Confirmed attempted guns snatch! On a concealed carrier!

[stealthyeliminator]

Shannon Watts is apparently upset that the batterer was arrested. On Twitter She referenced the arrest and then followed with a seemingly sarcastic "Because America" http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/21/anti-gun-leader-upset-police-followed-the-law/ Keep the tweets flowing, Shannon, you're doing wonderful.

 

[Bikenut]

What evidence have you that this had anything to do with CC?

-snip-
By the way... the guy who was assaulted was CCing....

Vigilante arrested for tackling licensed gunowner in Florida Wal-Mart

Deputies in West Florida arrested a 43-year-old man Tuesday after he tackled a man carrying a concealed weapon in Wal-Mart.
-snip-
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...or-tackling-licensed-gunowner-/#ixzz3PU35XiRX
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Given your history, I consider it inappropriate to take any pleasure in a crime being committed against a person lawfully carrying a gun.

Given my history? Personal attack?

And I hear very few actually attacking OCers or claiming that they will be taken out first. Those rare few who do tend to be very vocal. But they are rare. Most objections to OC come not to those who carry in a holster, but in response to incidents such as occurred in the Washington Senate gallery where we had either very poor muzzle control or some deliberate effort to paint others, insertion of magazines, and operating of slides/charging bolts.

Just because you personally have only heard a few attacking OCing doesn't mean there hasn't been a lot of folks attacking OCers using the tired old "they will be taken out first" thing. Stick around on gun forums and you will find a plethora of postings from folks who say the OCer will be taken out first.


I did NOT label long gun carry provocative. I referred to when long guns are carried in a provocative manner. Hand guns can be carried in a provocative manner as well, but rarely if ever see that as there seems to be near universal agreement that a handgun, in hand, is not appropriate in public. But some, such as yourself, seem intent to apply a very different, lower standard of conduct to what constitutes proper and safe carrying of long guns in public.

And again you reference long guns when the discussion isn't about long guns..... unless you want to use my position on carrying long guns as a means to attack my postings.

I bring up long guns because of what I see as your hypocrisy in defending the most provocative of carry modes for long guns (again, not all long gun OC is provocative, but some conduct certainly is) with strident language about how nobody should judge how anyone else carries, and then you turn around and "tease" about concealed carry. That kind of hypocrisy needs to be corrected.

A teasing needs to be corrected? LOL! And thank you for proving that you don't want to talk about the incident but you want to use the discussion as a means to attack me. But what does that have to do with a CCer being attacked because of his gun?


That would be great. You'll note my snide remarks were made only in response to a couple of folks who felt free to "tease" about CC. I will happily accept disagreement on the proper way to carry from anyone who accepts that there are proper and improper ways to carry.

Pray tell who gets to decide what is proper and improper?

From any who stridently defend carrying long guns in hand, or racking slides in public, or having zero muzzle control, etc, I consider any judgement against any lawful carry method as hypocrisy worthy of correcting.

Again with the long guns. Are you saying that I've advocated carrying long guns in hand, racking slides in public, having zero muzzle control, or whatever that "etc" represents? Got cites and/or links to my having said that?

Again...what exactly does the incident of a concealed pistol carrier being attacked have anything to do with long guns?

Now, what is there left to discuss of this event itself? The need for better SA? Check. The benefits of some training on hand-to-hand techniques? Sure thing. Benefits of a retention holster even if you believe you are concealing? Quite possibly?

Did I miss anything?

Charles

Some of my responses are within the above quoted post in blue ...

Yes Charles... I do believe you did miss something... it is glaringly apparent it is you who is trying to pick a fight.

 

[MSG Laigaie]

What's this? A concealed carrier attacked because of his gun? A concealed carrier got "taken out first"?

Say it isn't so!!!

Now where is that gentleman who repeatedly told us all that he could "draw faster from concealed"?

Maybe he loves guns but believes anyone concealing is up to no good, that the only proper way to carry is to OC for all the world to clearly see.

If the instigator was upset about a black man concealing a weapon, imagine his response to a black man open carrying. I do not think it would have been pretty.

On the underlined, This should be the "proper" method of carry. More honest in my opine.


I am at the halfway point in my life, I am about to be sixty-five. If you could get close enough to me to attempt a "grab" like this I would have to defend myself. In unarmed, close up and personal combat, I will go for your throat. In this case, he did not have that option. Second up would be a bit lower and more glandular. Grab tight and crush. You will be released and at that time have better options.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

"The report said Mr. Foster did not call 911 until he tackled the man."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/21/vigilante-arrested-for-tackling-licensed-gunowner-/

Well dang, there goes his only excuse in my book. I missed that.

I'm having trouble picturing someone who's just tackled a MWAG and put them in a choke hold saying "Hold on a sec, lemme get my cellphone and punch in 911" and took it as "Hey, someone call 911, this here guys' got a gun!" Letting loose of someone in that situation just doesn't seem likely to have happened.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

Video! http://www.wesh.com/news/man-accused-of-attacking-gun-toting-walmart-customer/30834502

I think, after watching the video, sexual assault may have been a more appropriate charge. I mean, really? REALLY?! "I'm going to detain you now.... BY LAYING ON TOP OF YOU LOLz"

So, who wants to be the first to say that if you saw this happening you'd question the reason for one civilian's detention of another and demand release as soon as an invalid reason was given? *raises own hand* I do.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Oh My! He needs to be taken to the vet and neutered so he does not do that anymore...:uhoh:

 

[utbagpiper]

it is glaringly apparent it is you who is trying to pick a fight.

Then you should demonstrate the wisdom and maturity to avoid it, shouldn't you?

On to your other points:

Given my history? Personal attack?

Only if you consider an accurate recounting of your history of vigorous defense of OCing long guns without regard to public opinion to be a personal attack. I had assumed you were proud of that position. Do correct me if you're having second thoughts given the results in Washington State.

Just because you personally have only heard a few attacking OCing doesn't mean there hasn't been a lot of folks attacking OCers using the tired old "they will be taken out first" thing.

Citations welcome to support your claim of "a lot".

Stick around on gun forums and you will find a plethora of postings from folks who say the OCer will be taken out first.

I've been on this forum for some 8 years, since a couple months after its founding and was on packing dot org before that. I'm currently on a Utah forum ostensibly dedicated to concealed carry. I contend that the number of persons on such forums opposed to OC is relative small. It rarely comes up at all except in response to some irresponsible conduct that someone wants to defend as OC such as happened last week in Washington.

Logically, we both know I can't prove something doesn't exist, so do feel free to show me the "plethora of postings" attacking OC or claiming it leads to gun grabs or being taken out first. Especially when compared to the overwhelming response in defense of OC. I don't believe you can do so on this forum. Maybe you are hanging out on some far less mature and civil discussion groups elsewhere?

And again you reference long guns when the discussion isn't about long guns..... unless you want to use my position on carrying long guns as a means to attack my postings.

A teasing needs to be corrected?

I will leave you to find the definition of "hypocrisy". It seems my explanation of the tie-in of your position on carrying long guns in provocative manners and your "teasing" here, has escaped you.

And thank you for proving that you don't want to talk about the incident

Right back at you. It is clear the closing paragraph in your previous post was simply empty rhetoric.

Pray tell who gets to decide what is proper and improper?

Any and all of the following:

• Apparently anyone who hides his feelings behind "teasings" rather than being fully honest about his view.
  
• Beyond that, I believe we are all free to voice our opinions about what is or isn't proper.
  
• In certain cases, the police, prosecutors, judges, and juries get to decide whether conduct involving the carrying of firearms crossed legal limits from a permitted exercise of rights into criminal conduct involving brandishing, disorderly conduct, disrupting government business, assault, or various other possible charges.
  
• Ultimately, voters and legislators get to decide what is proper as laws are passed, rules are written and enforced, and violators are punished. As much as some folks may want to live in some fantasy world, at some point, public opinion matters.

Are you saying that I've advocated carrying long guns in hand, racking slides in public, having zero muzzle control, or whatever that "etc" represents? Got cites and/or links to my having said that?

Do you really want me to post links to your posts attacking me for taking issue with carrying long guns in hand and otherwise being obvious and even hostile to prevailing public opinion?

Here you go post 84 in which you respond to my prior posts about the black panthers carrying guns into the Cali legislature:

Until you address the '67 Cali Black Panther incident and the 45 year (and counting) aftermath, you're a little premature in declaring any victory over my assertion that a little prudence in how we exercise our rights is better than thoughtless machoism.

...

I want folks to [carry] any way they wish regardless of whether someone else might not like it, doesn't think it is effective, thinks it is counter productive, or thinks it is "thoughtless machoism"............. simply because they have the right to bear the arm they please in any manner they please comporting themselves in any manner they please while saying anything they please. This discussion we are having isn't about the right to bear arms... it is about using furthering the right to bear arms as a vehicle to get other folks to only bear the arms that are considered "reasonable", in a way that is considered "appropriate", while behaving in a manner considered "acceptable" .

Anyone remotely familiar with the Black Panther incident knows they carried rifles in hand. And you defended them doing so when in context of discussing that incident you said you "want [them] to [carry] any way they wish...in any manner they please comporting themselves in any manner they please while saying anything they please."

So yes, you did support/advocate (at least through ignorance and a strident demand to never bend some supposed principle to reality) someone carrying their rifle in hand, and arguable inserting magazines and racking slides as well depending on how far we want to take "any way they wish....in any manner they please comporting themselves in any manner they please while saying anything they please."

If you'd like to back away from that position into something more defensible, I'd be pleased.

It was 5 weeks ago you railed on me for daring to suggest that how we carry can cause unwanted political/legal consequences. I know you personally had nothing to do with what happened in Washington. And this is a case where I really hate being right. But dammit, how many bad examples do we need (OCT is devoting some limited resources to damage control rather than to advancing good bills because one moron down there decided he didn't care what anyone thought of his behavior during inter-personal interactions with a legislator) before you will concede that some level of discretion is prudent if the goal is to advance RKBA?

If the real goal is to just push boundaries as far as possible for some personal gratification and to heck with the consequences, that is a different story altogether, but a also a very different position to defend publicly.

Charles

 

[FreeInAZ]

Man - I see yet another thread lock coming... Seems to be the objective of some gregarious posters ...

 

[Bikenut]

For the record...

I do firmly believe that the right to bear arms means exactly that. All people(s) have the right to bear any arm they wish in any manner they wish.

I also believe there should be legal penalties for those who use the arms they are bearing to cause harm.

Anything that involves restricting that right to bear arms is either an infringement by the government for the purpose of controlling the populace or an attempt by individuals/society to force others to adhere to some standard of conduct (generally using personal opinion, personal fears, and/or personal agenda as the standard).

After all.... if bearing arms is restricted to only the arms that people think are Ok carried in ways and places people think is Ok only by the folks that people think should be allowed then we do not have the right to bear arms but only have the privilege that is controlled by what other people think is Ok.

And henceforth my contributions to this discussion will be limited to the actual topic of the incident involved where a concealed carrier (not an open carrier) was targeted and attacked because of his concealed firearm.

 

[Bikenut]

The attacker was very lucky the older gentleman didn't decide to gouge out an eye or pull off an ear.

 

[OC for ME]

Never said that was what I paid- just posted the link because it had the best pictures. A little judicious inter-net shopping and it can be found for considerably less, I didn't pay near $90 for it. I would have to see the knife (please post link) before I would stake my life on a $10 knife any more than I would stake my life on a $100 gun.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#...er+Series+FD+Firefighter+Pocket+Knife&spell=1

6 bucks plus tax @ Wallyworld. I have a few that are almost 10 bucks.

 

[Bikenut]

Originally Posted by Bikenut

it is glaringly apparent it is you who is trying to pick a fight.

Then you should demonstrate the wisdom and maturity to avoid it, shouldn't you?-snip-
Charles

I know I said I would limit my responses to the original topic but I cannot let this attempt to put the onus on me to avoid a fight that you are trying to instigate pass without pointing out the foolishness of your statement. Wisdom and maturity indeed.

And with that....

I apologize to all other posters for my part in this waste of time bickering. To Grapeshot I extend my thanks for the patience you have extended.

Done.

 

[twoskinsonemanns]

Video! http://www.wesh.com/news/man-accused-of-attacking-gun-toting-walmart-customer/30834502

I think, after watching the video, sexual assault may have been a more appropriate charge. I mean, really? REALLY?! "I'm going to detain you now.... BY LAYING ON TOP OF YOU LOLz"

So, who wants to be the first to say that if you saw this happening you'd question the reason for one civilian's detention of another and demand release as soon as an invalid reason was given? *raises own hand* I do.

I am quite curious myself as to what I would do in that situation.
#1 Verbally try to convince the attacker to cease the attack?
#2 Physically try to stop the attack?
#3 Use the convenient diversion to go to the front of the check out line?

I'll have to ponder it a bit.

 

[rickyray9]

Nevadans should be aware of NRS 199.310 if this happens to them. Malicious prosecution is a serious offense here.

 

[MAC702]

Nevadans should be aware of NRS 199.310 if this happens to them. Malicious prosecution is a serious offense here.

Malicious prosecution.  A person who maliciously and without probable cause therefor, causes or attempts to cause another person to be arrested or proceeded against for any crime of which that person is innocent:
1.  If the crime is a felony, is guilty of a category D felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130; and
2.  If the crime is a gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

I hadn't thought of this one. Carrying a concealed weapon without a permit is a felony (assume same in Florida) so attempting to have someone wrongly arrested for it would give you a felony yourself. Good find.

Okay, so I finally just watched the video. Or at least the first half. I think the "funny" part is how many shoppers are pushing their carts right past a struggle with a "MAN WITH A GUN!"

 

[WalkingWolf]

I hadn't thought of this one. Is a chokehold considered an arrest?

He should be charged with sexual assault, looked like he was trying to hump him, and there has been a trend of charging sexual assaulter with kidnapping. IMO it certainly was kidnapping.

Okay, so I finally just watched the video. Or at least the first half. I think the "funny" part is how many shoppers are pushing their carts right past a struggle with a "MAN WITH A GUN!"

Those would be the non hoplophobes.

 

[sraacke]

After scrolling through this thread I get the impression that most of the readers who saw the headline or printed story don't have a clear undestanding of what happened. This wasn't a case of a CCer casually shopping when a nutball walked up behind him and wrapped a arm around his neck resulting in the two of them having a arguement about whether or not the CCer had a permit.

Take minute to go over to http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2015/01/20/shopper-tackles-man-with-gun-at-wal-mart/22067325/ .
Watch The Video. Stop it. Rewind. Watch it again.
The CCer was just walking in to the store when the "Hero" runs up behind him and grabs the CCer by the side of the head. The "hero" then shoves the CCer sideways tripping him, spinning him around and down to the ground and falls with him. The "hero" then quickly crawls over to the CCer and puts him into a headlock and grabs the gun in the holster. Within about 10 seconds of them being on the floor struggling over the gun others join in. You see a guy in shorts (store security or a bystander maybe?? ) join in the wrestling match. Then another person in a blue long sleeve shirt runs up and they get the gun away from him and hand it off to another person (the guy in the stripped shirt). The guy in the stripped shirt then hands the gun to another guy wearing a white shirt.
The attack was swift and immediately went to the floor. There was maybe a 3 second window where the CCer was on his back and rolled over to his knees and faced his attacker. The CCer could have drawn his pistol and fired but instead he hesitated and ended up in a headlock on the ground pinned by the "hero" and others who came to assist the "hero".
WATCH THE VIDEO. Then we can all have a more informed discussion and we can use this as a proper learning/teaching experiance.
Let's break this video down and discuss what went right and what went wrong. Let's refrain from What If'ing or I Would Have and see where a legally armed citizen may have been able to change the outcome of this attack through training and better situational awareness.
Let's not use this to bash CCers in general. For the purpose of this discussion let's just accept that the "hero" knew the CCer was armed because he caught a glimpse of the pistol. So the victim can be either CCing or OCing.
AFTER WATCHING THE VIDEO do you think the CCer made a good effort to retain his firearm?
AFTER WATCHING THE VIDEO do you think the CCer had any opportunity to draw his pistol and fire on the "hero"?
AFTER WATCHING THE VIDEO do you think that the CCer would have been able to hold on to his pistol if he had access to a second weapon such as a knife, a canister of pepper spray or even a second/backup gun?
AFTER WATCHING THE VIDEO are you rethinking how you carry your daily carry gun?
AFTER WATCHING THE VIDEO are you considering carrying a second weapon such as a knife or backup firearm?

 

[Adrich86]

On an interesting side note. The attacker/would be hero Michael Foster got in trouble for operating a motorcycle w/o a license last month. He was also baker acted the following day after attacking Mr. Daniels according to his arrest report. Wonder if he was feeling down and decided to try suicide by CC"er when he saw the gun. Or his liberal mind just couldn't compute that it's legal to carry a gun and it's a crime to run up and assault people. I would have love to seen the look on his face when the deputies told him he was under arrest for battery. I can see it now. But...but...the other guy had a gun, I was trying to save lives and ****.

 

[F350]

Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
Never said that was what I paid- just posted the link because it had the best pictures. A little judicious inter-net shopping and it can be found for considerably less, I didn't pay near $90 for it. I would have to see the knife (please post link) before I would stake my life on a $10 knife any more than I would stake my life on a $100 gun.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#...er+Series+FD+Firefighter+Pocket+Knife&spell=1

6 bucks plus tax @ Wallyworld. I have a few that are almost 10 bucks.

Ad does not say what type of steel other than "stainless". How thick is the blade at the back? Also what type of blade lock do they have? How solid is the hinge, is there flex? Is the handle more than just synthetic outer scales? (M16-14ZSF-super rigid InterFrame build with 420J2 stainless steel liners, threaded stainless steel back spacers, and Desert Camo pattern glass filled nylon scales).

I have seen many cheap knives that look good but won't take or hold a decent edge, in Iraq several of the Marines I worked with were transferring from a communications unit to an Afghanistan combat unit. They had purchased "K-Bars" at the PX and I offered to sharpen them for the guys. I had a 10" whetstone and a couple crock stick type sharpeners in including a Spyderco Sharpmaker. I could not get a shaving edge on any of the knives, I got a good point but the edges just would not shave no matter what I tried.

I'll stick with my $50 CRKT with a AUS 8 stainless steel blade; thank you just the same.

 

[cloudcroft]

"I am quite curious myself as to what I would do in that situation. "-- twoskinsonemanns


WHATEVER you decide to do, do NOT go to the Sporting Goods department, pick up a BB/pellet gun and walk around with it...

;-)