KUDOS to the Security Guard
- Thread starter Tanzer
- Start date
Yes, after this lady totally disabled him by shooting him numerous times.
After she got done with him, he knew it was over and he couldn't go on so he finished off his own self.
She went easy on him. I would have blown his brains out (sorry), and would have felt no remorse for it as it would have been a just, morrally correct shooting!
CrazyIvan007
New member
The purpose of CCW and defense is to stop the threat. That is what she did and I applaud her for that immensely.
If you are carrying a gun around for the purpose to torture, kill and mame anyone who attacks you...you are in for some jail time if you ever do have to defend yourself.
Hardly! If someone shoots at you, and you kill 'em...you have every right to do so and the law cannot make you shoot to wound as they may result in more people dying.
If you leave the guy alive it's a bigger problem than killing him.
Returning deadly force to respond to deadly force is perfectly legal.
With someone who's either a nutjob or jacked up on dope...killing them is the only way you can know for sure that you've disabled the threat to your life and the lives of others.
She would never get along with the majority of the people on this forum.
She didn't get under a table, crawl out the nearest exit.
She didn't come up with 25 dangers, complications and legal implications with engaging the shooter.
She didn't come up with 25 ways how her actions migt make things worse, endanger more people, or get her shot by a leo.
She didn't analyze the dangers and negatives to the point of rendering herself powerless.
She actually put herself in danger to defend poeple outside of her immediate family.
She woud be labeled a "John Wayne" or a "Rambo". She must be trigger happy, gung-ho, and just hoping for a reason to shoot someone.
Nope, she would never mix well here.
She didn't get under a table, crawl out the nearest exit.
She didn't come up with 25 dangers, complications and legal implications with engaging the shooter.
She didn't come up with 25 ways how her actions migt make things worse, endanger more people, or get her shot by a leo.
She didn't analyze the dangers and negatives to the point of rendering herself powerless.
She actually put herself in danger to defend poeple outside of her immediate family.
She woud be labeled a "John Wayne" or a "Rambo". She must be trigger happy, gung-ho, and just hoping for a reason to shoot someone.
Nope, she would never mix well here.
CrazyIvan007
New member
That is not the point. The point is you are sitting around saying your gonna kill this person, kill that person.
The injuries, paralysis or death of such a person by someone defending themselves is their own fault. I am simply acting in accordance to law, which is to use the proper level of force to hault a threat. I have no intentions other than that. You go spouting otherwise, you will land in jail or under Civil court for monetary damages out the wazoo.
It's not about killing! vengeful, righteous or otherwise. It's about bravery, selfless action, and the fact that a CCW holder made a difference. It's about "Take that, George Soros", "Take that, Tom Brokaw and the rest of your crew, do your little dance to fog the issue, but we know your game, and it shows"! It's about validating the fact that a private citizen was prepared to save many lives because the second ammendment is alive. It validates the reason I carry a sidearm, and most of you do also.
Liberals dont trust people, or human nature.
A liberal thinks it is absurb for me to feel safer in a room of 100 people knowing that 20 of them have guns. They dont understand why I would not feel safer in a gun free zone.
Liberals dont trust themselves, therefore they feel that anyone with a gun will 'crack' at any moment and start shooting people.
Pelosi said of commercial airline pilots: "We can't let the pilots have guns. What is they go crazy and start shooting poeple."
unbelievable.
How many massacres have happened in an area where multiple law abiding citizens are carrying?
A liberal thinks it is absurb for me to feel safer in a room of 100 people knowing that 20 of them have guns. They dont understand why I would not feel safer in a gun free zone.
Liberals dont trust themselves, therefore they feel that anyone with a gun will 'crack' at any moment and start shooting people.
Pelosi said of commercial airline pilots: "We can't let the pilots have guns. What is they go crazy and start shooting poeple."
unbelievable.
How many massacres have happened in an area where multiple law abiding citizens are carrying?
I wish I could find a woman like her .
I saw an interview with one of the shooting victims who was wounded. Also a hero IMO. He was a vet who had been in combat . He showed himself to the attacker to try to distract him - tryed to get a firearm from one of the other security gaurds who was hiding and doing nothing { he was already wounded at this time } - and when the attacker went down , took one of his handguns and got ready just in case there were more shooters .
I'll bet he'll be ccw from now on .
I saw an interview with one of the shooting victims who was wounded. Also a hero IMO. He was a vet who had been in combat . He showed himself to the attacker to try to distract him - tryed to get a firearm from one of the other security gaurds who was hiding and doing nothing { he was already wounded at this time } - and when the attacker went down , took one of his handguns and got ready just in case there were more shooters .
I'll bet he'll be ccw from now on .
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
How was he totally disabled if he was still able to use a long arm to shoot himself?
The shooter planned to kill himself at some point. When engaged and hit, he decided to end it.
If the guy was totally disabled and had no weapons within reach, if one then fired a deliberate killing shot, you probably are in technical legal trouble. A jury might let you go though.
The shooter planned to kill himself at some point. When engaged and hit, he decided to end it.
If the guy was totally disabled and had no weapons within reach, if one then fired a deliberate killing shot, you probably are in technical legal trouble. A jury might let you go though.
rockrz wrote:
The problem is not that someone dies if you defend yourself, it happens, but when the nature of your post reads as if you intended to 'KILL" from the get go, it makes you, and as a result CCW'ers in general look bad. You never say that you shot to kill or to wound, but simply to STOP the threat.
The problem is not that someone dies if you defend yourself, it happens, but when the nature of your post reads as if you intended to 'KILL" from the get go, it makes you, and as a result CCW'ers in general look bad. You never say that you shot to kill or to wound, but simply to STOP the threat.
mattro wrote:
Come on now mattro, thats a bit much don't you think? I think 90% of the people on here would not hesitate, hide, or otherwise if lives were in danger and they could honestly stop the threat. But the purpose of forums like this is to go over scenarios, the legal aspects of a shoot, ect. There is nothing wrong with being as knowledgable and informed as possible, so as to protect yourself and others before, during, and after an incident involving a firearm.
Come on now mattro, thats a bit much don't you think? I think 90% of the people on here would not hesitate, hide, or otherwise if lives were in danger and they could honestly stop the threat. But the purpose of forums like this is to go over scenarios, the legal aspects of a shoot, ect. There is nothing wrong with being as knowledgable and informed as possible, so as to protect yourself and others before, during, and after an incident involving a firearm.
It might be a bit much, but I am extremely shocked and discoraged by the number of posts that advocate hiding under a table, crawling out a door, and only getting involved if it is one of your own family members in trouble. I could reference a great deal of posts like that.
Courage and selflessnes have given way in this country, and the bad guys love it!
This women does just the opposite of what alot of people on this board advocate and she is applauded. I hope the people that look for all the reasons to not get involved, dont applaud this women for what she did, that would be sad.