A case from Memphis, TN in which a robber preemptively shot his victim, demanded and received money, then shot the victim again, shows that compliance with a robber’s demands is no guarantee of safety. Instead, a crime victim’s best option is armed self defense.
The Memphis, TN robbery
Police say Monkeith Gunn and another man shot at two men sitting in a car in front of the duplex hitting one man in the back of the head.
They say Gunn then went inside the duplex, pointed a gun at Jones, demanded money and shot him in the leg.
Jones told police after he gave Gunn $1,500 in cash Gunn shot him in the other leg.
“One bullet put a big hole in him,” said Epps.
Friends and family say Jones is still recovering from his injuries, but not walking around yet
Compliance with a robber’s demands is no guarantee of safety
Here was have a robber who allegedly shot his victim, before even giving the victim a chance to comply. It would seem that there was nothing this man could have done to prevent the robber from opening fire, which again shows the folly of trusting one’s safety to the compassion of a robber. By definition, a robber is someone who is prepared to inflict violence in order to take property from another. As such, robbers should not be relied upon to have compassion for their victims. Moreover, even after the victim complied, the robber is said to have shot him again. Compliance did not save this man from the robber.
This situation is nothing new. The fact is that many robbers will decide to harm or kill even the most cooperative victims. To name just a few examples: this bakery owner’s wife, this homeowner, and this deli owner were all shot by criminals, despite having offered their full cooperation. As another example, this mother of 11 was murdered by a robber after fully complying. Those who urge compliance with a robber’s demands should take note of those cases, as well as related studies into the ineffectiveness of compliance with a violent criminal’s demands.
Armed self defense is the answer
I have written about hundreds of real-life armed self defense examples on this website, but they are only a tiny portion of the approximately 2.5 million times that Americans use in a gun self defense each year. Such armed citizens save themselves from crime, and also save other would-be victims when the criminal is prevented from victimizing another person in the future.
This pregnant woman used a gun to defend herself, her unborn child, her toddler, and her husband from an armed robber, and suffered no harm. This armed student stopped multiple home invading robbers, saving his room mate. This armed barber shot an armed criminal who threatened him and his son, saving their lives. This armed pet shop clerk shot an armed robber who threatened a fellow employee’s life, as well as his own life, preventing them both from being stabbed. This armed pizza delivery man defended himself against 3 armed robbers, and walked away unharmed. This armed gas station clerk used his gun stop a violent robber. This armed citizen stopped a bank robber, while this armed Israeli citizen stopped a terrorist, suffering no harm themselves. This motel clerk was also able to stop an armed robber and ensure that neither a fellow employee, or a nearby mother and baby were harmed.
(No, gun bans won’t solve the problem of armed robbers)
When faced with the above facts, some individuals argue that the solution is a nation-wide ban on guns, on the theory that would prevent robbers from being armed. That is not a solution, as the British have learned. Instead, such a nation-wide ban on guns just leads to criminals illegally manufacturing guns themselves, smuggling guns into the country, stealing guns from the police, and using other tools to inflict harm. Indeed, British gun-related crime doubled in the decade after the gun ban was implemented. Given that Britain is a smaller country, with an easier-to-police border, with fewer civil rights to stop the police from searching citizens on a hunch, there is simply no way that the United States could succeed at nation-wide gun control where the British have failed. Moreover, there are hundreds of millions of guns in the United States which would not simply vanish.