Attacking a criminal during a robbery

[chitoryu12]

This was split from the Neo-Nazi beach party thread in News and Politics. I made this so that you can argue what the point was devolving into.

I personally do not support one man playing hero and trying to make a stand unless he is armed and can effectively disable the robber without hurting any bystanders, which is unlikely. However, I support any able people who have an opportunity to attack the criminal from behind. I've seen such tactics before. During a robbery on a small store in England that I saw the camera footage of, a man wielding a shotgun was attacked from the side by the clerk's parents. The father promptly tackled the man when his back was turned while the mother took advantage of it to take the shotgun. While police were on the way the father held the robber at knifepoint until he was arrested.

So, should any able-bodied victims ambush the robber if they have the chance, or should they stand by and watch?

[Count Dooku]

In some American states, the robber can sue you if you hurt them (in a home invasion). Honestly, I don't like the idea of going to prison for a decade because I attacked someone who broke into my house, threatened me and my family, and tried to get away with all my stuff. Having said that, I'd probably be too afraid to try and fight back. Still, I don't like the idea of being criminalized for defending myself in my own home.

In public, I really don't think it's a good idea to attack a robber. If things go bad (and there's a good chance they might), than you not only put yourself in a life-threatening scenario, but you put others at risk too. Able-bodied or not, if your life isn't in any immediate danger, it's probably better to wait for them to leave, and/or wait for the police.

[chitoryu12]

Looking at his actions is a good way to identify what they'll do if confronted. Usually the most nervous ones are the most likely to shoot if they hear just a funny noise. The ones who display little to no emotion will probably have no quams about painting the walls in brains if need be. The least dangerous are the ones who just look like they're in a hurry to get the cash and leave. They'll most likely give up if they fear the cops are nearby and they don't have what they wanted.

Then you get the odd drunk who calls the cops to report his own crime because they won't give him the money. Oy vey.

A fast reaction time and a good grip are vital, however. My mother was robbed in college by a guy with a tire iron and a .38 revolver. The guy was new and holding the weapons loosely, so she just ripped the bar from his hand and beat him with it. He had made a few robberies, but was overconfident and didn't even bother really aiming in her direction.

[Molyneux]

In some American states, the robber can sue you if you hurt them (in a home invasion). Honestly, I don't like the idea of going to prison for a decade because I attacked someone who broke into my house, threatened me and my family, and tried to get away with all my stuff. Having said that, I'd probably be too afraid to try and fight back. Still, I don't like the idea of being criminalized for defending myself in my own home.

In public, I really don't think it's a good idea to attack a robber. If things go bad (and there's a good chance they might), than you not only put yourself in a life-threatening scenario, but you put others at risk too. Able-bodied or not, if your life isn't in any immediate danger, it's probably better to wait for them to leave, and/or wait for the police.

Just a note: They can sue you unsuccessfully. I don't think I've ever heard a single confirmed instance of someone actually losing a case like that.

And regardless of all else, if you're in a hostile situation and someone armed tries to take a hostage into a back room - all bets are off. It's highly likely that the criminal is about to kill the hostage; an innocent person's life is in imminent danger already, you can't very well make things worse by interfering.

[chitoryu12]

I don't support hostage rescues. I'm talking about if the guy is, say, looking out a window with his gun pointed away from others. If he grabs someone, don't even bother to go for him.

[Superman]

In all 50 states, if you can prove that harming the robber, was done in self-defense, or protecting the life of someone else, then there's no crime. This also includes using deadly force.

[Superman]

Damn, hit 'send' before I could finish and clean that up.

I was just going to point out that 'self-defense' is not the same thing as protecting your own property. If a cat burgler is busy putting your silverware into a pillowcase while you sneak up behind him, you can't just unload your handgun into the back of his head. Different states also have different laws that apply to a situation like this.

[chitoryu12]

Damn, hit 'send' before I could finish and clean that up.

I was just going to point out that 'self-defense' is not the same thing as protecting your own property. If a cat burgler is busy putting your silverware into a pillowcase while you sneak up behind him, you can't just unload your handgun into the back of his head. Different states also have different laws that apply to a situation like this.

Yep. I remember a man in Texas was arrested for manslaughter after he shot at a fleeing robber and got him in the heart. You have to be careful.

[Superman]

Damn, hit 'send' before I could finish and clean that up.

I was just going to point out that 'self-defense' is not the same thing as protecting your own property. If a cat burgler is busy putting your silverware into a pillowcase while you sneak up behind him, you can't just unload your handgun into the back of his head. Different states also have different laws that apply to a situation like this.

Yep. I remember a man in Texas was arrested for manslaughter after he shot at a fleeing robber and got him in the heart. You have to be careful.

Now, if your certain he's unarmed (and you're much larger than he is), you can certainly kick his ass and hogtie him while you wait for the police to show up. It usually depends on each situation.

[chitoryu12]

Damn, hit 'send' before I could finish and clean that up.

I was just going to point out that 'self-defense' is not the same thing as protecting your own property. If a cat burgler is busy putting your silverware into a pillowcase while you sneak up behind him, you can't just unload your handgun into the back of his head. Different states also have different laws that apply to a situation like this.

Yep. I remember a man in Texas was arrested for manslaughter after he shot at a fleeing robber and got him in the heart. You have to be careful.

Now, if your certain he's unarmed (and you're much larger than he is), you can certainly kick his ass and hogtie him while you wait for the police to show up. It usually depends on each situation.

And that's why I have a solid wood paint stirrer within easy access at all times. That, or my dulled katana in the closet.

[Superman]

I just found out that you can legally use deadly force to protect your home in Texas.

How shocking.

[chitoryu12]

I just found out that you can legally use deadly force to protect your home in Texas.

How shocking.

Very. The reason the guy got arrested was because it wasn't for protection. The robber was running into the street.

[Lord of the Abyss]

I don't support hostage rescues. I'm talking about if the guy is, say, looking out a window with his gun pointed away from others. If he grabs someone, don't even bother to go for him.

So you are saying that if an armed man is taking money and property, you should risk your life to attack him ? But if he grabs an actual person, you shouldn't ?

As far as I'm concerned it's the opposite. I'm not even going to consider going after an armed man to protect inanimate objects, even my own, much less some shop's or bank's. If it was a person; I don't know if I'd have the opportunity or the courage, but if there's a time to risk my life, it's when someone else's life is at danger.

[Temjin]

This was split from the Neo-Nazi beach party thread in News and Politics. I made this so that you can argue what the point was devolving into.

I personally do not support one man playing hero and trying to make a stand unless he is armed and can effectively disable the robber without hurting any bystanders, which is unlikely. However, I support any able people who have an opportunity to attack the criminal from behind. I've seen such tactics before. During a robbery on a small store in England that I saw the camera footage of, a man wielding a shotgun was attacked from the side by the clerk's parents. The father promptly tackled the man when his back was turned while the mother took advantage of it to take the shotgun. While police were on the way the father held the robber at knifepoint until he was arrested.

So, should any able-bodied victims ambush the robber if they have the chance, or should they stand by and watch?

Just because the tactic has worked in the past, does not mean that it's a good idea.

Why the fuck should a group of people (supposedly customers) risk their lives to protect the store's money? Why should anyone risk their lives for that money? It's not worth it. I mean fuck, most companies have a policy for their employees for this situation which basically says "give the criminal whatever the hell he wants." If the parent company doesn't give a fuck, why should I?

Of course, one of the only reasons that policy is in place is because most stores and bars have something called insurance, which allows them to get most of the money back (which just means that trying to subdue the criminal is doubly stupid).

Of course, this is just talking about situations where it's unlikely anyone would get hurt if they cooperated. In situations where it's a sure thing that someone is about to get killed, taking action might be permissible.

[The Spartan]

I just found out that you can legally use deadly force to protect your home in Texas.

How shocking.

You're correct. As long as home invader of some sort or another is inside your home, you can shoot to kill and do not have to retreat anywhere (like a bedroom or closet, etc.).

And if you happen to live on a patch of land, by which I essentially mean not in a subdivision, you can shoot trespassers too.

It's something that goes all the way back to the frontier days, when cattle and horse rustling was a problem and they were considered capital offenses.

[chitoryu12]

Why the fuck should a group of people (supposedly customers) risk their lives to protect the store's money? Why should anyone risk their lives for that money? It's not worth it. I mean fuck, most companies have a policy for their employees for this situation which basically says "give the criminal whatever the hell he wants." If the parent company doesn't give a fuck, why should I?

With citizens, I meant more along the lines of also taking your money as a little extra. Then there's your standard mugger.

As far as I'm concerned it's the opposite. I'm not even going to consider going after an armed man to protect inanimate objects, even my own, much less some shop's or bank's. If it was a person; I don't know if I'd have the opportunity or the courage, but if there's a time to risk my life, it's when someone else's life is at danger.

Which is more intelligent: Charging a guy while he's busy loading his bag with money from the register, or charging a guy while he's pointing a gun to someone's head and has his finger on the trigger? Guns are often easy to set off. If his weapon has a light trigger pull, the shock could cause him to squeeze it and fire. If he sees you, he'll either fire at you or simply shoot the hostage. If he's got a blade, then simply moving his arm the wrong way could end up stabbing the hostage through the neck. Only someone trained to save others from a madman should do it. If he's busy loading up, fine, but it's attacking a hostage taker is stupid and will most likely result in a dead hostage.

[Temjin]

With citizens, I meant more along the lines of also taking your money as a little extra. Then there's your standard mugger.

So?

What could you possibly be carrying on you that is worth risking your life over? No, seriously, what's worth that? Just give the guy whatever the hell he wants.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Each situation is different, each person is different. It's impossible to have a blanket policy for situations like this. You can only be mentally ready to react quickly without panicking, and then trust yourself to make the right call at any time based on that trained and inoculated level-headedness, a right call which may be the exact opposite of another depending on the particular situation.

[Dark Flame]

But is some criminal stealing some business's money a reason to risk your life? Even if he has a bag of money in his hands he can simply drop it and fight back. Why risk so much for so little?

If he has a gun to someone's head, it raises the stakes a lot, but if at all possible action should be taken. Either way, if you can't get the drop on him and attack him from behind, strike the first blow, and do it with a minimum of risk to all, then don't do anything. If he has his back to me and a hostage in his arms, then I go for it. If it's the same situation but with a bag of money, I stand and watch.

[chitoryu12]

It's a tough call to make, as Duchess said. It depends on the situation. What worked on one man will not surely work on another. Doing it right means stopping a robber and possibly saving lives. Doing it wrong means you just got several innocent people killed. You have to take every detail into account.

[Covenant]

With citizens, I meant more along the lines of also taking your money as a little extra. Then there's your standard mugger.

So?

What could you possibly be carrying on you that is worth risking your life over? No, seriously, what's worth that? Just give the guy whatever the hell he wants.

This is one of the best self-defense things you can do. What are you possibly carrying that is worth a life, or massive physical injury? 200 bucks? Some credit cards you can cancel with a phonecall? Social security card? Etc. These are things that, yes, are worth keeping under normal circumstances but not worth getting seriously injured or killed for. If they want more than that, then you can and should stop them, since you shouldn't let yourself be hurt. But there are few things worth getting stabbed for, and I know I wouldn't let someone stab me for 200 bucks!

A lot of these nasty deaths are usually called 'robberies gone bad' and such. A robbery gone well is when the guy gets what he wants and leaves and nobody is hurt. A home invasion/robbery is different, but out on the street you really should just hand it over. Sometimes they won't even ask, and will just start beating the shit out of you, so you should be sure to be PREPARED to defend yourself (ie, make sure you know which way to run) but by and large, standing up to an attacker is often a last ditch thing and not too many people will be able to do it well, since an attacker usually bypasses the troublesome looking victims.

If someone gets mugged, and the guy only takes their wallet, you're still going to be helpful getting a description of the person and such. No reason to play Rambo. The guy might have a buddy around the corner you didn't see, for example. It think it makes sense not to escalate a conflict. If all he wants is the money or the shoes, hand 'em over.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

A lot of it--and I cannot stress this enough because I'm been attacked by a knife-armed assailant before myself and successfully disarmed him--is in the speed of your reaction. I was considerably outmassed by the fellow, and he certainly could have beaten me up. But instead I saw that he had about an 8-inch serrated edge cooking knife stuffed under his belt. So I just sort of acted, without thinking or freezing or responding verbally and any of that other stuff. I just reached in, grabbed the knife, and yanked it away from him. In the process of my doing so, he tried to grab the knife back but instead got his hand cut open while doing so. Five seconds into the encounter, it had gone from him looming over me to his being disarmed and gripping a right hand that was bleeding profusely.

I had no particular training in the past, oh, decade before that, so I was well out of practice, and all the advantages were nominally with him. But I just acted faster--I got inside his decision-making loop more or less--and so he ran off clutching a very badly bleeding hand, and I just shrugged and headed inside. Will that work in every circumstance? Hell no. But it's certainly true that the faster person wins the fight, not necessarily the stronger nor better armed. The ironic thing was that I never attacked him; I just wanted to get the knife away from him and hope that reversal of fortune would be enough to send him running. As it was he chose to stop me from doing that and in the process just got his palm cut to the bone.

[chitoryu12]

That's exactly what I meant in the first post. Don't try to fight unless you're able-bodied and able to easily take them down. Good reaction time is a must. If you're too slow, they can just slice your throat open or put a bullet in your gut, which will really ruin your chances of fighting him off.

[brianeyci]

Covenant, not that I disagree with what you're saying, but giving them what they want is not always the best solution especially if they're not wearing a mask. I didn't know this either, I'm a bookworm who used to think that criminals have a sense of ethics, but they don't. If a criminal isn't wearing a mask, and orders you into a place, giving them what they want is stupid because there's a chance they'll kill you after. If it's outside, depending on how physically strong you are, you can beat off the criminal, or run. If you said "give the rapist what he wants" you'd be flamed, and obviously rape is far more grevious than a wallet. But the point is the wallet's mine, and if I fight for it or run (running is always an option) then I don't see why you think it's not worth my life when it's my life.

In short don't always give the criminal what he wants. It depends on the criminal, what he's doing, what he wants. Street sense is something you need to cultivate, know who will go the distance and gut you and who won't, and there's no blanket rule for every situation. You were a security guard, so maybe you have a better perspective of this than me, but I'm not going to give a criminal my backpack if my Calculus notes are in it. They are my life, or as good as them, and there's little chance a criminal would take the backpack from me with no consequences especially since I frequent well traveled routes and carry pens and keys in my pocket for the explicit purpose of gouging someone's eye out should they attack me.

[chitoryu12]

The issue I have is that most self-defense teachings come from law enforcement or just people taught by law enforcement. Police view the safety of civilians as of the utmost importance. Thus, their opinion is that anything that decreases chances of living even in the slightest is a bad idea. Because of that, they advocate simply letting the criminal get away with it even in a situation where they could be easily fought off. They only want you to fight if cornered and being actively attacked, but that's not always obvious. As Brian mentioned, a robber will likely just kill any witnesses who can identify them. Most likely this will involve simply taking the item while the gun is to your head, firing, and running. They don't make it immediatly obvious that they want to kill you. It's either fight them off or try to read their mind.