I would like to think that I could "talk her off the ledge" if time/circumstance permitted. All the while I would have to say that my hand would be on my sidearm and my body between the threat and my loved one(s). But if it came down to myself and/or my loved one(s) or the threat, I would have to do what had to be done and try to "neutralize" the situation.
Recently, I asked myself a similar question. What about that kid who shot a fellow student some 3 blocks from our home a few weeks ago in Martinsville? What if he had headed my way with a gun in his hand? Is it easier to shoot a 15 year old boy than a 12 year old girl, both posing a threat?
This situation depends completely on the circumstances. How exactly is she holding the gun? Is she actually aiming? Or just pointing it in a general direction? Finger on the trigger? Is she scared? Or confident?
I'm pretty confident I could pick up any large object within reach and knock her out with it, I would much rather just hit her with something, than take her life. At 12 years old, there is still time to turn her around, just have to get out of Detroit first.
Edit: Don't get me wrong though, a person with a gun is a person with a gun, and they will be treated as such.
For those that chose any option other than the "act like an adult, faces the adult consequences" let me ask this; would your opinion be different if it were a 12 year old child that happened to be 6' 2" 200+ pounds. I throw this in their because the word child conjures up, well you know a "child" but I've seen a lot of kids that I thought were late teens early twenties and not the pre-teens or early teens that their ages indicated.
I ask this because of a recent incident in which a child of said dimensions was savagely beaten by a "gang" of out of control cops while he was on his way to choir practice after donating a kidney to a homeless person.
My reaction would totally depend on the situation and what other options were available. It would also depend on the age/size of the perpetrator. As the article notes, the store owner was able to disarm her, so she obviously wasn't completely prepared or intending to pull the trigger. In this case, I'm very glad that outcome was possible.
It might sound a bit naive of me, and it certainly goes against standard gun-board bravado, but I have a hard time believing any mature adult would resort to using a firearm against an armed child before trying other options... And at 12/13, they are still very much children.
If we're talking 16-year-old gang-bangers or meth heads? My pool of "alternative options" shrinks significantly. They're bigger, more physically coordinated and more prone to following through with violent action.
But assuming this girl was of average size and average cognitive ability for a 6th or 7th grader... I'm going to do everything I can to get the gun without shooting her.
When the 12 year old decides to steal a gun, and use it in a threatening manner, they have crossed the line into adult consequence land. I or my family will not be killed by some snot-nose punk that thinks they are hard because they got a gun. Plain and simple!
Killing a child would twist most peoples psyche. Some past the point of defending themselves. But choosing between a strangers child and the well being of MY family. . . . . I'm gonna hope the Darwin award goes to her house for being wrong and not mine for hesitating about whether she was wrong enough to shoot. Gonna be a slow OODA loop 'cause "D" may take a full second.
Same rules for her as for any other armed robbery. Unless I (or another person) is in immediate danger of being physically harmed, I would stand back and be a good witness. Cross the line and make me feel that you are going to physically harm someone, and its go time...
This. I've heard stories far too many times from guys who nearly shot kids who were holding toy rifles, let alone real ones. I imagine a lot of children have been saved by the split second that a manual safety adds to the OODA loop. I imagine plenty of soldiers have died because of it, too.