the same reasons. As for the good and reasonable advice... keep it coming and thanks.

He doesn't... I've met him in person. And he wasn't, for that matter.
He gave you a dead-nuts accurate answer - that's pretty much the definition of when you can shoot - when you honestly feel your life is in danger.

He could have probably worded it a little better, and expanded on it... but that is the correct answer.

 

[JimConway]

A simple fact is that the ONLY reason to shoot is to stop a threat of death or grevious bodily injury. When you shoot, you are shooting to stop he threat, not to kill. You do recognise that by shooting you may cause a death, but that is not your purpose. When the BG ceases to be a threat, you MUST stop shooting.

 

[MaverickNH]

Unfortunately I wasn't expecting a hazing.

Just trying to thicken your skin a bit so you can take more than a hazing from the public without shooting them all dead.

You didn't get hazed - really. If you do, you'll know it.

 

[Scrivener]

Massachusetts being a very unfriendly gun state, I figured I'd get a decent answer here.

You DID. A clear, concise, accurate one. Quite promptly, I might add.

Note that four (4) subsequent posts all confirmed the accuracy therein. Pity you are incapable of appreciating it.

Unfortunately I wasn't expecting a hazing. I'd like to think guys who "shit on newbies" don't do the same @ their local shooting ranges for a lot of the same reasons. As for the good and reasonable advice... keep it coming and thanks.

Unfortunately, you are as unappreciative as you are ignorant. Someone who actually possesses the expertise and experience you now claim to should KNOW the answer to your question. This is especially true in MA, where a signed affirmation to that effect is required by many towns as part of the LTC application.

Someone who doesn't know the standard should shut up, sit up and pay attention when their question is answered.

 

[rscalzo]

In a complaint released this afternoon, the Disciplinary Counsel for the Advisory

Committee on Judicial Conduct (ACJC) alleged that a municipal court judge appeared on the bench on several occasions while highly intoxicated and on other occasions bullied and abused attorneys and members of the public. The judge is also accused of public misconduct by utilizing his judicial position to attempt to intimidate members of the public outside of the courtroom.

Must be payback....

 

[M1911]

Ma**h***:

The reality is that self defense law is not simple. It is situationally dependent and there are no absolutes. It is not something that can be adequately addressed in a couple sentences. For example, I can tell you that you can only use deadly force if you or another innocent is in immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury. That is a correct statement, but it does not cover when you are legally obligated to retreat and when you are not. It does not discuss the ability, opportunity, and jeopardy yard-stick. It does not discuss what "immediate" means. It does not discuss disparity of force and when you might be able to use deadly force against an unarmed attacker. Justifiable use of deadly force is a complicated subject, so don't expect to be able to learn about it from a sentence or three.

I strongly suggest that you take Ayoob's LFI-1. He covers in detail when you can and when you can not shoot. For a shorter discussion on it, Aware is having a seminar in April http://www.aware.org

If you use deadly force when you are not legally allowed to do so, you may well get convicted of murder one. Here in MA, that is a mandatory life sentence with no possibility of parole. As a result, you really should NOT be learning about self defense law from anonymous web posters like me. You should be learning about it from people who know the law, whether that be expert witnesses like Mas Ayoob, appellate attorneys like Lisa Steele, or MA firearms attorneys like Scrivener or Cross-X.

 

[Ma$$hole]

Notice I recieved advice to "Shoot to Kill" and "Shoot to Stop" meaning someone has to be wrong. OPINIONS vary and when it comes to the law someone is going to be wrong. Anyhow it's all water under the bridge now. I was just trying to keep "E-thuggin'" to a minimum because when an E-thug gets his feelings hurt he tends to run to the Admin really quick (been there seen that). You wont see me on this post anymore because it's rapidly becoming a waste of my time to argue whether or not I have thin skin. It's thick enough just hope you have the skin of a tank when it comes back around to you. heh. Moving on...

 

[JimConway]

Ma**h***
Anyone that told you to "shoot to kill" is either stupid or crazy. There is not a single state in this country, that I am aware of, where this is considered legal. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are not just another Mall Ninja.
You said that you are moving on. Good

 

[MaverickNH]

OK - now THAT was a hazing. Well deserved, IMHO.

I, like others, found the forum rough going until I figured out that it wasn't TFL/THR in character, rules or worth. All are held to their words and expected to do their homework.

 

[GaryO]

we don't neutralize people, we kill them.
we don't shoot to wound, or to scare some one off, we shoot to stop the threat.
we do not draw a weapon to scare people away, we draw in response to a threat against our lives.

You might be able to "neutralize him" with copious amounts of baking soda