CCW Customer Stops Robbery in KC, MO

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Henry Bowman

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
6,717
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
A customer who was carrying in a convenience store stops an armed robbery using his CCW. Link to KCTV news report with store video from two angles. They say that he also reached for his cuffs, but was wearing a different uniform. They do not say that he is a special LEO or such.
http://www.kctv5.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?ClipID1=551171&h1=Caught%20on%20Tape%3A%20Customer%20Catches%20Crook&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=101266&LaunchPageAdTag=Homepage&activePane=info&playerVersion=1&rnd=2810932
There is a 15 second commercial at the beginning, but it's worth the wait.
 
hmmm

That weapon the BG is waving around looks supiciously like a Daisy Powerline693 CO2 BB gun, which would explain his sudden desire to give up.

attachment.php


Now granted a BB gun is a dangerous weapon of sorts, it does throw a .177 tiny round projectile at a screaming 400 ft/sec but I think true pistol is going to win everytime in that confrontation match up.
 

Attachments

  • pl_kit_5693.jpg
    pl_kit_5693.jpg
    10.5 KB · Views: 756
-

"Is the guy a cop or just a wanna be?"

Bothersome comment bud. Is your point only cops have the training to do that? Or did you mean only a cop should be allowed to defend themselves?:confused:
CT
 
It only plays a little bit for me. What I did see it looked like the guy was watching him walk towards the store and as soon as he opened the door he drew on him. Situational Awareness.
 
Byron - interesting outlook......

that I too share. LEO is usually obligated (??) to order a perp to 'Freeze/stop/drop your weapon, etc." BEFORE they may open fire.

But, we non-LEO folk are motivated by "fear for our lives, etc" and have no responsibility to utter the freeze/stop statements.

The bad guys would be better off encountering LEO (and live) vs the CCW'ers here and be perforated......lol

Meaning - are we justified to simply shoot first (with a justified threat)------as Byron alludes? I agree by the way - just curious to the outlook of others here.................
 
MikeIsaj said:
Waaa, Waaa, Waaaaaaaaah... It won't load for me. Stupid computer:banghead: :banghead:
Click to expand...
No doubt ... what is it with TV News sites that all seem to use the most worthless media streaming software out there ... doesn't work most of the time or requires that you be running IE or some such nonsense.

Why not just put a stupid direct link to the video file and let people download the stupid thing instead of streaming it :rolleyes:
 
Bothersome comment bud. Is your point only cops have the training to do that? Or did you mean only a cop should be allowed to defend themselves?
Click to expand...

None of the above.

However, if he's not a cop, why is he carrying handcuffs?

They also said in the video that there was a recent rash of armed robberies of convenience stores in the area and this guy was going around to different stores asking if there was "anything he could do".

Almost sounds like he was looking for trouble. Exactly the type of behavior that makes people who CCW look bad.
 
Not a shot was fired. Irreguardless of if this guy was proactive or not. This showes sheeple not everyone with a pistol strapped to their hip is itchin for an excuse to blow somone away.

This is a positive example.
 
Right.

If this guy was just some wannabe out looking for trouble, we got lucky this time. If something bad had happened, it would have been more ammo for the gun grabbers.
 
anyone have a direct link to the video ... I'm unable to get it to work.

EDIT
Nevermind ... I got it to run in *ick* Internet Explorer *bleh*
 
SJG26 said:
that I too share. LEO is usually obligated (??) to order a perp to 'Freeze/stop/drop your weapon, etc." BEFORE they may open fire.

But, we non-LEO folk are motivated by "fear for our lives, etc" and have no responsibility to utter the freeze/stop statements.

The bad guys would be better off encountering LEO (and live) vs the CCW'ers here and be perforated......lol

Meaning - are we justified to simply shoot first (with a justified threat)------as Byron alludes? I agree by the way - just curious to the outlook of others here.................
Click to expand...


Actually that's wrong. The justification to fire for a law enforcement officer and a civilian are exactly the same. If screaming "drop your weapon" would do more damage or cause more danger to the officer and public than just shooting would, the officer will simply shoot. Case in point, man with a gun walks in and pops the clerk, an officer is not obligated to say a word. In this case the officer could simply state or believe his live is in imminent danger and pop the guy same as anyone else. The only difference between the burden of proof in a leo involved shooting and a civilian is that the leo will have his "training" and "experience" considered when making a choice to fire.

So don't go out thinking there is a difference between off duty cop shootings and your own. Everything is the same. If you shoot the guy and your defense is “hey I’m not a cop” your gonna be writing letters to your kids on birthdays.

In this situation I think this guy reacted well, he obviously held the initiative, the only thing I would have recommended is that he side step out of the line of sight...but being that it was such a small store he may not have had the luxury and I'll bet had he jumped the counter to "take cover" (not that a plywood counter would stop crap) he would have lost the initiative and probably not had time to draw his weapon.

I think it's a good pinch.

Had the bad guy come in shooting, it would have been bloody and ugly anyways....the bad guy would most likely have lost as he was holding the gun left handed (he may be left handed) way over his head and at a downward angle as if to "display". Had he fired, controlling recoil and shot placement would have been nonexistent. As for our local hero...good shooting stance.
 
They also said in the video that there was a recent rash of armed robberies of convenience stores in the area and this guy was going around to different stores asking if there was "anything he could do".
Click to expand...
It said that he was a fellow business owner in the neighborhood. His truck door shows maybe a tire store.
 
The word on the Missouri Carry forum is that the "customer" was an off duty cop - this reported thru a detective friend of the individual who posted the info, who lives in the town where it happened.

I don't think it changes the analysis of the value of concealed carry, though - a gun available to a good guy stopped a bad guy from ripping off the store or worse. Unless you are prepared simply to hope that a cop is there when you need one (as happened to be the case here) and are willing to let the bad guys do what they want if a cop isn't handy, you have to recognize the value of concealed carry by as many good guys as are willing and able. Of course, most antis are perfectly prepared to let bad things happen to others as long as they can delude themselves that they're helping by "getting guns off the streets.".
 
El Tejon said:
CT, I think he's commenting on the handcuffs. How many of us carry a pistol(s) AND handcuffs and do not have a badge?:confused:

(Not the handcuffs by our nightstands:D).
Click to expand...

So do you have the fuzzy purple, blue or pink handcuffs? Generally speaking, they aren't very secure. You definitely don't want them for CCW duty at all, not unless it is part of the game for your captive to escape.
----------------

So the CCW customer wasn't your job blow good guy citizen but a trained professional who arrests people for a living? Sure that changes things. It is just the value that is shown to be effective, but the value of the criminal not knowing that the other folks in the store might be cops. A citizen with a gun may or may not take action, but you except that cops will take action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top