jmra wrote:Fortunately this individual did not believe a batman license was necessary in order to intervene on behalf of someone in need.
Some people are wired to intervene and some are not, but to use the "batman license" thing as a excuse suggest that those who are wired to intervene are somehow wrong for doing so. That stance is getting pretty old.
I agree, and am also tired of seeing the "batman" comments (when used inappropriately). There are definitely times when people with CHL's should not assume any active stance, but when someone is actually being assaulted, a person is not playing "batman" when they intervene. This guy did nothing wrong. I don't fault anyone that would choose not to become involved, but I applaud folks like this one who are willing to step in when needed.
Salty1 wrote:I saw this and the video on 5 News and was torn regarding the legality of threatening deadly force in this situation. Granted the man was hitting the woman but does this warrant drawing down on the guy? I would be more inclined to try to break it up rather than pull my gun which in itself could constitute deadly conduct. This seems to be one of those gray areas and depending on the PD and DA could land somebody in a pile of trouble facing serious charges and expenses. I am interested in what the LEO's thoughts on this would be and how their department would address this type of situation.
I'm jumping in a little late, but have the advantage of hearing an interview this morning with the CHL holder involved. He not only had a CHL, but he worked in security overseas after serving in the military, and also has a Texas private security license as well as being a firearms instructor.
He also instructed his wife to call 911 while he stopped the guy. He didn't initially pull his gun, only doing so when the attacker started to get out of the car, and he (the CHL holder) felt he was going to be attacked.
I think he did well.
Right2Carry wrote:They don't pay me to intervene in domestic disputes, that is why I pay taxes to the city and state. I let the professionals handle it.
Good for you. However, I don't see any need to demean those who view things differently.
Right2Carry wrote:... See below as I am not the only one who thinks this type of intervention is not encouraged. Nothing in the article suggests that a 911 call wouldn't have achieved the same result. If you want to argue with the experts I am sure the Southlake police department will be happy to entertain your phone call.
“While we commend this citizen's willingness to get involved in order to protect a victim of crime, the Southlake Police Department does not encourage the public to expose themselves in such a manner,” Mylett said. “Instead, we strongly recommend” that people who witness a crime call 911.
Read more here:
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I wouldn't consider that comment from the SPD to carry much weight. Many PD Chiefs would just as soon we not be allowed to carry at all. The CHL holder's wife
did call 911. It still took the police a few minutes to get there. I wonder what the chief's comments would be had the fatal blow been delivered in the few minutes it took for the PD to arrive...
rotor wrote:Good citizen pulls gun and fighting does not stop. What does he do next? Or what if bad guy pulls a gun? This can all turn into a much worse scenario than was bargained for and just like the woman beaten in the elevator by her football player husband who she loves and adores (and who brings home the paycheck) she will stand by her man. I vote for letting the cops handle this one.
Except according to the interview I heard this morning, that's not quite the way it happened. Good guy intervened by shouting "commands". That stopped the assault against the woman, but then the attacker turned his attention to the good guy. That's when he drew.
CoffeeNut wrote:Everyone saying DV calls have a high rate of violence toward the first responders are correct but the police only get one side of the story over the phone and they haven't a clue as to what they're walking into. However If I'm witnessing a whoopin with my own two eyes then I think my chances of a successful intervention are a little higher than walking into an unknown. Every situation is different but I know that if I was getting my face smashed in I would want someone to help me out.
See the part in bold, and that's a very good point. I still applaud what this guy did, but have to point out another thing he said in the interview this morning (on the Mark Davis show, with a substitute host). The good guy said that the police told him one of the 911 calls that came in stated that they thought someone was trying to carjack using a gun!
That is also worth thinking about...