RachelG

Good for you, Analise, in defending yourself. I have always hoped that, if I were in such a situation, that I would have enough presence of mind to do exactly what you did.

As far as the mugger in Costa Rica, when he took a gun to rob someone, he accepted the risk that someone might fight back and even kill him. My son is a Marine, and I can assure you that they are well trained in hand to hand combat, disarming someone who is trying to attack them, and (yes, shocking as it may be) killing someone with their bare hands. That's what they train for. Even though he was 70, once a Marine, always a Marine. Semper Fi.

the_nomad

Funny thing is:
Airlines had that same type of protocol in case of a hijacking... prior to 9/11 that is...

JumboJet

Yeah, I guess I am. No advice they could give would 'universal'. If it is a 7-11 robbery in lets say Grand Rapids they are probably right. On a dark street in Costa Rica I am certainly going to evaluate the circumstances and make a decision regardless of what the police recommend.

dhuey

How potentially unfortunate for your loved ones.

There you have, it. Disregard the universal (yes, universal -- find me one police department that suggests you should consider challenging an armed robber rather than cough up the cash) advice from the experts in personal safety, and go for the gun/knife. Gotta love OMNI.

MC891

I was about to say the same thing.

Kudos to the old gentleman who came to the aid of a lady in distress. ^
I think that was probably what ran through his mind first and foremost anyway, that a lady was in distress, not that it was a nice day to kill a mugger.

JumboJet

This is Newsstand in case your confused.

I didn't say I wouldn't cough up my cash and move on (that seems to be your crusade). All I meant is I would have to look at the situation and make a decision then. I'm not saying I would go for the gun everytime or anytime. I never been to Costa Rica before but if it is anything like Mexico you had better be ready for anything. Don't count on the police as they can take from 4 hours to 4 days to come around.

dhuey

Sorry -- it felt like OMNI. "Crusade" is a bit strong, but yes, I would hope that those who think it might be a good idea to attack a mugger would reconsider their views.

corporate666

It's also potentially unfortunate for one's family if dad stands around while mom is assaulted because "well, he's not trying to kill her, just rape her". An extreme example, for sure, but the point is that there is no universal law on what to do or not to do. I know many former and current LEO's and military, and while it's generally said to the average joe that it's better not to fight back in MOST robbert situations, MOST LEO's and military DO fight back. MANY criminals are taken down by former or off-duty LEO's and military personnel and they don't wait until they themselves are assaulted before reacting. So it's not a universal truth, more of a "don't do it unless you're sure you can handle it" type of thing. This guy thought he could handle it, and he did. If you are an accountant who never lifted anything heavier than a pencil, and I am a robber standing 10 feet away with a gun pointed at your head, that is one thing. If you are someone who is experienced in disarming an attacker who has the knowledge and confidence to take down said attacker, you are going to have a different reaction. In today's litigious society, very few folks are going to recommend fighting back.

Your point seems to be to argue that, overall, in most situations one has a higher chance of survival by doing nothing than fighting back. That may be true, but every situation is different, every attack-ee and attack-er is different and nobody can pass judgement on this situation and say, in absolute terms, that the guy was right or that he was wrong.

And, FYI, Bank of America teamed up with local law enforcement in Florida to educate their employees on best practices during hold-ups. After a spate of robberies and a couple of murders in the state, their recommended practice was to use any opportunity and all means necessary to mitigate the threat from any robber. They recommended that employees be ready to fight back in case of attack. If some scruffy looking nothing-to-lose type robbers come aboard a bus in a crap neighborhood in Costa Rica, I'm going to react differently than if I am at a bank in NYC and a professional crew hits them.

corporate666

You should tell that to the woman on this very thread who thwarted a mugger/potential rapist with quick thinking, aggressive retaliation and a double dose of bravery. I'm sure she would be happy to hear that you have judged her to have acted erroneously, and had she considered your 'experience' on the matter, she may have only been raped and robbed, but have lived to see another day.

You could also forward your insight on to the afore-posted website that educates women on how to fight back. If only someone had informed them that, by submitting to the will of an attacker, they will be more likely to be better off in the end.

timothyp_787

My thoughts EXACTLY.

Ultimately, it's a judgment call. Yes, LEO advice is to be passive and accede to the robber's demands -- because it assumes that the robber only wants your money and is reasonably rational (poor choice of wording, but it's all I can think of) such that they know that a murder is worse.

But you're not really dealing with rational people here, are you? The policy and instructions to US citizens in the event of an airline hijacking prior to Sept 11 was to let the hijackers run the show...because it assumed a certain amount of rationality on the part of the hijackers, that they'd want to stay alive, too. But the assumption was wrong, so the response was wrong.

I for one am glad to hear the Marine took care of the robber, although I suspect he wasn't intending to kill, only incapacitate. I have no problem with the use of deadly force when protecting my life or those that I love. But ultimately, only the potential victim can evaluate the situation as to whether that's the better response, or just one that's going to get them killed.

Oh, and good job, Analise! I always find a grim satisfaction in the report of a predator getting thwarted.

JumboJet

I did a little more reading on this incident. Apparently the Mugger’s neck was not broken, it was his collarbone and he died of asphyxiation. There were two shots fired. They ended up driving him to the Hospital.

I’ll post this article which apparently supports your position, dhuey. Although it doesn’t say how many attacks were stopped that didn’t result in death and in general their statistics are a little lacking. It sounds like this was a couple of punks that got more than they bargained for as when the other senior citizens fought back the other two attackers fled.

http://english.peopledaily.com.

Costa Rican security minister warns against gun crime

"Costa Rica's Deputy Minister for Public Security Gerardo Lascarez on Sunday warned against the proliferation of firearms in the nation, which were used in around 5,000 robberies in 2006.
Some 48 people were shot dead in Costa Rica resisting robbery, and another 24 robbery victims killed their attackers in self-defense, according to government data published in the La Nacion newspaper on Sunday.
William Hidalgo, director of weapons at the ministry, said it was impossible to know how many weapons were on the nation's streets, but said he was certain that thousands were traded on the country's black market.
Costa Rica passed a law in 2001 ordering jail sentences for people carrying guns illegally, but only a tiny fraction of the 15,500 people who were charged under the law have been jailed.
Source: Xinhua"

blueeyes_austin

Dheuy, you persist in claiming there is some universal set of rules for response based on the fact this simply appeared to be an armed robbery attempt. Surely, however, there CANNOT be any universal rules set because the capabilities of the persons being assailed will vary so greatly.

Let's say we have a random armed violence event and we know the statistics suggest that in 15 percent of these cases I will be seriously harmed/raped (in addition to the robbery) and in another 1 or two percent of the cases will be killed (these numbers are just for illustration).

Given the numbers above, if I have an informed belief that I have a better than 15 percent chance of attacking and restraining or killing the robber IT MAKES SENSE FOR ME TO DO SO, merely to lower the chance I will be harmed.

Now, untrained people are likely to misjudge their capabilities and increase their danger in the situation...but trained folks like this Marine are aware of their capabilities and have used them in the past.

dhuey

Sure, in your hypo, your actions would be logical. I just don't think that in a situation where someone threatens you with a deadly weapon and demands items of value there is anything close to a 15% chance that they're going to inflict bodily harm after you turn over your valuables. It just makes no sense whatsoever, as they should just be shooting/stabbing you as their introduction.

Now, I recognize that much of criminal behavior is not logical (these are usually not the sharpest knives in the drawer). That alone is pretty scary.

I'll concede that there might be situations where what you observe about the armed robbers gives you reason to think fight or flight is a better option than complying. I think those situations would be rare, though, as the whole harm after you turn over valuables routine is a very poor murder/rape/mayhem strategy. Hence the police recommendations re armed robbery.

taucher

For the purpose of control, for example, as well as to keep things relatively quiet while they go about their business. It wouldn't make much sense to shoot a group of people, then rifle through the corpses' belongings while the police are responding, would it?

I would hope so...but then this story keeps coming to mind.

taucher

You seem to have forgotten the presence of the other two criminals, a fact which I doubt eluded the Marine. Once he was in contact with the first guy, he presumably would have to deal with him as expeditiously as possible before his comrades could intervene. It's a pity he didn't kill them as well.

The term "civilization" which you keep bleating about doesn't have the strong connotations of "effeteness" and "degeneracy" you seem to believe.

Assumption of guilt without corroborating facts and a need to resort to ad hominem attacks.

What a sterling example of being "civilized".