PDA

View Full Version : Here's a clear cut case for CCW, BIG TIME


KenpoProfessor
03-28-2007, 3:40 PM
Website where vid is located is NOT WORK SAFE.

http://www.consumptionjunction.com/content/detail.asp?ID=67626&type=1&page=1


Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

tman
03-28-2007, 4:23 PM
Exactly. That man could have protected himself, while at the same time protecting any other potential victims from that guy.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-28-2007, 4:36 PM
I dont see how a weapon could have helped him in this situation. He was struck, initially, from behind. There was no chance for him to react. It was over as soon as it started. The only thing a gun would have done in that situation would have been to arm the criminal with more than his POS pocket knife.

MedSpec65
03-28-2007, 5:23 PM
I wish he had a BUG in the office.

KenpoProfessor
03-28-2007, 5:46 PM
I dont see how a weapon could have helped him in this situation. He was struck, initially, from behind. There was no chance for him to react. It was over as soon as it started. The only thing a gun would have done in that situation would have been to arm the criminal with more than his POS pocket knife.


So what you're saying is actually what the anti's are saying, there's really no need to CCW as you're just gonna give the criminal a gun.

Seems to me he had more than ample oppurtunity to draw, aim, and fire. Guess I'm not seeing the same thing you are.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

jtv3062
03-28-2007, 6:06 PM
What a DIRT BAG

leelaw
03-28-2007, 6:08 PM
I dont see how a weapon could have helped him in this situation. He was struck, initially, from behind. There was no chance for him to react. It was over as soon as it started. The only thing a gun would have done in that situation would have been to arm the criminal with more than his POS pocket knife.

So aside from when he was fully conscious, fighting back on the floor, or when he was in the bathroom unsupervised when the bad guy came back, when, exactly, was he incapable of reaching for a concealed firearm to protect himself?

At no point was the fight "over as soon as it started" - I did not for one second see this victim motionless, unconscious, or otherwise incapacitated to the point of being completely defenseless.

CalNRA
03-28-2007, 6:41 PM
exactly.

with some of the Calguns people we really have no need for the Bradies.

So what you're saying is actually what the anti's are saying, there's really no need to CCW as you're just gonna give the criminal a gun.

Seems to me he had more than ample oppurtunity to draw, aim, and fire. Guess I'm not seeing the same thing you are.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

triggerhappy
03-28-2007, 6:52 PM
exactly.

with some of the Calguns people we really have no need for the Bradies.

Man, you said it. Why are people so WIERD about this subject?? Let's be honest, the only reason anyone even HAS a CCW, is to avoid the hassle of dealing with the judicial system if you don't have one.

Long and short, CCW permits make it easier to carry, but to argue whether or not someone needs one is stupid. Self-defense is a right, never a privilege. :)

dwtt
03-28-2007, 8:15 PM
Let's be honest, the only reason anyone even HAS a CCW, is to avoid the hassle of dealing with the judicial system if you don't have one.
If that's your reason to want a CCW, if you ever do apply for one, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. Most people apply for a CCW because they want to defend themselves, not because they think it will allow them to avoid dealing with the courts.

Directshot
03-28-2007, 8:28 PM
If that's your reason to want a CCW, if you ever do apply for one, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. Most people apply for a CCW because they want to defend themselves, not because they think it will allow them to avoid dealing with the courts.

Well stated dwtt. If you have a CCW and use the weapon, you may not be found criminally liable but you most certainly will be sued in civil court by the family of the person your shot. NRA offers a great insurance policy for CCW's, not cheap but well worth the investment.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-28-2007, 11:01 PM
So what you're saying is actually what the anti's are saying, there's really no need to CCW as you're just gonna give the criminal a gun.

Seems to me he had more than ample oppurtunity to draw, aim, and fire. Guess I'm not seeing the same thing you are.

Have a great Kenpo day

Clyde

No, I did not say he had no need for CCW....I did not say he should not be allowed to CCW, I said IN THIS SITUATION I dont see how a CCW would have helped him. That was based SOLELY on the video from my perspective.

I would argue for open carry in this situation.

If the store owner would have been open carrying I feel it would have been MUCH more likely he would never have been attacked/robbed in the first place.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-28-2007, 11:03 PM
So aside from when he was fully conscious, fighting back on the floor, or when he was in the bathroom unsupervised when the bad guy came back, when, exactly, was he incapable of reaching for a concealed firearm to protect himself?

At no point was the fight "over as soon as it started" - I did not for one second see this victim motionless, unconscious, or otherwise incapacitated to the point of being completely defenseless.

I will concede that point...if he had been armed and it had not fallen, or something similar, in the initial struggle, the time he was alone in the bathroom would have allowed him to give the criminal a surprise upon his return to the bathroom...that could have been interesting.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-28-2007, 11:08 PM
exactly.

with some of the Calguns people we really have no need for the Bradies.


Ok pal, I'm a Brady....haha....with some of the CALguns people here we really have no need for reasoning.....

If anyone should dare say that a gun would not be helpful in ALL situations he is attacked. I would say that ignorance is on par with the Brady's.....I should know....I'm one of them.....:eek:

tman
03-28-2007, 11:12 PM
If that's your reason to want a CCW, if you ever do apply for one, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. Most people apply for a CCW because they want to defend themselves, not because they think it will allow them to avoid dealing with the courts.
I think what he means is the CCW will help keep him out of trouble, while carrying a firearm to defend himself.

Person A: Has a CCW, and carries a firearm for protection.
Person B: Has no CCW, yet still carries a firearm for protection.

Person A is within the (draconian) law, but they are both carrying for the same reason. Defense.

Like he said, defense should be a right and not a privilege.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-28-2007, 11:15 PM
Man, you said it. Why are people so WIERD about this subject?? Let's be honest, the only reason anyone even HAS a CCW, is to avoid the hassle of dealing with the judicial system if you don't have one.

Long and short, CCW permits make it easier to carry, but to argue whether or not someone needs one is stupid. Self-defense is a right, never a privilege. :)


Is your reading comprehension lacking?

Where did I EVER say, or argue, that the old timer did not NEED a CCW? I simply said I didn't think, in this situation, a CCW would have been very helpful....and could possibly have armed the intruder based on the jump he had on him.

Some of you people really need to step back from the edge.....if anyone should dare, even remotely, insinuate that a gun could not save a person in any situation he is attacked and his motives called into question.

Matt C
03-28-2007, 11:16 PM
Ok pal, I'm a Brady....haha....with some of the CALguns people here we really have no need for reasoning.....

If anyone should dare say that a gun would not be helpful in ALL situations he is attacked. I would say that ignorance is on par with the Brady's.....I should know....I'm one of them.....:eek:

No, you are worse than a Brady. You are a Zumbo.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-28-2007, 11:28 PM
No, you are worse than a Brady. You are a Zumbo.

touche

CalNRA
03-29-2007, 12:19 AM
Ok pal, I'm a Brady....haha....with some of the CALguns people here we really have no need for reasoning.....

If anyone should dare say that a gun would not be helpful in ALL situations he is attacked. I would say that ignorance is on par with the Brady's.....I should know....I'm one of them.....:eek:

reasoning? so grandpa couldn't have pulled a CCW when he stood up? did you watch the WHOLE video? he clearly had the chance to pull one. It would have helped.

If your arguement is used by the Sheirffs you would be sued for saying "you don't need a CCWs because most murderers and rapists come from behind". It's a timeless arguement from the Bradies, it's the oldest trick in the book. "you can't see behind you so your gun can only be used against you".

:rolleyes:

CalNRA
03-29-2007, 12:22 AM
...if he had been armed and it had not fallen, or something similar, in the initial struggle...

I invite you to get a good holster for a pistol and TRY to wrestle it loose by rolling on the ground and twisting around.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-29-2007, 12:50 AM
reasoning? so grandpa couldn't have pulled a CCW when he stood up? did you watch the WHOLE video? he clearly had the chance to pull one. It would have helped.

If your arguement is used by the Sheirffs you would be sued for saying "you don't need a CCWs because most murderers and rapists come from behind". It's a timeless arguement from the Bradies, it's the oldest trick in the book. "you can't see behind you so your gun can only be used against you".

:rolleyes:

Obviously, you are suffering from some sort of comprehension deficiency. And as far as the rest of your opinion...well, you know what they say about opinions.

triggerhappy
03-29-2007, 6:12 AM
If that's your reason to want a CCW, if you ever do apply for one, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. Most people apply for a CCW because they want to defend themselves, not because they think it will allow them to avoid dealing with the courts.

So, you're saying that I haven't the right to carry unless someone else (in govt) dictates this for me?

With regard to the court, I meant this in the event you were found to be carrying w/o a CCW. It is a tad easier to explain a weapon, if you have the credentials for it. That was my only point there. :)

triggerhappy
03-29-2007, 6:19 AM
I think what he means is the CCW will help keep him out of trouble, while carrying a firearm to defend himself.

Person A: Has a CCW, and carries a firearm for protection.
Person B: Has no CCW, yet still carries a firearm for protection.

Person A is within the (draconian) law, but they are both carrying for the same reason. Defense.

Like he said, defense should be a right and not a privilege.

Exactly! While I have a sincere disdain for the notion of CCW permits, I also understand that in the event I get pulled over for a broken taillight or my general unclean appearance, I don't want the cop to assume (as I would in their position) that I am some ne'er-do-well.

As someone above stated though, open carry would have (in my all-powerful and knowledgeable opinion) been the best choice. Didn't Elmer Keith open carry? How many times was he assaulted? :)

triggerhappy
03-29-2007, 6:31 AM
I dont see how a weapon could have helped him in this situation. He was struck, initially, from behind. There was no chance for him to react. It was over as soon as it started. The only thing a gun would have done in that situation would have been to arm the criminal with more than his POS pocket knife.

I have no comprehension problems, I merely commented on your above statement. After watching the video again, I am more convinced now than I was previously, that there was more than adequate opportunity for this man to have responded.
I guess what bugged me was your last sentence. Maybe I'm just a tad emotional, and should be over at the Oprah forums, but you have to admit, it does sound a bit assumptive. Anyway, I guess I can see your point, I just assumed that the gentleman would have blasted the goblin and had a parade thrown in his honor.

tango-52
03-29-2007, 6:38 AM
Under CA law, a business owner has the right to carry concealed in his place of business, no license needed. An employee of a business would need permission from the business owner or corporation to carry concealed without a CCW. With a CCW license, there may still be business or corporate internal guidelines that would prohibit him from carrying while at work. Some companies don't seem to care that by disarming their employees they are forcing them to be a victim. Bad for the corporate image to be killing your "customers".

radioactivelego
03-29-2007, 7:22 AM
I dont see how a weapon could have helped him in this situation. He was struck, initially, from behind. There was no chance for him to react. It was over as soon as it started. The only thing a gun would have done in that situation would have been to arm the criminal with more than his POS pocket knife.I said the same thing when I got hit in the head with a steel pipe... you'd be surprised what a little bit of adrenaline will do in a fat *** like me.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-29-2007, 8:14 AM
Under CA law, a business owner has the right to carry concealed in his place of business, no license needed. An employee of a business would need permission from the business owner or corporation to carry concealed without a CCW. With a CCW license, there may still be business or corporate internal guidelines that would prohibit him from carrying while at work. Some companies don't seem to care that by disarming their employees they are forcing them to be a victim. Bad for the corporate image to be killing your "customers".

Good points. I believe its the liability that prevents many businesses from allowing their employees from carrying concealed. I mean lets be honest, all it takes is for someone to get a scratch and and someone mentions a gun and its over in a civil case.

CalNRA
03-29-2007, 11:18 AM
Obviously, you are suffering from some sort of comprehension deficiency. And as far as the rest of your opinion...well, you know what they say about opinions.

pretty high and mighty words. Obviously you made up your mind already and willing to impose them on other people and condemn them as, what was that, "comprehension deficiency"? What are you, a psycological pathologist in the making?

The statement about opinions, well, applies to you too, Mr. Comprehension.

CalNRA
03-29-2007, 11:19 AM
what are you, lacking comprehension pal? ;)

I have no comprehension problems, I merely commented on your above statement. After watching the video again, I am more convinced now than I was previously, that there was more than adequate opportunity for this man to have responded.
I guess what bugged me was your last sentence. Maybe I'm just a tad emotional, and should be over at the Oprah forums, but you have to admit, it does sound a bit assumptive. Anyway, I guess I can see your point, I just assumed that the gentleman would have blasted the goblin and had a parade thrown in his honor.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-29-2007, 11:38 AM
pretty high and mighty words. Obviously you made up your mind already and willing to impose them on other people and condemn them as, what was that, "comprehension deficiency"? What are you, a psycological pathologist in the making?

The statement about opinions, well, applies to you too, Mr. Comprehension.


Wait.....didn't you previously say I was a Brady? Wouldn't that make Mr. Brady?:rolleyes:

Super_tactical
03-29-2007, 12:25 PM
Of course concealed handgun in his SOB would have helped him!!! Grandpa would have pulled it out when he hit the floor. He already had the POS robber at legs length! It would most likely have been:
Grandpa: 1
POS thug: 0

Situational awareness would have been the best thing in this situation. He shouldn't have had his back turned away from the guy pre-occupied with somehing else. Now think, situational awareness + CCW.

This would never have happened.

FreedomIsNotFree
03-29-2007, 12:39 PM
I still believe a open carried gun would have detered the crime from even happening.

1911su16b870
03-29-2007, 1:06 PM
The only thing I readily see from the footage is the store owner was not situationally aware. He was in white, but should have been in orange. The guy walked in. Owner forgot about the guy. Locked the door. Turned his back on the back doorway and was assaulted. The owner is lucky this wasn't his last mistake.