Would you have any qualms with shooting an armed assailant in the back?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rockrivr1

Rockrivr1

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,873
Location
Massachusetts
I'm sitting at work on a very long and boring conference call. While I'm only partially paying attention I'm staring out the windows to the parking area. One of my co-workers just got out of his car with a large gym bag. I was thinking that the bag could easily conceal a rifle/shotgun etc. My desk is right next to a side entrance. My work space is enclosed but I have a door next to my desk that opens to the hallway where the side entrance door is. As my co-worker entered the building I though about what I would do if he actually did have a gun and came in that entrance. Would I call security and then scram out of the building or would I try to take him out before he killed a bunch of my co-workers.

With my current location next to the entrance, if I did decide to engage the person with the gun, I would probably wait a few seconds to get behind him. Basically so when I entered the hallway I would have a straight shot at his back. Probably the safest way. The door to my space is secure and not accessable from the hallway unless the guy shot through it, so I'm reasonably sure he'd go down the hallway. Not exactly sure about how I feel about shooting someone in the back though. I know, the guy probably doesn't have the same reservations.

I guess my question is two fold. Would you engage the assailant or scram out of the building after calling the police? Also if you did engage the guy and had a free shot at his back, would you take it?
 
Well, unless your State has something like Florida's Stand Your Ground law, you must bug out, unless your life is threatened. With the BG's back to you it would be hard to convince the DA.

It would make me mad but I would have to leave. I wish more States would adopt Florida's law.
 
Depends on the circumstance. If the assailant was actively shooting people and I happened to be able to get behind them I would have no problem at all. Or if they had shot already and other people were in their path and therefor in danger. If they were in the act of fleeing and noone was injured or noone was in their path I would not because my rear would be on the line if I or someone else was not in immediate danger. I read a story once about a guy here in Oregon that shot his wife and then fled the house. A neighbor had seem him entering his estranged wife's home and retrieved his rifle to go confront him. By the time the neighbor got there he had already shot his wife and was running down the sidewalk. The neighbor shot him in the back and I do believe killed him. The neighbor was convicted of a lesser degree of manslaughter or something and then found guilty in civil court for damages. His mistake was shooting a fleeing man that was not threatening him or any other bystanders.
 
If the guy opened up on people, the back would be just fine with me. Even better than the front.;)
Just make sure that he's not there to show a new shotgun he got for his B Day to his co-workers first.
Biker
 
I recall a thread a while back about the mall shootings where the guy had a rifle and a CWP carrier got shot because he told the guy to drop his gun, first. I agree with a few of those posts on that thread.....if he's already shot people and is still shooting, take him out any way you can....but, if he hasn't shot anyone or even threaten to, yet, I'd have to tell him to drop the gun. If he didn't drop the gun and made a quick turn or something, I'd drop him. Shooting him in the back, if he hadn't shot at anyone or even made a threat, may be a bit overboard and may turn out to be really bad for you.......I'd be bad to find out the gun was a prop for a demonstration in another part of the building, and you just shot the person who was going to teach a self-defense course or something like that.

Edit - I need to type faster. PlayboyPenguin and Biker had the jump on me.
 
Carefull... What if the guy was bringing a rifle in because he had sold it to one of his co-workers? Can't just open up on someone because they have a firearm. Heck, many of the members here have firearms on them at all times (myself included).

Now, if they guy's shooting at people and I'm behind him, first thing's first, find some cover. Once I'm behind good solid cover, if I think I can make the shot, I would. Don't care which side of him is exposed, if he's in the process of shooting people, I am justified in stopping him.

Good cover, and an acceptable handgun range would be very important. Firing at a guy with a rifle, at long range, when all I have is a handgun... seems like a good way to get shot to me!
 
I would have to be SURE in my mind what was going on.
If I thought I had to shoot to stop a killing (or more killings) I'd shoot him anywhere that presents a good target.
 
There are 3 aspects to consider in any lethal force encounter. Legal, Tactical, and Moral.

Legal, depends on your state. Here it is dependant on if the assailant had the ability, opportunity, and is an immediate threat of causing you grevious bodily harm. Your state is going to be different.

Tactical, does it make sense for you to engage the assailant, or run away? Getting shot sucks. You may be legal to use lethal force, but it might be tactically unsound.

Moral, that is up to you. Getting involved vs. running away is a decision for each individual, and outside of the internet (where everybody is filled with courage, has ninja like shooting skills, and is good looking to boot) life is often not black and white, good vs. evil kind of situations.

Legally speaking, in my state, shooting an assailant in the back is fine. As long as a reasonable man would make the assumption that they were still a threat. In a mass workplace shooter scenario, shooting them in the back is fine.

Verbal challenges are great, when they work. But see above, it might not be tactically sound. If there is a crazy guy shooting up my workplace, my first warning is going to be a 230 grain TTI .45 impacting his center of mass.

Edited to clarify. This is using the reasonable man doctrine I mentioned above. You need to be sure that the assailant is actually a threat before you engage them.
 
You need to read this book:

Surviving Workplace Violence

It teaches you how to prepare for exactly those types of situations, regardless of what type of environment you work in, and what to do and not do if something actually happens. Well worth the $15.

My wife thought it was silly for me to buy the book, until a co-worker of hers went through his cheating wife's suicide last summer and started acting like he was going to explode. Then she read the book real quick! It finally blew over and nothing happened, but she still feels better even now for having the knowledge beforehand.
 
I recall a thread a while back about the mall shootings where the guy had a rifle and a CWP carrier got shot because he told the guy to drop his gun, first.
Click to expand...
There are accounts that say the CWP guy told the shooter, "Son, you'd better put the gun down." If true, it certainly played a part in the CWPer getting shot, that, and the CWP carrier coudn't make the mental decision to shoot.
News excerpt about the Tacoma mall shooting aftermath:
Mall victim held fire at ‘kid’
‘I would have had to shoot him in the head,’ man says from hospital bed

M. ALEXANDER OTTO; The News Tribune
Published: November 29th, 2005 02:30 AM

Tacoma Mall shooting victim Brendan “Dan” McKown, who has worked as a stand-up comedian, often makes his bedside guests laugh in his room at Tacoma General.

Brendan “Dan” McKown said Monday that he briefly drew his gun on Tacoma Mall shooting suspect Dominick S. Maldonado, but he’s not sure Maldonado saw it.
He could have shot Maldonado, McKown said, but hesitated.

From his bed in Tacoma General Hospital, McKown told The News Tribune what he saw and did during the Nov. 20 mall shootings.

McKown, 38, said he carried a gun and even trained for situations where he could keep innocent people from getting hurt.

But the situation in the mall was just too surreal to fully comprehend, he said: A young man wearing a baseball cap turned backward strolling through the mall in white tennis shoes.

It looked like he could just as easily have been carrying a guitar, McKown said, instead of a semi-automatic rifle.

“I’m looking at this guy,” McKown said. “He’s a kid. I would have had to shoot him in the head.”

McKown just wasn’t ready for that. It’s not easy to shoot someone in the head, McKown said. McKown also didn’t want to get in the way of the police if they were handling the situation, and he knew he could get in trouble for brandishing a weapon in the mall.

McKown was struck by as many as five bullets, leaving his left leg paralyzed. He has about 10 percent movement in his right leg, said hospital spokesman Todd Kelley. Five other people wounded that day were treated and released from area hospitals.
Click to expand...

In reply to the original question, if the BG was shooting at coworkers and I was in a position to shoot to stop, I'd do so, even if his back happened to be turned toward me. I doubt any jury would fault you for that.
 
Eddie, I sure hope you're joking, because if you aren't, I don't even know where to start about why that is just a BAD IDEA. :p
 
I'd step out in the hallway, ask the co-worker to fill in for me on the long, boring conference call, take the gun out of his bag and head for the range to try my new gun.:neener:
 
"Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."

That being said, anytime you shoot someone you will have to prove that you felt in fear for you life or the life of another. I would feel justified if their back was to me and they were pointing a gun a someone else and making clear threats to that persons life. Or if their were multiple assailants who show a clear intention to do harm to myself or the others present. Any other situations, where there is a danger but not a direct threat, I would draw on them and demand that they drop the weapon. If they then made a hostile move, I would fire.

The key is (even in states w/o duty to retreat laws) that the suspect is showing a CLEAR threat to life. And what may seem like a clear threat to you may not look like one to the other witnesses, police, DA, judge, or jury.

The First rule of surviving a gun battle is not to get in one.
The Second rule is to kill the other guy before he kills you.
 
If the assailant(s) had their back(s) to me, odds are (they)he is leaving the scene of the assault. In this case, I no longer fear for my life, or limb. No, I would not shoot fleeing assailant(s).
 
If they fall within this law I would consider stopping them a duty.:)
You'll notice according to 9.32.3(B) that in the Great State of Texas a person does not have to wait until their very life is in danger before the BG can be "stopped".
And deadly force can be used to protect PROPERTY.

"Sec. 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A person is justified in using deadly force against another:
~ ~ (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.31;
~ ~ (2) if a reasonable person in the actor's situation would not have retreated; and
~ ~ (3) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
~ ~ ~ (A) to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force; or
~ ~ ~ (B) to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery.
~ (b) [added 9/1/95] The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not apply to an actor who uses force against a person who is at the time of the use of force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the habitation of the actor. "
 
Anybody ever seen El Diablo?

"Of course I shot him in the back. His back was to me!"

If is a madman bent on mayhem (killing people or very obviously about to begin), his back is what gets the bullets if that is what I see.
 
Back shooting has a long and honored tradition behind it.
Ask any fighter pilot.
They do shoot from behind the enemy that's if they even let the enemy see them.
The idea is to win.

AFS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Good shoot/Bad shoot???
Replies
14
Views
644
tetleyb
T
I
  • Locked
Multiple assailant crime on the rise...
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
vanilla_gorilla
V
M
  • Locked
A Valuable Life Lesson: "Denial" Can Kill, Part 1
Replies
0
Views
440
mlandman
M
H
  • Locked
Stay or search?
Replies
15
Views
641
Arc-Lite
A
B
  • Locked
Is it appropriate to tell an assailant you're armed?
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
1911Tuner
1
Back
Top