Why didn't someone carrying in that Texas Wal-Mart interviene to stop that mass shooting?

[Ghost1958]

Self defense is an individual responsibility, as soon as people learn not to count on us who do carry, and the police the better. Not everybody should carry, or want to, but don't expect me to stick my neck out for you.

That is individual choice as it should be.

But a honest question

If every armed citizen takes the "me and mine only" stance, will it not wind being that active shooters, are never challenged during their slaughter?

Police don't figure in the equation. They are rarely there when active shooters,strike and even more rarely will act to stop the shooter in time to make any difference.

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

As I said one can always come up with excuses for acting or not acting.

Having been assaulted more then once by people wishing to harm me by various means.

Having prevailed in those situations. They either went to jail or the hospital then jail.

I have little idea what it takes to defend ones self against attack.

As some one else said every plan is good until the first shot is fired.

Or as Mike Tyson said- "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"

Stuff happens one has to be prepared to deal with it.

 

[solus]

FI, truly saddened you believe my explained deliberations of defending myself & loved ones in SD situations are excuses!

That stated, I am excited and so glad your psyche premonition capabilities are so attuned to deal with, how did you just state it...oh ya, “Stuff happens one has to be prepared to deal with it.” events!

yet in all of your explanations...never have you expressed why you have this altruistic “do good” hero complex to blindly step up and defend strangers who don’t care one iota if you are mortally wounded?

 

[solus]

That is individual choice as it should be.

But a honest question

If every armed citizen takes the "me and mine only" stance, will it not wind being that active shooters, are never challenged during their slaughter?

Police don't figure in the equation. They are rarely there when active shooters,strike and even more rarely will act to stop the shooter in time to make any difference.

I believe you stated it best when you previously identified that judicial/civil systems need reforming...similarly the way this nation’s state’s clarified their “Good Samaritan“ statutes ~ hold harmless both judicially & civilly!

It is my perspective the LEs & justice system have pushed the whole mentality over the years that citizen’s using firearms is reminiscent of the wild west’s vigilante justice ~ violation of religious society’s conventions and was completely unacceptable in a “civilized“ community!

for example...
In my great state, one of the main tenets of the law states: “The citizen actually believes that deadly force is necessary to prevent an imminent threat of death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault”.

The second tenet states: “The facts and circumstances prompting that belief would cause a person of ordinary firmness to believe deadly force was necessary to prevent an immenent threat of death, great bodily harm or sexual assault”.

There are two more tenets regarding can’t be instigator/aggressor and use of excessive force!

FYI, judicially, great bodily injury is undefined, as is who the person of ordinary firmness is, as is a definition of excessive force!

further, NC law states a citizen points a loaded/unloaded firearm at anybody in jest/SD is a felony.

Inside the residence, auto, motorhome ~ change above wording of “believes” to “are there to cause”!

A further sidebar...there is no citizen arrest allowed in NC! [olde jim crow statute]

All the above vague laws on my use of deadly force significantly contributed to my conscious decisions not to defend strangers so i do not have to defend myself through the judicial system cuz some idiot savant’s definition did jive with my “believes”

 

[WalkingWolf]

That is individual choice as it should be.

But a honest question

If every armed citizen takes the "me and mine only" stance, will it not wind being that active shooters, are never challenged during their slaughter?

Police don't figure in the equation. They are rarely there when active shooters,strike and even more rarely will act to stop the shooter in time to make any difference.

If the victims had not relied on police, or armed citizens might they have stood a much better chance of survival than relying on a stranger?

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

FI, truly saddened you believe my explained deliberations of defending myself & loved ones in SD situations are excuses!

That stated, I am excited and so glad your psyche premonition capabilities are so attuned to deal with, how did you just state it...oh ya, “Stuff happens one has to be prepared to deal with it.” events!

yet in all of your explanations...never have you expressed why you have this altruistic “do good” hero complex to blindly step up and defend strangers who don’t care one iota if you are mortally wounded?

What I stated that one can make an excuse/reason to justify his action or inactions.

Sometimes that is made for you by the actions of others

The actions needed to save or defend ones loves goes from doing nothing to full out use of deadly force.

That depends on how the situation develops

To say I will only do this or that puts one at a disadvantage..

If one is so afraid of something bad happening one should never get out of bed in the morning. Because everything one does has a risk factor.

You should not ride in or on any motor vehicle for sure.

 

[Ghost1958]

As I said one can always come up with excuses for acting or not acting.

Having been assaulted more then once by people wishing to harm me by various means.

Having prevailed in those situations. They either went to jail or the hospital then jail.

I have little idea what it takes to defend ones self against attack.

As some one else said every plan is good until the first shot is fired.

Or as Mike Tyson said- "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"

Stuff happens one has to be prepared to deal with it.

I think some posts are being misunderstood.

A pre made decision to engage an active shooter if caught in that situation isn't a "plan".
The plan gets made and adapted as the situation changes.

The decision to draw against the drop is pre made by many . Including myself.
Exactly how that is done depends on circumstances , but it will be done.

Either of those decisions made ahead of time , gives one a pre set course of action which saves what could be precious seconds deciding to act or not.

If the victims had not relied on police, or armed citizens might they have stood a much better chance of survival than relying on a stranger?

Some probably. But there are many who, while supporting the RTKABA simply know they themselves cannot shoot another human being even to save themselves.
Which is their choice as you'll likely come back with. But in many cases they have children , handicapped folks, etc in their care who have no choice but be rendered defenseless by that person's decision.

Don't get me wrong. The decision to engage or not too is rightfully individual choice.
Many wont. But many will. Those that will should be immune from any criminal charge or civil action for engaging an active shooter.

 

[Firearms Iinstuctor]

I think some posts are being misunderstood

That can be a problem when typing not having a one on one conversation.

 

[color of law]

I think some posts are being misunderstood

That can be a problem when typing not having a one on one conversation.

We all could meet-up at the corner café and discuss it over a cup of coffee.

 

[solus]

Chai...never partook in java...

your area, mine or ghost’s or N WI ~ nawlll tis getting to cold there!!

Or MO for OC to join everyone?

free Friday > > Monday...

 

[bushwacker]

I'm from Texas, so trust me when I say with complete confidence that there *had* to be at least 20 handguns in that store at the time of that rampage shooting, either carried concealed or openly. So why didn't someone in posession of one of them stop the shooter? If we're going to say that we (OC and CCW'ers) carry for the sake of protecting ourselves and those around us under dire circumstances, have we let the public down after that rampage shooting? Can we still make that argument?

Why wasn't the victims carrying for themselves or why did nobody smash and grabb a shotgun and ammo from the sporting goods section in order to save The day

 

[solus]

So you are advocating stealing a firearm & ammo from a FFL out of their locked cages ~ really?

 

[WalkingWolf]

So you are advocating stealing a firearm & ammo from a FFL out of their locked cages ~ really?

In the case of a active shooter? Hell Yes! But the truth is it would be impractical. The person would have to get the right gun, the right ammo, as well as trying to remove the gun lock. The best option is personal responsibility, and the nads to be prepared, after all the courts have made it clear, it is your responsibility, not police, not an armed citizen but yours.

The best we can do as individuals is open carry, it is proven to prevent crime. I OC to protect myself, and only myself, but it is very very clear that crimes just do not happen where law abiding citizens openly carry. Conceal carry is not a deterrent because MOST people do not carry period, those that do look like a victim.

 

[color of law]

In the case of a active shooter? Hell Yes! But the truth is it would be impractical. The person would have to get the right gun, the right ammo, as well as trying to remove the gun lock. The best option is personal responsibility, and the nads to be prepared, after all the courts have made it clear, it is your responsibility, not police, not an armed citizen but yours.

The best we can do as individuals is open carry, it is proven to prevent crime. I OC to protect myself, and only myself, but it is very very clear that crimes just do not happen where law abiding citizens openly carry. Conceal carry is not a deterrent because MOST people do not carry period, those that do look like a victim.

 

[Ghost1958]

Why wasn't the victims carrying for themselves or why did nobody smash and grabb a shotgun and ammo from the sporting goods section in order to save The day

The Wal-Mart shooting occured at a Wal-Mart located in a mall that was a GFZ. Texas criminalizes the RTKABA if one passes their FOL signage.

I doubt there were 2 carrying in that store. And they would have been prosecuted for criminal tresspass had they revealed they were carrying.

 

[solus]

A gentle reminder of NC’s second tenet on the use of deadly force
The second tenet states: “The facts and circumstances prompting that belief would cause a person of ordinary firmness to believe deadly force was necessary to prevent an immenent threat of death, great bodily harm or sexual assault”.

29 Sept 19 USAToday quote,
...told police he saw someone trying to break into his storage shed around 5 a.m. after hearing a noise outside. He then grabbed his gun, went out and yelled that he'd shoot if the person came closer, according to the affidavit.

The person took several steps toward him... so he fired. As the burglar dropped his pickax and ran toward a nearby park, [he] fired another shot "into the night" in the direction of the park.

Allegedly not knowing whether he shot anyone, [he] told police he went back to bed. He got up around 7 a.m. and told police he thought he saw a "black bag" in the park. It turned out to be the man's body, according to the affidavit.

Investigators wrote the suspected burglar posed no threat of serious bodily injury once he ran off...

[he was] no longer in custody Sunday. His bond was set at $150,000 Friday, unquote.

A 72-year-old Dallas man fatally shot a burglar, then went back to sleep, police say

A 72-year-old Dallas man fatally shot a suspected burglar outside his home, authorities said, and went back to sleep before calling police.

www.usatoday.com

ya, i sleep well at night with my decision regarding statutory mandates of my OC’g and my use of deadly force in SD situations...

 

[color of law]

Where was the BG shot, in the chest or the back? We can only surmise the BG was shot in the back because the GG was charged.

 

[solus]

Where was the BG shot, in the chest or the back? We can only surmise the BG was shot in the back because the GG was charged.

Sorry took a moment to locate a source which stated that info...quote
Police found the alleged robber face down with a gunshot wound on the back of his neck, according to CBS Dallas/Fort Worth unquote https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dallas-texas-man-allegedly-kills-burglar-then-heads-back-to-bed/

doesn’t say if wound was a side graze or middle of the back of the neck or ????

 

[willy1094]

It's pretty easy to see I don't comment a lot but I've been thinking about this a lot then saw this post. I will say that I used to lean more toward going toward the trouble to try to help (used to be a volunteer Fire Fighter as mentioned) but then my son was born. Now I am a "get away if at all possible" person. Stay alive, I owe that to my family. The possible lawsuit is another situation that could affect my family. With that said, my wife and son will be moving toward the exit as I lag behind enough to keep an eye on them and keep the shooter away.

As WalkingWolf said, I also thought about breaking into the gun case for a shotgun if I happened to be unarmed. I also know I will not draw my gun and start making demands like "freeze!". Once my gun is drawn, I'm firing. There should be no situation where the gun comes out when you are not justified in firing so why give the other person a chance to fire on you first? Just my thoughts.

 

[KBCraig]

The Wal-Mart shooting occured at a Wal-Mart located in a mall that was a GFZ.

No, it did not. The gun-free mall was a neighboring property. There are no Walmart stores located in malls.