He lives in seclusion in fear of gang members attacking him.
Additionally, he was shot twice--one of which was nearly fatal. The second time he wounded in the neck was a lucky chance and missed causing serious injury.
Even he states that not everyone could pull off what he did and that his success was due to extensive training.
Passing over that, even though other crims had been killed, there were still attempts on robbing his store. Eventually, the criminals won and he shut up shop.
What do you think, is this guy Lance a hero or a nut?
Are those the only two choices? Isn't there rather a lot of territory between those two extremes?
Regardless, I don't see how he could fairly be described as a "nut." Every shooting was a clear-cut case of self-defense. Surely, Mikeb, even you wouldn't argue that it's "nutty" to defend oneself.
In the interview, he came across as pretty sharp, I thought--warning would-be gunslingers about the foolishness of thinking that having a gun on your hip is in and of itself enough to make you secure against attack.
I would say he is a nutty hero. His acts of defense saved his life, but there was a defiance that kept him in that store on that street. He seemed to anticipate the violence, even before the first robbery.
If he hadn’t, he probably would be dead. If the robbers never entered his store, they would be alive... or wouldn’t have died that night.
How many times does a store get robbed before the city police patrols protect the store owners and their customers?
When I watched the story unfold, I cheered him on, but I think he is a nut and his violence didn’t solve the gang problem in the long run, but it did save his life.
If I owned a business in a neighborhood that was prone to armed robberies, I'd move--unless it was impossible to do so. I'd also make my sales area as secure as possible. Jewelers in places like NYC often have the equivalent of a sally port to make it harder for thieves to do smash and grabs or come in with weapons drawn.
It appears that the owner of the store had a variety of different weapons, both revolvers and semi-auto pistols. I wonder why. I think if i was going to have a bunch of guns stashed around my place of business, they'd all be the same type if not the same weapon.
If, in either instance of his store being robbed the criminals had come in shooting, his guns might have wound up being part of their haul. Now that the criminals (gang members?) know that area merchants are armed they might do just that. It appears that his guns were not enough to protect him, he still closed his business and moved.
Sebastian says he's neither, I say he's both. I was mightily impressed with his fearlessness, that kind of Marine-corps, never-back-down courage many of us grew up thinking was admirable. But, I think it can easily slip over into the nutty stubborn realm. The idea of NEVER allowing the other guy to have control over you is a bit extreme, and based on that extreme principle to arm yourself to the teeth and stay in business in a dangerous area, is going too far.
About the righteousness of the shootings, I had no doubt until the final one. The bad guys were retreating, turned around to fire, and were shot dead. Like so many DGUs, this one sounds like it could have been an unnecessary and excessive response to fleeing criminals about which afterwards the store owners claims was in response to their turning around and attempting to fire at him.
"MikeB, I did watch the whole thing through and what I saw was people using dead kids to further a political agenda that had nothing to do with Virginia Tech and breaking the law in the process. Disgusting.
March 18, 2010 12:38 PM"
And what we see in this video is dead scary black men being used to further someone's agenda. It's terrible that liebral gunhaterz are the only ones who get to use anecdotes and "scare tactics" to further their agenda, just terrible!
. . . this one sounds like it could have been an unnecessary and excessive response to fleeing criminals about which afterwards the store owners claims was in response to their turning around and attempting to fire at him.
Sure, I suppose it could have been--we just have exactly zero evidence that it was (actually, weren't there surveillance cameras in the shop--wouldn't the authorities have had a pretty good idea of how things went down?). That means, of course that we presume Thomas' innocence.
The idea of NEVER allowing the other guy to have control over you is a bit extreme . . .
If, by "extreme," you mean "extreme"-ly smart, we're in full agreement, and I applaud you for recognizing the murderer-enabling evil of advising people to "just give them what they want," when "what they want" might be your life (and now you know where I got the Lance Thomas link.
Democommie says:
And what we see in this video is dead scary black men being used to further someone's agenda.
How characteristically pathetic of you, Democommie, to suddenly turn this into a race issue. The only "agenda" that Thomas "furthered" was his own survival, and I'm pretty confident that he would have "furthered" it just as energetically, had his assailants been white. I would have applauded his skill and courage just as loudly, as well.
If Thomas's agenda was to survive, it sounds as if he came close to failing by being severly wounded. The clip descried his wounds as "nearly fatal".
Had he died, his tombstone would have read: "I was right--Dead but right"
You also neglect that he ended up closing his shop because he feared for his life. Again, the deterrence effect of an armed citizen failed to work and the criminals became more determined.
That leads me to question what is the point that you are trying to make here? Even though I admire Thomas's shooting ability, he failed miserably at keeping the criminals at bay.
If Thomas's agenda was to survive, it sounds as if he came close to failing by being severly wounded. The clip descried his wounds as "nearly fatal".
Regardless, he lived, and indeed seems to have fully recovered from his wounds. In other words, he was exactly 100% successful in his agenda of survival.
You also neglect that he ended up closing his shop because he feared for his life. Again, the deterrence effect of an armed citizen failed to work and the criminals became more determined.
Not sure I agree with the contention that I "neglected" that detail, I just didn't deem it relevant to the conversation about 5 dead scumbag thugs . . . er, I mean socio-economically disadvantaged urban youths who were victims of social injustice, and one wounded and arrested paragon of urban virtue, and the fact that shooting those six young worthies saved his life four times. Yes, he got out of that business, and I can hardly blame him for that, but he stayed in business for a number of years after the first attempted robbery.
Even though I admire Thomas's shooting ability, he failed miserably at keeping the criminals at bay.
Um, five of them are very much "at bay," and society has been improved a little by their removal from it.
The ultimate upshot is that despite the body count, the criminals won.
The surviving criminals could be said to have "won," I suppose, if their objective had been the closure of a watch repair shop. I hadn't thought that was the objective--I thought they wanted money, and maybe to kill Mr. Thomas--neither of which happened. Perhaps you're correct, though, and their motivation was all along rooted in a hatred of timepieces. If so, I must point out, they still have a lot of work to do.
The store closed.
Yes, Mr. Thomas is retired now.
Thomas lives in fear for his life.
When asked if he felt afraid, he shrugged and said, "I feel alive." Doesn't sound so bad--I had the impression that "alive" was how he wanted to feel.
I am glad you are happy with the results.
The "results" are the improvement of the universe, by virtue of the removal of five predatory thugs from it--what's not to like? I'd love to see about 10 million more Lance Thomases in the U.S., and about 50 million more dead thugs.
"How many times does a store get robbed before the city police patrols protect the store owners and their customers?"
The police have no obligation to protect store owners or their customers. The police will more than likely recommend you get private security or arm yourself.
Laci has a good point, the criminals won. Lance is lucky to be alive, if you can call that living.
Of course, some folks feel it's more important to never give in and stand tall in the face of overwhelming odds. But in the end, Lance had to compromise those lofty principles anyway.
If "winning" means forcing a watch repair shop out of business, after years of effort, at the cost of 5 dead, and one wounded and arrested, yeah--they "won." I take it you're one of those sorts who believes in giving trophies to the 19th place (in a 19-man race) "winner," eh?
Lance is lucky to be alive, if you can call that living.
Some might call it "lucky"--I call it skillful and courageous. And yes--I can call his retirement "living"--I call it that easily.
But in the end, Lance had to compromise those lofty principles anyway.
He never gave me the impression that he was guided by lofty moral principles. His refusal to surrender was simply a matter of him refusing to trust his life to the mercy and decency of people who had given him every reason to believe they lacked both. He never backed down from that--he just made it harder for them to find him.
That seems to me to be something for which they ought to be grateful.
I'm an owner of firearms, an NRA member and a shooting sports participant. I'm a violent crime survivor, as is my esteemed spouse, and I take a dim sharp-pointed view of crimes against my person, my property or that of my loved ones.
I'm also a progressive Democrat.
Now. About this blog entry.
"5 dead scumbag thugs . . . er, I mean socio-economically disadvantaged urban youths who were victims of social injustice, and one wounded and arrested paragon of urban virtue . . ."
Zorro, I didn't read anyone here say anything other than that these people were criminals. Don't put words in other people's mouths.
It makes you sound like someone with serious resentment issues, if not a hidden agenda. I'm assured that isn't the case – so why use the rhetoric of resentful bigotted blowhards?
Thomas was not wise to stay so long where he did, and he is lucky to be alive to tell his tale. Perhaps we should leave things at that.
Zorro, I didn't read anyone here say anything other than that these people were criminals. Don't put words in other people's mouths.
Tom, that somewhat sarcastic language on my part was in response to the idiotic and perverse implication in Democommie's comment, that this is somehow a race issue:
And what we see in this video is dead scary black men being used to further someone's agenda.
Tom, Thanks for the comment. You sound like an interesting guy. Of course you make my attempts more difficult to delineate gun owners from non gun owners along the Republican and Democrat line, but that's probably a good thing.
Lance Thomas did not close his shop out of fear, he made A TON OF MONEY, IN THAT STORE AND RETIRED WHEN THE TIME WAS RIGHT,and in the proscess took a lot of bad guys off the street, simple as that,...when asked he would do it all over again, its better to live on your feet then die on your knees...
He lives in seclusion in fear of gang members attacking him.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, he was shot twice--one of which was nearly fatal. The second time he wounded in the neck was a lucky chance and missed causing serious injury.
Even he states that not everyone could pull off what he did and that his success was due to extensive training.
Passing over that, even though other crims had been killed, there were still attempts on robbing his store. Eventually, the criminals won and he shut up shop.
Mikeb says:
ReplyDeleteWhat do you think, is this guy Lance a hero or a nut?
Are those the only two choices? Isn't there rather a lot of territory between those two extremes?
Regardless, I don't see how he could fairly be described as a "nut." Every shooting was a clear-cut case of self-defense. Surely, Mikeb, even you wouldn't argue that it's "nutty" to defend oneself.
In the interview, he came across as pretty sharp, I thought--warning would-be gunslingers about the foolishness of thinking that having a gun on your hip is in and of itself enough to make you secure against attack.
I would say he is a nutty hero. His acts of defense saved his life, but there was a defiance that kept him in that store on that street. He seemed to anticipate the violence, even before the first robbery.
ReplyDeleteIf he hadn’t, he probably would be dead. If the robbers never entered his store, they would be alive... or wouldn’t have died that night.
How many times does a store get robbed before the city police patrols protect the store owners and their customers?
When I watched the story unfold, I cheered him on, but I think he is a nut and his violence didn’t solve the gang problem in the long run, but it did save his life.
He is neither.
ReplyDeleteIf I owned a business in a neighborhood that was prone to armed robberies, I'd move--unless it was impossible to do so. I'd also make my sales area as secure as possible. Jewelers in places like NYC often have the equivalent of a sally port to make it harder for thieves to do smash and grabs or come in with weapons drawn.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that the owner of the store had a variety of different weapons, both revolvers and semi-auto pistols. I wonder why. I think if i was going to have a bunch of guns stashed around my place of business, they'd all be the same type if not the same weapon.
If, in either instance of his store being robbed the criminals had come in shooting, his guns might have wound up being part of their haul. Now that the criminals (gang members?) know that area merchants are armed they might do just that. It appears that his guns were not enough to protect him, he still closed his business and moved.
Sebastian says he's neither, I say he's both. I was mightily impressed with his fearlessness, that kind of Marine-corps, never-back-down courage many of us grew up thinking was admirable. But, I think it can easily slip over into the nutty stubborn realm. The idea of NEVER allowing the other guy to have control over you is a bit extreme, and based on that extreme principle to arm yourself to the teeth and stay in business in a dangerous area, is going too far.
ReplyDeleteAbout the righteousness of the shootings, I had no doubt until the final one. The bad guys were retreating, turned around to fire, and were shot dead. Like so many DGUs, this one sounds like it could have been an unnecessary and excessive response to fleeing criminals about which afterwards the store owners claims was in response to their turning around and attempting to fire at him.
From an earlier thread on the gunshow loophole:
ReplyDelete"MikeB, I did watch the whole thing through and what I saw was people using dead kids to further a political agenda that had nothing to do with Virginia Tech and breaking the law in the process. Disgusting.
March 18, 2010 12:38 PM"
And what we see in this video is dead scary black men being used to further someone's agenda. It's terrible that liebral gunhaterz are the only ones who get to use anecdotes and "scare tactics" to further their agenda, just terrible!
Mikeb says:
ReplyDelete. . . this one sounds like it could have been an unnecessary and excessive response to fleeing criminals about which afterwards the store owners claims was in response to their turning around and attempting to fire at him.
Sure, I suppose it could have been--we just have exactly zero evidence that it was (actually, weren't there surveillance cameras in the shop--wouldn't the authorities have had a pretty good idea of how things went down?). That means, of course that we presume Thomas' innocence.
The idea of NEVER allowing the other guy to have control over you is a bit extreme . . .
If, by "extreme," you mean "extreme"-ly smart, we're in full agreement, and I applaud you for recognizing the murderer-enabling evil of advising people to "just give them what they want," when "what they want" might be your life (and now you know where I got the Lance Thomas link.
Democommie says:
And what we see in this video is dead scary black men being used to further someone's agenda.
How characteristically pathetic of you, Democommie, to suddenly turn this into a race issue. The only "agenda" that Thomas "furthered" was his own survival, and I'm pretty confident that he would have "furthered" it just as energetically, had his assailants been white. I would have applauded his skill and courage just as loudly, as well.
If Thomas's agenda was to survive, it sounds as if he came close to failing by being severly wounded. The clip descried his wounds as "nearly fatal".
ReplyDeleteHad he died, his tombstone would have read: "I was right--Dead but right"
You also neglect that he ended up closing his shop because he feared for his life. Again, the deterrence effect of an armed citizen failed to work and the criminals became more determined.
That leads me to question what is the point that you are trying to make here? Even though I admire Thomas's shooting ability, he failed miserably at keeping the criminals at bay.
LtCC says:
ReplyDeleteIf Thomas's agenda was to survive, it sounds as if he came close to failing by being severly wounded. The clip descried his wounds as "nearly fatal".
Regardless, he lived, and indeed seems to have fully recovered from his wounds. In other words, he was exactly 100% successful in his agenda of survival.
You also neglect that he ended up closing his shop because he feared for his life. Again, the deterrence effect of an armed citizen failed to work and the criminals became more determined.
Not sure I agree with the contention that I "neglected" that detail, I just didn't deem it relevant to the conversation about 5 dead scumbag thugs . . . er, I mean socio-economically disadvantaged urban youths who were victims of social injustice, and one wounded and arrested paragon of urban virtue, and the fact that shooting those six young worthies saved his life four times. Yes, he got out of that business, and I can hardly blame him for that, but he stayed in business for a number of years after the first attempted robbery.
Even though I admire Thomas's shooting ability, he failed miserably at keeping the criminals at bay.
Um, five of them are very much "at bay," and society has been improved a little by their removal from it.
The ultimate upshot is that despite the body count, the criminals won.
ReplyDeleteThe store closed.
Thomas lives in fear for his life.
I am glad you are happy with the results.
LtCC says:
ReplyDeleteThe ultimate upshot is that despite the body count, the criminals won.
The surviving criminals could be said to have "won," I suppose, if their objective had been the closure of a watch repair shop. I hadn't thought that was the objective--I thought they wanted money, and maybe to kill Mr. Thomas--neither of which happened. Perhaps you're correct, though, and their motivation was all along rooted in a hatred of timepieces. If so, I must point out, they still have a lot of work to do.
The store closed.
Yes, Mr. Thomas is retired now.
Thomas lives in fear for his life.
When asked if he felt afraid, he shrugged and said, "I feel alive." Doesn't sound so bad--I had the impression that "alive" was how he wanted to feel.
I am glad you are happy with the results.
The "results" are the improvement of the universe, by virtue of the removal of five predatory thugs from it--what's not to like? I'd love to see about 10 million more Lance Thomases in the U.S., and about 50 million more dead thugs.
"How many times does a store get robbed before the city police patrols protect the store owners and their customers?"
ReplyDeleteThe police have no obligation to protect store owners or their customers. The police will more than likely recommend you get private security or arm yourself.
Laci has a good point, the criminals won. Lance is lucky to be alive, if you can call that living.
ReplyDeleteOf course, some folks feel it's more important to never give in and stand tall in the face of overwhelming odds. But in the end, Lance had to compromise those lofty principles anyway.
Mikeb says:
ReplyDeleteLaci has a good point, the criminals won.
If "winning" means forcing a watch repair shop out of business, after years of effort, at the cost of 5 dead, and one wounded and arrested, yeah--they "won." I take it you're one of those sorts who believes in giving trophies to the 19th place (in a 19-man race) "winner," eh?
Lance is lucky to be alive, if you can call that living.
Some might call it "lucky"--I call it skillful and courageous. And yes--I can call his retirement "living"--I call it that easily.
But in the end, Lance had to compromise those lofty principles anyway.
He never gave me the impression that he was guided by lofty moral principles. His refusal to surrender was simply a matter of him refusing to trust his life to the mercy and decency of people who had given him every reason to believe they lacked both. He never backed down from that--he just made it harder for them to find him.
That seems to me to be something for which they ought to be grateful.
I'm an owner of firearms, an NRA member and a shooting sports participant. I'm a violent crime survivor, as is my esteemed spouse, and I take a dim sharp-pointed view of crimes against my person, my property or that of my loved ones.
ReplyDeleteI'm also a progressive Democrat.
Now. About this blog entry.
"5 dead scumbag thugs . . . er, I mean socio-economically disadvantaged urban youths who were victims of social injustice, and one wounded and arrested paragon of urban virtue . . ."
Zorro, I didn't read anyone here say anything other than that these people were criminals. Don't put words in other people's mouths.
It makes you sound like someone with serious resentment issues, if not a hidden agenda. I'm assured that isn't the case – so why use the rhetoric of resentful bigotted blowhards?
Thomas was not wise to stay so long where he did, and he is lucky to be alive to tell his tale. Perhaps we should leave things at that.
Tom says:
ReplyDeleteZorro, I didn't read anyone here say anything other than that these people were criminals. Don't put words in other people's mouths.
Tom, that somewhat sarcastic language on my part was in response to the idiotic and perverse implication in Democommie's comment, that this is somehow a race issue:
And what we see in this video is dead scary black men being used to further someone's agenda.
Tom, Thanks for the comment. You sound like an interesting guy. Of course you make my attempts more difficult to delineate gun owners from non gun owners along the Republican and Democrat line, but that's probably a good thing.
ReplyDeleteLance Thomas did not close his shop out of fear, he made A TON OF MONEY, IN THAT STORE AND RETIRED WHEN THE TIME WAS RIGHT,and in the proscess took a lot of bad guys off the street, simple as that,...when asked he would do it all over again, its better to live on your feet then die on your knees...
ReplyDelete