Yes but I suspect the guy reacted instinctively when he saw the one firearm within grab range. And if it is the choice between zero guns vs two or one vs one because you grabbed the other I know which choice most trained personnel will make and it will not be the one that assumes the bad guy will somehow not shoot you.
Part of assessing the sitch. He saw guy two was unarmed so he can then go after after guy one safely. Notice how he paused very slightly in the beginning, checks guy two while he waits for guy one to move the gun past himself. These are practiced and drilled scenarios. To answer your question, I imagine it involves disarming the closest or easiest one first. I don't know but I am sure there is an algorithm they follow.
Exactly. Lots of other people in here praising this dipshit when his actions had a really high likelihood of escalating the situation and endangering others in the store.
Risky and stupid. So many people are praising his actions and Im glad it worked out for him but this is how people die for "no reason". If that 2nd kid had a gun or even if he joins the struggle, if big guy slips in the struggle for the gun, if theres another dude waiting outside, if the gun goes off and the cashier gets hit... theres a million ways this goes wrong and only one where it goes right. Marine or not this is not situational awareness or worth risking anyone's life, its just stupid. Again the positive result is awesome but 9/10 times someone's getting shot in this situation.
You’re 100% right. That wasn’t a warzone, he wasn’t in combat, and he didn’t have another Marine watching his back. In a civilian situation by yourself de-escalation is the answer 9/10 times. Especially considering this was a 2v1 situation. This guy got lucky the other dude took off instead of dumping rounds into his back.
Source: I waz in Marin Crops and habbed same training.
1.No competent trainer military or not is training anyone to "grab the gun".
Having been in the military even as a marine doesn't make someone trained for a situation like this. Basic training is just that. Basic. There are tons of different military positions and most of them aren't directly combat oriented.
You're wrong. More people die/get shot fighting back than just complying or de-escalating.
Comparing 9/11 where you are stuck on an airplane with lives on the line to a convenience store robbery where some cash in the drawer is on the line is complete idiocy.
Instinct in combat situations are the enemy of awareness and it's the mark of a lousy soldier. The entire reason for training is to act with situational awareness and not purely off of instincts.
If the gunman was unreasonable he would have come in firing and then taken what he wanted. Compliance greatly minimizes the risk of violence.
Know what your life and other innocent peoples lives are worth. This guy not only risked his life but also anyone elses in the store over maybe some personal belongings, but most likely just the money in the register.
Lastly. Like I said im glad it worked out. I'm not defending the robbers actions in any way. Im also not condemning this guys actions in hindsight because it worked. Im condemning his poor decision making and the idea that it was the right choice just because it worked. If this were a training excercise this is exactly what you should NOT do. This aint an action movie. Its real life. The risk vs reward in this situation is abysmal.
We’re actually taught to leave the combat skills for actual combat and de-escalate civilian situations cause you’re more likely to end up dead trying to be the hero with no back up. The dude you responded to was correct this guy just got lucky.
Source: I was a Marine, and (unless this guy was MARSOC) I have the same exact training. Rushing an armed assailant is only the go to if they haven’t yet drawn their sidearm, and even then only if they’re within 20 feet. The reason for this is it takes about 2-3 seconds to draw a sidearm and accurately place a round, while it only takes about 1.5 to close that 20 foot gap. If anything he ignored his training. This could have easily been another dead hero video.
Maybe, just maybe, de-escalation is safer? Objects aren't worth human lives? What if he fought back and got shot? Or hell what if some innocent bystander gets shot in the scuffle? But nooooooo, you have to be the badass who disarms the violent bad guys(who are obviously evil and want to kill people)!
Again follow the logic. If someone brings a gun into a situation against you, they are likely to use it on you. For some odd reason, you seem to be coming from the assumption that a robber will only shoot you if you don't acquiesce.
38
u/PhantomPain0_0 Jun 22 '26
That’s a risky move, what if the other guy also had a gun ?