Got my gun grabbed today...

[BiscuitNaBasket]

Was at Walmart in Greenwood, finishing checking out. The attendant at the self-scan area was a very short man (about waist-high to me). I was walking out with my two friends, and I hear "SIR! SIR!" behind me. I see it's him, and he's waving me over.

I walk half the way, and he walks over to me saying "Look, just lift your shirt and cover up the gun." as he's saying this, he grabs my shirt with his right hand and the back of my gun with his left.

I back up fast, and say "I'm fine." I didn't feel like verbally fighting with this guy in front of my friends. He says "It's just that people get frantic!"... I said "They'll be fine" and walked away. He said behind me something ending with ".... a freaking firearm....", but I was too far away by then to hear the rest.

So yeah, a small man grabbed my gun today.

If I were in your shoes I would have had a few words with the old chaps manager hoping to prevent that from happening again. Great job by not flipping out and creating a scene though!

 

[Mr. Habib]

This thread is EPIC. Mods, can we make this a sticky?

 

[LionWeight]

Don Hume leather holster. I can't imagine this guy would have been able to pull it out easily, at his height, if he were so inclined.

Doesn't matter. If someone grabs at my firearm he's going to hit the floor. You are responsible for the firearm in your possession. I personally would not take the chance that all he wanted was for it to be covered up. 1. It's none of his business. 2. Don't EVER touch me or my property. I guarantee it will result in a response you will not be satisfied with. If all you get is a smack and a loud voice, consider yourself lucky. A discussion with the manager or corporate would absolutely take place. If I had been in the line next to you and watched him do that I would have called him out asking him why he was being so stupid. Some just need a bit#$ slap and a monkey stomp.

 

[bwframe]

What happens with your LTCH if you are convicted of an assault or battery charge?

 

[red_zr24x4]

I call B.S. Its a believable story don't get me wrong, up to the point you said it was an older guy...now if you would have said a 5 yrold girl, I would have bought that....

Seriously tho I think you handled it rather well. You didn't kill the guy, I personally think he should have gotten atleast 1 punch tho. And I would have went straight to the manager and said do something right now or I call the cops and press charges.

 

[Roadie]

Gotta be careful out there, coulda been this lil guy grabbin your gun..

 

[Bill of Rights]

Haha, yeah. Thing is, I OC this Walmart frequently. He's been the self-checkout attendant many times, and I know he's seen the gun before (either the 1911 or the USP). He never said anything until tonight.

This is the reason I didn't react in a more physical way. He's obviously handicapped, and I have an observational history of his "not reacting negatively" to my gun. I don't know the guy by any means, and I surely was surprised that ANY person would confront me for one, and TOUCH me and my gun.

I wasn't nice in my reactions to him. I know this isn't equal to breaking his thumb or a spinning drop-kick with a 360 flip heel to the temple or something.... but I'm sure he noticed my sudden change in dimeanor and attitude.

Edit: I'm a well-trimmed and professional-looking person. I'm right there with you - How the hell could he assume that I'm NOT an off-duty LEO or something?

Given the additional info that was not in the OP about him being handicapped (presumably other than being hoplophobic), I retract my previous answer. Little details like that are important. I do think that if someone is reaching for your gun, you need to do whatever is necessary to retain it. I'd think that would be a given.

Wow. Isn't this a proud thread for INGO? So many members talking of harming a physically, possibly mentally challenged person.

Maybe all those tough guys should wear their guns on the outside just to show everyone how bad ass they really are.

Oh, that's what we're talking about, HUH. When you cannot defend the lethal tool that you openly advertise, hmm. Wonder who is really at fault here?

In fairness, Burl, most of the comments about that came before it was known that the guy was handicapped in some way. What reaction would you have to someone not known to be of diminished capacity doing what was described solely in the OP?

What happens with your LTCH if you are convicted of an assault or battery charge?

As Kirk pointed out, no assault charge in Indiana, however, if convicted of a battery charge, this case seems to me to be either a B or an A misdemeanor, not a felony. (IC 35-42-2) That said, IC 35-41-3-2 specifies that a reasonable belief that unlawful force is imminent is sufficient to justify the reactive use of force, if the reactive force is felt to be necessary to stop the unlawful act.

Further, while 35-41-3-6 might exonerate the employee in this case, I believe that 35-41-3-7 would do likewise for the gun owner, and the whole thing likely would be a "wash".

As I make exceedingly clear when I get into conversations like this, I am not a lawyer and this post does not constitute legal advice. I am only a citizen who knows how to read and post my opinion. As I said at the beginning of this post, the originally-undisclosed fact that the employee is in some way of diminished capacity is an important one, and probably will change answers other than my own. If the only necessary force is to cover your pistol and prevent it from leaving the holster, then of course that's what you do.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Wow caught up on a lot of reading here.

I don't personally know if he's "mentally" handicapped, but certainly physically, as others have confirmed.

One other person made a great point, I did not physically retaliate because I know how that would have looked to everyone around me. I know that's not the way to think about it... but seriously, "Gun owner attacks disabled man!" is exactly what I see happening.

I did not vieww this man as a threat, and I'm not embarassed to say... because of his stature. He did not approach me in a threatening manner, nor did he reach out quickly for my firearm. It wasn't an obvious attempt to take it, but merely him attempting to show me that it "needs to be covered up."

 

[LPMan59]

you didn't blade him -OR- draw on him?

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

You should have just gave him these looks and did your best Christopher Walken impression. That would have scared the hell out of him!

 

[bwframe]

...What reaction would you have to someone not known to be of diminished capacity doing what was described solely in the OP?

I would not have allowed them to get close enough to grab my gun. It is MY responsibility to maintain control of the firearm I am carrying.

...if convicted of a battery charge, this case seems to me to be either a B or an A misdemeanor, not a felony...

So a battery conviction on a handicapped person would have no effect on your "proper person" status?

 

[red_zr24x4]

Wow. Isn't this a proud thread for INGO? So many members talking of harming a physically, possibly mentally challenged person.

Maybe all those tough guys should wear their guns on the outside just to show everyone how bad ass they really are.

Oh, that's what we're talking about, HUH. When you cannot defend the lethal tool that you openly advertise, hmm. Wonder who is really at fault here?

As stated earlier I think the OP handled this appropriately, But lets break this statement down here.

"Harming a physically or possibly mentally challenged person"
Yes I would if they are grabbing my weapon. It could discharge an hit me on the way out of the holster, they could shoot themselves, plus if they see someone getting shot on T.V. and then an hour later see them again they might not comprehend that death is permanent and shoot someone else.

" Wearing their guns on the outside and being bad assed" has nothing to do with it, I don't care if someone duct tapes it to their forehead, its not against the law.
"Who is really at fault here"
I'd say his parents for not teaching him to keep his hands to himself and to not mess with other peoples stuff.

 

[bwframe]

... I don't care if someone duct tapes it to their forehead, its not against the law.
..

Neither is someone touching your gun...


'Bout time somebody answered some of my questions.
Kinda sounded like a sheep beating contest there for a bit.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I would not have allowed them to get close enough to grab my gun. It is MY responsibility to maintain control of the firearm I am carrying.

Agreed. And if he moves to get close enough, or surprises you while distracted? Maybe you're the exception to the "rule" we see here so often, that no one can be "on" 100% of the time. I don't mean that with any sarcasm. The exception, as is usually the case, proves the rule, though, which is to say that most of us aren't good enough to NEVER be surprised by something unexpected. If/when that happens, I think you'll agree that the gun owner needs to do what he must to keep the gun where it belongs.

So a battery conviction on a handicapped person would have no effect on your "proper person" status?

No effect? I don't know. It might. I was only saying it wasn't an automatic thing... and in the part you didn't quote, that if the gun owner's action was intended to prevent another person's crime, a conviction is also not a foregone conclusion.

I'm not a man given to violent action. I'm not a trained fighter, and there are probably many here who are far more- and better-trained than I am. Is it possible I'd be disarmed? Of course it's possible. Given the choice of facing a judge vs. facing my own barrel, though, I'll take the judge any day. (Of course, that's also a false choice: Given my 'druthers, I'd rather not face either one.)

Blessings,
Bill

 

[red_zr24x4]

Neither is someone touching your gun...


'Bout time somebody answered some of my questions.
Kinda sounded like a sheep beating contest there for a bit.

As stated earlier I think the OP handled this appropriately, But lets break this statement down here.

"Harming a physically or possibly mentally challenged person"
Yes I would if they are grabbing my weapon. It could discharge an hit me on the way out of the holster, they could shoot themselves, plus if they see someone getting shot on T.V. and then an hour later see them again they might not comprehend that death is permanent and shoot someone else.

" Wearing their guns on the outside and being bad assed" has nothing to do with it, I don't care if someone duct tapes it to their forehead, its not against the law.
"Who is really at fault here"
I'd say his parents for not teaching him to keep his hands to himself and to not mess with other peoples stuff.

I answered all 3 of your questions in the post I quoted. And the only one you respond to is the one that wont put your post in a bad light?

Would you or would you not Hit someone touching,for all you know trying to grab your weapon from behind? Or would you casually turn to see if it was your buddy playing grab ass?

How is it anyone Else's fault the guy grabbed for the weapon?

 

[bwframe]

I would not have allowed them to get close enough to grab my gun. It is MY responsibility to maintain control of the firearm I am carrying.



So a battery conviction on a handicapped person would have no effect on your "proper person" status?

I would not have allowed them to get close enough to grab my gun. It is MY responsibility to maintain control of the firearm I am carrying.

/

Agreed. And if he moves to get close enough, or surprises you while distracted? Maybe you're the exception to the "rule" we see here so often, that no one can be "on" 100% of the time. I don't mean that with any sarcasm. The exception, as is usually the case, proves the rule, though, which is to say that most of us aren't good enough to NEVER be surprised by something unexpected. If/when that happens, I think you'll agree that the gun owner needs to do what he must to keep the gun where it belongs.

No effect? I don't know. It might. I was only saying it wasn't an automatic thing... and in the part you didn't quote, that if the gun owner's action was intended to prevent another person's crime, a conviction is also not a foregone conclusion.

I'm not a man given to violent action. I'm not a trained fighter, and there are probably many here who are far more- and better-trained than I am. Is it possible I'd be disarmed? Of course it's possible. Given the choice of facing a judge vs. facing my own barrel, though, I'll take the judge any day. (Of course, that's also a false choice: Given my 'druthers, I'd rather not face either one.)

Blessings,
Bill

I certainly agree on the 100% of the time part. It's a huge laugh at those who throw around the "situational awareness" like it's a bubble around them.

It does bring up the issue, while not wanting to start another mind numbing CC/OC debate.
Even to the most militant of OCer's, are there places where you are much less effective at protecting your gun? Should you, without comprising your beliefs, have an alternate plan for these areas?

 

[bwframe]

I answered all 3 of your questions in the post I quoted. And the only one you respond to is the one that wont put your post in a bad light?

There were no questions in your first post.

Would you or would you not Hit someone touching,for all you know trying to grab your weapon from behind? Or would you casually turn to see if it was your buddy playing grab ass?

How is it anyone Else's fault the guy grabbed for the weapon?

I would not have let them get close enough to grab my gun. If I did It would be my own fault. If I could not be in an area where I could maintain enough distance to avoid someone grabbing my gun, I would avoid that area or cover my gun from their view.

 

[red_zr24x4]

I would not have allowed them to get close enough to grab my gun. It is MY responsibility to maintain control of the firearm I am carrying.

/

I certainly agree on the 100% of the time part. It's a huge laugh at those who throw around the "situational awareness" like it's a bubble around them.

It does bring up the issue, while not wanting to start another mind numbing CC/OC debate.
Even to the most militant of OCer's, are there places where you are much less effective at protecting your gun? Should you, without comprising your beliefs, have an alternate plan for these areas?

So thats a yes? You would hit a handicapped person if they were trying draw/touch your weapon

So you say you wouldn't let someone get close enough to touch it, But then you basically say no one has 100% situational awareness

I'm really not trying to pick a fight about this, but you keep flip flopping on the replys.
If its your responsibility to keep control of it you would hit a handicapped person if you had to yes or no?
Your the only one capable of having 100% situational awareness or someone could get close enough to grab your weapon, which is it?

 

[elwoodward]

STUPID SHOULD HURT.

Rep inbound

 

[bwframe]

So thats a yes? You would hit a handicapped person if they were trying draw/touch your weapon

So you say you wouldn't let someone get close enough to touch it, But then you basically say no one has 100% situational awareness

I'm really not trying to pick a fight about this, but you keep flip flopping on the replys.
If its your responsibility to keep control of it you would hit a handicapped person if you had to yes or no?
Your the only one capable of having 100% situational awareness or someone could get close enough to grab your weapon, which is it?

Answered above.
You cannot guarantee situational awareness in close quarters. You use distance or you avoid the areas where it isn't possible or you cover the shiny object.

No, I don't hit the handicapped, the stupid, the intrigued, children or anyone else naive enough to try to touch my gun. They are either far enough away I'll know they are coming or they don't know it's there.