Indianapolis postman shot in the eye with a .38

[danbrew]

Well, I'll keep it civil, fellas, but name calling isn't really helping your argument. A wimp? Less that a man? Perhaps - but I will be the man going home to my family this evening and going off to the salt mines tomorrow to earn a living for my family. I'm not sure that the postman will be doing that for some time.

I don't actually disagree with the principles that some here are espousing - everybody likes the idea of catching the bad guy and kicking his butt, sending him to prison, etc. I'm simply saying that the postman didn't have to get shot. I'd bet you a buck that the video camera outside the bank got a dandy shot of the car.

We can agree to disagree, but the actions portrayed by the postman (ironic, I know, good enough movie, though...) were quite foolish.

I hope that none of us ever have to discover that our actions are judged after the fact as that of a fool. Also, it must be nice to not have to worry about the financial devastation likely to be experienced after any shooting. Does anyone here really believe that the bank will pay the medical bills for the postman? Or that the postman is independently wealthy and can easily pay those bills? I don't.


(and, btw, what the heck is a "chicken soul"?)

 

[mongo4567]

I'm with danbrew and others on this. There is nothing heroic in my mind about chasing down a fleeing robber when no one was hurt and you are unarmed. It just sounds dumb and unnecessarily risky to me. Stepping in during the escalation of such a crime in progress, that would be heroic. Risking your life to protect someone else, that would be heroic.

 

[danprkr]

I suspect this would have happened regardless of the intervention.

"Suspect" is the key word in that sentence. It is always far easier for the cops to get the bad guy if they KNOW what he's driving than if they don't. Which is why he went to the back of the bank. If you'd read a little more closely you'd have read the sentence that ended:

...to get his vehicle information.

Then it turns out that he was either a bit to fast, or our BG was attempting to flee without a car. Instead of being in a car and ready to go the BG was still in the open so our hero:

...came face-to-face with Abebe and struggled to turn the gun, a .38 revolver, away from him.

Which means that he rounded the corner, surprised the BG, got a .38 pointed at him, and then had to struggle with the BG to get out of the line of fire. Which he sadly did not do with total success. I will admit that the literary styling of the article does take a murky turn here. But, that's what it says. My bet is that the author had cut x many inches from the article for an ad but maybe he's just a bad writer. There are certainly enough of them in the news business now a days.


But, the point here is that all citizens have a duty to protect the community, and he discharged his with great courage and deserves praise.

 

[chuckusaret]

There are alot of positive and negative comments about what should have or should not have been done. I don't believe any of you know what you would or would not do in the same situation until you have been placed in a situation like this. In the heat of battle everyone reacts differently, no matter how intensive their training has been, some retreat as cowards and others continue the attack.

 

[dom1104]

Cards, as I understand it, the perp ran out the back door, the postman ran out the front to try to get his liscense, and they collided with each other as the perp rounded the corner of the building.

 

[chuckusaret]

There are alot of positive and negative comments about what should have or should not have been done. I don't believe any of you know what you would or would not do in the same situation until you have been placed in a situation like this. In the heat of battle everyone reacts differently, no matter how intensive their training has been, some retreat as cowards and others continue the attack. This guy continued the attack and should be complimented for his actions. If we do not stand up to the BG, crime will only get worse. IMO danbrew is a person, based on his input, that always thinks of himself first.

 

[runrabbitrun]

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Amen.

 

[Yo Mama]

I am with you danbrew. If I am unarmed, you will not see me confronting a criminal that has already made it clear he is fleeing the scene.

Those of you that imply that to stand by idly is tantamount to being an uncaring citizen with no concern for others really worry me. Are you seriously suggesting that an unarmed citizen should confront an armed robber?

No one is telling you what you should have done. You've already decided your actions. The fact that the postman made the decision shows the courage against all odds. He was shot for this, and we should show the respect this person deserves.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

There's no guarantees. The only consistent thing about handgun ammo is that it's inconsistent. There was a police officer killed a few years ago when a perp being pulled over shot him with a .22 derringer. First shot hit him in the vest. Perp then took five .357 magnum rounds, three in the torso, while the police officer retreated to his car. Perp then fired his last .22, which hit the officer in the armpit, pierced his heart, and killed him nearly instantly. Perp survived his multiple major gunshot wounds.

That was SC Trooper Mark Coates. The perp didn't use a derringer, but a NAA Mini Revolver. Coates died fairly quickly, but it was not "almost instantly." As I recall from the video, he was able to finish his radio call for help and staggered around before the loss of blood pressure resulted in his collapse.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Yeah, sure. Then again, all that is necessary evil to triumph over good men is for unarmed, situationally naive, and combat inexperienced good men to force encounters with armed evil men.

The postman performed with heroism, but quite naively. Putting oneself in danger so as to save the money of an insured business entity when the danger had already passed and to do so without body armor, firearms, and/or careful use of cover just isn't a good idea. The postman went to where he expected the robber to be - not good.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Yeah, sure. Then again, all that is necessary evil to triumph over good men is for unarmed, situationally naive, and combat inexperienced good men to force encounters with armed evil men.

You are very right, trying to collect evidence was foolish. After all, the police, though absent and therefore unavailable, are the sole seekers of such evidence and should not have to have their absolute authority challenged by such idiotic civilians. The postman should be condemned for having such counter-productive ideals of civic responsibility. Shame on him, the robber should get a pass for having his God given rights to threaten, rob and kill violated.

 

[danbrew]

I almost feel a little misogynistic asking this question, Officers'Wife, but what does your husband think?

Nobody was slamming cops here btw, nor suggesting the bad guy get a pass. The fact remains that somebody is paying the medical bills for this guy. Note I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, I get that some folks agree with me and some do not. But I couldn't help myself asking the question in light of post #35.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Hi Danbrew,

I apologize if you found that post offensive. I come from an area where neighbors look after neighbor and get most annoyed to hear people that put themselves on the line criticized for following their duty in insuring a peaceful society.

Yes, someone is paying his medical bills, by the same token someone is paying for the capital stolen. Since that someone is federal banking insurance that someone is you and me. By trying to get that plate number the postman was attempting to help insure a peaceful society by gathering evidence that would have helped put a dangerously violent person behind bars. Two generations ago this sort of act would have been the norm, the generation of 'peace and love' would rather this violence stay on the street in order to mind their own business and let the better trained albeit absent professional handle the paperwork after. Post #35 was pure sarcasm in response to statements I interpreted as less than civic minded. This postman strikes me as the sort that saddles his own horse and shines his own boots, a quality both my husband and I admire.

Selena

 

[fireflyfather]

Back to the original question:

Those deer that you shot probably had the bullet strike the bone in such a way that the bullet was penetrating a very thin cross-section of bone, rather than, say the bullet entering the top of the femur, and traveling down the inside of it the long way. Anything over a 45 degree angle when dealing with thick bone, using a handgun cartridge (especially with less than optimal ammo) is a crap shoot. Bullets do funny things.

Don't hesitate to get your j-frame. Load it properly (not cowboy style 125 grain round nose soft lead) with a decent personal defense round, and practice with it.

Odds are the perp just bough crappy practice ammo, fired upwards into the jaw during a struggle, and the bullet traveled length-wise through several inches of bone. If it had been an inch or two off, or a few degrees off, there are all kind of vitals it could have hit. The guy was just lucky.

 

[scythefwd]

38 is somewhere between 380 and 9mm in power yes?

Yes and no. A standard .38 sp is just a hair shy of 9mm. Then again, a .38 bullet is actually a .358 projectile, the same that is used in a ..... get this.... .357. Was the gun recovered or are they guessing the caliber of it based on the bullet? A small .357 looks an awfully lot like a .38. The .38 +P can get into light .357 velocities and weight if you reload it. The man who was shot is lucky that he isn't dead. There is nothing wrong with the ammo he was shot with.

 

[zxcvbob]

I've only read about 1/3 of this thread.

No cartridge is 100% effective, not even your favorite .50 caliber. Mailman was lucky (or blessed). A .357 or a 9mm might have killed him (or might not), or on another day a .25ACP might have done what the .38 failed to this time.

 

[MAURICE]

A j frame loaded with good +p SD ammo is nothing to sneeze at, even if(thankfully) this guy lived. I have never felt out gunned with a .38.

 

[Elvishead]

I know for a fact of a guy getting shot in the head with a .357 magnum. It ricocheted of his skull and went through many walls, and the worst thing it did was pop his ear drumbs.

 

[earlthegoat2]

I have all the faith in the world that shooting someone anywhere in the face with a 38 is going to stop the fight.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Here is the problem with taking head shots in combat. The bullet must strike at an exact spot, not just any old place on the head, or the risk of the bullet skidding off like that is greatly increased.

If you read Jim Cirillo's Guns, Bullets and Gunfights, he writes that in one of his shootings he hit the "perp" multiple times in the head with .38 Spl. LRN and the bullets glanced off the skull and tunneled through the flesh. Only one penetrated and stopped the fight. We have better ammo today, but at the time he had to make his own.

 

[doc2rn]

Quote:
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

+1 He was doing what he could, getting the tag #!

 

[rainbowbob]

I took a self-defense class from an officer that was shot in the face with a 9mm. That shot "stopped" him (for about a year) - just like the .38 "stopped" the postman.

No caliber is the ultimate magic bullet - but either one will ruin your day if shot into your face or COM.

The whole "hero" vs "chicken" argument is off-topic and usually ends in thread-lock.

 

[Highwayman]

Any bullet to any face is going to stop the fight.. I'll have to agree.

 

[Elvishead]

Highwayman:

Any bullet to any face is going to stop the fight.. I'll have to agree.

Ohh really? Back it up with fact's.

 

[c919]

OK First of all.... +10 danbrew.

Seriously, is there anything more elementary than "Don't confront an armed aggressor when unarmed"?

For those of you who think he's a hero,

Did he stop anything? Save anyone?

.....NO, He went and got himself shot in the face. Period.

I feel for the guy, I mean, that sucks. But you better be ready for that when you confront a criminal with a gun.

Yeah, he lived. We can all be thankful that he was amazingly lucky and/or blessed. But he's going to walk around with a deformed face forever because of a really stupid decision.



And in regards to shot placement...... If you hit thick bone at a tangential angle, you can pretty well expect poor results.

 

[61chalk]

From what I read, he did not intend to take on the armed man, so why is he being judged that way? If he wanted to do that he would of done that in the bank. I suppose someday some pervert will kidnap a child from off the street, an some postman will run up an try an get the plate number, the pervert stops, backs up, gets out an shoots the postman....an some bonehead will say the postman should of known better, what did he prove, he should of known better an let the police handle it.
Big guns might only wound, little guns might kill, its tooo much mathmatics for me to figure out.