US: CCW Permit Holder Saves Woman's Life

[nognig]

Aug 26, 7:11 AM EDT

N.M. Police Probe Homicide at Wal-Mart

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) -- One man was killed and a woman was injured Thursday during an apparent domestic dispute inside a Wal-Mart on the city's southeast side, the second time in less than a week that one of the retail giant's Western stores has been the scene of deadly violence.

Police spokeswoman Trish Hoffman said a witness told authorities that a man had been stabbing the woman inside the store when another man intervened and shot her attacker.

Hoffman said the stabbing appeared to stem from a domestic dispute. She did not know the relationship between the woman and the dead man, but friends of the woman told Albuquerque television stations that she had recently obtained a restraining order against her ex-husband.

"It looks like it's a possibility that the guy who shot the other man will be justified," Hoffman said. "From what witnesses are telling us, it corroborates his story that the male was stabbing the female and he intervened."

The woman, whose name was not immediately known, was taken to University of New Mexico Hospital where she was being treated for multiple stab wounds.

The man who was shot was ****ounced dead at the scene. His name was not immediately released, nor was the name of the man accused of shooting him.

Witnesses told Albuquerque television stations that the gunshots shortly after 5 p.m. sent some people running as others hit the floor and crawled to safety.

Earlier this week, customers at a Wal-Mart in a Phoenix suburb also ran for their lives when a man opened fire and killed two store employees in the parking lot.

In that case, police accused 53-year-old Ed Liu of shooting 18-year-old Anthony Spangler and 36-year-old Patrick Graham on Tuesday. Both employees were collecting shopping carts at the time.

Authorities on Thursday released the 911 calls made during and after that shooting, with employees urging people to run for safety into the store and a woman driving away in terror.

"Get in here," one caller said to those outside while the shots were still being fired. "Now. Run."

Police said it didn't appear that Liu knew the Wal-Mart employees or that he had a grudge against the company. Court filings indicated Liu was mentally disturbed but gave no further details.

"I was right next to the shopping cart, where they do the shopping carts," one woman on the 911 tapes said, sounding as if she were on the verge of tears. "And I thought I heard firecrackers, so I looked over and there was this guy just shooting people. And I just put it in reverse and took off."

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

[joe mama]

Assuming the first shooting described went down as reported, I'll be curious to hear from the anti's how this situation would have gone better if the guy hadn't been ccw'ing and/or how he shouldn't have shot the stabber...

[nognig]

This sort of things happens ever day in the US. Check out this blog of news articles concerning self-defense shootings.

Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog (http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html)

NN

[packetloss]

Where does it say anything about the type of gun, the permit used, or how it was carried? How do we know a man didnt grab a shotgun from sporting goods, or a deer rifle from his pickup, or a gangstah rapper with a tec-9 in his pants?

[packetloss]

Ah, thanks nognig, an article with actual information can be found here:

http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19858_4032728,00.html


Moore, 72, had a concealed arms permit and was an unpaid volunteer with the Police Department's cold case unit, Hoffman said.

[Creeper]

yeah baby! woot woot

[EffJi]

It's funny how they change the article in the middle and starts to write about a madman who killed store employees.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

[EffJi]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

I think the woman - who's life was saved by the actions of Mr. Moore - doesn't mind that the man died.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

For sure. And I agree.

However action does need to be taken due to people starting to use this as an excuse.

I'm not saying this will happen but we are humans and we will use any excuse in the book to get out of ****.

[Abolith]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.


Sooo it would be better if he did nothing and an innocent women died? because thats what would have happened if he had done nothing, and likely the killer would have gotten away.


your sense of justice and right vs. wrong is seriously F*cked up.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

This man done the right thing. I never said he dident.

[Abolith]

This man done the right thing. I never said he dident.

and yet you think he should be put on trial for manslaughter?

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Yes.

[Abolith]

Yes.


then I still say your sense of justice and right vs wrong is messed up badly.



If a person does the right thing than they shouldn't be punished by 20 years in Federal prison. by your thinking it would have been better for him to let her die, and THAT is wrong.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

But you can't just have people killing other people.

Lets say a person sees a similar incident but this time the defender was actually on top of the attacker. But they kill the person who was simply defending themselves.

At worst this man should atleast spend a month in prison. No death is justified unless it's an extreme case of "it was either them or me"

This was not one of those cases. Why dident he fire a warning shot and detain the attacker?

[dangerclose]

Yes.

That squirrel's nuts in your avatar are bigger than your brains.

You're the type of person that after being pulled from a burning car wreck .. would sue your rescuer for separating your shoulder.

[nognig]

But you can't just have people killing other people.


Most of the states that allow CCW permits allow such permit holder's to defend not only their own lives but others as well in order to stop a violent felony from occuring (murder, rape).

Fire a warning shot? That will get you in more trouble than shooting the guy! Where do you aim when you are inside a store? The floor? The roof? Where does the bullet go? You shouldn't even pull your concealed weapon unless you are intent on shooting to stop the taking of a life.

NN

[joe mama]

LOL at Minardiau...again.


This man done the right thing. I never said he dident

So the guy was right...


This is not justified homicide.

No he was wrong...


Why dident he fire a warning shot and detain the attacker?

Because the woman was being stabbed, which is certainly an attempt to KILL her, RIGHT THAT SECOND, and any reasonable person, based on the information available AT THE TIME could reasonably conclude who was the bad guy here. The guy wasn't 50 feet away, walking toward her with a knife, where, maybe, something short of shooting him would have been reasonable. The world isn't a video game where you can hit pause and decide what to do. This woman is being attacked in a way that is extremely likely to kill her, right that second. This guy had seconds to act, and acted in a way that police officer might act, and saved her life.

If he'd been an on duty cop, would you be ok with him having shot this guy? Or are people (even cops) only allowed to use deadly force to protect themselves and not to protect another person? If you're ok with people using deadly force (when there's no other choice) but only to protect themselves, where's all your concern for society as a whole, mr socialist? Aren't we supposed to look out for each other?

[Lurch]

This is not justified homicide.

You're right, its not. That man should never have tried to stab his wife to death.

Is using force to stop the murder of an innocent not justified?


This man himself was not in direct danger.

Maybe one day you'll need help and someone answers back like you would have... *shrug, someone is being hurt...not my problem.*


But you can't just have people killing other people.

He was shot, precicely because "you can't just have people killing other people."

Dang right, husband got what he deserved. He tried to murder his wife and lost his in the process...tough luck.

From the article posted it seems he may be a retired police officer. I doubt they'd allow some nobody to work in their cold case dept.

[Buckeye67]

But you can't just have people killing other people.

Lets say a person sees a similar incident but this time the defender was actually on top of the attacker. But they kill the person who was simply defending themselves.

At worst this man should atleast spend a month in prison. No death is justified unless it's an extreme case of "it was either them or me"

This was not one of those cases. Why dident he fire a warning shot and detain the attacker?

If it hasn't been obvious before, it should be blatantly obvious to anyone and everyone after replies like this that all you're doing in these threads anymore is trolling.

But I'll play anyway.

In nearly every state in the union it is lawful to use deadly force in order to prevent death or serious injury to oneself or another person. So no, no crime was committed here at all (on the part of the CCW holder who saved a woman's life).

[FallenAngel]

But you can't just have people killing other people.

Lets say a person sees a similar incident but this time the defender was actually on top of the attacker. But they kill the person who was simply defending themselves.

At worst this man should atleast spend a month in prison. No death is justified unless it's an extreme case of "it was either them or me"

This was not one of those cases. Why dident he fire a warning shot and detain the attacker?

If it hasn't been obvious before, it should be blatantly obvious to anyone and everyone after replies like this that all you're doing in these threads anymore is trolling.

But I'll play anyway.

In nearly every state in the union it is lawful to use deadly force in order to prevent death or serious injury to oneself or another person. So no, no crime was committed here at all (on the part of the CCW holder who saved a woman's life).

^ this is true. The right of self defense is expanded here in the states to include others under immediate threat. Maybe in Australia it's different though.

[AlexNenadic]

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

In the US the use of deadly force is legal in defense of your life, or the lives of others. I bet it is the same in Australia too.

Anyhow as somebody already said, your logic is seriously f***ed up.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Not in Australia it's not.

[Oddbod]

Not in Australia it's not.

Yes it is & it's called Justifiable Homicide, the same as here in the UK.

[James]

But you can't just have people killing other people.


Sure you can. It's murder that's bad.

Maybe I'm rare in that I see a vast difference between the two. I don't know.

[Nikitaras]

But you can't just have people killing other people.


Sure you can. It's murder that's bad.

Maybe I'm rare in that I see a vast difference between the two. I don't know.

Yup, all types of homicide but not all are illegal. It sounds like a good shoot in this case.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Not in Australia it's not.

Yes it is & it's called Justifiable Homicide, the same as here in the UK.

Here you go


Section 268 of the Criminal Code provides that the killing of any person is unlawful 'unless such killing is authorised or justified or excused by law'.


The degree of proportionality has been spelled out in similar fashion in comparable provisions in the Criminal Code. For example, whereas in section 243 it is provided that it is lawful for any citizen to use 'such force as is reasonably necessary' to prevent the commission of certain offences or acts, when in section 233 recourse is had to such force to prevent an escape from arrest, the proportionality is express, and the force which might be used limited by a subsection which provides that the use of force 'that is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm' is not authorised except where used by a police officer, or a person assisting him, upon a person reasonably suspected of having committed an offence punishable with imprisonment for life, and then only after that person has been called upon to surrender before that force is used.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/special/rsjproject/rsjlibrary/rciadic/individual/brm_rjv/23.html

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

So basically in Australia you can not shoot to kill even in self defence.

[-Caveman-]

First a verbal warning should have been given if he still continues to stab her then a warning shot should be fired if he still won't stop and at this point by some miricle the women is not already dead or dieing only then should a fatel shot be taken right Minardiau because that makes perfect sense, and after that the man should be charged with manslaughter because he was stupid enough to care for the life of a complet stranger.

:cantbeli:

[BarkingSquirrel]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.


Sooo it would be better if he did nothing and an innocent women died? because thats what would have happened if he had done nothing, and likely the killer would have gotten away.


your sense of justice and right vs. wrong is seriously F*cked up.
You'll have to forgive Minawhatthe****ever. After all, he is australian.

[Teufel_]

So basically in Australia you can not shoot to kill even in self defence.what a ****hole

[Buckeye67]

First a verbal warning should have been given if he still continues to stab her then a warning shot should be fired if he still won't stop and at this point by some miricle the women is not already dead or dieing only then should a fatel shot be taken right Minardiau because that makes perfect sense, and after that the man should be charged with manslaughter because he was stupid enough to care for the life of a complet stranger.

:cantbeli:

Minardiau, how many more times would you like to be stabbed while someone gives a verbal warning and then fires a "warning shot"?

So I have to wait until I'm dead or dieing before you think someone should be allowed to save me?

How many times do you want them to be stabbed and/or how close to death do you want them to be before someone can attempt to save them?

--------------------

Killer: *STAB STAB STAB*

Victim: "AHHHHHHHH"

You: "I say! You there! Cease and desist immediately!"

Killer: *STAB STAB STAB STAB STAB*

You: *Fires warning shot*

Victim: "AHHHHHHHGGGGGHHHHH HEEEELLLLLPP!!!"

Killer: *STAB STAB STAB STAB STAB STAB*

You: *thinks* "Hmmmm... it would appear that at this point the victim is either dead or very close to death. Since this chap who has already stabbed her several times wouldn't listen to reason and comply with my reasonable request to stop, and failed to heed my warning shot - I must take action!"

*Fires shots and incapacitates assailant*

You: AH HAH! You foul beast! Your heinous crime has been foiled! I'm sorry you're on the brink of death from having been stabbed several more times whilst I bade that fellow to cease and desist - but you'll be glad to know that he has indeed stopped stabbing you now! If only he'd listened to reason - you might be able to attend your daughters piano recital!

--------------

:|

Sorry, if it's my wife/daughter/mother/any other family member/any other human being - I'm going to take the shot as soon as I can to y'know... save an innocent victim from being stabbed to death.

[Abolith]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.


Sooo it would be better if he did nothing and an innocent women died? because thats what would have happened if he had done nothing, and likely the killer would have gotten away.


your sense of justice and right vs. wrong is seriously F*cked up.
You'll have to forgive Minawhatthe****ever. After all, he is australian.


just makes me glad I don't live there....

[jedisponge]

Man... :roll:

[Oddbod]

"Quote:
Section 268 of the Criminal Code provides that the killing of any person is unlawful 'unless such killing is authorised or justified or excused by law'."

As I said earlier:

Oh yes you can.

[joe mama]

To Min and anyone that thinks this shooting wasn't right: Do you think it wasn't right because it's bad for society if one person kills another? I'll assume that's at least part of the reason. Don't you see, though, that in this case, the person who was killed was attempting to kill another person, and killing him was done to prevent a murder? People who think like you are upset at the killing of one person by another...but you're upset about the killing of a person who is in the process of committing murder...don't you have any concern for the person being murdered, who, at least in this case, appears innocent? There was, essentially, a choice of two outcomes in this situation: innocent woman is killed and man committing murder lives, or man committing murder is killed and innocent woman lives (or at least has a better chance of living since the stabbing gets stopped). No one killing anyone isn't an option in this case, it's one or the other. Which is better?

[Seraphim]

Min is into latex and ****...so you know theres some screws loose.

[MichaelF]

Firing a "warning shot" in a crowded building would be a punishable offense. Ricochets, anyone?

Use of deadly force to prevent unlawful bodily harm is protected* by law in most States in the Union. In certain states, it is expanded to include prevention of theft/trespass after dark!

[Belrick]

You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).



Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

[Jacko]

Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.

In my state, when they're trying to kill me, trying to kill someone else, or raping somebody.


A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

Even if it makes them all 3 of those things, it might not make them one thing: A victim. That's infinitely preferable.

[Oddbod]

1)You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

2)What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

3)How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).

4)Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

5)A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

1) The woman was attacked with a knife by her ex husband, who had a restraining order against him, requiring him to keep away from his victim.

2) The situation didn't exactly need a rocket scientist to see the agressor was trying to stab the woman to death. :roll:

3)Most CCW licenses require a certain degree of marksmanship & a knowledge of the Law regarding the use of firearms. Many CCW licensees have more range time than the average LEO, because they BELIEVE in the right to self defence.

4)So it is perfectly OK for someone to commit murder, by stabbing his ex wife to death, without fear of interference from anyone with the wherewithal to stop him?

5)In this case, yes & rightly so - or should the guy have stood there & let the woman get killed :roll:

(Your post numbered to save confusion & rationalise my reply)

Is it your contention that the dead man should have been allowed to "express himself" by murdering his ex wife without hindrance by law-abiding citizens/

That's how your post reads to me.

If so, then you are an idiot.

RSVP

[HooyahCQB]

You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

What the hell do you mean? They didn't say the woman was stabbing the man, and the paper didn't say the woman was found with any weapon. She had a RESTRAINING order against her ex, and probably for a damn good reason...maybe, just maybe...so she WOULDN'T GET STABBED TO DEATH

What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?


The guy works with the police. I believe we can safely say that he knows how to properly discharge a firearm while aiming, and in close quarters, it doesn't take much aiming to hit your target.


How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).

See above

Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

And justice is to let a man stab a woman repeatedly until she is laying in a pool of her own blood, dead? Yes, let's shoot him in the back AFTER the trial. Two people dead, instead of the one, whom is going to be dead anyway, is better? Oh yeah...it didn't even say in the article that he shot him in the back. Not that it matters...unless you'd rather have the perp armed as well and have them duel...So what if he wasn't a threat to the shooter? He was KILLING a woman. What if the guy just witnessed it, then the perp came after him, after the woman was already dead? Would it be justifiable in your eyes then?

A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

Damn straight, because hundreds, perhaps thousands of innocent victims would be dead, and the perps would still be wondering the streets under your utopian society

[Oddbod]

Two MILLION uses of CCW (most times, the showing of a weapon by the potential victim dissuades the agressor) a year in the US & such an insignificant number of misuses that they don't even show in the statistics must surely mean something - EXCEPT to the gun grabbers (like Rosie O' Donnell with her armed guards & Fiendswine with her own CCW permit & Kennedy with his Government paid security & Boxer with the same & Schumer & & &.........).

[-Caveman-]

Question for Belrick

If you were that women in that exact scenerio would you want someone to shoot your attacker?

Keep in mind you are in the process of being killed and a mire fraction of a second can mean life or death for you.
And after its done and over would you seek his prosecution?

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

"Quote:
Section 268 of the Criminal Code provides that the killing of any person is unlawful 'unless such killing is authorised or justified or excused by law'."

As I said earlier:

Oh yes you can.'

You might want to read everything on that link I gave you. It's quite clear that the only people that can shoot to kill are LEO's.

[seva108]

You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).



Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

Wow, within the space of one generation, some New Zealanders have become shaking cowards, waiting for the 'approved authorities' to arrive while a woman is being murdered in front of their eyes. Disgusting.

Belrick, people are people. Cops and judges are not elite human beings, while the rest of us are peon serfs.

I have friends who are cops. I am just as capable as they are in determing whether my or another's life is in danger. But we wouldn't even be talking about this if a cop had shot the guy. You are so programmed do just be a stagnant coward and wait for the SUPERMEN of the GOVERNMENT.

You would wait while a woman is being stabbed in front of you to make that call? Now I understand how women have been raped and men horrifically beat in front of crowds in cities. It's because citizens have become programmed to sit there like sheep and wait for their betters to do what every man's instinct should be: STOP IT.

And yes, I do carry. A Glock 19 with 15 in the clip.

[BarkingSquirrel]

I like you.

[Oddbod]

"Quote:
Section 268 of the Criminal Code provides that the killing of any person is unlawful 'unless such killing is authorised or justified or excused by law'."

As I said earlier:

Oh yes you can.'

You might want to read everything on that link I gave you. It's quite clear that the only people that can shoot to kill are LEO's.

It's quite clear that YOU haven't read all of it:

"... the test laid down by the law today for determining whether the homicide is justifiable or not is a two-fold test which may be stated in this form: (1) Did the accused honestly believe on reasonable grounds that it was necessary to do what he did in order to prevent the completion of a felony or the escape of the felon? and (2) Would a reasonable man in his position have considered that what he did was not out of proportion to the mischief to be prevented?"

Nowhere does this state that only LEOs can use deadly force to stop a crime, it merely deliniates WHEN such force may be justifiable.

[Geezah]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

Not sure if this has been covered by someone else but, if you fear for the life of yourself, a family member of an innocent third party, then you can use lethal force to remove that threat.

[Erik_MAA]

A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

No it does not. A CCW license allows a permit to carry a gun, nothing more. It's not a license to kill, and it's not a junior G-man badge. All laws governing the use of deadly force continue to apply to a permit holder in the same manner they apply to anyone else (in some cases more so.)

On the other issue - it is legal to use force in the defense of another person in the USA. Laws vary from state to state, but generally the shooter must reasonably believe tha the person they are defending is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.

I think there is a lot of confusion here between self-defense laws in other countries (UK and Austrailia, among others) and the USA. The USA is not like these countries, as here we have the inherent right to use force in self-defense.

Frankly, I'm very thankful that I live in the USA, that my state grants me the right to carry (provided I clear a background check and take a training course), and that I have been able to certify over 200 people to recieve carry permits.

[joe mama]

Since the attacker was in the middle of stabbing this woman, and stabbing someone is an extremely good way to kill them, and would be believed by most reasonable people to be an attempt to kill them, you have two options here:
1) allow the guy to continue stabbing her, most likely resulting in her death
2) do something about it. this guy had the option of shooting since he was legally ccw'ing. this resulted in a dead criminal attempted murderer (only an attempted murder because he was shot before he could become a murderer).

DEAD (most likely) ATTACKED WOMAN or DEAD CRIMINAL. Tell me which one is better for society?

[joe mama]

What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

If you were walking down the street and saw a guy attacking someone in a way very likely to kill them almost immediately (ie the police are not going to get there in time, it's most likely up to you to help and if successful, save their life), would you do anything about it?

[joe mama]

Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

WHEN THE MAN IS IN THE PROCESS OF MURDERING ANOTHER PERSON, IN WHAT A REASONABLE PERSON, IN THE TIME ALLOWED, COULD JUDGE TO BE AN ACT OF MURDER.

[joe mama]

You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).



Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

Overall response: if I ever see you being stabbed, and I'm carrying, I'll be sure to not intervene and let the guy stab you. Feel better now?

[Nikitaras]

You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).



Since when is it justice to shoot a man in the back without trial nor was he a threat to the shooter.
Nice America real nice.

A CCW liscence makes an American a law enforcer, judge and executioner.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

Overall response: if I ever see you being stabbed, and I'm carrying, I'll be sure to not intervene and let the guy stab you. Feel better now?

rofl Best response I've heard yet. he can wait till soneone better trained and qualified to handle the situation comes along.

[Baboonass]

But you can't just have people killing other people.

Lets say a person sees a similar incident but this time the defender was actually on top of the attacker. But they kill the person who was simply defending themselves.

At worst this man should atleast spend a month in prison. No death is justified unless it's an extreme case of "it was either them or me"

This was not one of those cases. Why dident he fire a warning shot and detain the attacker?

For that matter, why didn't he simply shoot the knife out of the attackers hands?

:roll:

[Geezah]

You guys are all making an assumption that the woman is innocent.

Didn't think of that, the guy with the knife was defending himself against the crazy lady.......good point.



What training did the shooter have to determine how to handle such an voilent incident?

Isn't fearing for your life or a family members or a third parties training enough, he saw a woman being stabbed, he acted upon what he saw. The bad guy is dead, how much more training did he need?



How accurate a shooter do you need to be to gain a CCW liscence? (obviously a liscence intended so that you can pistol shoot in crowded public places).

What does that have to do with what took place?

Only the bad guy was shot and killed, end of story.

[StukaJr]

But you can't just have people killing other people.

Lets say a person sees a similar incident but this time the defender was actually on top of the attacker. But they kill the person who was simply defending themselves.

At worst this man should atleast spend a month in prison. No death is justified unless it's an extreme case of "it was either them or me"

This was not one of those cases. Why dident he fire a warning shot and detain the attacker?

For that matter, why didn't he simply shoot the knife out of the attackers hands?

:roll:

Matchanu - I've almost missed the sarcasm... Ay, ay, ay - that would have been a mess!

Minardiau - there is no such thing as a "warning shot" - the bullet is still discharged from a weapon and there is hardly a safe way to account for where the bullets end up, unless they impact and expand in the attacker... The typical Hollywood "shot in the air" is the worst thing a person can do, especially in urban enviornment - shooting into the floor/walls/ceiling makes the situation ****e to richocettes and everybody knows that those can kill unintended targets. Shooting appendages or the weapon is a bad idea - the bullet still keeps going one making an impact.

Giving a warning to the attacker is an option (personally, is the one I would have taken - verbal, but not a "warning shot"), but what happens if the attacker moves out of a clear line of sight and into a hostage taking position? The victim bleeds out and you save a life of a derranged psychopath whom now has to deal with the effects of having killed his wife... Real class act!

As for mistaking an attacker for the victim... Even if the victim is on top - would not change the fact that he/she is bleeding from multiple cut wounds and the person on the bottom has a weapon... In any case - the shooting in this case was justified and the victim/attacker were correctly idenitified. Was it not the case - I'm sure the shots would not have been fired until the gunman knew for sure.

Like I've said, if I were in that situation - I would have approached the attacker in force with the firearm drawn while verbally ordering him to drop the weapon - hoping that the victim would have an opportunity to break the contact. Yet, anything short of compliance from the attacker would get him shot-to-kill - I think my actions would rest deeply on making a shoot by the book and later dealing with neural stresses of having shot a bad guy.

[joe mama]

...Like I've said, if I were in that situation - I would have approached the attacker in force with the firearm drawn while verbally ordering him to drop the weapon - hoping that the victim would have an opportunity to break the contact. Yet, anything short of compliance from the attacker would get him shot-to-kill - I think my actions would rest deeply on making a shoot by the book and later dealing with neural stresses of having shot a bad guy.

No you wouldn't have, because you, like me, and anyone other than Min and his buddies, are a gun nut. And all we're capable of is blasting away at any perceived threat if we have a gun, because it's impossible for a human being to behave responsibly while they have a dangerous tool in their hands. The gun doesn't just give you one more option of what to do in many situations, the gun takes control completely, and you just start shooting. It's a well known fact. Actually, to prove how true it is, my guns are right now attempting to convince my bed to go out and carjack someone or attempt to intervene in the first argument they spot so somebody can get shot. It's true.
Cops, of course, being a different species, are capable of restraining the demons we call guns and resisting their evil whispers.
p-)

[Buckeye67]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

Not sure if this has been covered by someone else but, if you fear for the life of yourself, a family member of an innocent third party, then you can use lethal force to remove that threat.

Already got ya covered Geezah ;)

By the way, did you get my PM? p-)

[Durandal]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

Ahhhh....

A person who lets another person die without helping that person is just as guilty as the murder in my eye.

It was quite justified, and I hope that people would come to my aid if I required it be it resulting in the death of my assailant or not.

A human is responsible for defending another human. Morally and ethically responsible.

Now as far as the use of force goes, the attacker was armed, with a knife. A knife is just as deadly as a gun. it is a weapon. Force was used against a criminal using like force.

If he had not had a gun, the woman could have been murdered and the her "protector" could have been hurt or much much worse, also murdered.

[Durandal]

I'll add a little extra...

If a cop can shoot a dude charging him or her with a knife, I can DAMN WELL shoot a dude intent on killing a woman with a similar weapon.

I would feel guilty the rest of my life I had not.

[Abolith]

Minardiau, if the women had been attacked by a raging dog, biting and clawing intent upon killing her would THAT be a justifiable shooting??

[Creeper]

I'll add a little extra...

If a cop can shoot a dude charging him or her with a knife, I can DAMN WELL shoot a dude intent on killing a woman with a similar weapon.

I would feel guilty the rest of my life I had not.

Well put- The word/term you usedINTENT, carries alot of weight in accurently responding to the threat- assumed one utilizes the 5 tier "threat pryramid" (whatever the dammed thing is oficiallycalled- i got the dammed notes)

[Creeper]

Durandal wrote: "A human is responsible for defending another human. Morally and ethically responsible. "

He used the term RESPONSIBLE, here in the states we are afforded a great deal of that, (in its function as a noun or the inflected forms) use it with proper-moral-accurate judgement, one shall not have a problem with the courts etc,,,

We are trusted by out local, state, and federal government to act as such.
Failure to do so,,, pay the Pieper.

I certainally COULD talk all night about this issue, but I have cold beer to drink and guns to clean (NOT-JUST KIDDING)

So screw all the free thinking Liberals-antigun turds that disagree with me.
:P

[Geezah]

This is not justified homicide.

This man himself was not in direct danger.

He should not be charged with murder but should atleast be charged with manslaughter.

Not sure if this has been covered by someone else but, if you fear for the life of yourself, a family member of an innocent third party, then you can use lethal force to remove that threat.

Already got ya covered Geezah ;)

By the way, did you get my PM? p-)

Nice one and PM returned, sorry about the tardy response.

[Belrick]

Brilliant comments.

You yanks need to all arm yourselfs (oops already done) get rid of your cops and just handle crime yourself.
May the man with the fastest arm win!
BANG BANG!

Wohooo. Hey honey i shot and killed a man today on my way home from cleaning the local school.

Fu*k as the CCW executioner has shown, you dont need to be trained in law enforcement. Anyone with 9mm's in there belt can do it!!!

Afterall theres no chance of ever getting it wrong and killing an innocent is there?

(shiite, if a man can get his brains scattered over a train by a trained cop merely for being a dark skinned electrician how the @)&^@$ do you expect civilians to get it right in who they chose to slay?)

[Geezah]

Belrick, please........

Law Enforcement, enforce the law.

Civilians that CCW do so not to enforce the law, but to protect themsleves, their family and innocent third parties. So please get off this 'Wild West Everyone in America is Armed' bandwagon, and produce facts!

Also your comment about schools, these are "Gun Free Zones", only people that pay attention to this, are the law abiding!

[HooyahCQB]

Belrick. I'll be sure to let you get stabbed to death in Wal Mart if you visit the states and find yourself in a similar situation, because I don't want to offend your views.

[StukaJr]

Belrick:

The issue in this thread is US, not Brittish Laws.

Acting within the confines of the US and State law (sometimes, local laws as well) when the Law Enforcement Agencies are not present to serve and protect.

Trial and Jury is a great way to judge and persecute someone of a crime committed - note the past tense. The aforementioned case is that of a crime being stopped in progress - has the "executioner" shot the knife wielding assailant standing over a lifeless body, he would have been charged by the police.

Hone your comprehension skills. Yanks or no Yanks - when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

[joe mama]

Fu*k as the CCW executioner has shown, you dont need to be trained in law enforcement. Anyone with 9mm's in there belt can do it!!!

Exactly how much training in law enforcement does someone need to see a man stabbing a woman repeatedly with a knife to recognize:
1) a crime is happening
2) this woman may die if the attack is not stopped asap
3) in the US, use of deadly force is, generally, legal, when in defense of your own life or the life of another when you (or the third person) is threatened with serious bodily harm or death?

Afterall theres no chance of ever getting it wrong and killing an innocent is there?(shiite, if a man can get his brains scattered over a train by a trained cop merely for being a dark skinned electrician how the @)&^@$ do you expect civilians to get it right in who they chose to slay?)

Funny, I don't remember seeing a single post from anyone saying that there's no chance of getting it wrong. The best commando in the world could have gotten it wrong, should he have not acted if he was there? What's with the obsession anti ccw (or anti gun, whatever) people have with shooting innocents? Are you people all that bad at shooting that you think no one knows how? Anyway, apparently this civilian got it right. As have others. And you seem to continuously ignore the fact that this civilian getting it right, which I'm sure you think is a miracle, if you even acknowledge that he got it right, allowed the innocent person to live. Don't worry though, I'm sure the woman who is alive today because of the "CCW executioner" interrupting her being stabbed feels the same way as you and thinks he shouldn't have intervened.


Wait a minute, why are you even still here? Didn't I tell you that if I ever see you being stabbed, even if it's completely legal for me to intervene by shooting the guy stabbing you, I won't, just so you feel better about it? After all, god forbid I do something to intervene that might be violent enough to stop the guy quickly, which might be important, you are, after all, being stabbed, repeatedly, right that second and are, therefore, in extreme danger of being killed, because whatever I do, not just shooting him, well, gosh and golly gee, it might hurt him so bad he might die, and that would be just plain wrong. Don't worry, I give as much concern to you maybe dying as you're giving to this woman.

Now if you'll excuse me, I must mosey on out to buy a new cowboy hat and look for somebody to shoot so's I can carve another knotch in my gun, since that's how everybody is here.

If you have any questions, please first review the part where I assure you that if you're being stabbed, I won't offend you by trying to intervene by shooting your attacker, so you have nothing to worry about. You'll be stabbed and possibly dead, but you'll feel good about it because the crazy gun nut with no law enforcement training didn't interfere.

[Durandal]

(shiite, if a man can get his brains scattered over a train by a trained cop merely for being a dark skinned electrician how the @)&^@$ do you expect civilians to get it right in who they chose to slay?)

By making it just difficult enough that people who have enough responsibility to go out and get the training and take the test are more than likely competent enough to make the call.

Cops are not some special case. The are citizens like the rest of us. Nor do they have they have the legal right to interpret or change the laws. They are simply enforcers of the laws.

Conceal Carry Laws are quite clear and they also drum it into your skull when its a justifiable use and when its not.

Most people that get conceal carry permits understand that to draw a weapon can result in jail time and that it is to be done sparingly and for a damn good reason.

Please do not make sound as if every yahoo gets a permit. You go through a background check and even though the entire population who can legal own a firearms can get a permit, roughly on 2% or less of a population actually gets a permit and of those, even less carry ALL the time.

But its enough to matter. ;)

[Geezah]

Something else that Belrick needs to understand, there are allot of Law Enforcement Officers that only shoot their firearms when they need to qualify.
Unlike us gun toting lawless lunatics, we shoot all the time, because we enjoy shooting, constantly working on our skills.

If anyone could post/host the Police Shootout in Wilmington, where the Crim and Police Officer were less than 10' apart but neither of them could hit the broad side of a barn, this would be great to prove a point?

[joe mama]

Something else that Belrick needs to understand, there are allot of Law Enforcement Officers that only shoot their firearms when they need to qualify.
Unlike us gun toting lawless lunatics, we shoot all the time, because we enjoy shooting, constantly working on our skills.

If anyone could post/host the Police Shootout in Wilmington, where the Crim and Police Officer were less than 10' apart but neither of them could hit the broad side of a barn, this would be great to prove a point?

Yeah but Geezah, the cops that shoot only now and then are still 19th degree black belt ninja's in gun-fu and don't need to shoot any more. And the main reason they don't is because everyone knows that all bullets are children/grandma seeking and if they shot more lots of those bullets would kill innocents immediately. Us gun nuts only shoot alot because we're insane and trigger happy and are hoping to kill children and puppies and grannies and frogs with funny little hats. Also we have to shoot more, because we don't have the super ninja cop gene in us that all cops have that make them elite expert marksmen...if we did, we'd be cops...

[Durandal]

If anyone could post/host the Police Shootout in Wilmington, where the Crim and Police Officer were less than 10' apart but neither of them could hit the broad side of a barn, this would be great to prove a point?

Speaking of which we need to get together sometime this month to see, again, whoi is the better shot. ;)

Maybe next weekend or the one after that. Last weekend in September Christie and I are going camping down at Red River Gorge.

[Geezah]

If anyone could post/host the Police Shootout in Wilmington, where the Crim and Police Officer were less than 10' apart but neither of them could hit the broad side of a barn, this would be great to prove a point?

Speaking of which we need to get together sometime this month to see, again, whoi is the better shot. ;)

Maybe next weekend or the one after that. Last weekend in September Christie and I are going camping down at Red River Gorge.

Possibly the weekend of the 10th, my little bro told me that if he enjoys shooting Labour Day weekend, he wants to go again(which is fine by me), I'll confirm once he gets here, plus I still have your home digits.
Mine is still the same also.

I'll be out of the office all next week and will have no internet access unless I come in here for something ;)

[Durandal]

I'll be out of the office all next week and will have no internet access unless I come in here for something ;)

This weekend I am going fishing with Christie's dad...going to ask him for his blessings, then pop the question at the end of this month. :D

So I'll be busy with that next week.

The 10th sounds solid...I'll pencil it in.

[Geezah]

I'll be out of the office all next week and will have no internet access unless I come in here for something ;)

This weekend I am going fishing with Christie's dad...going to ask him for his blessings, then pop the question at the end of this month. :D

So I'll be busy with that next week.


Mate......that's top notch woot

Even though I've only met Christie once, she's a real likeable person, real easy to talk to. Congratulations.

That's great :D



The 10th sounds solid...I'll pencil it in.

Just keep in mind he may change his mind(once he gets to shoot my 12ga p-) ), so it may just be us shooting but this will also put the date off as I will be spending time with my little bro the weekend of the 10th.

I'll keep you posted.

[Oddbod]

Why would anyone complain if we shot Frogs in funny little hats?

Would it make a difference if we wore big hats instead?

Or do you mean that they should stopwearing berets? ;)

[Durandal]

I think the events taking place in New Orleans is a perfect example of why you need a firearm and a license to legally carry it in public.

End of discussion.

[Belrick]

Belrick, please........

Law Enforcement, enforce the law.

Civilians that CCW do so not to enforce the law, but to protect themsleves, their family and innocent third parties. So please get off this 'Wild West Everyone in America is Armed' bandwagon, and produce facts!

Also your comment about schools, these are "Gun Free Zones", only people that pay attention to this, are the law abiding!

Your confused... Understandable since your desperate to defend the right for this CCW to murder another person.
Ill help you.

The CCW man wasnt defending himself. (<- makes your ENTIRE post pointless and random and very niave)


Ill give you a simple to understand example.
A citizen in NZ recently caught a burgler in the act and chased him. The would be burglar turned and lashed out with a toy scooter. The citizen hit back with a bat and gave him the bash with it....
What do you think would happen if a CCW chanced upon that scene just at that moment?

Starting to sink in yet?

(what actually happened was the citizen called the cops who turned up and promptly arrested him, he was charged with assualt but the company who the burglar was breaking into paid his fine)

I like NZ, little to no one has guns. Check out of ratio of gun related deaths to yours yanks then give me more pro-gun excuses as to why little children need have there brains accidently blown out just so you can carry around your ego boosting toys.

[Belrick]

I think the events taking place in New Orleans is a perfect example of why you need a firearm and a license to legally carry it in public.

End of discussion.

By your rather silly comment then Iran can also say that events in nuclear wars require them to also have nukes.

Duh.

Theres armed people on the street with assualt rifles shooting at people. If there were no guns theyd be using harsh language.

Silly.

[Belrick]

Belrick. I'll be sure to let you get stabbed to death in Wal Mart if you visit the states and find yourself in a similar situation, because I don't want to offend your views.

You miss my point completely.

I dont want you having a gun at all in a wal mart. Why the F**K do you need to carry a people killer in order to go shopping? In case your credit card is declined and you have to rob the place???

WTF!!!! why do you need tools to help you slay humans in order to put a can of baked beans in a trolley?

[BarkingSquirrel]

I'm not going to ask you if you were dropped on your head as a baby, that would be stupid...

...So how many times were you dropped on your head as a baby?

[Geezah]

Belrick, please........

Law Enforcement, enforce the law.

Civilians that CCW do so not to enforce the law, but to protect themsleves, their family and innocent third parties. So please get off this 'Wild West Everyone in America is Armed' bandwagon, and produce facts!

Also your comment about schools, these are "Gun Free Zones", only people that pay attention to this, are the law abiding!

Your confused... Understandable since your desperate to defend the right for this CCW to murder another person.
Ill help you.

The CCW man wasnt defending himself. (<- makes your ENTIRE post pointless and random and very niave)

Maybe you should have read my post more than once, just incase you didn't get it I'll post it again in a larger font.


Belrick, please........

Law Enforcement, enforce the law.

Civilians that CCW do so not to enforce the law, but to protect themsleves, their family
and innocent third parties. So please get off this 'Wild West Everyone in America is Armed' bandwagon, and produce facts!

Also your comment about schools, these are "Gun Free Zones", only people that pay attention to this, are the law abiding!

Anyone other than yourself or a family member would be a thrid party ;)



Ill give you a simple to understand example.
A citizen in NZ recently caught a burgler in the act and chased him. The would be burglar turned and lashed out with a toy scooter. The citizen hit back with a bat and gave him the bash with it....
What do you think would happen if a CCW chanced upon that scene just at that moment?

Shoot the burglar?

Please, that example does even come close to the original story.



Starting to sink in yet?

(what actually happened was the citizen called the cops who turned up and promptly arrested him, he was charged with assualt but the company who the burglar was breaking into paid his fine)

I like NZ, little to no one has guns. Check out of ratio of gun related deaths to yours yanks then give me more pro-gun excuses as to why little children need have there brains accidently blown out just so you can carry around your ego boosting toys.

Sorry, how many children are killed a year by "ego boosting toys" in the US of A?

From what I can tell there are quite a few lawfully owned firearms in NZ, and I remember a story a while back where a CoP decided that they did not need any kind of new restrictions on ownership.

[Geezah]

Belrick. I'll be sure to let you get stabbed to death in Wal Mart if you visit the states and find yourself in a similar situation, because I don't want to offend your views.

You miss my point completely.

I dont want you having a gun at all in a wal mart. Why the F**K do you need to carry a people killer in order to go shopping? In case your credit card is declined and you have to rob the place???

WTF!!!! why do you need tools to help you slay humans in order to put a can of baked beans in a trolley?

You have a serious problem understanding that people that carry legally are held to a much higher standard than normal citizens. I would like for you to show all of us how many times a law abiding citizen with CCW over here has broken the law?

[joe mama]

Belrick. I'll be sure to let you get stabbed to death in Wal Mart if you visit the states and find yourself in a similar situation, because I don't want to offend your views.

You miss my point completely.

I dont want you having a gun at all in a wal mart. Why the F**K do you need to carry a people killer in order to go shopping? In case your credit card is declined and you have to rob the place???

WTF!!!! why do you need tools to help you slay humans in order to put a can of baked beans in a trolley?

I'm sure the woman who is alive today because the guy was ccw'ing is as upset as you that this guy decdied, for whatever reasons, to be LEGALLY carrying that day. And, amazingly, even though he had "a people killer" and a "tools to help you slay humans", he managed, somehow, to resist it's evil and only used it LEGALLY. He must have the superduper cop gene that most civilians don't have to be able to resist that evil, huh? After all, everybody knows the vast majority of the rest of the 80 MILLION legal gun owners in the US can't resist it, right? Because it's the legal gun owners committing all the gun crimes in the US, right?

[Oddbod]

You miss my point completely.

I dont want you having a gun at all in a wal mart. Why the F**K do you need to carry a people killer in order to go shopping? In case your credit card is declined and you have to rob the place???

WTF!!!! why do you need tools to help you slay humans in order to put a can of baked beans in a trolley?

The tool isn't there to slay humans - it's there to protect IF NECESSARY.

Do you think that the criminals will disarm if everyone else does?

Here's a clue: look at the rise in violent crime in the UK(where it is now higher than in the US).