Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 41

Thread: Columbus OH CCer Foils Robbery Attempt

  1. #1
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    This CCer was skilled enough to foil a stick-up. Even got a 2 for 1.

    Good on Mr. Smith. That's what gun carry is for, for those situations.

    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?





    1 Person Shot, 4 Arrested On Northeast Side

    NBC 4
    Police were called to the area of Republic Avenue and Bremen Street on Friday night on a reported shooting involving a robbery.

    By Angie Price

    Updated: January 17, 2010

    COLUMBUS, Ohio – Police were called to the area of Republic Avenue and Bremen Street on Friday night on a reported shooting involving a robbery.

    Reports say Thomas Clark, Larry Smith and Christopher Frasure arranged to meet at Clark’s house so Smith could purchase two television sets and a Play Station.

    Once Frasure and Smith arrived at the agreed-upon location, the suspects jumped Smith and Frasure and attempted to steal their money.

    Smith is a concealed carry permit holder and had his personal weapon with him. Smith was able to obtain his weapon and fire a single shot striking two of his attackers.

    The suspects fled the scene and the victims called police.

    One suspect, 23-year old Thomas Clark was transported to the hospital in critical condition with a gunshot wound to his abdomen. Austin Young, 21, was transported in stable condition with a gunshot wound to the hip.

    Police also arrested 22-year old Tyrone Clark and 23-year old Erick Brown in connection with the robbery.


    http://www2.nbc4i.com/cmh/news/local...st_side/30077/

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

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    This CCer was skilled enough to foil a stick-up. Even got a 2 for 1.

    Good on Mr. Smith. That's what gun carry is for, for those situations.

    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?

    *

    *

    1 Person Shot, 4 Arrested On Northeast Side
    *
    NBC 4
    Police were called to the area of Republic Avenue and Bremen Street on Friday night on a reported shooting involving a robbery.

    By Angie Price

    Updated: January 17, 2010

    COLUMBUS, Ohio – Police were called to the area of Republic Avenue and Bremen Street on Friday night on a reported shooting involving a robbery.

    Reports say Thomas Clark, Larry Smith and Christopher Frasure arranged to meet at Clark’s house so Smith could purchase two television sets and a Play Station.

    Once Frasure and Smith arrived at the agreed-upon location, the suspects jumped Smith and Frasure and attempted to steal their money.*

    Smith is a concealed carry permit holder and had his personal weapon with him.* Smith was able to obtain his weapon and fire a single shot striking two of his attackers.

    The suspects fled the scene and the victims called police.

    One suspect, 23-year old Thomas Clark was transported to the hospital in critical condition with a gunshot wound to his abdomen.* Austin Young, 21, was transported in stable condition with a gunshot wound to the hip.

    Police also arrested 22-year old Tyrone Clark and 23-year old Erick Brown in connection with the robbery.


    http://www2.nbc4i.com/cmh/news/local...st_side/30077/
    Good for the carrier in protecting himself. Correction though, that is two people shot... with one bullet! I am guessing the abdomen wound came first then the hip. Wow, that's penetration for ya. The CCer pulled off an Indiana Jones shot.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    I wonder if he was using ball ammo?

    I'd be interested to learn the specifics of his carry firearm: what ammo, firearm, caliber...

    Not often you hear of a 2-fer that ends up so positively.
    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 aggressionand this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Folsom, , USA
    Posts
    389

    Post imported post

    Yes this is interesting. Courts look at "hollow point" ammo as if you were some sort of renegade. Although hollow point ammo would have saved some poor little girls face if it where in place of the hip (assuming the bullet went through the stomach and then to the other guys hip).

  5. #5
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    Gad I reckon I'd be in real trouble. I carry .40 cal. "Black Talons" as my SD ammo in CC.
    Good on the self defense and good deal he got 2 for one. Almost too bad they'll both survive.
    Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson

  6. #6
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279

    Post imported post

    I carry .40 Ranger "T" series (RA40T) myself. Expensive little do-hickeys, but very very accurate out of my XDm. (It might be the gun, but it really likes the RA40T's) I no longer believe HP's are viewed as "evil" by as many people as you would think. I think the last bastion of Hollow Point "witch burners" are in New Jersey.

    The thing that I like about this article, and that we need to see more of, is the person who fired the weapon openly and plainly referred to as the "victim".

    Finally! Someone who defends themself from a crime called a "victim" instead of "shooter" or "vigilante", and the robbers called "suspects" and "attackers" instead of"victims of self defense".

    Way to go Ms. Angie Price from (gasp) NBC!

  7. #7
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?


    They would've turned tail and got away as fast as they could.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  8. #8
    Regular Member OPS MARINE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    392

    Post imported post

    I have to agree with Mustang...it's almost too bad they survived. At least, however, they'll think about it next time they want to commit a bad act. Stupi asses.
    "Most people respect the badge. Everybody... respects the gun."

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?
    He would've been shot first and DRT...don't you know. :quirky

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558

    Post imported post

    Would have been better if the sob's bleed out.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    Superlite27 wrote:
    I no longer believe HP's are viewed as "evil" by as many people as you would think. I think the last bastion of Hollow Point "witch burners" are in New Jersey.

    The thing that I like about this article, and that we need to see more of, is the person who fired the weapon openly and plainly referred to as the "victim".
    International convention still considers HPs taboo, which is why they're verboten on the battlefield, except in very limited and specially sanctioned usage. I think the premise is that with today's rifles, an FMJ is a definate party pooper, but leaves enough tissue left for a fairly normal life if the recipient survives. HPs would indeed result in higher kill rates, but kill rates cannot be, by international convention dating back nearly 100 years, the goal. The goal is to stop the enemy.

    Kudos to the news crew for the "victim" status.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  12. #12
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    since9 wrote:
    Superlite27 wrote:
    I no longer believe HP's are viewed as "evil" by as many people as you would think. I think the last bastion of Hollow Point "witch burners" are in New Jersey.

    The thing that I like about this article, and that we need to see more of, is the person who fired the weapon openly and plainly referred to as the "victim".
    International convention still considers HPs taboo, which is why they're verboten on the battlefield, except in very limited and specially sanctioned usage. I think the premise is that with today's rifles, an FMJ is a definate party pooper, but leaves enough tissue left for a fairly normal life if the recipient survives. HPs would indeed result in higher kill rates, but kill rates cannot be, by international convention dating back nearly 100 years, the goal. The goal is to stop the enemy.

    Kudos to the news crew for the "victim" status.
    Cite please. I've never seen statistical data to back that up.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  13. #13
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    TechnoWeenie wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?

    They would've turned tail and got away as fast as they could.
    Hmm, probably not. Based on the story, I'm thinking they would have just completed the sale if they had the goods. Or, maybe, they would have made some excuse if they didn't have the stuff. I don't see the motivation for them to run away...

    SpringerXDacp wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?
    He would've been shot first and DRT...don't you know. :quirky
    It doesn't say that the Clarks, Brownor Young had a gun. Shoot Smith...with what?

    OTOH, if Smith was known to be an OCer in advance.....and the Clarks/Brown/Young team really wanted Smith's money.....then the only proper way to rob him would be to do something about either a) Smith's gun, or, b) Smith's ability to deploy his gun.

    Wouldn't make any sense to try to rob an armed man like Smith without disabling him or his gun. Shooting Smith multiple times, especially in the head,would work, of course.

    Or, maybe, just have three guys with guns point them at Smith as he walks in the door...and relieve Smith of his gun....

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    Almost too bad they'll both survive.

    what the hell kind of comment is that? really dude? really?

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Timonium, Maryland, USA
    Posts
    47

    Post imported post

    Yeah. Some of us feel if one is a lowlife loser and risk OTHER'S lives, it wouldn't be a bad thing if they lost theirs!

    Poetic Justice.

    Reminds me of the feeling I got when I heard about some Bleeding Heart Christian who thought the convict found Jesus, so the BHC pardoned him. To show his gratitude the convict killed 4 police officers as they sat in a coffee shop.

    Huckabee. Naivete.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mountain Home, Arkansas, United States
    Posts
    400

    Post imported post

    theschultz wrote:
    Yeah. Some of us feel if one is a lowlife loser and risk OTHER'S lives, it wouldn't be a bad thing if they lost theirs!

    Poetic Justice.

    Reminds me of the feeling I got when I heard about some Bleeding Heart Christian who thought the convict found Jesus, so the BHC pardoned him. To show his gratitude the convict killed 4 police officers as they sat in a coffee shop.

    Huckabee. Naivete.


    First, get your facts strait before you post it makes bashing Christians more believable. He didn't pardon the man.


    Second, look at who istrying to take your rights away in this country before you paint allChristians as bleeding hearts. Health care anyone? (the usual reply will begin in 3,2,1...)

    Back on topic: Wow, I shot two coon out of a tree with one shot. Does that count?

    If he was OC I bet they would have just left him alone. It took three cowards to attack one man and two got shot. Wow.

    Back on topic.


    Don't confuse me with the facts, I have my emotions!

    I guess that's the difference between no crime and "stopping" a crime in progress. I prefer no crime.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705

    Post imported post

    simmonsjoe wrote:
    since9 wrote:
    Superlite27 wrote:
    I no longer believe HP's are viewed as "evil" by as many people as you would think. I think the last bastion of Hollow Point "witch burners" are in New Jersey.

    The thing that I like about this article, and that we need to see more of, is the person who fired the weapon openly and plainly referred to as the "victim".
    International convention still considers HPs taboo, which is why they're verboten on the battlefield, except in very limited and specially sanctioned usage. I think the premise is that with today's rifles, an FMJ is a definate party pooper, but leaves enough tissue left for a fairly normal life if the recipient survives. HPs would indeed result in higher kill rates, but kill rates cannot be, by international convention dating back nearly 100 years, the goal. The goal is to stop the enemy.

    Kudos to the news crew for the "victim" status.
    Cite please. I've never seen statistical data to back that up.
    Definitely good to see the armed defender referred to as "victim" instead of shooter. Very proper and correct.

    As to military action, it is fairly obvious, and considered in planning, that seriously wounding opponents is more effective in many cases than killing them. If they are simply killed, it removes one 'effective.' If they are seriously wounded it removes one effective, and takes time, resources, and other able bodies to care for them, multiplying the effect. It also actually increases the load on supply lines instead of reducing it, etc. A hundred wounded slows the enemy more than a hundred dead.

    It's also a heavier load on the civilian population for a longer time, and brings the effects of the war closer to home - which has propaganda value in making the war unpopular, besides tying up the civilians in caring for recovering wounded instead of aiding the war effort. Wounded also have a correspondingly larger effect on the opponent's economy than dead.

    Statistical data? No. Been too long since I was in the military and 'studied war.' Just think about it, though, and work it through - you'll see it.
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Facimus!

  18. #18
    Regular Member Eeyore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    on the move
    Posts
    558

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    This CCer was skilled enough to foil a stick-up. Even got a 2 for 1.

    Good on Mr. Smith. That's what gun carry is for, for those situations.

    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?
    No indication that the perps were armed. You praise Mr. Smith, but doesn't this violate your precious postulate?
    Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Darby Montana
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    Tomas,

    When I was in the service, and took my firearms training, they never taught us to just wound the enemy. We were taught to shoot for effect. That means killing them. A wounded enemy can still be a deadly enemy. If by their luck they were only wounded and then removed from the battlefield, they were lucky. But shooting to wound was never done on purpose. You shoot to remove the threat. And you keep shooting till the threat is removed. That is how you survive.
    Evil rarely comes in the form of monsters, but rather in the form of relatively normal people who, for reasons of careers, ideology, or desire for society's approval, are indifferent to the human consequences of their actions. Hannah Arendt

  20. #20
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705

    Post imported post

    ridgerunner98570 wrote:
    Tomas,

    When I was in the service, and took my firearms training, they never taught us to just wound the enemy. We were taught to shoot for effect. That means killing them. A wounded enemy can still be a deadly enemy. If by their luck they were only wounded and then removed from the battlefield, they were lucky. But shooting to wound was never done on purpose. You shoot to remove the threat. And you keep shooting till the threat is removed. That is how you survive.
    Absolutely, Ridgerunner. And "unofficially" the view was you never left live enemy behind you...

    The considerations in the above post, though, are not at the grunt-on-the-front-line viewpoint, but at the way-up-the-chain "what if" level.

    With your life on the line you were going to damn well kill the other guy because that is the way you stayed safe.

    The view from the tower, though, wasn't that direct. They looked at the overall effect in large numbers, not the one-on-one, in-your-face problem.

    Their view was if we drop artillery into an area and injure a hundred, the effect on the enemy is greater than if we killed that hundred.

    The guy on the ground, though, did NOT have the freedom to think of it that way.

    (In any case, even though I did study the 'theoretical' stuff a bit, my personal viewpoint on the ground was "shoot it 'til it stops moving.")


    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Facimus!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    24

    Post imported post

    Spongebob wrote:
    *Almost too bad they'll both survive.

    what the hell kind of comment is that? really dude? really?
    What's wrong with it?
    We kill innocent people all the time, perfectly legally.
    What is wrong with removing someone who has proved they are a danger to society?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,415

    Post imported post

    ridgerunner98570 wrote:
    Tomas,

    When I was in the service, and took my firearms training, they never taught us to just wound the enemy. We were taught to shoot for effect. That means killing them. A wounded enemy can still be a deadly enemy. If by their luck they were only wounded and then removed from the battlefield, they were lucky. But shooting to wound was never done on purpose. You shoot to remove the threat. And you keep shooting till the threat is removed. That is how you survive.
    I concur as well. In fact, double-tap is practice.

    War is real. War is cruel.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...
    On "Personal Responsibility just after the previous, in the same exact thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Religion uses is as a tool, they did not create it.
    The wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round.

    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You think that I am ill-equipped...hit me with your best shot Einstein, I am calling you out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Free will is only slightly a conscious exercise...

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    TechnoWeenie wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?


    They would've turned tail and got away as fast as they could.
    Or maybe get hit over the back of the head, money gone, gun(s) and holster(s) gone, ID gone,

    bad guys GONE.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Post imported post

    Mjollnir wrote:
    TechnoWeenie wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    I wonder what would have happened if Smith had been OCing, instead of CCing?


    They would've turned tail and got away as fast as they could.
    Or maybe get hit over the back of the head, money gone, gun(s) and holster(s) gone, ID gone,

    bad guys GONE.
    The url concealedcarry.org is available for purchase. This is opencarry.org.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    craftsman wrote:
    Spongebob wrote:
    Almost too bad they'll both survive.

    what the hell kind of comment is that? really dude? really?
    What's wrong with it?
    We kill innocent people all the time, perfectly legally.
    What is wrong with removing someone who has proved they are a danger to society?
    What's wrong with it is the enmity and selfishness.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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