Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Idaho Barista foils robbery with 9mm Christmas Present...

  1. #1
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    http://www.witn.com/crime/headlines/80474842.html

    Idaho Barista Pulls Shots, Packs Heat, Stops Theft A teen trying to rob an espresso stand in northern Idaho met his match in a gun toting barista. Posted: 9:00 AM Jan 3, 2010

    A teen trying to rob an espresso stand in northern Idaho met his match in a gun toting barista.

    Police say the 17-year-old confronted Sunshine Espresso owner Michelle Cornelson with a gun this past week, demanding all her money.

    Cornelson has been hunting since she was a girl and says she remained calm as a customer pulled up to the other side of her kiosk in Coeur d'Alene, distracting the teen.

    Cornelson quickly whipped out her 9 mm Kel-Tec pistol, which was a Christmas present from her husband. That scared off the teen so Cornelson could call police.

    A sheriff's deputy was nearby after picking up a beverage at the stand and caught the suspect. The teen was later taken to a juvenile detention center.

    (Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    Woot for pistol packing baristas.

    Good for her. Glad it didn't escalate any further.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    Glad to hear that the little punk was caught. Now, if they'll just give him a few years at hard labor, he might straighten his butt up.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Huck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Evanston, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    647

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    Glad to hear that the little punk was caught. Now, if they'll just give him a few years at hard labor, he might straighten his butt up.
    At the least it would probably loosen his butt up!
    "You can teach 'em, but you cant learn 'em."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,040

    Post imported post

    To clarify, it was mentioned in another article that this woman has had her CWP for several years ( I think the other article said seven years).

    New pistol, good habits!

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    "Now, if they'll just give him a few years at hard labor, he might straighten his butt up." -- Task Force 16

    Unfortunately, that's not likely. The odds are that hewillbe out on the street in no time (and back with his POS "associates") and spend the rest of his life in and out of jail as he continues in his life of crime, maybe even eventually killing someone...or several people. Besides, how often do prisons (or being sodomized while in there) really reform/rehabilitate anyone? Hardly ever.

    That's why when an armedcriminal approaches an armed"victim," as soon as a gun/knife/tire-iron/pipe/screwdriver is seen, it's best to kill said criminal right then and there. It's the only real solution, since our "criminal justice system" -- which would more accurately be called the "criminal legal system" -- is ineffective and impotent. That's probably because most Americans don't have the stomach to do what's really necessary and effective in dealing with crime -- killing criminals -- so American justice will always be soft on crime...and drugs, etc..

    Consequently, the onlyREAL danger to criminals nowadays is the armed citzen. Well -- and most unfortunately -- probably only a small # of armed citizens would shoot right up front on seeing a weapon, but at least it's something for the POS out there to fear as they fear nothing else, not even the "armed professionals" -- cops.

    -- John D.
    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    3

    Post imported post

    I love stories with happy endings! Way to go for her!

  8. #8
    Regular Member opusd2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    453

    Post imported post

    I wonder how this story affects the statistics of the antis who want to rid us of our guns? And since the gun was a gift, is it an honest to goodness straw purchase if it was on her wish list?

    Screw the crybabies who say we should only allow the soulless criminals be be armed. Not only was Michelle able to stop a crime from escalating into something brutal, but she did it without firing a shot and utilizing confidence and self control throughout the event. That's admirable and amazing! But unfortunately our little wannabe gangster will probably just rework his act and next time someone will get hurt, chances are it will be someone who doesn't deserve it.

    It's a rotten thing to think and say, but maybe society would have been better off if Michelle would have squeezed that trigger. I'm not sure what to think on that, but another thread brought that idea to mind. All I can safely say I feel is that I am glad she was able to legally defend herself and I hope she doesn't encounter any legal troubles over it.

    Another example of how crime is best stopped at the source; at the event.
    I aim to misbehave

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    I think "society" needs to get pastits deep (but erroneous) belief that ALL human life is "sacred" (which is similar to the "all clutures are equal" BS) -- as if they'd know what a religiousconcept means in increasingly secular America anyway. No, not EVERYONE deserves to live, especially when they assaut/rob/rape/molest/kill others. That WAS understood in most of our history, but too many people today think that's so "uncivilized." So criminals are back out on the street in no time while the victim remains forever dead, maimed or with a lifetime of terrible memories ofsome criminalassault.

    Human life is NOT all "sacred" -- too much of it is worthless crap. But you know, it'sALWAYS been like that.

    So once you get past that -- and see criminals and other assorted low-lifes as garbage -- and not AT ALL to be comparedwith the life of a decent citizen, it's not hard to throw the trash out. After all,thecriminalsknow they're low-life trash, so where's the problem recognizing them as such? Perhaps fears of being called a racist, bigot, homophobe or otherwise "intolerant?" Get over it...who cares what stupid cluless naive people think.

    That's not elitsm, or looking down on the poor, it's just fact (besides, even rich folk can be trash, they just wear more expensive clothes). THEY know what they are and are ready to do WHATEVER to you and yours...it's time their "victim pool" wakes up and treats the losers accordingly.

    -- John D.

    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    cloudcroft wrote:
    Perhaps fears of being called a racist, bigot, homophobe or otherwise "intolerant?" Get over it...who cares what stupid cluless naive people think.

    HA! Yup.

    Anyone who fears being called a racist, bigot, homophobe, or otherwise, intolerant, probably is anyway. As we all should know; thereisn't a group of people in this country that are entirely decent and law abiding. We're just one big family of innocents, screw-ups, and malignant-evil people.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    The defesne attorney of some low-life on trial would love you on the jury...as you're partof the same ilk: An enabler and excuser...and proudly participating in the decline of America.

    Good for you.

    Yup.

    -- John D.

    P.S. There's nothing wrong with being "intolerant" -- it's just what you're "intolerant" about. Most people would be "intolerant" of someone robbing/raping/maiming/mugging/molesting or killing them. But you'd say that's certainly wrong, I mean being "intolerant," right? You really don't think about these things too deeply, do you...just afraid of being called "intolerant." Wow...but certainly you have a veryaverage viewpoint, which is understandablesince you'rea very average person. "Ha, Yup."


    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    cloudcroft wrote:
    The defesne attorney of some low-life on trial would love you on the jury...as you're partof the same ilk: An enabler and excuser...and proudly participating in the decline of America.

    Good for you.

    Yup.

    -- John D.

    P.S. There's nothing wrong with being "intolerant" -- it's just what you're "intolerant" about. Most people would be "intolerant" of someone robbing/raping/maiming/mugging/molesting or killing them. But you'd say that's certainly wrong, I mean being "intolerant," right? You really don't think about these things too deeply, do you...just afraid of being called "intolerant." Wow...but certainly you have a veryaverage viewpoint, which is understandablesince you'rea very average person. "Ha, Yup."


    I don't follow how you get that from my post. I was merely stating that if you believe something, then bloody say it and mean it. Don't worry about being politically correct. I don't see how that would help a defense attorney. I didn't say there was ANYTHING wrong with being intolerant. I am intolerant of all extremists, especially those who choose to infringe on my or any other person's right to life and liberty. At the same time, I am against the Klu Klux Klan, personally, but I'll be damned if I am going support their organization be singled out and prohibited from free speech and assembly.

    There is a difference between being afraid of how someone sees you and practicing or exerting your beliefs. Just don't be afraid to do so.

    If you are what you say you are, then have no fear, the camera's on, the mic's are on, the crowd is here, and they want to know...

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    Okay...then I misintrepreted where you were coming from. I had to guess given the very little you wrote.

    Personally, I tend to elaborate (verbose mode is usually stuck in the "on" positon) partly in order to make myself clear, so there are as few understanding as possible re: where *I* am coming from, what I am saying. Regardless, sometimes people still take it wrongly.

    Anyway, my apologies to you...

    -- John D.
    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    cloudcroft wrote:
    Okay...then I misintrepreted where you were coming from. I had to guess given the very little you wrote.

    Personally, I tend to elaborate (verbose mode is usually stuck in the "on" positon) partly in order to make myself clear, so there are as few understanding as possible re: where *I* am coming from, what I am saying. Regardless, sometimes people stil take it wrongly.

    Anyway, my apologies to you...

    -- John D.
    BAH! No worries, my apologies for not being clear.

    In the mean, time...

    To Hell With Not Being Armed

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    Thanks...and I agree.

    People read about these violent criminal events taking place many times every day, yet still go about unarmed, even unaware of their surroundings for the most part. The proverbial "herd instinct" as they expect/hope a criminal will choose someone else in their vast heard of wildebeests, not them in particular.

    Good luck with that...but I'd want more going for me than hope...or luck.

    -- John D.

    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    I've had a solution to much of this preditory criminal acitivty, that I think would solve everyones concerns.

    Many of the criminals that end up in the prison system are by their very nature PREDETORS.And as predetors, they could be refered to as animals, right?

    Most law abiding citzens of our society would liek to see all teh animals removed from our msits permantantly. Now, I don't about the rest of you but I adhore the idea of house one of these useless animals for life at tax payers expense. Another option is to execute them. Soem folks in our society feel that that solution is just too cruel.

    So I have a better idea. PROJECT ANIMAL ISLAND

    It's actually a penal colony sort of thing, except there are no imenities, infrastructure, or supervision. Take an un-inhabited island in the Pacific Ocean a couple hundred square miles with a surrounding reef. It should be over 500 miles from any other occupied islands, with the exception of a small island with an airstrip for bringing the new residents to the bigger island. This would be the transferance Island, also the home base of a couple of helo gunships and a small fleet of fast surface gun boats (or maybe pull a couple of old WWII DD's out of mothballs) and sufficent crews,that will patrol the surrounding waters of the island and it's reefs (did I mention Shark infested reefs?).

    The "animals" would be flown to the island under heavy guard in C130's, transferred to a ship, which will carry them to the outer boundery of the reef and put over the side in row boats. The new residents will then row themselves ashore on the island with the understanding that if they are cought outside a 2 mile perimiter of the island (we'll let them fish the reefs), their boat will be shot out from under them (by helo-gunship or gun boat)and be left for the sharks to deal with.

    Aside form that boundery rule, the new residents to the island will have no other rules to have to follow. There will be no guards on the island, no supervision, no doctors, no visitors, no cell blocks, totally primative...... just them and what ever rules they might want to come up with themselves.If they want to live like animals, so be it, they canprey on each other for the rest of their lives.

    We can make it co-ed as well. Just sterilze all of them so they can't propagate, before they are deliverd to their new final home.

    This system will solve4 problems. 1)removing them from society permantly with the least expense to tax payers, 2) End executions that the weenies in our society don't like. 3) Possibly make future bad boy wannabes think twice. 4) Reduce the prison population here (also a savings to tax payers).

    So what do you think of my idea?

  17. #17
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    TaskForce 16....

    If I remember correctly, Great Britain basically did this .... We call the Island AUSTRALIA!

    LOL
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    JoeSparky wrote:
    TaskForce 16....

    If I remember correctly, Great Britain basically did this .... We call the Island AUSTRALIA!

    LOL
    Not the same, though. Re-read my version.

    Animal Island would have no conveniences what so ever. No streets, no buildings, no electric, no running water, no telephones/Internet, nothing. Just a tropical island with rain forest and wild animals. The criminals we would send there would have to live off of the land, because there would be no supplies sent to them. They'll have to find what they need to survive on the island.

    There would be no laws forbidding them from stealing from each other, or killing one another. They'll have to improvise for weapons.

    I call it "Animal Island" for a reason.

    Australia was a chance to start over for many British convicts. Animal Island will be a final destination, with no reprieve.

  19. #19
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    JoeSparky wrote:
    TaskForce 16....

    If I remember correctly, Great Britain basically did this .... We call the Island AUSTRALIA!

    LOL
    Not the same, though. Re-read my version.

    Animal Island would have no conveniences what so ever. No streets, no buildings, no electric, no running water, no telephones/Internet, nothing. Just a tropical island with rain forest and wild animals. The criminals we would send there would have to live off of the land, because there would be no supplies sent to them. They'll have to find what they need to survive on the island.

    There would be no laws forbidding them from stealing from each other, or killing one another. They'll have to improvise for weapons.

    I call it "Animal Island" for a reason.

    Australia was a chance to start over for many British convicts. Animal Island will be a final destination, with no reprieve.
    Oh, I understood the differences but couldn't resist just a little jab... LOL

    And your proposal does offer those sent their a NEW START also, just as SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST with rocks, stones, sticks, logs, oars, and row boats as weapons for both defense and offence!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16

    That sounds like a reasonable solution for our crime and prison population problem...except PETA would be all over you for that! But you'd ship THEM over, too, yes? Good! ;-)

    [fantasy mode on]

    The "non-lethal" solution I came up with some years ago -- and also with no reprieve like yours -- was to send them all to Siberia, where the Soviets had those Gulags...a verycold harshplace, where if you caught a rat to eat you were lucky -- in between the timesthe guards were beating you within an inch of your life that is. IIRC, thoseprison camps aren't being used and in sad a state of disrepair, butthere are plenty of unemployed Russians (no longer "Soviets" since the fall of the USSR, and so no longer guaranteed a job) who could use the money...which would also help the local Russian economy.

    So why not "fix" up those old prison camps (which wouldbe done via prisoner forced-labor in true Soviet tradition -- let's start our "American" trash off right away over there, introducing them to a new and exciting foreign culture via building their own crude huts to live in), hire Rssian guards and support staff (support for the guards -- prisoners get jack), ship our trash over to them (in a cargo hold of some rust-bucket tramp steamer of questionable seaworthiness), and said trash can serve their life sentences over in Siberia?

    Yes, for most it would beshort brutal "animalistic"life, but who cares?

    And let's not fail to appreciate that the Russians sure know how to mistreat prisoners (as do the Asians and Arabs...butI digress). There'd be no TVs, no talking even (I like that -- just like Alcatraz, and as it SHOULD be in every American prison today), prisoners would have to be seated in their cells at all times -- when they weren't on chain-gang duty somewhere -- staring at the door...if the guard checked and someone wasn't looking at the door,he'd beremoved and beaten. You know, those nice little psychological touches the Soviets came up with that only enhanced a prisoner's physical hell.

    To me it's a win-win situation: We help employ out-of-work Russians, they get to make some decent money compared to what they ordinarily couldexpectif they found a job paying what the Russian economy would, our trashdoes not experience the death-penalty over HERE (to satisfy the naiveliberals here against it)yetthe likehood the trash would survive long is doubtful.Even if they did, however, they'd havea life sentence and there'd be no such thing as parole for them anyway. And if they escaped in Siberia and the dogs, guards, winters didn't kill them, any Russians living nearby could shoot them on sight and earn a bounty. Especially the Russians who make their living as hunters/trappers (THEY would find our trash stumbling about in the snow I'd expect). And if caught by the guards, the penalty for escaping would be death.

    Frankly, given what THEY would be in for, were I one of them, I'd choose death here than be shipped over there.

    And then there's my plan for "crime and punishment" here -- no outsourcing whatsoever -- and that one is even simpler. The result: Prisons are cleared out for first-time offenders only, crime drops almost overnight, street gangs have to hide under rocks, and problem kids in school would either straighten out or be "escalated" up the "chain-gang opportunity program." There'd be a REAL war on crime, which could be extended into a REAL war on drugs, too.

    If nothing else was ever accomplished in this country, just removing most drugs and most crime wouldhave a HUGE impact on making America a great placeto live and do business in.

    [fantasy mode off]

    Obviously though, we all know that even these non-lethal solutions wouldn't happen, as most "Americans" still can't deal with these "inhumane" measures (as if criminals acted "humanely" in the first place), non-lethal solutions or not. So we continue the same old BS where criminals ply their trade with very little deterrence and no real punishment...whilelots of citizens have gotten, are getting and WILL get maimed/raped/molested/killed because of that. It's disgraceful.

    So all one can do -- and that's almost all of us here, andunlike MOST of America-- is not be an easy victim-waiting-to-happen but rather be armed and ready to deal with our own little personal "war on crime" when/if we ever encounter it -- in a very decisive, violent and permanent way. Yes, violence really DOES solve criminal problems, and they are best solvedpermanently.

    But as I have said, under the present circumstances with our sorry "justice system,"only the armed citizen can give any REAL justice to a criminal...at risk of getting into trouble themselves.

    That's completely upside-down and needs to change.

    -- John D.

    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Near Lapeer (Hadley), Michigan, USA
    Posts
    932

    Post imported post

    opusd2 wrote:
    I wonder how this story affects the statistics of the antis who want to rid us of our guns? And since the gun was a gift, is it an honest to goodness straw purchase if it was on her wish list?
    it is not a straw purchase if you buy a gun for a person who can legally posses it.

    It IS a straw purchase if for instance you purchase a gun for a felon because he is unable to legally purchase one himself.
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (who will watch the watchmen?)

    I am not a lawyer. Nothing in any of posts should be construed as legal advice.

  22. #22
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    lapeer20m wrote:
    opusd2 wrote:
    I wonder how this story affects the statistics of the antis who want to rid us of our guns? And since the gun was a gift, is it an honest to goodness straw purchase if it was on her wish list?
    it is not a straw purchase if you buy a gun for a person who can legally posses it.

    It IS a straw purchase if for instance you purchase a gun for a felon because he is unable to legally purchase one himself.
    Now we just had a long discussion about this in Washington forum, I agree that that should be how it is but the federal form has a box if you are purchasing this for your self or someone else, and the consensus was you will not pass the back ground check if you check for someone else.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  23. #23
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164

    Post imported post

    sudden valley gunner wrote:
    Now we just had a long discussion about this in Washington forum, I agree that that should be how it is but the federal form has a box if you are purchasing this for your self or someone else, and the consensus was you will not pass the back ground check if you check for someone else.
    I have checked that box twice ... both times I was told that when the other person received the gun (they were gifts) to come back and do the "transfer" at the shop so their records would be straight.

    We made it an 'outing' with the people, you know, introduced them to the store owner, completed the paper work, they browsed the cases for a while, handled a few guns, etc.

    IIRC, I did have to supply the name of the person who was going to receive the gun on the background form when I filled it out ... and I believe it asked for the relationship to the person who would ultimately receive the gun. Since they were BIL and DD, I knew they were legal to own a gun.

    My gun store owner did not charge me these two times nor when I had another gun drop shipped for the paperwork, just the original purchase BGC, and on the dropshipped gun, they were more interested in the gun than the paperwork ... it was open the shipping box, pull the gun out, look it over, pass it around, then do the paperwork



    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  24. #24
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338

    Post imported post

    Awesome I am going to paste your post if you don't mind.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •