PDA

View Full Version : Robbed at gunpoint--again



Rubio Negro
06-11-2013, 08:19 AM
In 2010, I was living in the ghettos around Buenos Aires as a missionary. I was at that time robbed at gunpoint, and the totality of my experience taught me to be a little more aware on the street.

This morning, as a foreign exchange student in the city proper, I was robbed at gunpoint once more.

It is foggy today in Buenos Aires. Tuesday mornings at 6:30 local time I go to my church for a bible study-type class. I got off the bus on one of the major streets of the city, and started the four block walk to the chapel. Still dark and very foggy, though there are a few people on the street. I made it to block two when I became aware of a young man walking in my direction, about twenty-five yards out. He isn't particularly dressed like the gangster types I knew from my days in the hood, but I decide to keep an eye on him anyway. And I do--right up to the point where he stops about five feet in front of me, pulls a semi-auto out of his waistband (high polish bright finish, from the size probably an Argentine-made Bersa .380), racks the slide, and says "dame todo tu dinero" (give me all your money).

For a split second I consider drawing the 15cm fixed-blade I carry AIWB (in traditional Argentine fashion; CCW of firearms is strictly illegal and even the knife could possibly cause me problems, depending on the cop I run into, though it is not strictly illegal), but decide it's too risky.

I reach into my pocket and pull out a wad of bills amounting to some $25 Argentine pesos (less than four dollars using the real exchange rate). "Dame el celular," (give me your cell phone) he continues. I give him my el-cheapo Samsung that a previous foreign exchange student had left in my room. "La billetera, dame la billetera" (Your wallet, give me your wallet). "No tengo billetera, pero tengo tarjeta SUBE si querés," (I don't have a wallet, but I have a bus card if you want) I respond.

He doesn't want it. "Vení... seguí caminando que te pego un tiro" (Come here... keep walking or I'll shoot you). He sends me on my way. I keep walking in the direction I was headed--church is only two blocks away--and warn two oncoming female joggers without turning my head: "Chicas, doblen que recién me robaron" (Girls, turn now because I just got robbed).

Lessons learned: being situationally aware is not the same as being prepared, and being prepared is not just having a weapon or even knowing how to use it, but having a plan and being prepared to do so.

I was completely situationally aware, and had my eyes fixed on the mugger for several seconds before he became an explicit threat. I was prepared in the sense that I had the best weapon legally available to me and was physically able to draw it very, very quickly (at least in practice). I am starting to train with a teacher in traditional Argentine knife fighting. But when the threat energy ceased to be potential and became kinetic, so to speak, I was left without effective options, because I had only managed to recognize and observe the threat, not prepare a plan of action to deal with it.

Also, it is important to note that this was one of the city's nicer neighborhoods--lots of wealthy houses, a large Catholic school and the Australian and South Vietnamese embassies on the same street or nearby. Crime can happen anywhere.

In the end, I lost almost nothing in monetary value, was completely unscathed, and did not have to file a police report for self-defense. But I did learn some valuable lessons from this experience that I want to put into practice immediately. Even being 100% prepared, I might decide, based on the situation, to just hand over the money. But in the case that is not the best course of action, I want to have the option of defending myself effectively.

Final thoughts: one of the main factors in my decision not to draw my knife was the fact that I would have to go through the whole draw process: lift cover garment, grab knife, draw, thrust. A small revolver in the pocket (I usually carry a 1911 IWB at 3:00) would have, on the other hand, been easily accessible as it was into that very pocket that I reached--without the mugger batting an eye--to retrieve the small wad of cash I handed over. I believe it would have been feasible to produce from that pocket not cash, but a weapon, and come out firing. For now, it might be convenient to carry a pocketknife, considering legal consequences. When I return to the States I might begin carrying a pocket gun in addition to my main sidearm.

TR675
06-11-2013, 10:30 AM
Thank you for the post.

It's hard to counter someone just walking up to you and sticking a gun in your face. Even if carrying I don't know that I'd do anything different. Sometimes you get the bear, and sometimes the bear gets you.

Southnarc has probably been robbed more times than anyone else on this forum - and IIRC (please correct me if I'm wrong) cooperated with the robber more often than not because the situation demanded it. It's hard, and probably stupid, to turn a maybe-fight into a definite-fight when a deadly weapon is involved unless you have no other choice...

David Armstrong
06-11-2013, 10:36 AM
Even being 100% prepared, I might decide, based on the situation, to just hand over the money. But in the case that is not the best course of action, I want to have the option of defending myself effectively.
That is what I teach. "Going to the guns" should be a last resort, not a first resort, because once you do that it is hard to de-escalate. You want to always have that option of escalating the encounter, but it is hard to de-escalate once things have reached that point of full blown fighting.

When I return to the States I might begin carrying a pocket gun in addition to my main sidearm.
I like pocket carry specifically for that reason. Reaching into the pocket is a natural and often expected movement.

Ed L
06-11-2013, 06:12 PM
Lessons learned: being situationally aware is not the same as being prepared, and being prepared is not just having a weapon or even knowing how to use it, but having a plan and being prepared to do so.

I was completely situationally aware, and had my eyes fixed on the mugger for several seconds before he became an explicit threat. I was prepared in the sense that I had the best weapon legally available to me and was physically able to draw it very, very quickly (at least in practice). I am starting to train with a teacher in traditional Argentine knife fighting. But when the threat energy ceased to be potential and became kinetic, so to speak, I was left without effective options, because I had only managed to recognize and observe the threat, not prepare a plan of action to deal with it.

Welcome to the forum. Good points made.

Ed L
06-11-2013, 06:19 PM
I like pocket carry specifically for that reason. Reaching into the pocket is a natural and often expected movement.

For exactly this reason if I have my pants on I am pocket carrying a J-frame or Kahr PM-9--even though I typically carry a larger handgun IWB as well.

Josh Runkle
06-12-2013, 07:52 AM
It should be taken into account that on television, compliance with the bad guy's requests always leads to safety, yet, in the real world, people are often still shot after compliance.

Dropkick
06-12-2013, 08:08 AM
I'm not sure I see how introducing a second gun into the situation (without dealing with the first gun) would effect the outcome positively.

Rubio Negro
06-12-2013, 09:42 AM
It should be taken into account that on television, compliance with the bad guy's requests always leads to safety, yet, in the real world, people are often still shot after compliance.

This seems to be happening a lot lately here in Argentina. Being on drugs probably has to do with it. The first guy who robbed me, who laid hands on me and actually stuck his gun against my jaw, was a lot more aggressive, and I believe he was on drugs. People from the neighborhood told me he was a dangerous person after the incident, and I believe he would have killed me if it seemed like a good idea. I actually saw him a couple of times after that, even said "hi" to him in the street (out of nerves, as he was walking right past me). He gave me a dirty look and kept walking. Anyway, the guy who robbed me yesterday seemed a lot more chill (relatively speaking), and kept his muzzle toward the ground.

I made a conscious choice to submit, but I feel like I was not in as much control of the situation (as much as you can be in control of a situation like that) as I could have been. Even if I ended up submitting, I would have liked to have been negotiating from a stronger position. If it had been necessary to employ a weapon, I would have been at a disadvantage, not only due to the obvious, but because of my decision to continue to walk towards a potential threat without actually mentally preparing to defend myself. That's what I want to fix for next time, assuming I can't just leave.

Thanks for the responses thus far.

Tamara
06-12-2013, 10:03 AM
I'm not sure I see how introducing a second gun into the situation (without dealing with the first gun) would effect the outcome positively.

Depending on the situation, a second gun might be the way to deal with the first gun. Or it might not. Dunno, wasn't there.

David Armstrong
06-12-2013, 11:02 AM
It should be taken into account that on television, compliance with the bad guy's requests always leads to safety, yet, in the real world, people are often still shot after compliance.
Don't know where you are getting the info, or what constitutes "often", but actual research indicates that compliance is far safer than resistance.

Dan_S
06-12-2013, 01:40 PM
Don't know where you are getting the info, or what constitutes "often", but actual research indicates that compliance is far safer than resistance.

Maybe so, but as for myself, I'd rather take my chances while trying to defend myself, than to be trussed up like a hog, and have a bullet put into the back of my head like an animal.

JodyH
06-12-2013, 02:03 PM
Maybe so, but as for myself, I'd rather take my chances while trying to defend myself, than to be trussed up like a hog, and have a bullet put into the back of my head like an animal.
If all you have is a hammer the whole world looks like a nail.

You're significantly changing the situation from a simple street robbery in a public location to a bound, probable execution.
There's a HUGE difference in the statistical outcomes between those two scenarios.
The vast majority of simple street robberies are strictly business transactions, and anything more than a bloody nose is unlikely.
Being tied/bound or being taken to the "second crime scene" those are huge escalations in probable violence towards you.

The only way you regularly beat the house is to play the odds and know when to fold and when to go all in.
Going all in on every hand may make you look like a hero every once in a while, but in the long run you will lose badly.

ToddG
06-12-2013, 02:11 PM
Maybe so, but as for myself, I'd rather take my chances while trying to defend myself, than to be trussed up like a hog, and have a bullet put into the back of my head like an animal.

I'd rather do most things than have a bullet put into the back of my head like an animal. So we're in agreement.

OTOH, I'd rather turn over the money clip in my pocket with ~$40 in it than get shot, or go to prison for what someone else decides wasn't "justified enough," or pay tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees avoiding same.

I'd humbly suggest that anyone who thinks any of these answers:

I'd give him the money.
I'd deal with/fight over/disable the BG's gun.
I'd draw my own gun.


... is a 100% solution has a very weak imagination and poor grasp of the reality of random street crime.

Dan_S
06-12-2013, 02:40 PM
I'd rather do most things than have a bullet put into the back of my head like an animal. So we're in agreement.

OTOH, I'd rather turn over the money clip in my pocket with ~$40 in it than get shot, or go to prison for what someone else decides wasn't "justified enough," or pay tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees avoiding same.

I'd humbly suggest that anyone who thinks any of these answers:

I'd give him the money.
I'd deal with/fight over/disable the BG's gun.
I'd draw my own gun.


... is a 100% solution has a very weak imagination and poor grasp of the reality of random street crime.


I guess to me, the whole discussion is ridiculous. Of course there *is* no 100% guarantee no matter what you do, but, I take personal offense to being told that I should just comply, because that'll be safer...

JodyH
06-12-2013, 02:42 PM
I guess to me, the whole discussion is ridiculous. Of course there *is* no 100% guarantee no matter what you do, but, I take personal offense to being told that I should just comply, because that'll be safer...
If you are taking "personal offense" then maybe you need to look at how emotion is driving your decision making processes.

The vibe i'm getting from the thread is not that complying is "safer" but that's it's probably the smarter choice.

Dan_S
06-12-2013, 03:20 PM
If you are taking "personal offense" then maybe you need to look at how emotion is driving your decision making processes.

The vibe i'm getting from the thread is not that complying is "safer" but that's it's probably the smarter choice.

I guess you don't get it. Oh well.

Kukuforguns
06-12-2013, 03:23 PM
You left the encounter unharmed, which is the most important factor. I'm sorry you had the experience, but glad you're ok.

It sounds like the robber had done this multiple times before and that he treated this as a purely economic transaction. He used a minimal amount of force (he kept the muzzle off of you), he asked you for specific items, he gave you clear directions, he appeared relaxed. All of these factors suggest that he was not interested in hurting you, that his interest was only economic, and that he had committed this crime frequently in the past. You were almost certainly more hopped up on adrenaline than him and almost certainly have less experience than him in violent confrontations. Considering how it could have gone, your decisions were rational and appropriate once he pulled the gun on you.

As you've already observed, you had more/better choices before he pulled the gun. One lesson to be observed is that you failed to act to avoid a confrontation when your intuition alerted you to a problem. This is not surprising, since humans have difficulty acting outside our normal parameters. You have to train yourself to act assertively. I recommend Amanda Ripley's The Unthinkable: Who Surives When Disaster Strikes - And Why? (http://www.amazon.com/The-Unthinkable-Survives-Disaster-Strikes/dp/0307352900) She explains why humans fail to act decisively in disasters. Rory Miller is another author that addresses how to psychologically prepare for threat situations.

Erik
06-12-2013, 03:25 PM
I guess you don't get it. Oh well.

I don't get why you find the suggestion that compliance may be safer than resistance personally offensive either.

Tamara
06-12-2013, 03:43 PM
I don't carry a gun to protect my feelings from getting hurt.

41magfan
06-12-2013, 04:52 PM
A small revolver (or pistol - my edit) in the pocket (I usually carry a 1911 IWB at 3:00) would have, on the other hand, been easily accessible as it was into that very pocket that I reached--without the mugger batting an eye--to retrieve the small wad of cash I handed over. I believe it would have been feasible to produce from that pocket not cash, but a weapon, and come out firing. For now, it might be convenient to carry a pocketknife, considering legal consequences. When I return to the States I might begin carrying a pocket gun in addition to my main sidearm.

That's one of the wisest takeaway points I've seen in a forum posting in a long time. The movement associated with a pocket presentation is completely innocuous to a BG, especially if he’s given you a command to do something. He’s expecting the movement as an expression of your compliance, so he’s already set himself up to be behind the curve. In a situation like yours, any furtive movement associated with “going for a weapon” is learned by street people by the age of 5 and they will likely respond to it quickly.

Dropkick
06-12-2013, 05:28 PM
Depending on the situation, a second gun might be the way to deal with the first gun. Or it might not. Dunno, wasn't there.

Well, hypothetically speaking say you're being mugged similarly to the OP... Would you elaborate on how you think a drawing a second gun could help the situation?

Tamara
06-12-2013, 05:34 PM
You're completely right. If I was being mugged similarly to the OP, there is no way a second gun could have helped the situation. I guess. I dunno. Like I said, I wasn't there. There are a kittenload of variables that are impossible to tell from the given description and I don't have any particular point I'm trying to score here.

On the other hand, last time I had a gun pointed at me, I was glad that it was not the only gun present, so there's that.

Morbidbattlecry
06-12-2013, 07:59 PM
Call me stupid, but if someone comes up and wants to mug me and my GF, i'm going to pull on him if i get the chance. If i don't then i don't but i'm not taking the risk that said guy has my life in HIS hands. Again there is plenty of variables that would go into this decision. But its going to be what i'm thinking about the whole time.

Dropkick
06-13-2013, 08:06 AM
You're completely right. If I was being mugged similarly to the OP, there is no way a second gun could have helped the situation. I guess. I dunno. Like I said, I wasn't there. There are a kittenload of variables that are impossible to tell from the given description and I don't have any particular point I'm trying to score here.

On the other hand, last time I had a gun pointed at me, I was glad that it was not the only gun present, so there's that.

Fair enough.

Josh Runkle
06-13-2013, 11:38 AM
Attacking the armed bad guy isn't about being macho.

If an unarmed bad guy, or one who said he was armed but didn't draw, etc, asked for my wallet, I'd give it to him. There's nothing in there that can't be replaced.

If, on the other hand, that person has a gun, they are well aware of the seriousness of their actions and prepared to make a serious threat. Why shouldn't I assume that they will dispose of me as a witness afterward? Why should I bet my life that they will stop as soon as they have the money? They've shown they're serious and it's now a high-stakes poker game where my life is at stake. If I have to bet on anything, I would rather bet on my own skills, my own perseverance, my own will to survive, rather than bet on them not harming me.

It's not about alpha-male BS. I could care less about my stuff. It's about survival.

Dan_S
06-13-2013, 12:31 PM
Call me stupid, but if someone comes up and wants to mug me and my GF, i'm going to pull on him if i get the chance. If i don't then i don't but i'm not taking the risk that said guy has my life in HIS hands. Again there is plenty of variables that would go into this decision. But its going to be what i'm thinking about the whole time.


Attacking the armed bad guy isn't about being macho.

If an unarmed bad guy, or one who said he was armed but didn't draw, etc, asked for my wallet, I'd give it to him. There's nothing in there that can't be replaced.

If, on the other hand, that person has a gun, they are well aware of the seriousness of their actions and prepared to make a serious threat. Why shouldn't I assume that they will dispose of me as a witness afterward? Why should I bet my life that they will stop as soon as they have the money? They've shown they're serious and it's now a high-stakes poker game where my life is at stake. If I have to bet on anything, I would rather bet on my own skills, my own perseverance, my own will to survive, rather than bet on them not harming me.

It's not about alpha-male BS. I could care less about my stuff. It's about survival.

These above posts are what I (apparently unsuccessfully) was *trying* to say. Not that anyone cares....

41magfan
06-13-2013, 01:24 PM
When it comes to resisting or counter-attacking, knowing the IF, WHEN and HOW is paramount to determining a predictable outcome. In this modern age, we have the great benefit of pervasive video recordings (passive and active) and while a picture doesn't tell the whole story, it can tell us a lot. There's a lot to learn from watching video if you have some ability to see things in the proper context.

Street robberies like the event narrated in the original post tend to be "short and sweet" affairs. Unless the BG attempts to move you to another location, compliance may be the best option unless you have a response he can't see coming.

Every situation is different, but as long as I feel like all someone wants is my "stuff", I will likely play along until an opportunity to mount an effective response presents itself. Now, if a BG wants to change locations or attempt to restrain me, he's doing that for a reason and all bets are off.

JodyH
06-13-2013, 01:34 PM
I'm willing to make a bet on who in this thread has attended ECQC and who hasn't.
Or, in lieu of ECQC who has truly tested their "skills" under the stress of an opposing will with malevolent intent.
:cool:

TR675
06-13-2013, 01:54 PM
I'm willing to make a bet on who in this thread has attended ECQC and who hasn't.
Or, in lieu of ECQC who has truly tested their "skills" under the stress of an opposing will with malevolent intent.
:cool:

That class really bursts all sorts of bubbles, doesn't it.

For those posters who intend to draw to a gun-in-hand, you owe it to yourself to try some FOF training, whether ECQC or airsoft.

One thing that ECQC taught me was that drawing to a PO'd, actively resisting, close-in, unarmed opponent can be freaking tricky enough as it is. Good-bye gunfight, hello fight with a gun.

Kukuforguns
06-13-2013, 03:10 PM
These above posts are what I (apparently unsuccessfully) was *trying* to say. Not that anyone cares....

I think everyone here cares. That's why we're here. I think you may be misunderstanding what the posters who support a less aggressive response are saying. No one is saying that an armed robbery is a non-dangerous event. No one is saying that an armed response is inappropriate in the context of an armed robbery. No one is saying that you should trust an armed robber. Instead, people are stating (IMO) that in any violent encounter your actions should be planned to increase your odds (and the odds for anyone under your protection) of survival. In order to make accurate decisions about increasing your odds, you need to know something about the odds. Armed robbery is incredibly common. Murder and attempted murder are orders of magnitude less common. This information immediately tells you that most armed robbery does not end in murder or attempted murder. Some armed robbery does, unfortunately, end with murder or attempted murder. Once you're in an armed robbery situation, there is a chance you will be dead no matter what you decide. Again, your decisions should be made to maximize your odds of survival.

As already stated, most armed robbery does not end with murder or attempted murder (unfortunately, there is a fair amount of punching, kicking, clubbing, etc.). Do your own research. The vast majority of armed robberies do not involve that level of terminal violence. So, if it is truly an armed robbery -- complying with demands for material goods produces relatively good odds for survival.

Now, what does resisting an armed robbery (where the robber has a drawn gun and you are armed with a "holstered" knife) do to your odds of survival? It reduces your odds of survival. In fact, robberies committed by robbers armed with guns are among the least violent robberies. Do your own research. It's out there. Gary Kleck is a good place to start.

So, if you want to maximize your odds of survival, complying with demands for material goods is a rational (rational this is different than right) course of action in the context of an armed robbery.

All that being said, if the armed robbery deviates from a standard path, you will have to re-evaluate your plan. If the robber tries to tie you up or to transport you to a new location, you are no longer in an armed robbery situation. The robber no longer is motivated by material goods. He's got plans that involve YOU. Your odds of survival just went from pretty good to really bad. At this point, it may make sense to present your knife and attempt to incapacitate a robber armed with a .380. A .380 is unlikely to immediately disable you (other than a shot to the CNS), which means you have a realistic opportunity to seriously injure the robber. Before you act though, recognize that you likely will be shot and that you must continue to act until the threat is gone.

David Armstrong
06-14-2013, 10:19 AM
Maybe so, but as for myself, I'd rather take my chances while trying to defend myself, than to be trussed up like a hog, and have a bullet put into the back of my head like an animal.
If you wait that long before deciding to escalate things, you have probably waited too long.

David Armstrong
06-14-2013, 10:25 AM
Attacking the armed bad guy isn't about being macho.

If an unarmed bad guy, or one who said he was armed but didn't draw, etc, asked for my wallet, I'd give it to him. There's nothing in there that can't be replaced.

If, on the other hand, that person has a gun, they are well aware of the seriousness of their actions and prepared to make a serious threat. Why shouldn't I assume that they will dispose of me as a witness afterward? Why should I bet my life that they will stop as soon as they have the money? They've shown they're serious and it's now a high-stakes poker game where my life is at stake. If I have to bet on anything, I would rather bet on my own skills, my own perseverance, my own will to survive, rather than bet on them not harming me.

It's not about alpha-male BS. I could care less about my stuff. It's about survival.
You can assume they will dispose of you as a witness afterwards. Of course, you can assume you will win the lottery every time you buy a ticket. Neither of them are particualrly likely. I personally prefer to work with the odds instead of against them. If this were a high stakes poker game would you go with the odds or against them? Would you throw away three of a kind hoping you would draw a royal flush?? If it truly is about survival shouldn't you do things to improve the chance of survival and not do things that reduce the chance of survival?

Tikrit Tourist
08-06-2013, 11:20 AM
Attacking the armed bad guy isn't about being macho.

If an unarmed bad guy, or one who said he was armed but didn't draw, etc, asked for my wallet, I'd give it to him. There's nothing in there that can't be replaced.

If, on the other hand, that person has a gun, they are well aware of the seriousness of their actions and prepared to make a serious threat. Why shouldn't I assume that they will dispose of me as a witness afterward? Why should I bet my life that they will stop as soon as they have the money? They've shown they're serious and it's now a high-stakes poker game where my life is at stake. If I have to bet on anything, I would rather bet on my own skills, my own perseverance, my own will to survive, rather than bet on them not harming me.

It's not about alpha-male BS. I could care less about my stuff. It's about survival.

I tend to agree, but as others have stated, no one correct answer for all the possible variables.
Regarding the natural movement of reaching for a pocket carry weapon.....I often practice holding my weak-side hand up in apparent compliance and submission, while informing the aggressor that I am getting my wallet for them. With my strong-side hand, I grip my weapon (worn just behind the point of hip) and draw while moving offline.

I understand that the above mentioned scenario that i practice is not going to be my fall-back plan, but I just wanted to illustrate that there are alternatives to pocket carry that also seem "natural"

Loving this forum! I just discovered it today, and have a TON of reading to do on the many sub-forums. great stuff!