Do you keep eyes on the attacker?

[stonewall1350]

So I saw a video on youtube recently(I cannot find the link) of a robbery gone right. By this I mean there was a CCP holder who was carrying and he drew his gun and the robber backed out of the store and a few rounds were fired I think at that point.

Now my question is do you, in that situation, want to keep your eyes on the attacker as he flees the store? The man in the video kept eyes on the attacker as he was going across the front window and was repositiong towards the door trying to get a shot I assume. He got to the door and fired a few more rounds from the door at the robber. I am just curious if the moving to keep eyes on the attacker is a good idea? I would feel that as long as the attacker is facing me and still has a weapon that I would want to be moving for cover or to get a shot.

 

[Deaf Smith]

stonewall,

No two situations are alike but... to lose sight of your attacker is to force you to find them later. You give up an important advantage if you do that.

Like they say in air combat, 'Lose sight, lose the fight'. That is once you have lost track of them no telling where they are. And if they have kept track of where you are they then have the advantage of surprise and position.

More importantly, before the fight starts you need to keep track of their hands. Hands are more dangerous because they can produce a weapon and you must make sure they don't get the opportunity.

So, if at all possible, keep track of your attackers, before and after the fight starts.

Deaf

 

[72ronin]

So you mean like he put himself in possible danger to get those last shots off?
Well, if the robber decided to shoot at that point in time he may very well have been shot. But i dare say the robbery was a failure at that point and the robbers intention was robbery not murder, so he was busy sprinting off.

How about the owner of the premises, "Rob me i kill you".. The wild west or what! At what point does the need for self-defense end is a good question. Fair enough if it was a shootout in the store, fire away
But to chase down the street endangering others with a volley of shots is... stupid. He may have found himself facing some charges there if things went a little differently.

Basically he should have remained in the premises, and allerted authorities as soon as possible, using the counter as cover with his weapon at the ready, not the chase down endangering innocents on the street.

Welcome to MAP

 

[sgtmac_46]

So I saw a video on youtube recently(I cannot find the link) of a robbery gone right. By this I mean there was a CCP holder who was carrying and he drew his gun and the robber backed out of the store and a few rounds were fired I think at that point.

Now my question is do you, in that situation, want to keep your eyes on the attacker as he flees the store? The man in the video kept eyes on the attacker as he was going across the front window and was repositiong towards the door trying to get a shot I assume. He got to the door and fired a few more rounds from the door at the robber. I am just curious if the moving to keep eyes on the attacker is a good idea? I would feel that as long as the attacker is facing me and still has a weapon that I would want to be moving for cover or to get a shot.

Entirely situational...........there are pluses and minuses to either........certainly looking for cover may give you an advantage, but taking your eyes off your attacker may just also give him a chance to flank you.

 

[stonewall1350]

thanks guys. This really helps with my discussion. The guy in the video proceeded to, but not out of, the door. I myself would have probably returned fire and not gone towards the door and just watched the window from where I stood as long as he turned and ran. Of course put in the situation to draw my gun I am shooting to kill(or neutralize the target as I would tell a liberal jury nowadays).