North Charleston : Thug robs Waffle House; Concealed carry citizen shoots him. Crime solved!

[HereWeGoAgain]

And this is why enacting CWP laws LOWERS crime. This 1 thug is dead. Shot during an armed robbery by a CWP holder.

1000 other thugs will read about it.

And when they scope out a business to rob....they scout it looking for cops. They know a 911 call means they have 3-5 minutes to do the deed before cops arrive.

But CWP holders??? They could be anywhere anytime. And thugs know it.

This 1 incident will prevent 100 future ones.

I wouldnt go as far as to say that when you consider the level of intelligence the average ghetto rat holds.
Although it most certainly will make the smarter one's think twice.

 

[semaj]

Such encounters happen more often than the national press reports. For example, a clerk in an Omaha store thought he and his customers were in danger. He pulled a gun from under a counter and a gun battle resulted as it spread into the street. One bad guy was killed, I think, and another was paralysed.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

Your premise was that if the thug didn't shoot first.....then he shouldn't have been shot. Even if he was pointing a gun at people.

Otherwise....you wouldn't have asked. But you did. Because to you...it matters if the thug shot first. Because you think he shouldn't have been shot if he didn't also shoot.

Fuck you asshole, don't you EVER put words in my mouth.
I asked whether the customer shot first, or returned fire. In other words, who initiated it. And you don't know. I could have asked how he found it necessary to kill-shoot instead of disable. You wouldn't know that either, nor were you willing to wait to find out, because you'd already assumed the roles of judge, jury and governor approving an execution.

See....when we point out your retardedness you don't understand it....because...you're a retard.

Go fuck yourself ya whiny little bitch.

The animal was robbing people with a gun. Civil society doesn't do that. And yes....someone might kill you because we aren't obligated to wait and see if you shoot first or not.

See what I mean? You just did it again. "The animal".

What was his name? Where'd he live? What was he like?
You don't know and don't want to know, because that would humanize him.

Values. Go get some.

So you want to wound a guy with a gun in his hand?
Yeah,that'll go over real well..

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

CWP holder was eating breakfast.

Nowhere does it say the CWP was 'eating breakfast', or what he or anybody else was doing.

LIAR.

Thug ran in pointing a gun at people.

Nowhere does it say anybody was "pointing a gun at people". Outside of the CWP there's no mention of a "gun" at all.

LIAR.

Who initiated it?!?!?!

You did, making shit up you don't know.

And yes...animal. I don't know his name or race. I don't care. I don't give a damn about "humanizing" him. He ran into a restaurant pointing a gun at innocent people. That's not a civilized human. He's acting like an ANIMAL. Like a bigger lion running smaller ones away from a carcass by force. Animals do that. Humans dont.

Again, nowhere does it say anybody "pointed a gun" at anybody. You pulled that out of your ass, because you don't wait for facts. The "animal" exists only in your sicko fantasy.

You don't even know his NAME.

Oh...and I'll put whatever words I want in your mouth douche bag haha. And you can't do a damn thing about it!

I am compelled to amend: ADMITTED LIAR.

He was at the waffle house....you think he was there for a shoe shine?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

Your premise was that if the thug didn't shoot first.....then he shouldn't have been shot. Even if he was pointing a gun at people.

Otherwise....you wouldn't have asked. But you did. Because to you...it matters if the thug shot first. Because you think he shouldn't have been shot if he didn't also shoot.

Fuck you asshole, don't you EVER put words in my mouth.
I asked whether the customer shot first, or returned fire. In other words, who initiated it. And you don't know. I could have asked how he found it necessary to kill-shoot instead of disable. You wouldn't know that either, nor were you willing to wait to find out, because you'd already assumed the roles of judge, jury and governor approving an execution.

See....when we point out your retardedness you don't understand it....because...you're a retard.

Go fuck yourself ya whiny little bitch.

The animal was robbing people with a gun. Civil society doesn't do that. And yes....someone might kill you because we aren't obligated to wait and see if you shoot first or not.

See what I mean? You just did it again. "The animal".

What was his name? Where'd he live? What was he like?
You don't know and don't want to know, because that would humanize him.

Values. Go get some.

So you want to wound a guy with a gun in his hand?
Yeah,that'll go over real well..

--LOL

the way the anti thinks

--LOL

first off you cant have a gun

well if you must have a gun

you cant carry it concealed for protection

then again if you carry it concealed for protection

you can only shoot a bad guy in the foot

--LOL

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

The law is on the side of the shooter in this case. Nowhere does it say the criminal has to shoot first, it says reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, Or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The last part, prevent a forcible felony requires no shot prior to defense, does not even require someone be shot first.
Law worked. Time to move on and get rid of the next thug.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

The law is on the side of the shooter in this case. Nowhere does it say the criminal has to shoot first, it says reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, Or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The last part, prevent a forcible felony requires no shot prior to defense, does not even require someone be shot first.
Law worked. Time to move on and get rid of the next thug.

in this case the felony was already in progress

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

The law is on the side of the shooter in this case. Nowhere does it say the criminal has to shoot first, it says reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, Or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The last part, prevent a forcible felony requires no shot prior to defense, does not even require someone be shot first.
Law worked. Time to move on and get rid of the next thug.

in this case the felony was already in progress

If it had not been already in progress, the outcome would be different, then we get into that mind reading thing and having to prove that the guy walked into the business with the intent to rob it.
One must wait until the act is in progress to avoid questions.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

The law is on the side of the shooter in this case. Nowhere does it say the criminal has to shoot first, it says reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, Or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The last part, prevent a forcible felony requires no shot prior to defense, does not even require someone be shot first.
Law worked. Time to move on and get rid of the next thug.

in this case the felony was already in progress

If it had not been already in progress, the outcome would be different, then we get into that mind reading thing and having to prove that the guy walked into the business with the intent to rob it.
One must wait until the act is in progress to avoid questions.

Black dude in a Waffle House already raises hackles. The robbery probably didn't surprise anyone. What else was he there for, the Sunrise Special of the day?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

The law is on the side of the shooter in this case. Nowhere does it say the criminal has to shoot first, it says reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, Or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The last part, prevent a forcible felony requires no shot prior to defense, does not even require someone be shot first.
Law worked. Time to move on and get rid of the next thug.

in this case the felony was already in progress

If it had not been already in progress, the outcome would be different, then we get into that mind reading thing and having to prove that the guy walked into the business with the intent to rob it.
One must wait until the act is in progress to avoid questions.

Black dude in a Waffle House already raises hackles. The robbery probably didn't surprise anyone. What else was he there for, the Sunrise Special of the day?

Not being sure of the negro diet requirements, I cant honestly say that they don't eat waffles.

They eat them at home. Aunt Jemima insists.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

“A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another, or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

The law is on the side of the shooter in this case. Nowhere does it say the criminal has to shoot first, it says reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, Or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
The last part, prevent a forcible felony requires no shot prior to defense, does not even require someone be shot first.
Law worked. Time to move on and get rid of the next thug.

in this case the felony was already in progress

If it had not been already in progress, the outcome would be different, then we get into that mind reading thing and having to prove that the guy walked into the business with the intent to rob it.
One must wait until the act is in progress to avoid questions.

Black dude in a Waffle House already raises hackles. The robbery probably didn't surprise anyone. What else was he there for, the Sunrise Special of the day?

Not being sure of the negro diet requirements, I cant honestly say that they don't eat waffles.

They eat them at home. Aunt Jemima insists.

I thought Aunt Jemima because an uncle/Aunt Tom in their eyes when she tried to look white with that change in hair style.

 

[westwall]

CCW qualification is a joke. Do you know a single person who paid the money but failed the qualification? Of course you don't. CCW just means you paid the money and sat in a very short class. It doesn't mean you aren't as likely to shoot an innocent bystander as your target.

In AZ, where I live, there is no "Qualification". You fill out a form, write a check, and walk out with a CCW. Since even that is not required here, few people even bother to do that. Nevada stoped reciprocating CCW authorizations with AZ on CCW's.

Yup. Nevada requires you to demonstrate a level of skill with your weapon.

What level of skill? No time limit, and no limit on the times you repeat. You can keep shooting till the last shots fired add up to 70%. The only skill required is being able to pay the money.
Someone who had never seen a gun could plan on spending half a day to meet that standard.
CCW Reno Frequently Asked Questions

Time limit. Ranges of 7 and 15 yards. And the level of difficulty depends on who is doing the training. Some are better than others. The MAJORITY of people carrying weapons are very familiar with them and have much higher levels of training than law enforcement. Much higher. There are some newbies though. No question about that.

No time limit according to ConcealedCarryNevada.com. We both know that only a few have anything but very limited training,but I'm willing to look at any proof you can come up with that the MAJORITY are very familiar with them.

I don't care. I conceded to you that the standards aren't high. But there are some. We also both know that the number of people who carry guns who's sole experience with them is that training is likewise very small. How about you show us some links to CCW carriers engaging in criminal activity, randomly shooting up people for no apparent reason, accidentally shooting innocent people, and accidentally shooting themselves.

We know it happens. We know that there are millions of them, so you should have no trouble finding a whole bunch of them. Knock yourself out, show us how menacing they are.

 

[westwall]

Big fucking deal. Law enforcement training concentrates on report writing, interpretation of the law and social work. However they spend precious little time on firearms training. To the modern day law enforcement administrator the gun is a tool on the belt and a little used one at that. I have spent decades with law enforcement and have watched the steady decline in firearms skills of those who graduate from the academy. When I was in the Bay Area there were maybe 5 cops who could shoot as good as me. All of them had gone through Coopers Gunsite training on their own dime and that's where we met.

You're nothing but a blowhard who knows nothing. We can call you the Jon Snow of USMB!

That's a big part of the problem. Cops aren't getting the training they should, and their judgement is crap as a consequence.

Ah. And the mandatory "I out shot all the cops this one day at the gun range" story. These are always good.

Of course he out shot the cops. He's also a geologist who teaches classes to weather scientists, and probably an astronaut/concert pianist on weekends. After reading some of WW's claims,I'm truly in awe of his accomplishments.

Shit I'm nothing. You should have met one of my buddies. He was a surgeon named Harper and was a US Naval officer. He also won the Palma Match (look it up) 3 times. He also incidentally set up the first MASH unit on the beach at Iwo Jima and performed open heart surgery on a wounded marine thus saving the mans life. You would be shocked that most people who are serious shooters are also very accomplished in academia, business, engineering, medicine, and other professional pursuits.

Basically we do things. You probably don't understand that.

Oh I think I understand completely. You act as if you don't think I am familiar with guns, or many of the people who have become gun nuts in the last few years because of politics.

Big fucking deal. Law enforcement training concentrates on report writing, interpretation of the law and social work. However they spend precious little time on firearms training. To the modern day law enforcement administrator the gun is a tool on the belt and a little used one at that. I have spent decades with law enforcement and have watched the steady decline in firearms skills of those who graduate from the academy. When I was in the Bay Area there were maybe 5 cops who could shoot as good as me. All of them had gone through Coopers Gunsite training on their own dime and that's where we met.

You're nothing but a blowhard who knows nothing. We can call you the Jon Snow of USMB!

That's a big part of the problem. Cops aren't getting the training they should, and their judgement is crap as a consequence.

Ah. And the mandatory "I out shot all the cops this one day at the gun range" story. These are always good.

Of course he out shot the cops. He's also a geologist who teaches classes to weather scientists, and probably an astronaut/concert pianist on weekends. After reading some of WW's claims,I'm truly in awe of his accomplishments.

Shit I'm nothing. You should have met one of my buddies. He was a surgeon named Harper and was a US Naval officer. He also won the Palma Match (look it up) 3 times. He also incidentally set up the first MASH unit on the beach at Iwo Jima and performed open heart surgery on a wounded marine thus saving the mans life. You would be shocked that most people who are serious shooters are also very accomplished in academia, business, engineering, medicine, and other professional pursuits.

Basically we do things. You probably don't understand that.

Oh I think I understand completely. You act as if you don't think I am familiar with guns, or many of the people who have become gun nuts in the last few years because of politics.

No, I think you don't. Your condescending attitude is pretty obvious. The facts are serious shooters are universally accomplished people who do lots of things other than shoot. While you and your buddies are smoking your dope, or swilling your beer, we are doing other things. I also am a pilot, and I like making things on my Bridgeport mill and Clausing lathe. I'm almost 70 years old and I plan on staying very active right up till they plant me.

That's the difference. People like you bleat a lot about what go's on around you. We actually do things. Something that you and morons like dainty, can never ever hope to comprehend. You'd rather sit on your couch and watch football.

 

[westwall]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

Your premise was that if the thug didn't shoot first.....then he shouldn't have been shot. Even if he was pointing a gun at people.

Otherwise....you wouldn't have asked. But you did. Because to you...it matters if the thug shot first. Because you think he shouldn't have been shot if he didn't also shoot.

Fuck you asshole, don't you EVER put words in my mouth.
I asked whether the customer shot first, or returned fire. In other words, who initiated it. And you don't know. I could have asked how he found it necessary to kill-shoot instead of disable. You wouldn't know that either, nor were you willing to wait to find out, because you'd already assumed the roles of judge, jury and governor approving an execution.

See....when we point out your retardedness you don't understand it....because...you're a retard.

Go fuck yourself ya whiny little bitch.

The animal was robbing people with a gun. Civil society doesn't do that. And yes....someone might kill you because we aren't obligated to wait and see if you shoot first or not.

See what I mean? You just did it again. "The animal".

What was his name? Where'd he live? What was he like?
You don't know and don't want to know, because that would humanize him.

Values. Go get some.

So you want to wound a guy with a gun in his hand?
Yeah,that'll go over real well..

I know. The stupid is strong in this one. Talk about basing your life on movies!

 

[dannyboys]

That's a big part of the problem. Cops aren't getting the training they should, and their judgement is crap as a consequence.

Ah. And the mandatory "I out shot all the cops this one day at the gun range" story. These are always good.

Of course he out shot the cops. He's also a geologist who teaches classes to weather scientists, and probably an astronaut/concert pianist on weekends. After reading some of WW's claims,I'm truly in awe of his accomplishments.

Shit I'm nothing. You should have met one of my buddies. He was a surgeon named Harper and was a US Naval officer. He also won the Palma Match (look it up) 3 times. He also incidentally set up the first MASH unit on the beach at Iwo Jima and performed open heart surgery on a wounded marine thus saving the mans life. You would be shocked that most people who are serious shooters are also very accomplished in academia, business, engineering, medicine, and other professional pursuits.

Basically we do things. You probably don't understand that.

Oh I think I understand completely. You act as if you don't think I am familiar with guns, or many of the people who have become gun nuts in the last few years because of politics.

That's a big part of the problem. Cops aren't getting the training they should, and their judgement is crap as a consequence.

Ah. And the mandatory "I out shot all the cops this one day at the gun range" story. These are always good.

Of course he out shot the cops. He's also a geologist who teaches classes to weather scientists, and probably an astronaut/concert pianist on weekends. After reading some of WW's claims,I'm truly in awe of his accomplishments.

Shit I'm nothing. You should have met one of my buddies. He was a surgeon named Harper and was a US Naval officer. He also won the Palma Match (look it up) 3 times. He also incidentally set up the first MASH unit on the beach at Iwo Jima and performed open heart surgery on a wounded marine thus saving the mans life. You would be shocked that most people who are serious shooters are also very accomplished in academia, business, engineering, medicine, and other professional pursuits.

Basically we do things. You probably don't understand that.

Oh I think I understand completely. You act as if you don't think I am familiar with guns, or many of the people who have become gun nuts in the last few years because of politics.

No, I think you don't. Your condescending attitude is pretty obvious. The facts are serious shooters are universally accomplished people who do lots of things other than shoot. While you and your buddies are smoking your dope, or swilling your beer, we are doing other things. I also am a pilot, and I like making things on my Bridgeport mill and Clausing lathe. I'm almost 70 years old and I plan on staying very active right up till they plant me.

That's the difference. People like you bleat a lot about what go's on around you. We actually do things. Something that you and morons like dainty, can never ever hope to comprehend. You'd rather sit on your couch and watch football.

These LIB pyjama-boys don't watch football on TV. Too 'violent'. They watch Oprah.

 

[dannyboys]

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

Your premise was that if the thug didn't shoot first.....then he shouldn't have been shot. Even if he was pointing a gun at people.

Otherwise....you wouldn't have asked. But you did. Because to you...it matters if the thug shot first. Because you think he shouldn't have been shot if he didn't also shoot.

Fuck you asshole, don't you EVER put words in my mouth.
I asked whether the customer shot first, or returned fire. In other words, who initiated it. And you don't know. I could have asked how he found it necessary to kill-shoot instead of disable. You wouldn't know that either, nor were you willing to wait to find out, because you'd already assumed the roles of judge, jury and governor approving an execution.

See....when we point out your retardedness you don't understand it....because...you're a retard.

Go fuck yourself ya whiny little bitch.

The animal was robbing people with a gun. Civil society doesn't do that. And yes....someone might kill you because we aren't obligated to wait and see if you shoot first or not.

See what I mean? You just did it again. "The animal".

What was his name? Where'd he live? What was he like?
You don't know and don't want to know, because that would humanize him.

Values. Go get some.

So you want to wound a guy with a gun in his hand?
Yeah,that'll go over real well..

I know. The stupid is strong in this one. Talk about basing your life on movies!

Hold on there pardner! If you're a good enough shot like Roy Rogers or The Lone Ranger you'll never have to actually hit anyone with a bullet. Just shoot the gun out of the 'bad guy's' hand.

 

[Pogo]

CWP holder was eating breakfast.

Nowhere does it say the CWP was 'eating breakfast', or what he or anybody else was doing.

LIAR.

Thug ran in pointing a gun at people.

Nowhere does it say anybody was "pointing a gun at people". Outside of the CWP there's no mention of a "gun" at all.

LIAR.

Who initiated it?!?!?!

You did, making shit up you don't know.

And yes...animal. I don't know his name or race. I don't care. I don't give a damn about "humanizing" him. He ran into a restaurant pointing a gun at innocent people. That's not a civilized human. He's acting like an ANIMAL. Like a bigger lion running smaller ones away from a carcass by force. Animals do that. Humans dont.

Again, nowhere does it say anybody "pointed a gun" at anybody. You pulled that out of your ass, because you don't wait for facts. The "animal" exists only in your sicko fantasy.

You don't even know his NAME.

Oh...and I'll put whatever words I want in your mouth douche bag haha. And you can't do a damn thing about it!

I am compelled to amend: ADMITTED LIAR.

He was at the waffle house....you think he was there for a shoe shine?

Ever try to actually EAT at a Waffle House? *

The poster claimed the patron was in the act of eating breakfast. He has no such info; he pulled that out of his ass in the bottomless torrent of fiction he's been plugging in here since he started this thread on a story that was only just developing. Like the perp "waving a gun in people's faces". Same thing, he made it up.


*Many years ago I was on the road and looking for a place for breakfast, but everywhere I went was packed with a waiting line. Then it dawned on me --- it was Mother's Day. So I went to a Waffle House, because nobody would think so little of their mom as to take her to Waffle House. I got right in.

 

[Pogo]

Ah. And the mandatory "I out shot all the cops this one day at the gun range" story. These are always good.

Of course he out shot the cops. He's also a geologist who teaches classes to weather scientists, and probably an astronaut/concert pianist on weekends. After reading some of WW's claims,I'm truly in awe of his accomplishments.

Shit I'm nothing. You should have met one of my buddies. He was a surgeon named Harper and was a US Naval officer. He also won the Palma Match (look it up) 3 times. He also incidentally set up the first MASH unit on the beach at Iwo Jima and performed open heart surgery on a wounded marine thus saving the mans life. You would be shocked that most people who are serious shooters are also very accomplished in academia, business, engineering, medicine, and other professional pursuits.

Basically we do things. You probably don't understand that.

Oh I think I understand completely. You act as if you don't think I am familiar with guns, or many of the people who have become gun nuts in the last few years because of politics.

Ah. And the mandatory "I out shot all the cops this one day at the gun range" story. These are always good.

Of course he out shot the cops. He's also a geologist who teaches classes to weather scientists, and probably an astronaut/concert pianist on weekends. After reading some of WW's claims,I'm truly in awe of his accomplishments.

Shit I'm nothing. You should have met one of my buddies. He was a surgeon named Harper and was a US Naval officer. He also won the Palma Match (look it up) 3 times. He also incidentally set up the first MASH unit on the beach at Iwo Jima and performed open heart surgery on a wounded marine thus saving the mans life. You would be shocked that most people who are serious shooters are also very accomplished in academia, business, engineering, medicine, and other professional pursuits.

Basically we do things. You probably don't understand that.

Oh I think I understand completely. You act as if you don't think I am familiar with guns, or many of the people who have become gun nuts in the last few years because of politics.

No, I think you don't. Your condescending attitude is pretty obvious. The facts are serious shooters are universally accomplished people who do lots of things other than shoot. While you and your buddies are smoking your dope, or swilling your beer, we are doing other things. I also am a pilot, and I like making things on my Bridgeport mill and Clausing lathe. I'm almost 70 years old and I plan on staying very active right up till they plant me.

That's the difference. People like you bleat a lot about what go's on around you. We actually do things. Something that you and morons like dainty, can never ever hope to comprehend. You'd rather sit on your couch and watch football.

These LIB pyjama-boys don't watch football on TV. Too 'violent'. They watch Oprah.

"TV"?

 

[Pogo]

Amazing the nonsense libs are saying.

Like the thug is entitled to shoot first.
Or the CWP holder must ensure its a REAL gun.
Or the crime simply shouldn't be stopped at all.

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

Your premise was that if the thug didn't shoot first.....then he shouldn't have been shot. Even if he was pointing a gun at people.

Otherwise....you wouldn't have asked. But you did. Because to you...it matters if the thug shot first. Because you think he shouldn't have been shot if he didn't also shoot.

Fuck you asshole, don't you EVER put words in my mouth.
I asked whether the customer shot first, or returned fire. In other words, who initiated it. And you don't know. I could have asked how he found it necessary to kill-shoot instead of disable. You wouldn't know that either, nor were you willing to wait to find out, because you'd already assumed the roles of judge, jury and governor approving an execution.

See....when we point out your retardedness you don't understand it....because...you're a retard.

Go fuck yourself ya whiny little bitch.

The animal was robbing people with a gun. Civil society doesn't do that. And yes....someone might kill you because we aren't obligated to wait and see if you shoot first or not.

See what I mean? You just did it again. "The animal".

What was his name? Where'd he live? What was he like?
You don't know and don't want to know, because that would humanize him.

Values. Go get some.

So you want to wound a guy with a gun in his hand?
Yeah,that'll go over real well..

I have no evidence the guy even had "a gun in his hand". That's OP embellishment, and he's not exactly a reliable source. Where's his weapon?

Where?

Anyway that post has nothing to do with "wounding" anybody or with firearms at all. It has to do with his sitting himself in judgment about shit he knows nothing about, to wit this incident, and filling in parts of the story he doesn't know by simply making it up. Which is what all of my posts here have been about from the first.

 

[westwall]

Libs =

Bux is a fucking liar. Nobody suggested anybody is "entitled to shoot" first, last or anywhere in between.

I asked him whether the patron "shot" or "shot back". As in "returned" fire. He couldn't answer, because he didn't know and still doesn't know. He just ass-umed, and decided on his own that an "animal" (his term) had to be put down.

--- which is what I mean by "values". Or in this case, lack thereof.

Your premise was that if the thug didn't shoot first.....then he shouldn't have been shot. Even if he was pointing a gun at people.

Otherwise....you wouldn't have asked. But you did. Because to you...it matters if the thug shot first. Because you think he shouldn't have been shot if he didn't also shoot.

Fuck you asshole, don't you EVER put words in my mouth.
I asked whether the customer shot first, or returned fire. In other words, who initiated it. And you don't know. I could have asked how he found it necessary to kill-shoot instead of disable. You wouldn't know that either, nor were you willing to wait to find out, because you'd already assumed the roles of judge, jury and governor approving an execution.

See....when we point out your retardedness you don't understand it....because...you're a retard.

Go fuck yourself ya whiny little bitch.

The animal was robbing people with a gun. Civil society doesn't do that. And yes....someone might kill you because we aren't obligated to wait and see if you shoot first or not.

See what I mean? You just did it again. "The animal".

What was his name? Where'd he live? What was he like?
You don't know and don't want to know, because that would humanize him.

Values. Go get some.

So you want to wound a guy with a gun in his hand?
Yeah,that'll go over real well..

I have no evidence the guy even had "a gun in his hand". That's OP embellishment, and he's not exactly a reliable source.

Where's his weapon? Where?

In the police evidence locker. Along with your brain evidently.