Shop Security - Guns and Robbery

Jewelry Discussion
21

This is a sticky subject here. Many readers really dislike guns.
Others feel differently. I respect those choices either way. For
instance-Kraftwerks will have uniformed and armed security guard to
look out for theft gangs that prey on jewelry shows, and whatever
trouble might come. Of course all that is a very remote chance of
trouble. Our choice-One very well credentialed guard, a California
Corrections dept cop.

One question remains that I direct to “hand it over and all will be
fine” advocates-After you hand over the goods, the bad guy just might
get violent anyway, for one reason or another. A third striker, or a
guy who has already killed.

As a person who actually trains people in the defensive use of
pistols, and unarmed defense, obviously I believe we have the right
and given training the ability to defend ourselves and our customers.
While the training is substantial, it is nowhere near what SEALS or
HRT or CIA (huh?) gets. It is more than what the average street beat
cop gets. It about de-escalation and intelligent cooperation. Bad guy
says "hand it over-I say yes. Bad guy says “get in the trunk of my
car” and the fight is on.

Students from the defensive school where I trained and now teach
have an excellent record of success. Including those times they did
pull a gun, and yet nobody got hurt. Many of those people were cops.
Some not. Obviously things have gone horribly wrong when any robbery
takes place. Guns can help, or it can go against you. Is that not
true with or without the guns? We all know of occasions where unarmed
jewelers got murdered. And occasions where the police were unable to
help in time.

The bottom line is choosing your defensive/security tool and methods
as carefully as you choose your jewelry tools. Many people who would
never touch a gun can deter or escape harm with good planning and
execution.

For those who do include guns in the security plan, I suggest you
practice in realistic methods at least monthly. Stay sharp. People
who do not shoot are literally astonished at what a reasonable amount
of practice can do for a trained shooter. Besides, there are shooting
sports that support defensive methods, like IDPA. A fun sport for
those who can enjoy target shooting.

Daniel Ballard
Day Job- Precious Metals West & Kraftwerks.
Part Time- Range Officer for The International Shootists Institute

22

I agree with what Doctor says…however, everyone must decide for
themselves whether it is better to take the softer approach and
acquiesce with your adversary or the stronger approach and resist. I
do not agree with the premise that one must be an ex-SEAL or
lawofficer to handle difficult situations (Not Doc’s comment).

I must say however, if one does decide to take the latter route and
arm themselves, it is vital that they know what they are doing. In
other words, they must practice, practice, practice. It is true that
just practicing on the range is not the same as real life experience
but at the same time it is much worse to lack both real life AND
range experience. This can involve some pretty serious time and
money. For example, after purchasing an expensive firearm (and it
must be a good one to be of any use) there is time traveling to and
from the range at least once every two weeks (better every week)
range fees, ammo, etc etc. An average trip to the range (if located
nearby) will use around 2+ hours and cost up to $50 a session. Many
people also require an instructor if they have no previous experience
and that is another cost. And then, don’t forget upon returning home,
there is another hour to clean the weapon. Once one decides to go
this route, their life will never be quite the same.

I can say from experience though, when in a delicate situation, it
can be difficult to get those great big bullets into those little wee
holes!!!

Cheers from Don at The Charles Belle Studio in SOFL where simple
elegance IS fine jewelry!

23

I would help them carry the cash register out if I was faced with
that situation. I do not have a retail outlet that I work at, never
will. Too many of my friends have been robbed.

Where I live people carry guns as a regular thing, but they also
carry hundreds if not thousands of dollars in cash also.

Jerry

24

Obviously, I confused the “Castle Doctrine” with "duty to retreat."
Thanks for clearing that up, Scott.

James S. Duncan, G.G.
James in SoFL

25

When I read the story of the woman who scolded the robber away, it
made me want to share an old south-side-of-Chicago story. A woman
waiting at a bus stop saw a young man edging up to her, and she felt
sure he planned to rob her and was working up his nerve. She turned
to him, looked him in the eye and said, “Don’t I go to church with
your mama?” The young man fled.

Noel

26 
If there's an armed guy in front of you who wants the goods, unless
you're the fastest draw west or east of the Pecos, give 'im the
goods

I can’t vouch for the wisdom of this, but there used to be a guy who
lectured in schools, etc, about dealing with robbers. He recommended
that instead of carrying a weapon in case of robbery, that you carry
a gold-plated (“gem” encrusted?) money clip with a wad of ones
wrapped in a 20. If held up, you toss the money clip to the ground
to one side of the robber. The theory is, he’ll look at the money
instead of at you, and you take that opportunity to book it–
dropping anything your carrying. Out in the open, your chances of
getting shot at and hit are pretty small.

As I see it, if you’re behind the counter in a store, you may have
nowhere to run. The same obstacles designed to keep robbers out keep
you in. Did anyone see the article I think in AJM about a
theft-deterrent system that fills the room rapidly with “gas”? It is
actually water mist or something else harmless, but makes criminals
absolutely panic.

Noel

27

I don’t have a bricks and mortar shop so it’s not an issue, but I
don’t care for guns and don’t own one. Whether you have one or not,
you could end up being shot, and Lisa makes a good point. Depending
where you live, you could end up in a criminal or civil case
involving the shooting. Remember that guy in New York who shot three
teenagers on the subway? His name still pops up in the news now and
then.

Brian Corll
Brian Corll, Inc.
1002 East Simpson Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

28

If I had a storefront I would rely on an alarm system and a
closed-circuit videocamera for protection against robbery. A gun, not
so much.

If somebody is going to rob you at gunpoint, they will pull the gun
on you and tell you to give them the money or whatever. What are you
going to do when they already have the drop on you? Hope they miss
from six feet away while you pull out your own piece? Try to shoot
them from under the counter? Accept that you will take a bullet but
try to nail 'em before you go down so you have a really macho
obituary?

Seriously, most robbers will case a place before they decide to do
the job. If it looks like you have good security, e.g., camera, alarm
system, they will likely pass on it and look for an easier target.

Lee

29 
As I see it, if you're behind the counter in a store, you may have
nowhere to run. The same obstacles designed to keep robbers out
keep you in. Did anyone see the article I think in AJM about a
theft-deterrent system that fills the room rapidly with "gas"? It
is actually water mist or something else harmless, but makes
criminals absolutely panic.

One such gadget is called a “Smoke Cannon”. An article in a security
system trade magazine talks about several such systems:
http://securitysolutions.com/mag/security_smoke_gets/

(I install stuff like this for a living (decorative metalwork is
part of my hobby), and I have mixed feelings about the concept; but
it seems to be effective in the right situation).

Ron Charlotte – Gainesville, FL

30

Sorry I’ve been largely away from the WWW, but I do have to now
comment on an issue on which I have more than minimal knowledge.
This is not intended to be combative but there has been some
mison this thread. (I’m a vet too James and God bless
you for your service.)

Our (USA) Second Amendment identifies the individual citizen’s right
to keep and bear arms, not as a privilege but as an innate right
protected by the Constitution. It has its history in the English
Common Law, which has its historic basis in court decisions dating
to 1330 AD. As a part of the right to arms was the right to
self-defense and the “castle d.octrine”. Self-defense was not just
OK, but was recognized as the first line of defense and was
considered to be an obligation of the individual to his community,
the basis of discipline in the society.

A wave of redefined liberalism swept across the US (and most of the
Western world) in the 60’s, affecting our entire culture; education,
literature, art, law, etc. It resulted in a questioning of the right
to self-defense (it’s essentially against the law in Great Brittan
now), confusion over the definition on the Second Amendment and major
changes in the castle doctrine, to the degree that in many
jurisdictions one was required to retreat from a threat, even in ones
home.

The tide has changed! The meaning of the Second Amendment has been
clarified, and may be further solidified in the next session of the
Supreme Court; concealed weapon permit systems are now in place in
48 or our 50 states and the castle doctrine is being reinstated and
expanded, I believe there are now 36 states that have taken action.
In general the requirement to retreat is being dropped and the castle
is being defined as your home, car and any place where you are
carrying out your lawful business.

Most of the details are under state and local jurisdictions; whether
and how to obtain permits, the legal definitions of the castle
doctrine, personal responsibilities, etc. Each REALLY needs to know
his own circumstances. There is a compendium of state gun laws
available at, it is now updated through 2006.

Enough for now; In a few days I’ll give you some honest information
on violence, crime, accidents, firearms, self-defense, etc. Much of
the common wisdom is just plain wrong!

My best to all,
Dr. Mac

31

While many have suggested all types of scenerios on this matter and
how to deal with them I think there are several distinctions to be
made in regards to what situation we may be covering here.

The flight solution is certainly the best if faced with an
opportunity for flight that is an absolute end to the threat, but
what if your situation does not offer this option? What if trying to
run away puts you in a more vulnerable position? What do you do if
you are almost positive that the individual threatening you is going
to cause you bodily harm and you have the means and opportunity to
defend yourself?

It is statistically true that someone with a gun has a slim chance of
hitting you with a shot as you are running away, but do you want to
take the chance that you will be one of the few who gets shot?

It is true that in the event that you shoot someone you may have to
face litigation, but would you rather be alive and face a lawsuit or
be dead or maimed?

It is possible that if you draw a gun it could be turned around on
you, but would you rather get shot by your own gun…or with his?
(Point being it doesn’t matter…however you should never draw a gun
unless you plan on immediately using it to incapacitate your
assailant)

Here is another somewhat different but parallel situation. I ask all
women on this forum…If you knew you were about to be raped would
you just let yourself be raped or would you fight? Would you use any
means possible to ensure your bodily safety? I ask all men…What
would you want your wife or girlfriend to do? What would any parent
want their daughter to do?

These are tough questions for a very tough subject. I respect all
opinions on the matter but I think that we need to truly look at the
worst case scenario and ask ourselves how we would deal with it and
make sure that you have a system in place in order to do so whether
you are in your own store, doing a trade show, or simply working in
your studio late at night… The idea that “it could never happen to
me” is avoidance at best. We have a responsibility to ourselves and
our families to be safe and knowledgeable about how to defend
ourselves and how to use the implements of our choice, whether it is
a gun, a knife, martial arts, pepper spray…ect.

My point is to bring to surface the fact that when faced with
imminent harm you will either be harmed or attempt to protect
yourself. At least if you have a protection plan you have the
opportunity to come through, where as if you don’t then you are
leaving yourself to the plans of your assailant. Perhaps his
intention
is not to kill you(or worse) but I am not willing to trust the guy
holding a gun, knife, or meaty bicep in my face that he plans no
eventual harm.

Our intellect is our best initial weapon, but when the situation
calls for raw defense in the face of pure threat what is the best
course of action? The answer is to fight with everything that you
have. Arm yourself with the knowledge and weapons to do so but hope
that you will never have to use it.

Shauna Gilardi

32

First off, I grew up shooting and hunting. I still have grandpa’s
old single barrel 12 ga. - still shootable. I would come home
everyday from school, grab my trusty Remington Model 12 (no, NFS),
which I also still have, and go out rabbit hunting. I never did
military service, or police training, but I know about as much about
guns as most lay-people do. It’s not my place to try to moderate this
thread, but PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PULEEEEEEZE spare us another
recitation of the NRA doctrine. We all know it by heart, we can all
recite it from memory. If one cared to enter into that debate there
would be no end to it. I just don’t think that this thread is the
proper place for it, either. The point of this thread is really not
(in my mind) any sort of debate about the right to bear arms. The
point of it is what people can do to protect and defend themselves on
a personal level, if anything, in a given circumstance, on a
realistic level. I would propose that if people have something
original or useful to say, that that would be appropriate, but just
using it as a soapbox is pretty tiresome…

http://www.donivanandmaggiora.com

33

OK I can’t take anymore of this without putting in my 2 cents worth.

I am picking on no one individual person but on a dangerous
attitude. I call it the Bear defense. ROLL OVER AND PLAY DEAD. It
has worked for some people but by no means all. It is the same
doctrine of give them what they want and hope they don’t hurt you.

How often have you seen security video on the evening news from bank
robberies, min-mart / seven eleven / jewelry store robberies. That
is a great testimony of the deterent capabilities on security
cameras, alarms etc.

By the way how many times have you heard then say that the police
were having to enhance the images to get any details on the
criminal?

Folks the Cameras are great if you have a very good one. Have your
tapes at a remote location, so the robber cannot also take that
evidence with him.

A gun is not the only answer but if you are compitent with you gun
or any other weapon of your choice then you are a fool to not have
it available to you. I don’t care if that weapon is pepper spray,
Taser, or ball bat. You have to know how to handle it fast and
accurately. You also have to be constantly on alert to sings of
trouble before they get out of hand.

There is only one thing that will give you peace of mind in the long
run. You must do what you canpersonally live with after the incident
is finished. If you can live with killing someone then perhaps
lethal solution is for you. If you can’t live with harming someone
in defense or yourself or your employees or family. Choose your own
poison. It is all guess work between you and the criminal,
sometimes, not very often, the one that blinks win but usually it is
the person with the cool head and a plan and can implment that plan
automaticaly that wins. Is that going to be you or is it the
criminal trying to deprive you of a living and perhaps your life.

Enough from me on this. I do find it interesting seeing all the
Ideas that we all have on this attitude towards security. jack

John (Jack) Sexton

34

Here’s a subject I haven’t seen mentioned on this thread: We had a
guy in our shop with a felony conviction (Pot in the 70’s I
think…) He can’t own a gun. What happens if he grabed one of the
guns we had for security & used it against a robber?

35

John,

This isn’t about guns or robbery, but your story about hunting after
school brought back memories. I too would get off the school bus,
grab my whatever-it-was 12 gauge and a bunch of 3" magnums and head
out into the fields (right at the end of the backyard) with my beagle
Sarge. We had everything on the farm behind us, rabbits, squirrels
and pheasants. Those were fun days in the fall.

Brian Corll
Brian Corll, Inc.
1002 East Simpson Street
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055

36

Here in Australia self-defense is treated as a crime; the defender
is no different from the attacker and both must account for their
actions equally. Previous charges and convictions are barred from the
trial. When confronted by an attacker the advice given by the police
is “give up, hand over the goods, offer no resistance”. The robber
has a guaranteed victim.

I was brought up in South Africa and Rhodesia; up till the 1970’s I
recall the opposite. If you had just been robbed, you could well hear
a policeman exclaim, “You say you didn’t resist??.. that means you
actually helped the robber… therefore you aided and abetted in the
robbery. You are an accomplice, not a victim”! Your onus was to
resist a robber by all possible means; robbers could be desperate and
violent.

The laws in the USA seem to be balanced; you have the choice to give
up and comply, or to fight and resist with the legal means to do so.
Unlike Australia, crime statistics in the USA are heading in a
positive direction.

And what if I was robbed today? For fear of legally prejudicing
myself I have to say I have no idea. The robber has the opportunity
to plan in advance and has the element of surprise. What have you
done to prepare for a surprise sneak attack, decoy attack, head-on
violent attack?

A famous motto to remember: “Be prepared”; a less famous quote “The
best weapon is found between your ears”; and a summary from the
writings of Mushashi “With correct mindset and training, a fence post
will serve as your sword; with incorrect mindset or training, your
sword is nothing but a fence post”.

Alastair

37

To continue my thoughts:

The reference for the history of self-defense and the castle
doctrine got lost in the previous posting, it is fascinating reading;
Caplan and Caplan in Vol. 73, Number 4, University of Missouri KC Law
Review (summer 2005).

I have a partially military background, National Guard in the 50’s
and active duty US Army in the 60’s when I was a rather successful
competitive pistol marksman across the Fourth Army Area. I’m not
sure just what “recitation of the NRA doctrine” means, but it sounds
like a purely emotional reaction. I am not interested in trying to
convince anyone what they should do but I am very interested in
helping people understand the truth about firearms, violence and
discipline in our culture. I have 10 grandchildren who give me great
concern about behavior in our society. Sadly, on this subject, the
truth is not often

on national TV news nor in your local newspaper!

Shauna, John, Ray and Alastair, you have all raised very important
points, including the vast difference from one place to another.
This adds emphasis to the fact that everyone MUST know and understand
the laws and regulations under which they live97down to the municipal
level.

There are several widely held, but mythical, opinions that should
NOT be a basis for the very difficult decisions you might make
regarding self-defense. There is extensive government accumulated
data and scholarly analysis by criminologists debunking these myths
as they relate to the US.

  1. Guns in private ownership cause violent crime. Not so. Actually
    the opposite may be the case. In the US, gun ownership has increased
    greatly in the past 30 years during which time the rate of violent
    crime has fallen to its lowest recorded point. In Great Britain,
    Canada, Australia and New Zealand, while gun ownership has been
    severely restricted in the past several years the rate of violence
    has increased dramatically.

  2. The concealed carrying of weapons by law-abiding citizens will
    result in greatly increased violence. Wrong. An incredibly detailed
    study (which included violence data from every county in the US)
    showed that there was a progressive decline in violence in every
    jurisdiction beginning when concealed carry laws were passed.

  3. Guns are rarely used in self-defense against criminal attack.
    Wrong again, but you sure don’t read about it in the paper. Extensive
    evaluation of victimization among the US population has shown that
    somewhere between 1.5 and 3 MILLION episodes of gun use in
    self-defense occur every year, vastly outnumbering the incidence of
    violent attack. In the great majority of these episodes the gun is
    not fired.

  4. If you defend yourself with a gun they’ll just take it away and
    shoot you. This is a really uncommon result, and the data prove it.

I think the critical thing is don’t make an emotional decision based
on the anecdotal incidents that “make the news”. This is too
important and needs the firm basis of facts. And, as has been amply
pointed out, if you choose to arm yourself (legally), for goodness
sake, become competent, get good advise, training and practice. I
pray for safety in orchidland.

Dr. Mac