You always here of some fluke incidents of super-brazen criminals like this...very risky on the part of the mugger...especially if he was bluffing and the gun owner decided to call his bluff.
I remember one such incident that was reported in one of those "dumbest criminals" articles where a guy tried to rob a gun store...
However, I do find the comments in this thread a bit puzzling...
If we evaluated all of the armed robberies that take place, the overwhelming majority of them are still directly against targets who the perpetrator knows to be unarmed.
Yet, a rare fluke instance where the robber knows the victim to be armed occurs, and folks are taking the "told ya so" attitude. Not really grounded in reality if you ask me.
The DOJ actually did a grant-funded study of felonious armed robbers in various states to determine the efficacy of armed civilian as it pertain to deterring the actions of a would-be robber. The prisoners they studied were the career-criminal types who had made a living off of robbing.
The prisoners, studied under a grant from the National Institute of Justice of the U.S. Justice Department, were incarcerated in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada and Oklahoma.
Percentage who avoided a target due to knowing that the target was armed: 74%
Percentage who attempted to find out ahead of time if their potential target might be armed: 81%
The report also went on to say:
In states with widespread gun ownership and tough punishment for gun misuse, criminals surveyed were often unarmed: 54% in Oklahoma, 62% in Georgia, 40% in Maryland, 43% in Missouri, and 35% in Florida. In Massachusetts, however, only 29% of the felon-respondents were unarmed. In that state, it is difficult lawfully to acquire a firearm, and the illegal carrying of a firearm, rather than the criminal misuse of a gun, is subject to the mandatory penalty. The survey data indicate that the criminals' fear of an armed victim relates directly to the severity of the gun laws in the state surveyed. Where gun laws are less restrictive, such as Georgia and Maryland, criminals think twice before running the risk of facing an armed victim; they are much less concerned in Massachusetts.
Fifty-six percent of the felons surveyed agreed that "A criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun;" 74% agreed that "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot."
A 57% majority agreed that "Most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."
...and really, all of this makes perfect sense when you look at it from the criminal's perspective. Obviously, the whole reason a criminal is carrying in the first place is because they're not entirely confident of a successful outcome when attempting their robbery when "the odds are even" so to speak. Most criminals typically want to execute their "mission" when they know they're at a clear position of advantage.
Are there a few criminals who are reckless enough to attempt something on an armed victim?...sure, there will always be some people who are at a 10 on the crazy-meter (thus the kind that still try to attack cops who are openly carrying), however, the vast majority are more opportunistic than they are suicidal/reckless...and thus an armed target is always going to be less desirable than an unarmed one.
