Geezer shoots punks

Maggot

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood"
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
  • Jul 27, 2007
    26,114
    29,861
    Virginia
    This old boy was really spitting lead, hit both of them. Needed a smile today.
    grin.gif


    [video:yahoo]http://www.wogx.com/video?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=7508687[/video]
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dennis_in_VA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hopefully that guy will be protected from any civil suits brought against him by either of those two thugs.
    </div></div>

    Most states that have stand your ground also have laws that protect a justified shooter from civil damages....Oklahoma does.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    Guy was aggressive, fast, accurate. He went from zero to full throttle almost instantly. Under stress conditions, he hit two moving perps in about five seconds, while moving himself... And after firing his last shot and watching the door close, his finger was already off the trigger and next to the slide. Then he locked the door and waited for police.

    That guy has his 'stuff' together in a major way. My bet is that he has spent a lot of time thinking about how to react in a situation like that. And situational awareness, muscle memory and practice paid off.

    A happy ending, indeed! Thanks for posting.

    Cheers,

    Sirhr
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MintyCock</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pretty damn good for a 71 year old.

    The stupid ass civilians didn't even hit the deck when the shooting started. </div></div>
    NEVER count on common sense when lead is flying.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dennis_in_VA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hopefully that guy will be protected from any civil suits brought against him by either of those two thugs.
    </div></div>

    If you freeze the video at the time he fires his first shot. The perp has his firearm pointed directly at him. No better evidence of being justified to use deadly force.

    Good for him.

    Note to perp number two. never ever bring a bat to a gunfight.

    Win for the good guys.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    This was taken from Yahoo news (yeah I know):
    "Officials said it is unlikely that Williams will be charged with a crime for <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="color: #FF0000">attacking</span></span> the teens because the shooting seemed justifiable."
    Why would they call this attacking? I think a better word, oh, I don't know...defending...would be a better choice. I think better verbage should have been used in favor of the victim. Good for the gentleman for doing what needed to be done.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sirhrmechanic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Guy was aggressive, fast, accurate. He went from zero to full throttle almost instantly. Under stress conditions, he hit two moving perps in about five seconds, while moving himself... And after firing his last shot and watching the door close, his finger was already off the trigger and next to the slide. Then he locked the door and waited for police.

    That guy has his 'stuff' together in a major way. My bet is that he has spent a lot of time thinking about how to react in a situation like that. And situational awareness, muscle memory and practice paid off.

    +1 I agree completely. Good work.

    A happy ending, indeed! Thanks for posting.

    Cheers,

    Sirhr </div></div>
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fpdsniper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is being reported as a .380. Too bad he didn't have a Springfield XDs .45acp....
    smile.gif
    </div></div>

    LOL I was thinking that, but with the extra mag ready as he clearly ran through the mag quickly. I'm picking one of those bad boys up tomorrow for a nice light carry rig.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    yes, that is great but why was he the only one armed there, where are all the CCW people, I really hope this will help the sheeples figure out what they need to be doing.
    congrats old man, you are a hero in my book.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TLong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This was taken from Yahoo news (yeah I know):
    "Officials said it is unlikely that Williams will be charged with a crime for <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="color: #FF0000">attacking</span></span> the teens because the shooting seemed justifiable."
    Why would they call this attacking? I think a better word, oh, I don't know...defending...would be a better choice. I think better verbage should have been used in favor of the victim. Good for the gentleman for doing what needed to be done. </div></div>

    Plain and simple is that the law is on the guys side and there is not controversy in it. The news doesn't want hero's now a days they want villains, and what this guys did needs to be broadcasted on every news station in the country and every person without a criminal background needs to receive a "how to apply for a CC letter" in the mail and let the criminals know this that way they think twice before doing stupid shit like this.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    What impressed me what how he followed and pursued the BG. He was at a pretty close range & there appeared to be hits - any word on injuries? Where these kids on drugs?

    I have taken numerous defensive handgun courses and was always taught to seek cover and retreat when facing assailant with firearm - the point of good training is hitting your target at a distance greater than assailants. Neutralize threat -done. I know there is an argument here he was protecting other patrons - but playing devil's advocate could his pursuit be an issue? The case with the armed pharmacist comes to mind....
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: UKDslayer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What impressed me what how he followed and pursued the BG. He was at a pretty close range & there appeared to be hits - any word on injuries? Where these kids on drugs?

    I have taken numerous defensive handgun courses and was always taught to seek cover and retreat when facing assailant with firearm - the point of good training is hitting your target at a distance greater than assailants. Neutralize threat -done. I know there is an argument here he was protecting other patrons - but playing devil's advocate could his pursuit be an issue? The case with the armed pharmacist comes to mind....</div></div>

    When I first saw the video, that was my exact thought. He shouldnt have pursued them, and then taken a shot at them after they exited the building. I think he did great, but unfortunately our legal system may not see it the same way. What is sad is that we actually have to think that way in a self defense situation because of the messed up thinking of our country and legal system. I would probably have done the same thing, but had a bigger caliber. Hope he turns out ok...

    Bill
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    Not to down play this mans heroic effort, but he never took cover. ABC had a special on this, that ccw carriers are likely to square up to a threat and give a full target. You need to train to find cover THEN fire From cover.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: maggot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This old boy was really spitting lead, hit both of them. Needed a smile today.
    grin.gif


    [video:yahoo]http://www.wogx.com/video?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=7508687[/video] </div></div>Saw that on "The Five" last night. Talk about bringing it "Old School"! I laughed when I saw those two bone heads scrambling out the door.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MGD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to down play this mans heroic effort, but he never took cover. ABC had a special on this, that ccw carriers are likely to square up to a threat and give a full target. You need to train to find cover THEN fire From cover. </div></div>

    The best defense is a good offense. The old guy wasnt taking any crap, he took the fight to them, and gave them more than they could handle. The only criticism I have was stated above...he wasnt packing a 45 ACP. That might have saved an expensive trial. Bravo.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    Tough to argue with results. His aggression overwhelmed these guys...who is to say that if he took cover that gives the criminal time to take the first shots?

    There is a well publicized but tough to watch video of a police officer who gets killed because he retreats seeking cover instead of aggressively attacking. He pulls over a guy who reaches for a 30 carbine. The officer fires as he is retreating and seeking the cover of his squad car. The killer advances using suppressive fire, aggressively seeking the officer and kills him.
    Any handgun, especially a 380, is not well suited to stop an attacker. Sometimes it may be appropriate to "square up" and get a quick good hit rather than seek cover. I think there are few hard and fast rules in these things and everything depends on the circumstances but it is a fact that raw aggression
    can win a fight.

    One thing to think about is that even if you are well trained and disciplined enough to not hit bystanders, chances are the bad guy won't be. The most important decision of all is whether to intervene at all. Once you do, I do believe aggressively attacking the threat has a lot of merit as it is more likely to stop the threat immediately with least risk to bystanders.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MGD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to down play this mans heroic effort, but he never took cover. ABC had a special on this, that ccw carriers are likely to square up to a threat and give a full target. You need to train to find cover THEN fire From cover.</div></div>

    If you look, he did go into a crouch (or at least started to) to decrease his profile. Completely involuntary reaction, IMO.

    KYPatriot is right on about advancing into the target under certain circumstances. Cover is the right thing to do sometimes. But there is also value to a rapid, aggressive advance. It was right on in this case, because the sierra bravos ran like cockroaches and were too surprised/scared/off balance to do anything effectively. They couldn't even get out the door without tripping.

    This guy called his moves right... and had some good training at some point, methinks. There is muscle memory all over his actions.

    Cheers,

    Sirhr
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MGD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to down play this mans heroic effort, but he never took cover. ABC had a special on this, that ccw carriers are likely to square up to a threat and give a full target. You need to train to find cover THEN fire From cover. </div></div>

    Bullshit. Some actions can only be won by mounting a strong counter offensive as was this case here.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MGD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to down play this mans heroic effort, but he never took cover. ABC had a special on this, that ccw carriers are likely to square up to a threat and give a full target. You need to train to find cover THEN fire From cover.</div></div>

    I would not take my firearms training advice from ABC.

    The man had a small gun, there were innocents walking all over the place, had he retreated to cover all sorts of issues would have arose. First the bad guys would have been farther away, hits would have been much more unlikely with the mouse gun (likely no real sights on it). Then there's the issue with the innocent bystanders likely getting shot by either party since they were now in the middle of a gunfight. Overall I'd say that he handled the situation in the best and most heroic way possible given the situation.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    So what's the fallout on this one? The cops let him go after a nice ride downtown? They take his weapon? Is he in custody until the DA decides to prosecute? What? The bad guys sue for hurting their feelings or making them fall down and look like idiots?


    It's a pretty damn clear (and public) case of self defense so I would be interested to know how the legal bits shake out and how the good guy fares in criminal and civil court.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    Um, just let me say that the current legal doctrines about using deadly force on a fleeing felon are bullshit and need to be revised.

    The requirement for "imminent" threat is generally valid, and was used to CONVICT a man in Las Vegas who in news reports was said to have engaged a fleeing suspect with a shotgun at 75 yards (I have no knowledge of slugs vs. super-buckshot vs. one lucky hit). Juries and judges are too willing to decide that threats instantly end when the felon turns to run.

    Truth of the matter is this: Once a person crosses that line, they remain a threat to everyone in my society, all of my citizens remain at risk during the flight of ANY armed felon. Because even terrified punks change their minds, you have every right to believe that they are fleeing for cover or looking for a hostage or might kill anyone who blocks their flight.

    So the law should allow anyone to use any deadly force on a fleeing violent felon.
     
    Re: Geezer shoots punks

    Keep in mind that though the armed citizen was firing at them as they 'fled', they were still close by, armed, and inside a space with other civilians. Inside 21 feet, a handgun or a bat are both lethal weapons. Ability, Opportunity and Jeopardy were all present, and so the CCW had no issues engaging.

    Another thing the CCW holder did right was that he stopped at the door (even though he shot through the opening) and locked it after the perps had fled. He didn't pursue them for blocks, or even go outside. He secured the inner space that he now dominated and that effectively ended the engagement.

    From what has been posted on this case on various news outlets, he will not be charged.

    Is he still open for civil suit? Yup. But whether the perps will pursue largely depends on whether a lawyer would take their case. And unless the CCW holder is a millionaire, it's a waste of time to go after him anyway... What will they get? And based on that video, be pretty hard to get a jury to convict the hero even on civil charges.

    Do keep in mind that if you use a firearm in self-defense (as a civilian or as an LEO) your life will change, at least for the short term. It is not a small thing to engage like this. For an LEO, you don't go to commercial break or roll credits. You go on suspension, you go in front of review boards, get grilled, blood-tested, psycho-analyzed, etc. You may get charged, dismissed, sued... or a citation for valor. Or maybe all the above.

    For civilians, you are at the mercy of your local prosecutor/DA's office when it comes to criminal charges. And regardless, the police will detain you, will question you, will take your gun for evidence (you may well get it back...). Charges will be the discretion of the DA, but the police won't just say "Thanks" and give you a ride home, even if it's what you may deserve.

    And if you get through all that, your friendly ambulance-chasing activist lawyer may well sue you for everything you own on behalf of a perp who (by the time of his court appearance) be all cleaned up, have a nice suit, a $100 haircut, have found religion and will now be a volunteer at the local soup kitchen.

    Were the guy's actions the right thing to do under the circumstances? IMHO, absolutely 100 percent. Are there likely to be consequences, even though he had a successful outcome? Perhaps not in this case, but in an identical engagement in a different city or jurisdiction... it's a crap shoot. Hopefully for the gentleman in the video, there will be no criminal or civil consequences.

    Again, know the law, train well, have a plan, etc. IMHO, this guy should go down as a textbook example of doing it right.

    Cheers,

    Sirhr