Do You Ever Comply?

Status
Not open for further replies.
From the jump your scenario, or any scenario where a gun is pointed at you before you can react at all puts you in an awful position. Your safest bet is to comply and look for a weakness or a distraction. Often what they are demanding may be the weakness or distraction you need. They want your car, ok drop your keys as you toss them to the guy, or shut the door as you get out. Comply until you get an opportunity to draw, aim and fire quickly, and at that point you had better be hoping and praying your aim is true enough and your finger fast enough to send the other guy to talk it over with his/her choice of supernatural judges.
 
I didn't read all of the responses, but here's a few things to consider based on the OP's question:

1) Of course there are scenarios that cannot be won. Sometimes it's worth trying to win anyway, and in other instances you're better off complying (ex: do you judge that your opponent is merely trying to take your stuff, or is he trying to kill you?). You'll need to decide which is which if you ever find yourself in such an unfortunate position. But, to automatically assume that there is no way anyone could ever get the jump on you is a bit naive.

2) It's easy to create a training scenario that no person can reasonably be expected to win. In our force-on-force training exercises at work we always consider this factor when designing training modules. Simply put, a trained shooter with tactical experience (such as a police firearms instructor) can certainly set up a stage in which he draws all of the other participants into an ambush, and takes them down without a reasonably winnable option for the trainees. But, where's the training value in such an exercise? I'm not suggesting that you can't train to fight through an ambush, but I am suggesting that training needs to have a realistic goal in mind.

3) When the bullets are flying, things aren't certain. Being the tactically superior combatant with great firearms skills means very little if your opponent gets lucky with one bullet. I lost a friend and coworker in the line of duty a couple of years ago when a gang member got lucky while firing wildly into a crowd of people/officers from a significant distance. This shot connected not because of this killer's skills or tactics, but simply because of luck (bad luck for the good guys, obviously).
 
Is there ever a scenario where you comply with a bad guy’s instructions?
Off the top of my head? Voice comes out from behind me, "Don't turn around. I have a gun pointed at you. Reach for your wallet and drop it on the ground behind you."

I'll be complying, every time.

Granted, it's probably unwise to try and lump any particular theoretical circumstance into a "comply or don't" response, because there are always going to be additional factors in a real-world situation that aren't conveyed in a theoretical situation. For instance, I can't think of just about any hypothetical scenario that would warrant a "shoot" response every time. If anything, an inclination toward a "don't use your gun" response - where using force is the exception - would probably be very wise.
 
In our officer survival training some years ago we always included at least one or two "no win" situations for our young officers. The reason we did this was to force everyone that participated to realize that your tactics had to be in place always -to keep you out of such situations (upon completion of the course not one of our guys or gals would walk up on folks seated in any vehicle if they had the slightest hint that something wasn't right, period... ). After each scenario we pointed out just where their approach or positioning could have made all the difference BEFORE things went sour... That's one of the reasons that to this day I think that your tactics are far more important than weapons skills since the "no win" scenario is only that if you allow yourself to walk into it. We emphasized over and over again that the idea was to put yourself in the best position possible from the beginning of any encounter so that any potential opponent was at a disadvantage from the beginning. Using this kind of approach whether in police work or as an armed citizen greatly lowers the opportunities that a potential assailant has to operate with.

In the world of vehicles the first slight advantage we taught was that you never pulled up closely behind another car when stopping in traffic - always leave just enough room to move if necessary... If you looked ahead and saw the possibility of an ambush (one or more on foot moving into a position for an approach or carrying themselves in a manner that indicated a possible weapon in hand - or even another vehicle in a position for blocking or ramming) then you immediately drove defensively -even turning away or reversing course... The ambush you're not caught in is far superior to the one you've allowed yourself to enter....

By the way in each training scenario that we ran we videoed the incident and later showed the exercise after the fact to every participant. Some of our folks were amazed at just how exposed they'd left themselves... That filming really allowed us to show things done right as well as things done wrong.... Lots of other things involved -but they were only germane to the world of cops on the street so I'll omit them here. One last point though, something we were taught long before any of us hit the street.... In a classroom setting an instructor chose a student at random, handed them a training weapon (painted bright orange to denote that it could not fire), then picked up a single piece of paper saying that it was his "shield"... The student was told to say "bang" when he was able to get a shot off to end a possible threat. It took several students trying to work around that piece of paper before someone (a marine veteran) finally simply pointed the handgun right at the piece of paper and said "bang"... The point our instructors were trying to get across is that you deal with what's actually in front of you - and that concealment (that silly piece of paper) wasn't the same as cover (something that would actually stop a bullet...). In that same vein, in a survival situation everything around you is a potential weapon or a potential defense - you just have to keep your eyes open and deal with what you're facing at the moment (me, I think a car is a fine weapon in the right circumstances....).
 
Around summer of 1990 I was actually in this scenario. I was a college student. Iirc driving west to Dallas in a Toyota mr2 and stopped in Memphis for gas about 1am. Deserted streets downtown. I pulled to a red light. Two guys from my left approached one from the front and one moved toward the rear. The guy in front was looking right at me and stupidly heading to stand in front of my car I guess thinking I wouldn't run him over. I stepped on the gas and ran the light before they got there. No shots were fired especially because I didn't even own a gun at the time.
 
If someone wants to kill you and they have a gun already pointed at you, you're probably going to die. If all they want is your car, then your odds of survival (a.k.a. "winning") greatly improve if you comply and don't put them in a position where they believe force is their only option.
 
Occasionally movie scenes can be very instructive.... That old movie Hombre from the sixties (Elmore Leonard script, Paul Newman the lead...) had one particular scene that stuck with me... The bad guy in negotiating mode walked up the hill to confront the hero and talk him into surrendering... after getting nowhere the hero asked "How are you going to get back down that hill"? As you can guess the bad guy (Richard Boone) then has a very bad time getting back down the hill....

I would always want to be the one setting the time, the place, and the conditions in any possible confrontation -particularly where weapons or very real threat of harm exist. That's one of the reasons why any "no win" scenario in training can be a very positive learning tool -if you encourage students to think in terms of not allowing themselves to get into bad situations if at all possible. I always operated from the perspective that the good guys don't always win and tried to stack the deck as much in my favor as possible... The situations that still linger are the times I made out fine -but it was entirely by luck since I was pretty much either clueless or just plain careless.... That sort of stuff will keep you up at night.
 
1) Does an unwinnable scenario exist? 2) Is there ever a scenario where you comply with a bad guy’s instructions?

Of course, but they depend upon the situation and how much information you have to make a decision to comply or not. Most people don't have the training or the information needed in the first place and unless they've trained as lemaymiami has cautioned to avoid the worst case by keeping control of as many conditions as possible (time, place, placement) when they've not avoided the confrontation.
 
Last edited:
One last point though, something we were taught long before any of us hit the street.... In a classroom setting an instructor chose a student at random, handed them a training weapon (painted bright orange to denote that it could not fire), then picked up a single piece of paper saying that it was his "shield"... The student was told to say "bang" when he was able to get a shot off to end a possible threat. It took several students trying to work around that piece of paper before someone (a marine veteran) finally simply pointed the handgun right at the piece of paper and said "bang"... The point our instructors were trying to get across is that you deal with what's actually in front of you - and that concealment (that silly piece of paper) wasn't the same as cover (something that would actually stop a bullet...). In that same vein, in a survival situation everything around you is a potential weapon or a potential defense - you just have to keep your eyes open and deal with what you're facing at the moment (me, I think a car is a fine weapon in the right circumstances....).

A really interesting point.

For those who don't understand the difference between "cover" and "concealment", it would be very educational to take a look at the Box O Truth videos about pistols and rifles vs car doors.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-buick-o-truth-3-pistols-and-car-doors/

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-buick-o-truth-4-rifles-and-car-doors/
 
I thinks it good to have no win training--it makes us more attentive to surroundings, and it stomps home the fact that c/c is serious stuff. If someone plans a crime against you, even if he's only been planning it for just a few seconds, he's already way ahead of you concerning who's going to win.

Also, I'm one of the run away kind of people if the opportunity is given to me. I don't enforce the law anymore. I don't want hostile contact. I don't have sufficient pride to stand my ground if I can get away. If it involves shooting, the one you win is still going to change your life forever.

However, I can imagine some scenarios where I would stand my ground. If running meant leaving someone in extreme danger, or if the b/g was demanding my gun, I would chose to fight. I might give up my car or my wallet, but not my gun. If you give him your gun, you are for sure doomed.

I sort of got off topic (again).
 
Good point re: cover vs. concealment. Not much is "cover" in our everyday surroundings from even handgun rounds. On a car, the portion of the wheel where the brake rotor is, probably. The engine block definitely. The rest of the car...doubtful. Inside a home...nothing I can think of (up-ended table ala "Hollywood" Ha! :eek: )

Out and about...the exterior wall of most commercial buildings would probably stop a handgun round. I know a Connex/shipping container will stop 9mm ball (it was a ND, not mine :what:). Not sure how the thickness/hardness of a commerical dumpster compares to a Connex. Can't think of much else aside from a large tree or prone behind a curb or large concrete planter. Everything else is just concealment.
 
So what do you do

I keep a 9mm in the map pocket on the driver's door. Out of sight of any carjackers/kidnappers.

When he opens the door, I open fire.
 
Having considered this a few times, I believe the car jacker just wants the car.

My life isn't worth the car.

I calmly tell the robber "Okay, you can have the car. I'm going to get out."

As I exit, his attention will be on securing the vehicle - not likely shooting me.

Now, timing here is important. As he gets in the car, this is your opportunity to flee, toward the back and diagonal weaving behind cover, while his attention is entering the car. If you're standing there, you're foolish. Alternately, move behind and diagonal to the car, and shoot the robber. I think you're well within your legal right to shoot him during his commission of a violent felony with a firearm.

If forced somehow to stand there, at gunpoint, assuming I'm armed, I'll say something to distract him, like, "There's $5000 cash in the glove box."

A rational person (assuming a rational crook, not just a homicidal maniac in which case you're going to get shot no matter what) isn't going to shoot me as his next act. His next act will be to look in the glove box. His attention will be away from me. This is the opportunity to either move, draw and shoot him, or flee.

Now, having said that my life isn't worth a car, it would be a split second calculus whether to flee if given the opportunity, or act in self defense. This would be determined based on infinite factors (gut feeling, numbers of perps and guns, situation, proximity of cover - am I in an open parking lot, or are is there nearby cover - type of gun perp has - Jennings .22 or Ruger .357 - and a host of other variables).

Here's a good and short 2 min video worth watching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tHAV1l6NFE

Edited to add the following thoughts:

1. The best defense here is a good offense. AVOID these situations. BEWARE of dangerous areas. These include, sitting in a parked car in a lot, side of the road, ATM, etc for more than a moment. The darker and more secluded the more dangerous they are. AVOID being the first car at the stop light in an urban area where someone can get the jump on you, especially at night, and in a sketchy area of town ("wall art," liquor stores, check cashing stores, vacant buildings and lots, etc.). In times you cannot avoid these areas, be on high alert and have gun out and ready.

2. My answer above assumes I'm alone in the car. Compliance until/unless I suspect this is a murder and not a robbery. The analysis changes if it appears it's a murder, or I'm defending a child or other person in the car.

3. Never go along as a kidnap victim. Distract and fight or flee immediately.
 
Last edited:
Most responders have picked the low hanging fruit of the armed male alone in the car.
How about with children and spouse, elderly with spouse, woman with multiple children and infants. Not so cut and dried then.
 
A really interesting point.

For those who don't understand the difference between "cover" and "concealment", it would be very educational to take a look at the Box O Truth videos about pistols and rifles vs car doors.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-buick-o-truth-3-pistols-and-car-doors/

http://www.theboxotruth.com/the-buick-o-truth-4-rifles-and-car-doors/
This unclassified DoD video on cover vs concealment is also instructive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8iu_SDVb64
 
Most responders have picked the low hanging fruit of the armed male alone in the car.
How about with children and spouse, elderly with spouse, woman with multiple children and infants. Not so cut and dried then.
Yep, that complicates things.

No cookie cutter answer, other than situational awareness to avoid a CJ.

If put in this situation, if the driver guns it, the decision is made for everyone in the car.

A second person in the car can simply comply also and get out if that's the nature of what's going to happen. Obviously an infant or infirm adult cannot.

Unless - again - it's a murder initiation, the perp probably just wants the auto and will leave folks physically okay.

I suspect everyone here would - at some point - act in self defense at the first reasonable chance if it appear this was a murder or kidnapping and not a robbery.
 
I think the scenario would have been better served if the instructors or course directors took into account what has actually happened in real carjacking scenarios. They should have researched the most recent scenarios, dating back to no earlier than 1990 to present, especially those caught on video. Based on their observations, police reports, witness/complainant/victim statements, they could have come up with a more realistic scenario than what you described.

In response to your scenario, I think hitting the gas would be the best bet.
 
I think the scenario would have been better served if the instructors or course directors took into account what has actually happened in real carjacking scenarios. They should have researched the most recent scenarios, dating back to no earlier than 1990 to present, especially those caught on video. Based on their observations, police reports, witness/complainant/victim statements, they could have come up with a more realistic scenario than what you described.

In response to your scenario, I think hitting the gas would be the best bet.

Who says they didn't? The OP didn't post that information, either way.

But the fact of the matter is that car jackings do span the full spectrum, from people who safely got away in their vehicles to outright killings.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChCx2744
I think the scenario would have been better served if the instructors or course directors took into account what has actually happened in real carjacking scenarios. They should have researched the most recent scenarios, dating back to no earlier than 1990 to present, especially those caught on video. Based on their observations, police reports, witness/complainant/victim statements, they could have come up with a more realistic scenario than what you described.

In response to your scenario, I think hitting the gas would be the best bet.

Who says they didn't? The OP didn't post that information, either way.

But the fact of the matter is that car jackings do span the full spectrum, from people who safely got away in their vehicles to outright killings.

I'm just saying, the OP's instructor decided to use the "worst case scenario" as the exercise. Granted, there is a possibility that this type of scenario could happen, but how do we train for a virtually no-win scenario as such? To be able to respond to the OP's scenario attacker, you would need to be very close to condition red at every stop you ever make in a vehicle; that just doesn't seem plausible at all to me.
 
I'm just saying, the OP's instructor decided to use the "worst case scenario" as the exercise. Granted, there is a possibility that this type of scenario could happen, but how do we train for a virtually no-win scenario as such? To be able to respond to the OP's scenario attacker, you would need to be very close to condition red at every stop you ever make in a vehicle; that just doesn't seem plausible at all to me.

Hmmm...some more input from the OP would be good on this. I'm assuming that a variety of training scenarios were used, because he describes various scenarios in his original posting:

"In some cases he was merely a pedestrian and nothing happened. Sometimes he was a carjacker and drew his weapon. When the pedestrian was indeed a carjacker we had to decide what our best options were and implement our plan. Everyone who attempted to draw their pistol took rounds, a lot of rounds. Several who decided to comply were left standing on the street as the bad guy drove away. Some who complied were shot and left for dead. All but two who hit the gas in an attempt to flee took rounds."

I agree with you, though, that sticking to a no-win scenario for a training course, as opposed to a simple training demonstration to emphasize a point, is not as productive as it could be. I would think that such a training course would involve discussing various aspects of carjackings and teaching people to plan for, analyze, and implement certain skill sets to enhance their ability to survive such encounters.

However, the OP DID wish to focus on whether or not unwinnable scenarios existed and whether or not we would ever comply with a carjacker's demands.
 
Here's the deal: in that training scenario, the "carjacker" was an instructor who was trained and prepared to shoot at you if you decide to floor it and get out of there. His reactions and muscle memory were already set up in his head. He is also probably an accomplished marksman. If he were a bad guy, he would be what you would call a "trained killer."

In real life, however, you almost certainly won't be dealing with a trained killer. You may be dealing with someone who is prepared to kill, but not someone who has practiced this exact scenario over and over again and is also an accomplished marksman to boot.

Were this to happen in real life, the best scenario is to floor it while ducking down. There's a solid chance you'll nail the guy with your mirror, and even you don't, he's going to be shaken by nearly getting run over. I'm guessing you'll survive 95% of the time in this situation.

My own experience:

I have considered such a situation before, and I watch for it. One time, I was stopped at a light. I was in "pole position" (which is where carjackers always strike, since jumping in a car you can't immediately drive away is stupid). This particular light had the stop bar a good 10 feet back from the crosswalk. There was also a median that ended at the stop bar. As I'm sitting there, I see a pedestrian suddenly deviate from the crosswalk and start heading towards my driver side door, which was locked.

I am left-handed, but ambidextrous when it comes to pistols. I carry a Polish P-64 on my left hip in a cavalry draw (handle forward) position. The moment I saw him start heading my way, my left hand went to the handle. In a split second I could have that gun out and in my right hand, aimed at him. I also was prepared to floor it and get the hell out of there. He could not see what I was doing, as I kept it concealed and I also drive a tall vehicle (FJ Cruiser).

Fortunately, for both of us, he, for whatever reason, had just decided to stop at the median instead of finishing crossing (I don't know why; he had plenty of time and getting to the median took about as long as to the other side, and he definitely wasn't a panhandler). I don't know what he heck he was thinking, but I don't think he would have expected what would have transpired had he had ill intentions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top