My comments:
That’s because the punch was little more than a slap. But, like the manly gun owner he was, he didn’t have to take it. That’s what being armed is all about. You can be a real man, you don’t have to be afraid to open the door to an angry customer, and if he slaps you in the face a little bit, you can shoot his ass.
and
That
punch did not look like part of a serious attack. It was more of an
exclamation point to whatever he was yelling. It wasn’t even that hard
and it wasn’t followed by another punch or any aggressive move.
The shooter should be guilty of attempted murder. Gun owners need to exercise better restraint than that.
The shooter should be guilty of attempted murder. Gun owners need to exercise better restraint than that.
Sheesh - people shouldn't hit other people, but there is a difference between being in fear of your life, versus fear of a minor embarrassment. This was disproportional, and one more example of the gun guys lacking the control, discipline or judgment to be armed. What a bunch of wimps and crazies.
ReplyDeleteSo being punched in the face isn't enough, in your mind, to justify using a gun to defend oneself. Two questions, Dog Gone:
Delete1. Describe a scenario in which you would regard using a gun as an appropriate response.
2. Explain why you had a gun and a carry license when you had a stalker.
That was a punch that clearly put the victim at risk of TBI or death. Good shooting.
DeleteNo, that was not clear at all. A true assault would not end with a soft punch in the face that didn't even hardly phase the guy. It would have been a much harder punch followed by further attack.
DeleteThe guy with the gun was a punk just like so many of you.
Keep believing that, Mikeb. This is one of many reasons why your side is losing.
DeleteDog Gone, any answer?
My blog is losing because I don't think you can shoot someone for a slap in the face?
DeleteYour blog gets a lot of views, but that's because people enjoy controversy. The gun control movement is losing. One reason is that your side keeps objecting when a good citizen defends himself against a violent attack.
DeleteWhat we see in the video was not a slap. But as I said, keep doing what you're doing. With enemies like you, how can we lose?
I don't have much of a problem with this.
ReplyDeleteWhat do we want? Justice. Exactly. When the guy who punched the store clerk recovers from the gun shot wound, he should go to jail. Beyond that, the clerk should file a wrongful termination suit against the owner.
ReplyDeleteWhat do we want? Justice. When do we want it? Now.
Let me see if I have this right. The guy was in the store where he had a fair degree of protection, so he goes OUTSIDE where he has none?
ReplyDeleteThis seems to be another one of those, "I got me a gun, I ain't takin' shit from no motherfucker" sortathangs.
The store clerk is, at the least, a moron.
I agree with you Democommie. If you have the opportunity to end or avoid a hostile situation by simply keeping the door closed then that is what you must absolutely do. After securing the door, he should have called 911.
DeleteWhat does Greg Camp want? He wants to be allowed to shoot people who "threaten" him without having to worry about any consequences for doing so--whether it's warranted or not. When does he want to do that? Always.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the service station's owner (it's unclear whether the station is a franchise operation or company owned) has a set of rules in the employees handbook, detailing how to deal with situations like the one reported. If so, I'm guessing that their liability lawyer might tell them that encouraging employee vigilantism is prolly a spectacularly bad idea.
Someone punches me in the face? Yup, that's a genuine threat. Apparently, Democommie is more accommodating. I likely wouldn't have unlocked the door in the situation shown in the video, but we don't know if the attacker threatened to break the glass.
DeleteOn your other point, the fact that some lawyer could file a suit on behalf of the attacker and might get money, if only in a nuisance settlement, is an illustration of what's wrong with our legal system.
Mikeb, let's use your methods here. Do you imagine that this is the first time the attacker has hit someone? If someone who has a gun accident is likely to have had others in the past, someone who commits battery is also likely to have been violent previously.
ReplyDelete"Someone punches me in the face? Yup, that's a genuine threat.
ReplyDeletePunch them back, you fucking pussy.
"Apparently, Democommie is more accommodating."
Not fucking likely, but then I wouldn't have been stupid enough to open the door and put myself in that position.
"I likely wouldn't have unlocked the door in the situation shown in the video, but we don't know if the attacker threatened to break the glass."
Is reading for comprehension a problem for you. Wait, I know the answer. According to several reports the station had bullet proof windows. Whether it did or not, the clerk should have called the police and hunkered down. Not everybody is a marksman of your caliber, Greggie (it's a little joke, son, you get the drift?) and taking on several people who might be armed would be what? INCREDIBLY FUCKING STUPIT!, that's what.
Looks like Mr. Azzam has a predilection for shootin' teh gunz when he's "threatened" (http://www.khou.com/home/Clerk-captured-in-violent-Valero-confrontation-has-opened-fire-on-job-before--181484701.html)
I'm working from what the video said, but did you catch the part about how I wouldn't likely have opened the door? It's easier to complain about reading comprhension than to practice it.
DeleteAlso, I've told you this before, but you apparently need a refresher. You're not my father.
It appears as if keeping the door closed and locked was a realistic option. If that was indeed the case then that is what the shooter should have done. However, if that was not an option utilizing a non-lethal device, such as pepper spray, would be the next step to neutralize the threat without possible loss of life.
ReplyDeleteOr, how about backing down and letting the puncher win? In this case there was no follow-up attack. It was over. But. that's too much for most gun owners to even consider. Their egos wouldn't allow such a departure from justice.
DeleteSomeone like that punches you, and you do nothing, what do you expect to be the response? The attacker is likely to punch again, this time harder. Notice how the good guy with the gun hasn't been charged? Notice also how the good guy with the gun wasn't a fat white man? If the cops had seen a crime here, the shooter would have been arrested--isn't that your usual claim?
DeleteAssuming that the shop clerk could not keep the door closed and had to take the punch. I feel the only realistic course of action would be to try and step back while preparing the pepper spray for use. At this point the use of pepper spray is justified and likely needed. The thug punched the clerk once and he could easily do it again.
DeleteJustice Pacific Beach style. Halloween night 1990, my buddy and me are too tight on LSD and alcohol. Two dewds bop into the store and start clowning around. I call them fags. The burly, long-haired guy clocks me dead on the jaw. I recover. I tell the clerk. "Hey man, I don't want any trouble in a liquor store!"
ReplyDeleteHe sells liquor to both parties and we all go home happy.
I like your style better than the guy in the vid.
DeleteI'm glad I missed the 60s--including the leftover 60s.
DeleteIt just really points up that when angry people carry guns around, other people get killed. If nobody has a weapon, a small conflict or fight can be almost nothing. No fatality required. Guns are specifically for killing people.
DeleteSo you don't believe that one person can kill another with a club, knife, or simply bare fists?
DeleteFJ, it's so simple and clear, when you don't have an agenda.
DeleteSo is that a yes or a no, Mikeb? We both have an agenda, but the question is one of fact.
Delete