Customer At Internet Cafe Shoots 2 Robbers

Ocala.com also has an interview with one of the robbers, Duwayne Henderson. In it, Henderson describes the robbery from his perspective:
“I feel horrible. It doesn’t feel good. It makes you think about life’s decisions, and how you should live your life,” Henderson said in an interview with the Star-Banner at the jail on Saturday afternoon.

Wow, nice form, Gramps.

Here is another nice RIGHTS article about this and the police shooting of the FL citizen from Karl Denninger's "Market Ticker"

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=208811

An excerpt:

"Florida, and indeed the rest of the country, should adopt not just "must-issue" concealed carry but rather Constitutional Carry.

The clause in the Second Amendment is very clear: shall not be infringed. If I wish to carry a firearm, openly or concealed, I have the constitutionally-protected right to do so. Note that the Constitution doesn't give me that right, it protects it. I have that right as a consequence of the unalienable right to life and liberty, which are not the government's to give. If someone intends to take either from me by force I have the right to resist."

Kromwell said:

...He kept his cool...He seemed to have total situational awareness, of the other patrons, as he fired at the robbers...

Click to expand...

The adrenalin dump in your brain in a life and death situation can make it easier than you'd think to maintain situational awareness. Things that your brain perceives as important it will immediately decide you need to take action on. Issues which aren't important get excluded from being noticed. But even then, you'll only be as good as you've practiced, so it's a good thing this guy knew what he was doing.

The way he kept steady, that indicates he'd been in situations like this before. Police, military, or simunitions practice in all likelihood. He exhibited symptoms of having been "inoculated" as Dave Grossman puts it when referring to what simunitions will do for you. In other words, the ability to stay that calm and concise in life or death situations can only happen with hard earned experience, and it looks like he had it prior to this.

I'd feel horrible too if I got shot in the buttocks.

Let me guess, he was in the process of turning his life around and got persuaded to do wrong, just one more time, for old times sake.

Just think of how this guy could have altered the outcome of the movie theater shooting in Colorado this morning.

Makes me ANGRY, these stupid No-Guns policies get people KILLED.

TFred

TFred said:

Just think of how this guy could have altered the outcome of the movie theater shooting in Colorado this morning.

Makes me ANGRY, these stupid No-Guns policies get people KILLED.

TFred

Click to expand...

I've been wondering the same...

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk 2

TFred said:

Unless Florida state law prohibits it, I bet the guy shot in the butt sues the shooter.

Shooter will have to claim he was trying to stop a fleeing felon.

TFred

Click to expand...

Won't happen. Here in Fl we have laws to protect someone who has to shoot in self defense from civil action.:banana:

I just like the fact that he chased them out of the store still shooting

scott58dh said:

DITTO !!! Anyone who thinks otherwise should mull this over.

There are Lots of scenarios to consider, however, IMHO, think of the obvious.

Who's to say that IF he only discharged his firearm, let's say 3 rounds, the dudes run out, then come back in with reinforcements = other BG's, Scatter Gun &/or Whatever you can imagine.

The Gentleman made the Right decision by being of the mindset to be on the DEFENSIVE Assault until the Threat was Eliminated.

He was obviously prepared to SYG.

Peace !

Click to expand...

IMO a better way to deliver the message is "until the threat is stopped."

"Eliminate" has other connotations that are not so desirable. I do recognize that what you intended was the elimination of the threat (action) specifically, not the person.

dudeman351 said:

Won't happen. Here in Fl we have laws to protect someone who has to shoot in self defense from civil action.:banana:

Click to expand...

I get it and I entirely support the armed citizen, but my point is that it's easy to make the case that a guy running away from you as fast as he can is not a threat to your life, which ends your justification for using deadly force. That's all.

TFred

TFred said:

I get it and I entirely support the armed citizen, but my point is that it's easy to make the case that a guy running away from you as fast as he can is not a threat to your life, which ends your justification for using deadly force. That's all.

TFred

Click to expand...

Arguably there is the threat of great bodily harm or death to others, thereby keeping the door open to justifiable or excusable.

Even if a bg is running away from you, as long as he has a gun in his hand he is still a threat. Even if bg falls down, as long as he has the gun in his hand, he is a threat.

While running out of the business, he could have turned and shot the man shooting at him or even shot someone that was in or beside his path.

When he fell down, he could have shot from the ground.

I do not see any reasonable person in the world that would say this man did not do the right thing by running these two pieces of $&*! totally out the door by firing as many times as he had too.

i guess the pavement and criminals turning their back to you are now considered "safe zones". "ooh cant shoot me im in my safe zone!" says the robber.

i cannot remember the modification made to Missouri Justification of Defense, like the accusing party (criminal) will have to pay for your lawyer or something like that...i dont remember.


during a self defense situation like this, it remonds me of a damn football game. this **** happens in split seconds but damn everyone is more than ready to spend a week reviewing the play from the sidelines