Church pastor, janitor shoot out

[whitehall]

Pastor shoots employee in gunfight at Kissimmee church

The pastor of a Kissimmee church shot and critically wounded an employee Tuesday morning in a shootout after he notified the man he was being fired, according to the Osceola County Sheriff's Office.

The shooting shortly after 8 a.m. was witnessed by other church workers at Living Water Fellowship on Pleasant Hill Road, said sheriff's spokeswoman Twis Lizasuain.

Benjamin Parangan Jr., a member of the maintenance crew for at least eight years, allegedly opened fire when he was told he no longer had a job, Lizasuain said.

The bullets missed Pastor Terry L. Howell Sr., 61, who drew his own pistol and critically wounded Parangan, 47, according to the Sheriff's Office.

Just another work day but good thing 'men of god' are packing heat these days.

Jesus would be so pleased.

Well, it isn't "just another work day". It's about the rarest shooting incident you could find in recent U.S. history. The more the bigots make light of serious incidents the more frequent they become.

 

[2aguy]

Well the janitor had a carry permit and you insist was then obeying the law until this one instance. So if he was law abiding he would not have had a gun.

You lost me on this one....what? What do you mean if he was law abiding he would not have had the gun....do you mean because the church was a gun free zone? He went there to commit murder.....

I believe he went there to work. When he was fired he got mad. And since you legally armed him he had a gun when he got mad and started shooting.

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

 

[Brain357]

Well the janitor had a carry permit and you insist was then obeying the law until this one instance. So if he was law abiding he would not have had a gun.

You lost me on this one....what? What do you mean if he was law abiding he would not have had the gun....do you mean because the church was a gun free zone? He went there to commit murder.....

I believe he went there to work. When he was fired he got mad. And since you legally armed him he had a gun when he got mad and started shooting.

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

 

[2aguy]

Well the janitor had a carry permit and you insist was then obeying the law until this one instance. So if he was law abiding he would not have had a gun.

You lost me on this one....what? What do you mean if he was law abiding he would not have had the gun....do you mean because the church was a gun free zone? He went there to commit murder.....

I believe he went there to work. When he was fired he got mad. And since you legally armed him he had a gun when he got mad and started shooting.

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

If he was willing to kill, a cooling off period wasn't going to stop him....just ask the theater killer, or the Santa Barbara killer....

Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

It seems like giving a concealed carry permit to the pastor was a very good idea....in fact...it saved several lives......

 

[Brain357]

Well the janitor had a carry permit and you insist was then obeying the law until this one instance. So if he was law abiding he would not have had a gun.

You lost me on this one....what? What do you mean if he was law abiding he would not have had the gun....do you mean because the church was a gun free zone? He went there to commit murder.....

I believe he went there to work. When he was fired he got mad. And since you legally armed him he had a gun when he got mad and started shooting.

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

If he was willing to kill, a cooling off period wasn't going to stop him....just ask the theater killer, or the Santa Barbara killer....

Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

It seems like giving a concealed carry permit to the pastor was a very good idea....in fact...it saved several lives......

You don't know that. You are comparing crazy mass shooters to a guy who got mad when he was fired.

Yes because you armed the janitor the pastor needed to be armed. Sounds like a great way to sell guns. But both not armed seems to be the better option.

 

[2aguy]

You lost me on this one....what? What do you mean if he was law abiding he would not have had the gun....do you mean because the church was a gun free zone? He went there to commit murder.....

I believe he went there to work. When he was fired he got mad. And since you legally armed him he had a gun when he got mad and started shooting.

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

If he was willing to kill, a cooling off period wasn't going to stop him....just ask the theater killer, or the Santa Barbara killer....

Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

It seems like giving a concealed carry permit to the pastor was a very good idea....in fact...it saved several lives......

You don't know that. You are comparing crazy mass shooters to a guy who got mad when he was fired.

Yes because you armed the janitor the pastor needed to be armed. Sounds like a great way to sell guns. But both not armed seems to be the better option.

Except...if you pass a law banning guns or carrying them....only the pastor would have been unarmed....the killer would have gotten a gun.....as the example in gun controlled Australia, Canada and France have shown us....

 

[Brain357]

I believe he went there to work. When he was fired he got mad. And since you legally armed him he had a gun when he got mad and started shooting.

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

If he was willing to kill, a cooling off period wasn't going to stop him....just ask the theater killer, or the Santa Barbara killer....

Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

It seems like giving a concealed carry permit to the pastor was a very good idea....in fact...it saved several lives......

You don't know that. You are comparing crazy mass shooters to a guy who got mad when he was fired.

Yes because you armed the janitor the pastor needed to be armed. Sounds like a great way to sell guns. But both not armed seems to be the better option.

Except...if you pass a law banning guns or carrying them....only the pastor would have been unarmed....the killer would have gotten a gun.....as the example in gun controlled Australia, Canada and France have shown us....

He was carrying a gun because he had a carry permit. You armed the bad guy. You are just guessing on everything else and that has no value.

 

[2aguy]

His having a gun had nothing to do with his ability to carry at work....just ask the 3 terrorists in France, gun controlled france where a known and convicted terrorist on government watch list acquired a arsenal of military grade Russian rifles and a rocket propelled grenade launcher.....

So if he wanted to kill people...gun laws would not have stopped him....since the laws against murdering people didn't stop him from trying that either....it was a good guy with a gun who stopped that....

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

If he was willing to kill, a cooling off period wasn't going to stop him....just ask the theater killer, or the Santa Barbara killer....

Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

It seems like giving a concealed carry permit to the pastor was a very good idea....in fact...it saved several lives......

You don't know that. You are comparing crazy mass shooters to a guy who got mad when he was fired.

Yes because you armed the janitor the pastor needed to be armed. Sounds like a great way to sell guns. But both not armed seems to be the better option.

Except...if you pass a law banning guns or carrying them....only the pastor would have been unarmed....the killer would have gotten a gun.....as the example in gun controlled Australia, Canada and France have shown us....

He was carrying a gun because he had a carry permit. You armed the bad guy. You are just guessing on everything else and that has no value.

not guessing....there are examples from our own country and around the world....there are 8-9,000 gun murders here every year....those are committed by felons who are not allowed to own guns.....and the mass shooters at Columbine were just teenagers...if they could get illegal guns, this guy could....but by law, the pastor would have been the only one of the two without a weapon....

again...France...with strict gun control...in particular gun control of fully automatic weapons.....3 guys got guns, one of them a convicted terrorist who served 3 years in prison and on a government, terrorist watch list, still able to get military grade, fully automatic rifles and a grenade launcher....

When criminals want or need guns, they get them.....laws only incarcerate, they do not stop the criminals like Tom Cruise in "minority report" with a "pre-crime" unit.....

 

[Brain357]

Or maybe he wouldn't have been carrying and had gone home and cooled off with no incident. Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

If he was willing to kill, a cooling off period wasn't going to stop him....just ask the theater killer, or the Santa Barbara killer....

Clearly giving this guy a license to carry was a very bad idea.

It seems like giving a concealed carry permit to the pastor was a very good idea....in fact...it saved several lives......

You don't know that. You are comparing crazy mass shooters to a guy who got mad when he was fired.

Yes because you armed the janitor the pastor needed to be armed. Sounds like a great way to sell guns. But both not armed seems to be the better option.

Except...if you pass a law banning guns or carrying them....only the pastor would have been unarmed....the killer would have gotten a gun.....as the example in gun controlled Australia, Canada and France have shown us....

He was carrying a gun because he had a carry permit. You armed the bad guy. You are just guessing on everything else and that has no value.

not guessing....there are examples from our own country and around the world....there are 8-9,000 gun murders here every year....those are committed by felons who are not allowed to own guns.....and the mass shooters at Columbine were just teenagers...if they could get illegal guns, this guy could....but by law, the pastor would have been the only one of the two without a weapon....

again...France...with strict gun control...in particular gun control of fully automatic weapons.....3 guys got guns, one of them a convicted terrorist who served 3 years in prison and on a government, terrorist watch list, still able to get military grade, fully automatic rifles and a grenade launcher....

When criminals want or need guns, they get them.....laws only incarcerate, they do not stop the criminals like Tom Cruise in "minority report" with a "pre-crime" unit.....

I'm not debating whether he could get a gun. What I'm saying is he was armed and so when he was mad at being fired he started shooting. Now if he had instead needed to go buy a gun illegally any number of things might have happened before he started shooting. He might have cooled off and no shooting. Maybe he'd get another job before he could find a gun and cool off. Maybe he gets caught illegally buying a gun. But him being legally armed was clearly the worst option in this case.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ Guns have to be allowed because people who do not care about laws will do whatever they have to do in order to get their hands on a gun no matter how guns are looked at by the authorities and if guns did not exist, the janitor would have been carrying something else, like a knife for example which can do just as much damage as a gun can if not more.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. Actually a knife could be worse because a person who has one may be more likely to not miss on their first swipe because the person they take the knife to will not know that they have one. When the janitor fired his first gun shot, he missed. If he had used a knife, the preacher would've been stabbed if he had not had the ability to fight the janitor off.