Witness to Bank Robbery

[SOLVS LVPVS]

As others have already stated, I wouldn't do a damn thing unless subjects were armed and my life was in immediate danger. Not a good idea, to shoot "unarmed" scum-bags for some reason in this "state".

 

[sksguns]

I don't think banks are gun free zones. Most peoplee who rob them usually bring a gun so it makes me think they are not gun free zones. I mean ....if they can do why can't I....

 

[BOBKATT]

Having family changes things. However, if the shooting starts and I have an opportunity, I'm putting the BG down. I couldn't live with anything else.

I understand completely, and could never entertain the thought of judging someone who could not stand to think of their family going on without them while they are in jail because they tried to save someone elses life. I am a man who was raised to believe in family first. Right now however, I do not have a family, but if this situation were to occur and I were to save lives of someone elses family, I would hope to atleast get a few thankful letters from some of you while I rot in jail.

 

[Raoul Duke]

While not "easy," the decision is simple. Either

A: You're life, or the life of a loved one is in certain, imminent danger, in which case you don't need our approval or our encouragement to use your lawfully-owned firearm. Draw, aim, shoot, good luck.

OR

B: Your life isn't in certain, imminent danger, in which case, why would you involve yourself (beyond witnessing) at the risk of death, injury, jail time, defense bills that exceed your yearly salary, emotional distress, loss of firearms rights, and civil suit by the criminal's family...yes, really.

I dunno, not much of a choice. You do what you will. I don't think you need our blessing.

 

[drgrant]

From reading... I am under the impression there is a list of places that are off limits... I am not even sure locking in the car is ok, I think some of them consider possesion on premisses a no-go... like banks, post office, any other federal property, state parks, oh and the most important... schools... however it wouldnt be a bad idea to allow teachers to open carry...

BANKS ARE NOT OFF LIMITS IN MA, or any other new england state for that
matter. Please don't spread this myth any more.

Actually, I don't know of ANY state which statutorily bans CCW in
banks- the banks that do ban CCW in the US more than likely can only do
so via binding signage. (Which MA, NH, VT, and ME don't have, not sure about
RI or CT... )

-Mike

 

[jhblaze1]

not sure if someone posted this yet, but if I were in the bank I wouldn't be doing shit unless the BG's started offing "hostages" or threatened someone with a gun and I thought I had a chance.

Bank money is FDIC insured, not mine, and frankly I couldn't give two shits about a bank's money.

 

[gene]

Here's the math and it's my opinion only!

Agressive non life threatening behavior = Walk Away if you can or mace if you can't.
Knife = Mace, or CCW with the latter being a costly court battle.
Gun, = Gun, 911 with a potentially costly court battle anyway.
Fisticuffs as a last resort when Applicable in all cases!

I have no problem walking and my attitude is why should I protect anyone's money but my own! Especially the biggest rip off artist of them all, namely banks!

 

[gene]

BANKS ARE NOT OFF LIMITS IN MA, or any other new england state for that
matter. Please don't spread this myth any more.

Nice to know I haven;t been engaging in criminal behaviour!

 

[law dawg]

I'm not going to speak to the laws in your jurisdiction because, frankly, I don't know them.

What I would speak to is what to do if you were inside -

1) Is the situation, while tense, still under control? Would you shooting be lighting the match over gasoline?
2) Where are the other people? Where's your backstop?
3) Do you really think you can take three armed men by yourself with no additional collateral casualties?
4) Do you have the drop on them or them on you?

At the end of the day you have to measure two things, environment and tactics. Both require judgment, but environment is the most important for decision-making purposes. Is the environment such that lethal force is necessary? If so, then you move onto tactics, ie-how are you best able to take the bastards out?

But you don't think on tactics until you've decided you have to shoot. I'm not going to tell you when that is and no one else should either. That's a personal choice. Legally speaking you have means, opportunity and intent. Legally speaking you've got pretty much a green light. But we're not talking legally here. We're talking about is starting a firefight in an enclosed building with a numerically superior force the smart thing to do.

Personally, I would be a good witness. I wouldn't make a move unless someone had been killed or was about to be. I'd only step in to save lives. Other than that, let 'em rob it and just focus on what I saw so I could tell the responding prowl car.

But that's me.

 

[Martlet]

I'm not going to speak to the laws in your jurisdiction because, frankly, I don't know them.

What I would speak to is what to do if you were inside -

1) Is the situation, while tense, still under control? Would you shooting be lighting the match over gasoline?
2) Where are the other people? Where's your backstop?
3) Do you really think you can take three armed men by yourself with no additional collateral casualties?
4) Do you have the drop on them or them on you?

At the end of the day you have to measure two things, environment and tactics. Both require judgment, but environment is the most important for decision-making purposes. Is the environment such that lethal force is necessary? If so, then you move onto tactics, ie-how are you best able to take the bastards out?

But you don't think on tactics until you've decided you have to shoot. I'm not going to tell you when that is and no one else should either. That's a personal choice. Legally speaking you have means, opportunity and intent. Legally speaking you've got pretty much a green light. But we're not talking legally here. We're talking about is starting a firefight in an enclosed building with a numerically superior force the smart thing to do.

Personally, I would be a good witness. I wouldn't make a move unless someone had been killed or was about to be. I'd only step in to save lives. Other than that, let 'em rob it and just focus on what I saw so I could tell the responding prowl car.

But that's me.

Good post. I absolutely agree. The only thing I hope I'd change is I'd be thinking tactics from step one. Determining tactics AFTER you've decided you have to shoot could cost lives. Of course, after you've fired your first shot the rest of the plan generally goes to shit.

 

[MassMark]

I'm not going to speak to the laws in your jurisdiction because, frankly, I don't know them.

What I would speak to is what to do if you were inside -

1) Is the situation, while tense, still under control? Would you shooting be lighting the match over gasoline?
2) Where are the other people? Where's your backstop?
3) Do you really think you can take three armed men by yourself with no additional collateral casualties?
4) Do you have the drop on them or them on you?

At the end of the day you have to measure two things, environment and tactics. Both require judgment, but environment is the most important for decision-making purposes. Is the environment such that lethal force is necessary? If so, then you move onto tactics, ie-how are you best able to take the bastards out?

But you don't think on tactics until you've decided you have to shoot. I'm not going to tell you when that is and no one else should either. That's a personal choice. Legally speaking you have means, opportunity and intent. Legally speaking you've got pretty much a green light. But we're not talking legally here. We're talking about is starting a firefight in an enclosed building with a numerically superior force the smart thing to do.

Personally, I would be a good witness. I wouldn't make a move unless someone had been killed or was about to be. I'd only step in to save lives. Other than that, let 'em rob it and just focus on what I saw so I could tell the responding prowl car.

But that's me.

Excellent... +1

 

[drgrant]

not sure if someone posted this yet, but if I were in the bank I wouldn't be doing shit unless the BG's started offing "hostages" or threatened someone with a gun and I thought I had a chance.

Bank money is FDIC insured, not mine, and frankly I couldn't give two shits about a bank's money.

Simply stated, this is how I feel. Most bank robberies people won't even know the place is getting robbed until a guy leaves the teller window with a satchel of cash. A lot of the people who rob banks don't have anything more than a threatening note. The Platt and Matix and the No Hollywood robbery are exceptionally rare exceptions rather than the rule.

Bottom line is unless I feel that one of the perps is a direct threat to me, I'm not doing a damned thing.

FWIW I think "stop and rob" store scenarios are far deadlier than any bank robbery- mainly because the guys that hit convenience stores are several orders of magnitude more desperate for cash, to the extent that
they might attempt to also rob people who happen to be in the store. A bank robber isn't going to give a rats ass about what anyone has in their wallets in the bank most of the time, because it amounts to peanuts compared to what they're getting from the bank.

-Mike

 

[N.E. CHARTERS]

Were was the Bank Guard?

Were was the Bank Guard?

 

[Palladin]

If they are robbing the bank and not putting you or your wife in immediate jeopardy, let them go.

The money is insured and we'd rather have you in one piece. Unless you have extensive training in addressing multiple armed assailants, play it cool.

Now, if they make you lay on the floor and start taking wallets or licenses, then you have to make a decision. This is done in a lot of small robberies, usually not a bank job.

If they start shooting people at random, well a small chance is better than no chance.

The best you can do, is be a good witness. Get a good description and provide it to authorities.

I agree 100%

 

[Palladin]

Were was the Bank Guard?

That ended in the 50's !!!

 

[law dawg]

Good post. I absolutely agree. The only thing I hope I'd change is I'd be thinking tactics from step one. Determining tactics AFTER you've decided you have to shoot could cost lives. Of course, after you've fired your first shot the rest of the plan generally goes to shit.

You're right, of course.

What I'm trying to get across is that the decision to shoot or not to shoot is the most important one. It's the hardest to do, as well, because there are so many variables and conscious thought is very difficult under such stress.

The individual tactics chosen are small decisions compared to the one to pull the pistol and go to work.

What's the old saw? "Be nice, be polite. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

 

[Martlet]

You're right, of course.

What I'm trying to get across is that the decision to shoot or not to shoot is the most important one. It's the hardest to do, as well, because there are so many variables and conscious thought is very difficult under such stress.

The individual tactics chosen are small decisions compared to the one to pull the pistol and go to work.

What's the old saw? "Be nice, be polite. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet."

Absolutely. There would have to be no doubt in my mind that someone was going to die, or suffer serious injury, before I'd act.

 

[icyclefar]

Whenever this topics get discussed, (and it does pop up frequently) I always think back to one thought someone left with me ...................

Do you know with certainty that the "Bad Guy" or "Bad Guy's" are working alone? Have they "seeded" the Bank with a few other accomplices in plain cloths ready to put one in your dome if you try and stop them?

 

[rscalzo]

Simply stated, this is how I feel. Most bank robberies people won't even know the place is getting robbed until a guy leaves the teller window with a satchel of cash. A lot of the people who rob banks don't have anything more than a threatening note.

We had a few bank robberies in our time over the past few years. You are quite correct that in many cases, no one in the bank knew the robbery was in progress. The cash haul isn't that great as the tellers do not have large amounts of cash in the drawer. Even tellers are becoming a thing of the past as ATM terminals are replacing them to a great extent inside a bank itself.

In the surrounding towns, no firearm was ever displayed and in fact it was never proved the actor themselves ever possessed one. Even the FBI will not respond unless a large amount of money is lost. You do better hitting a small store with an active lottery machine of an active theater on a busy weekend.

 

[Admin]

So what if you were IN the bank?
What action is legal to take?
If unarmed.... probably none... right?
If armed and shooting... would you be in your right pull a Jack Bauer on them?

Unless people are getting killed it's a very bad idea to attempt to stop a bank robbery.

 

[dwarven1]

Do you know with certainty that the "Bad Guy" or "Bad Guy's" are working alone? Have they "seeded" the Bank with a few other accomplices in plain cloths ready to put one in your dome if you try and stop them?

An excellent point. And a more than somewhat chilling one.

 

[KMaurer]

A couple of years back my mother-in-law, who was living with us at the time, asked me to run down and cash a check for her. I finished up what I was doing a the time and headed down the street to the bank. It seems I got there about 1 minute after the cops (Westford, Chelmsford and just behind me, MSP). If I had dropped what I was doing and gone as soon as she asked me, I would have been right in the middle of it, and I would have been every bit as well armed as I was 5 minutes later. If the guy had simply passed the note and taken the money, I honestly don't know what I would have done. Yes, the money's insured, but damn it, I have a hard time just standing there gawking while somebody does something seriously wrong. Sure he could have had a few buddies standing around acting innocent to cover his back, or he could have had a pound of C4 wrapped up in a couple pounds of nails under his jacket, but let's be realistic, people dumb enough to rob banks (which generally have less cash sitting around ready to grab than a good liquor store, and result in a hell of a lot more law enforcement coming after you) rarely plan things out in that sort of detail. I do know that if he actually presented an obvious threat to anyone there I would have responded accordingly, but I still wonder about what I would have done in the more likely situation of his simply handing them note and standing there with his hand in his pocket.

Ken

 

[law dawg]

Whenever this topics get discussed, (and it does pop up frequently) I always think back to one thought someone left with me ...................

Do you know with certainty that the "Bad Guy" or "Bad Guy's" are working alone? Have they "seeded" the Bank with a few other accomplices in plain cloths ready to put one in your dome if you try and stop them?

What we call sleepers in my line of work.

 

[Stellar05]

The BGs were Un-Armed and I was Outside the bank... We only witnessed the three men running into the bank... nothing else... but the robbery was confirmed... They made off by foot...and were soon apprehended...

Just missing the incident like you did KMauer, makes you start to think... hence this post...

Thank you everyone for your two cents!

 

[Jose]

So what if you were IN the bank?
What action is legal to take?
If unarmed.... probably none... right?
If armed and shooting... would you be in your right pull a Jack Bauer on them?

You really should not be carrying a firearm if you don't know the answers to your questions. Seriously.

 

[Martlet]

I'm guessing troll?

 

[icyclefar]

Sleeper ...........