TexasCHLforum.com

This incident happened in California, but there is lots of tactical meat to chew on in the details of how the intended victim (retired from law enforcement only 8 days earlier) managed a really bad situation and came out of it alive.

That was a cool story.

I have some comments, with the caveat that this is a second-hand account and may not be entirely accurate.

Then he sees two adult black males emerge from some bushes about 10 feet away. They had been trailing suit man but Buddy saw them and made eye contact and they immediately advanced on him....
Bandanna Boy and Turtle boy advance on buddy and stop within 3 feet of him.

The only opportunity to abort the robbery was the few seconds between making eye contact and the criminals getting within handshake distance.

Without a sketch of the scene, we can't know if there was anything Buddy could do in the way of evasion or getting to cover.

Buddy starts pulling his cell and more or less argues with bandanna boy about it being his work cell (it is). All the while raising his arms in exasperation and dropping them and shuffling his feet.

This was a courageous move, and it worked in this case. However, he could just as well have been shot if the robber had a real weapon.

A murder trial just concluded in Galveston. Three teenagers armed with a revolver tried to rob a game room. The manager of the game room told him to go away, and the armed robber shot him. Inexperienced robbers can be very jumpy or just vicious.

Buddy squats down and smoothly draws his revolver and rises ...

I'd like to see video of that. We are often told that it is difficult to draw from an ankle holster.

I wonder if he will switch to another carry method.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:I have some comments, with the caveat that this is a second-hand account and may not be entirely accurate.

Then he sees two adult black males emerge from some bushes about 10 feet away. They had been trailing suit man but Buddy saw them and made eye contact and they immediately advanced on him....
Bandanna Boy and Turtle boy advance on buddy and stop within 3 feet of him.

The only opportunity to abort the robbery was the few seconds between making eye contact and the criminals getting within handshake distance.

Without a sketch of the scene, we can't know if there was anything Buddy could do in the way of evasion or getting to cover.

Buddy starts pulling his cell and more or less argues with bandanna boy about it being his work cell (it is). All the while raising his arms in exasperation and dropping them and shuffling his feet.

This was a courageous move, and it worked in this case. However, he could just as well have been shot if the robber had a real weapon.

A murder trial just concluded in Galveston. Three teenagers armed with a revolver tried to rob a game room. The manager of the game room told him to go away, and the armed robber shot him. Inexperienced robbers can be very jumpy or just vicious.

Buddy squats down and smoothly draws his revolver and rises ...

I'd like to see video of that. We are often told that it is difficult to draw from an ankle holster.

I wonder if he will switch to another carry method.

- Jim

We are often told that drawing from a shoulder holster is "slow" too.

Ankle carry (like shoulder carry) may not be the ideal method for all situations. However, depending upon the equipment (holster/gun) and the person behind it (practiced/experienced)...I can easily see a smooth and fairly quick presentation.

The retired LEO first created a diversion that bought him the time he knew he needed, so he did well IMO.

I'm not so sure that the retired LEO's exclamation "I will kill you" if you move...was the best thing (I think he did this more than once).

I have no doubt...it sent the "strongest" message to the BG, but if that had been overheard by a bystander...and the case went to court (in the event of an actual shooting), this might work against the former officer.

I think the warning "I will shoot" would be more appropriate.

I have noticed in quite a few incidences presented on various television shows...officers pointing their guns and proclaiming the same thing "I will KILL YOU" (generally followed by an expletive or two).

Other than that....I think all in all, he did pretty well. He had his hands full keeping the robbers proned out and covered. He knew he was vulnerable to attack if any other BG's were involved and nearby. His ability to "be aware of his surroundings" at that point was severely compromised by his immediate need to watch the two he had. He later alluded...that he got a good taste of what it is like to be waiting on the police to arrive.

I'm guessing that the retired cop has carried a BUG on his ankle for 30 years and it has become second nature to him.

Elsie Pea wrote:I'm guessing that the retired cop has carried a BUG on his ankle for 30 years and it has become second nature to him.

No, if you read the story, here is why: "In an often practiced move Buddy squats down and smoothly draws his revolver....."

A good lesson for all, dry practice presentation for your carry weapon as much as possible and live fire practice when you can.

seamusTX wrote:I have some comments, with the caveat that this is a second-hand account and may not be entirely accurate.

Then he sees two adult black males emerge from some bushes about 10 feet away. They had been trailing suit man but Buddy saw them and made eye contact and they immediately advanced on him....
Bandanna Boy and Turtle boy advance on buddy and stop within 3 feet of him.

The only opportunity to abort the robbery was the few seconds between making eye contact and the criminals getting within handshake distance.

Without a sketch of the scene, we can't know if there was anything Buddy could do in the way of evasion or getting to cover.

Buddy starts pulling his cell and more or less argues with bandanna boy about it being his work cell (it is). All the while raising his arms in exasperation and dropping them and shuffling his feet.

This was a courageous move, and it worked in this case. However, he could just as well have been shot if the robber had a real weapon.

A murder trial just concluded in Galveston. Three teenagers armed with a revolver tried to rob a game room. The manager of the game room told him to go away, and the armed robber shot him. Inexperienced robbers can be very jumpy or just vicious.

Buddy squats down and smoothly draws his revolver and rises ...

I'd like to see video of that. We are often told that it is difficult to draw from an ankle holster.

I wonder if he will switch to another carry method.

- Jim

At the point in the account when the ex officer is first confronted by the BG's from two angles, it states:

Surveying the area Buddy sees no immediate cover and no one seems to have noticed these two bad guys.

The victim thought about it and looked for cover, but as luck would have it, none was available. Murphy ruled again, as he so often does.

Jim is entirely correct that armed robbers are typically hyped and extremely impulsive. The ex officer took a calculated risk by creating a diversion and drawing his gun, and he won. It could easily have gone the other way.

If you haven't had the pleasures of trying it, I can tell you it is difficult to draw from an ankle holster. Early in my LE career I carried several weapons this way and practiced extensively. I found that the gross movements required telegraph intent to anybody with any experience. ("Excuse me, but whenever I'm robbed at gunpoint I just have to retie my shoe" doesn't fly.) and there are too many potential points where the draw sequence can go awry (loss of balance, hammer tangling in pants leg, etc.) for me to consider it a viable choice. When I tried it, I was 6/2" and 195 lbs. and pretty agile. If you know someone who uses this carry method and is say, oh, about 70 lbs over the weight his doctor keeps telling him he should be at, see if he'll demonstrate his draw technique while you video it. There's a TV show that pays lots of money for the kinds of things you're likely to see. Lots of folks like this technique for its everyday comfort and convenience, (sorta like why folks like itty bitty guns with microscopic sights that fling itty bitty bullets - sorry, I just had to get that in somehow ) but convenience isn't what I carry a gun for, and I disfavor anything that diminishes the success chances of the primary mission, which is to keep myself and my loved ones alive during a life threatening violent incident.

Ankle carry is fairly comfortable way to keep a gun the size of a snub nose revolver with you and concealed without a lot of trouble (once you get used to having one heavy foot), and the complex and time consuming draw sequence it requires is OK if one is always able to see the situation far enough out to accomplish the draw before coming directly under the BG's gun. As this incident illustrates, even with superbly trained and hyper alert people, sometimes incidents break so fast that this opportunity never presents itself. Performing an ankle draw under the gun requires extraordinary proficiency from a technical standpoint, and outstanding acting skills to create a successful diversion. This particular ex officer with an extraordinarily deep background in firearms training and street experience had the ability to pull this off successfully this once, but, like Jim, I'll bet he's giving serious after incident review consideration to that part of his defensive posture. There are very few people with the requisite abilities at the level of the ex officer in this incident. His success (and luck) should not be seen as predictive of a similar outcome for someone with a lot less training and experience who tries to get a gun out of an ankle holster while facing a BG's drawn weapon. At or above the waist carry methods (including a shoulder rig on the off hand side) are much easier to master, less failure prone, don't put your face within the foot arc of most bad guys, and are considerably faster than ankle carry. Even these methods would not have ensured success under the very unfavorable parameters of this incident.

With all that being said, before the flamethrowers come out, let me be clear that I'm not saying that ankle carry should never be used. It's very viable for a backup weapon that may have to be accessed while ground fighting, and might be a reasonable choice in other situations as well. Some folks who understand the dynamics I've outlined as well as or better than I do still choose to use it under some circumstances. They count on their ability to see a situation developing in time to complete the draw before they are in a short range confrontation with a BG who already has a gun in his hand. The risk here is that this can't be counted on, as the incident under discussion clearly illustrates, and under this circumstance it's a major liability that isn't found with on or above the waist carry methods.

flintknapper wrote:I'm not so sure that the retired LEO's exclamation "I will kill you" if you move...was the best thing (I think he did this more than once).

I have no doubt...it sent the "strongest" message to the BG, but if that had been overheard by a bystander...and the case went to court (in the event of an actual shooting), this might work against the former officer.

I think the warning "I will shoot" would be more appropriate.

I have noticed in quite a few incidences presented on various television shows...officers pointing their guns and proclaiming the same thing "I will KILL YOU" (generally followed by an expletive or two).

Other than that....I think all in all, he did pretty well. He had his hands full keeping the robbers proned out and covered. He knew he was vulnerable to attack if any other BG's were involved and nearby. His ability to "be aware of his surroundings" at that point was severely compromised by his immediate need to watch the two he had. He later alluded...that he got a good taste of what it is like to be waiting on the police to arrive.

Flintknapper raises a good and debatable point. In a one on two situation where the ex officer would have been in an extremely precarious position if his two proned out suspects just agreed to jump up and rush him (or have one create a diversion by just rolling to the side as the one he believed had a gun drew and fired on him), getting the desired behavior out of the suspects until the cavalry arrives usually takes precedence over semantic nuances. Later in court, the priorities often reverse. This is not a good situation.

Suspects, like other folks, are more likely to respond in the way you want if you use language that is clear and familiar. The ideal wording may vary some from locale to locale, and the officer may have selected his choices accordingly. I would favor using Flint's recommended wording myself both because it is clear and factual without possibly conveying an intent to kill instead of stop a threat, and also because it leaves room for verbal escalation if that becomes necessary.

In my experience, profanity (which was not mentioned in this case) accomplishes little other than to inform the other party that you're about to soil your underwear (or already have). With the considerable number of suspects I've held at gunpoint, I found that absence of profanity conveys exactly the opposite impression and tends to produce better compliance. YMMV. Its extensive use in the entertainment industry (where people hit by handgun bullets fly 10 feet through the air backwards, then tumble over cars, and are propelled through large plate glass windows) should make it suspect as well.

Flint picked up on another excellent point when he noted the ex officer's experience of "where the heck is the cavalry - I need them now!". He clearly knew exactly what to expect and how long it actually takes to get help and why, but the first person experience of this while he was trying to control two dangerous and unrestrained armed robbery suspects was just as unpleasant as it would be for any of us.

Surveying the area Buddy sees no immediate cover ...

I overlooked that.

I am not too concerned about the "I will kill you" statement in this particular case. The robbers were without doubt armed robbers (armed with a replica gun that looked like the real thing, which in itself is probably a felony in California). The defender was a former LEO. If he had had to shoot, I can't see him being prosecuted, even in California.

As a general rule, IMHO, the "stay down" and "don't move" instructions are probably more appropriate.

I have read the advice to develop a script for yourself and rehearse it, and I do that.

- Jim

Excaliber and Jim have made an excellent assessment of the situation in the article and of course I agree with their evaluation, I just wanted to make a comment concerning the officer's choice of words..."I will kill you!" All of the instructors I have had any dealings with said that would be the worst thing you can say, especially with witness around. Of course, he was a x-officer, but had it been a civilian with a CHL...it may come back to haunt you later.

-geo

Good ideas and analysis so far. The only thing I can add to the discussion at this point is I would likely have positioned myself slightly differently from the robbers when they were proned on the ground, and handled myself slightly differently upon arrival of first responders. If possible, I would have tried to position myself or order them to position their heads so they could not see me while I held them at gunpoint. When the (hopefully uniformed) police arrived, my preference would be to immediately place my handgun on the ground, barrel pointing toward the robbers, possibly under my foot, while holding my arms out to the sides and fingers spread. This way, I would hope to obtain a balance between reducing the responding officer's apprehension of the situation, and retaining a semblance of control over my handgun and the suspects.

If there is a bad idea here, let me know. It would be really tragic to win a fight, only to be rused by the detained VCAs into giving up situational dominance, or mistakenly shot by first responders.

yerasimos wrote:Good ideas and analysis so far. The only thing I can add to the discussion at this point is I would likely have positioned myself slightly differently from the robbers when they were proned on the ground, and handled myself slightly differently upon arrival of first responders. If possible, I would have tried to position myself or order them to position their heads so they could not see me while I held them at gunpoint. When the (hopefully uniformed) police arrived, my preference would be to immediately place my handgun on the ground, barrel pointing toward the robbers, possibly under my foot, while holding my arms out to the sides and fingers spread. This way, I would hope to obtain a balance between reducing the responding officer's apprehension of the situation, and retaining a semblance of control over my handgun and the suspects.

If there is a bad idea here, let me know. It would be really tragic to win a fight, only to be rused by the detained VCAs into giving up situational dominance, or mistakenly shot by first responders.

Yerasimos brings up an excellent point about suspect control positioning. In my experience, a 4 o'clock position to the subjects' rear (subjects' heads are 12 o'clock) at about a 6 foot distance with the subjects ordered to face to the side opposite the one I'm standing on is about as good as it gets. The ideal position for the suspects is face down, arms extended out to the sides, palms up, and feet crossed at the ankles. (If you're wondering why, get down on the floor in that position and then try to get up in a hurry.)

The ex officer involved in the original incident here had effectively communicated to dispatch that there was an armed retired officer on the scene, and he had a badge to display. Responding officers were expecting to find him, and he was able to quickly ID himself to their satisfaction. Was this dicey? YOU BETCHA!

For an armed civilian, even if communications were good, it's best not to have your gun visible when officers arrive (if it is, you'll almost certainly be ordered to drop it anyway at gunpoint).

If suspects are under control and you are out of their sight as described above, you've got a number of options. One is to simply reholster the weapon (concealed) just before responding units reach the scene and keep your hands clearly in view while you verbally identify yourself to the first arriving officer. This is not as risky as it sounds if you've kept yourself located out of the suspects' sight as described above so they aren't aware of the small window of opportunity for flight or resistance that opens up during the time your gun is put away and until responding officers establish full control.

It's very helpful to maintain continuous cell phone contact with dispatch once you've established control so you can update them on anything else that happens, give your description and descriptions of the suspects accurately so responding units can pick out the good guy even if the situation deteriorates before they get there, and you can describe to them where you are and what you're doing so there are no uncomfortable surprises on either side when the cavalry arrives.

Excaliber wrote:Ankle carry is fairly comfortable way to keep a gun the size of a snub nose revolver with you and concealed without a lot of trouble (once you get used to having one heavy foot), and the complex and time consuming draw sequence it requires is OK if one is always able to see the situation far enough out to accomplish the draw before coming directly under the BG's gun.

So, when is ankle carry preferable to or faster than SmartCarry/Thunderwear? The only situations I can think of would be if you're wearing clothes that don't open in the middle, like overalls or a dress. (Even coveralls have a fly that's big enough to get a gun through, or a double-ended zipper, and overalls have that nice carry pocket on the chest.) The draw may be a little tougher to make excuses for, but it is a lot less obvious even if you do have to stick your hand an inch or two into your pants.

I can carry a 1911 or PT-99 with some loss of comfort in the SmartCarry under any clothing I could legally walk down the street in. The Taurus 605 with two speed strips, once positioned correctly, is easy to get to and not the least bit uncomfortable. I've driven several hours with it carried like that with no problems, and it's my preferred carry method anytime I'm not wearing my vest.

I just don't see a need for ankle carry anymore.

KD5NRH wrote:I just don't see a need for ankle carry anymore.

The guy was a retired LEO so maybe he was used to carrying his BUG in an ankle holster. I could see an ankle holster being good for a BUG if lost your primary handgun and you were already on the ground mixing it up with a BG.

IMO, one should be in pretty good physical condition to use an ankle holster. If you are overweight and/or don't have the flexibility and dexterity required to quickly bend down then it wouldn't be a good choice. If you have arthritis, back trouble or bad knees then look for another carry method.

KD5NRH wrote:

Excaliber wrote:Ankle carry is fairly comfortable way to keep a gun the size of a snub nose revolver with you and concealed without a lot of trouble (once you get used to having one heavy foot), and the complex and time consuming draw sequence it requires is OK if one is always able to see the situation far enough out to accomplish the draw before coming directly under the BG's gun.

So, when is ankle carry preferable to or faster than SmartCarry/Thunderwear? The only situations I can think of would be if you're wearing clothes that don't open in the middle, like overalls or a dress. (Even coveralls have a fly that's big enough to get a gun through, or a double-ended zipper, and overalls have that nice carry pocket on the chest.) The draw may be a little tougher to make excuses for, but it is a lot less obvious even if you do have to stick your hand an inch or two into your pants.

I can carry a 1911 or PT-99 with some loss of comfort in the SmartCarry under any clothing I could legally walk down the street in. The Taurus 605 with two speed strips, once positioned correctly, is easy to get to and not the least bit uncomfortable. I've driven several hours with it carried like that with no problems, and it's my preferred carry method anytime I'm not wearing my vest.

I just don't see a need for ankle carry anymore.

IMHO, ankle carry is almost never preferable to on or above the waist carry (and I classify Thunderwear / Smartwear as an IWB carry for this purpose, although it is technically just below the waist) as I indicated in my earlier post:

Excaliber wrote:At or above the waist carry methods (including a shoulder rig on the off hand side) are much easier to master, less failure prone, don't put your face within the foot arc of most bad guys, and are considerably faster than ankle carry.

Ankle carry of a handgun for me just has way too many drawbacks and too few advantages to be seriously considered. It is, however, an arguably reasonable method for carrying spare magazines that you don't want flopping around in your pockets or carried in mag pouches on the belt.

KD5NRH is right that the Smartcarry method offers excellent concealment and a draw speed close to that of IWB (albeit a little slower) without the positional drawbacks of ankle carry. Drawing from the center of the body also requires less obvious hand and arm movements than many other methods, and may have advantages in terms of surprise if the draw is practiced well. This last caveat of course applies to any draw method.

Another concealed carry method worthy of consideration is the Deep Concealment soft shoulder rig. It makes a medium size handgun (e.g., Glock 36, Kahr PM40, and similar size guns) virtually invisible under casual street clothes without a jacket. Again, it's slower than IWB but faster and less disadvantageous than ankle carry. Leaving the corresponding shirt button unbuttoned makes it considerably more accessible.