Woodbridge VA Armed citizen (clerk) defends himself with Glock

OK, this is a CC story, so it's not quite on-topic here, but its local to the DC area. Lucky for this clerk he was working in VA. Had he been working in MD or DC, he would likely have ended up dead...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duVPOR4BKeU&feature=sub

Dreamer said:

OK, this is a CC story, so it's not quite on-topic here, but its local to the DC area. Lucky for this clerk he was working in VA. Had he been working in MD or DC, he would likely have ended up dead...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duVPOR4BKeU&feature=sub

Click to expand...

Actually I think THERE IS AN "OC" angle to this incident. Had the clerk NOT BEEN CONCEALING as he walked from the store to his vehicle - WOULD HE HAVE BEEN TARGETED AT ALL ? I think not.

EVEN IN TEXAS - that clerk would not have been required to conceal from premises UNDER HIS CONTROL in a direct route to his vehicle. Whether others IN TEXAS accept this opinion - or not. If I were working at a C-Store I would most definitely display when in route to my vehicle at night. Question ofcourse remains - would BG's have seen handgun at night ?

They knew he was in the right, and took his weapon "for tests" anyway...

sultan62 said:

They knew he was in the right, and took his weapon "for tests" anyway...

Click to expand...

I would go on the assumption that because the victim stated " He didn't think he missed" is they need spent rounds to compare with if they find the perps. Help speed up the investigation. With that being said. He probably will need a lawyer to get his weapon back & it won't be anytime soon.
I try not to be a conspiracy theorist every time.

rushcreek2 said:

Actually I think THERE IS AN "OC" angle to this incident. Had the clerk NOT BEEN CONCEALING as he walked from the store to his vehicle - WOULD HE HAVE BEEN TARGETED AT ALL ? I think not.

EVEN IN TEXAS - that clerk would not have been required to conceal from premises UNDER HIS CONTROL in a direct route to his vehicle. Whether others IN TEXAS accept this opinion - or not. If I were working at a C-Store I would most definitely display when in route to my vehicle at night. Question ofcourse remains - would BG's have seen handgun at night ?

Click to expand...

at the same time OCing could scare away a potential attacker, i think it could also encourage a potential attacker to target you because right off the bat he sees something on your hip thats worth a lot of money, and something that he also needs to keep his robbing career up to par, a deadly weapon. So he sees you with a gun... is that going to scare him off or just sweeten the pot a bit for him?

I think if someone were to run into a store in a rush in order to get in, rob, then get out then he would be surprised by seeing a firearm and it might just put him off his game enough to make him reconsider.

But at the same time if someone looking to rob you sees you walking alone to your car and he planned on running up behind you and shooting you or tasing you anyway, theres a good chance he will just look at your gun as another chunk of change to get his hands on.... thats how i look at it anyway

Claytron said:

at the same time OCing could scare away a potential attacker, i think it could also encourage a potential attacker to target you because right off the bat he sees something on your hip thats worth a lot of money, and something that he also needs to keep his robbing career up to par, a deadly weapon. So he sees you with a gun... is that going to scare him off or just sweeten the pot a bit for him?

I think if someone were to run into a store in a rush in order to get in, rob, then get out then he would be surprised by seeing a firearm and it might just put him off his game enough to make him reconsider.

But at the same time if someone looking to rob you sees you walking alone to your car and he planned on running up behind you and shooting you or tasing you anyway, theres a good chance he will just look at your gun as another chunk of change to get his hands on.... thats how i look at it anyway

Click to expand...

Has this ever happened? You would think there would be a news story or something.

Claytron said:

at the same time OCing could scare away a potential attacker, i think it could also encourage a potential attacker to target you because right off the bat he sees something on your hip thats worth a lot of money, and something that he also needs to keep his robbing career up to par, a deadly weapon. So he sees you with a gun... is that going to scare him off or just sweeten the pot a bit for him?

I think if someone were to run into a store in a rush in order to get in, rob, then get out then he would be surprised by seeing a firearm and it might just put him off his game enough to make him reconsider.

But at the same time if someone looking to rob you sees you walking alone to your car and he planned on running up behind you and shooting you or tasing you anyway, theres a good chance he will just look at your gun as another chunk of change to get his hands on.... thats how i look at it anyway

Click to expand...

Got any links to verified stories of this actually happening? This hyperbole (in various forms) is waved around frequently, but nobody has ever actually posted a legit story of someone targeted specifically because they were openly carrying a firearm. If someone really wants to shoot/tase/rob you, how would NOT having a gun on your hip improve your chances?

And if you're worried about someone "running up behind you and shooting you or tasing you", then you should be paying attention to your surroundings (AKA "situational awareness").

4angrybadgers said:

Got any links to verified stories of this actually happening? This hyperbole (in various forms) is waved around frequently, but nobody has ever actually posted a legit story of someone targeted specifically because they were openly carrying a firearm. If someone really wants to shoot/tase/rob you, how would NOT having a gun on your hip improve your chances?

And if you're worried about someone "running up behind you and shooting you or tasing you", then you should be paying attention to your surroundings (AKA "situational awareness").

Click to expand...

Well in the real world where you can be theoretically be attacked from any angle at anytime, its hard to always be 100% on top of things. In case you didnt watch the video in this thread the guy who was attacked DID have someone "run up behind him and tase him" and he didnt sound like a dope, he just got surprised on one of any given normal nights.

You asked how not having a gun on your hip could improve your chances of not being shot... One situation could be where a potential mugger spots you and you are wearing sweat pants, a crappy windbreak and a beat up pair of Payless brand shoes, you wouldnt make that great of a target... until you turn and the mugger sees a shiny new looking 45 on your hip.

People asked me for links to "verify" that people had been targeted for OCing but i didnt claim it had happened, i said "I think..." a few times because its all just my opinion on how it could happen. There was recently a story about a guy who was seemingly targeted because he was OCing, someone saw his pistol and came up behind him with their own gun and robbed him of his -

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/play/1506862/open_carry_gun_enthusiast_robbed_at_gunpoint

The man even believes it was his openly carried pistol that made him a target.

that being said at this point i dont know which method is better and maybe neither is, both seem to have their ups and downs.

Well there you have it. One news story about an armed robbery where the reporter says the unknown open carrier says he thinks he was robbed because he open carried a gun. Now he's a concealed carry advocate, and most assuredly would not have been robbed if he had been unarmed, or had been concealed carrying.

Or even worse he could have been targeted and shot in the head and been dead. So this person did what he had to do and the person that posted this in open carry forum was also correct. The bottom line is that it has to do with defending yourself from some prep whether concealed or open carry. No disrespect to anyone but we are here for one reason and that is to make sure that the GOV'T don't violate our second admendmet.

Claytron said:

Well in the real world where you can be theoretically be attacked from any angle at anytime, its hard to always be 100% on top of things. In case you didnt watch the video in this thread the guy who was attacked DID have someone "run up behind him and tase him" and he didnt sound like a dope, he just got surprised on one of any given normal nights.

You asked how not having a gun on your hip could improve your chances of not being shot... One situation could be where a potential mugger spots you and you are wearing sweat pants, a crappy windbreak and a beat up pair of Payless brand shoes, you wouldnt make that great of a target... until you turn and the mugger sees a shiny new looking 45 on your hip.

People asked me for links to "verify" that people had been targeted for OCing but i didnt claim it had happened, i said "I think..." a few times because its all just my opinion on how it could happen. There was recently a story about a guy who was seemingly targeted because he was OCing, someone saw his pistol and came up behind him with their own gun and robbed him of his -

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/play/1506862/open_carry_gun_enthusiast_robbed_at_gunpoint

The man even believes it was his openly carried pistol that made him a target.

that being said at this point i dont know which method is better and maybe neither is, both seem to have their ups and downs.

Click to expand...

I remember that story being discussed months ago, and I seem to recall some doubt as to whether he was really targeted because of OC, or it was just a coincidence.

But for the sake of discussion, we'll say he was indeed targeted specifically because he was OCing. That's one, ONE incident, out of tens of thousands, maybe more, openly carrying firearms for a sum total of decades across the U.S., with no such incidents.

We have the same number, maybe more, of verified stories stating that a crime was averted because someone was OCing (http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-atlanta/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw was the most recent one I can think of). If that feller had been CCing, he would have had zero effect on preventing a crime. I'm sure you can find other examples by perusing the "True Tales" section of OCDO.

To sum it up, the deterrent effect of OC is demonstrably equal or stronger than any supposed danger of being targeted by a criminal because of OC. I'm not going to tell you how to carry - if you want to CC instead of OC, fine. But I ask you not to spread hype about imaginary dangers. The subject has been beaten to death on OCDO.

4angrybadgers said:

I remember that story being discussed months ago, and I seem to recall some doubt as to whether he was really targeted because of OC, or it was just a coincidence.

But for the sake of discussion, we'll say he was indeed targeted specifically because he was OCing. That's one, ONE incident, out of tens of thousands, maybe more, openly carrying firearms for a sum total of decades across the U.S., with no such incidents.

We have the same number, maybe more, of verified stories stating that a crime was averted because someone was OCing (http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-atlanta/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw was the most recent one I can think of). If that feller had been CCing, he would have had zero effect on preventing a crime. I'm sure you can find other examples by perusing the "True Tales" section of OCDO.

To sum it up, the deterrent effect of OC is demonstrably equal or stronger than any supposed danger of being targeted by a criminal because of OC. I'm not going to tell you how to carry - if you want to CC instead of OC, fine. But I ask you not to spread hype about imaginary dangers. The subject has been beaten to death on OCDO.

Click to expand...

So when a guy OCing admits that HE believes he was robbed for OCing theres doubt about whether it actually happened, but your story about how open carrying "could" have prevented a robbery is set in stone fact? Sounds like a double negative to me.

Im not spreading hype. Did you read my first post? If you had read it and subsequently read peoples responses you might have realized that i was linking that story by request from somebody else. You are biased. OCing is your "thing" and you stick up for it, not because you know its better but because you THINK it is and some stubborn people will go to the ends of the earth ebfore admitting they could be wrong.

Im saying that both ways of carrying are good and both have their drawbacks. How many stories of OCing preventing a robbery or crime can you find? You showed me one story compared to my one story, i dont really see how that was supposed to prove anything.

And how can you prove that their havent been people out there who have been shot dead for OCing and then robbed of all their belongings and never even getting identified?

You need to look at the entire situation with an unbiased, open mind and stop acting like OC is the best way to carry just because its your preferred method.

THATS spreading hype my friend.

Claytron said:

So when a guy OCing admits that HE believes he was robbed for OCing theres doubt about whether it actually happened, but your story about how open carrying "could" have prevented a robbery is set in stone fact? Sounds like a double negative to me.

Click to expand...

1) The would-be robbers in the Kennesaw incident themselves said they waited because of the OCing citizens. They're explaining the criminal's mindset - they were the criminals who were deterred by the OCer.
2) The OCer who was robbed at gunpoint only said HE thought the criminal did it because he was OCing. He didn't know for sure why the criminal did it. Did anyone ask the criminal whether that was the reason?

Im not spreading hype. Did you read my first post? If you had read it and subsequently read peoples responses you might have realized that i was linking that story by request from somebody else. You are biased. OCing is your "thing" and you stick up for it, not because you know its better but because you THINK it is and some stubborn people will go to the ends of the earth ebfore admitting they could be wrong.

Click to expand...

No, I "stick up for it" as a valid option of carry. I OC sometimes, CC other times, depending on multiple factors (that aren't worth getting into here). Like I said in my last post, carry as you wish, I certainly won't pick on how someone carries. What I will take issue to is FUD.

Im saying that both ways of carrying are good and both have their drawbacks. How many stories of OCing preventing a robbery or crime can you find? You showed me one story compared to my one story, i dont really see how that was supposed to prove anything.

Click to expand...

I already posted one, and don't have the time to look for more.

And how can you prove that their havent been people out there who have been shot dead for OCing and then robbed of all their belongings and never even getting identified?

Click to expand...

Wow, talk about extreme hyperbole! How can you prove there aren't people who have been shot dead for wearing a red shirt, robbed of all their belongings, and never getting identified? We could go on and on. You can worry about imaginary dangers if you wish, I'll operate on hard, proven facts.

You need to look at the entire situation with an unbiased, open mind and stop acting like OC is the best way to carry just because its your preferred method.

THATS spreading hype my friend.

Click to expand...

When did I say OC was "the best way to carry"? Hint: I didn't. All I did was counter your worry about a situation that, at worst, is rarer than being hit by lightning.

But it's clear by now that you're not interested in discussing facts, and instead have some emotional hold on your little pet theory and a knee-jerk reaction against someone who dares to question it. Good luck with that, I have better things to do than beat my head against a brick wall.

4angrybadgers said:

1) The would-be robbers in the Kennesaw incident themselves said they waited because of the OCing citizens. They're explaining the criminal's mindset - they were the criminals who were deterred by the OCer.
2) The OCer who was robbed at gunpoint only said HE thought the criminal did it because he was OCing. He didn't know for sure why the criminal did it. Did anyone ask the criminal whether that was the reason?

No, I "stick up for it" as a valid option of carry. I OC sometimes, CC other times, depending on multiple factors (that aren't worth getting into here). Like I said in my last post, carry as you wish, I certainly won't pick on how someone carries. What I will take issue to is FUD.

I already posted one, and don't have the time to look for more.

Wow, talk about extreme hyperbole! How can you prove there aren't people who have been shot dead for wearing a red shirt, robbed of all their belongings, and never getting identified? We could go on and on. You can worry about imaginary dangers if you wish, I'll operate on hard, proven facts.

When did I say OC was "the best way to carry"? Hint: I didn't. All I did was counter your worry about a situation that, at worst, is rarer than being hit by lightning.

But it's clear by now that you're not interested in discussing facts, and instead have some emotional hold on your little pet theory and a knee-jerk reaction against someone who dares to question it. Good luck with that, I have better things to do than beat my head against a brick wall.

Click to expand...

Im absolutely interested in discussing facts, im not even sure why you made that comment?

Because in the OC robbery situation the man said he thought he was robbed because he was OCing? Its not a fact because when interviewed he said he "thought" instead of "knew"? And you also consider the criminals statement to prove the "fact" that OCing deters criminals? They didnt say "We were waiting for the open carrying armed citizen to leave".... how do you know they didnt think they were cops? How are you sure it was the idea of being shot by a citizen that deterred them and not the idea of robbing/shooting a cop (bigger penalty) or the idea of the cops being able to radio for backup?

And in the end how the hell does one story suddenly become the end all be all of factual information?

you said there are more stories but you didnt feel like looking them up..... maybe you should have thought about that before you directed a comment towards me AND requested i search up stories for you? Just saying.

Just like some of the other opinionated "pro" forum posters here you come at me acting like i did something wrong just for stating my opinion, which happened to differ from yours. Saying things like "dont spread hype about imaginary dangers" is childish.

If you look at anything ive said as hype and not just someones honest opinion then perhaps you are a little bit too defensive about the issue and maybe banging your head against that wall a few times might knock something back into place.