TexasCHLforum.com

Solaris wrote:

locke_n_load wrote:To everyone who says that they would have simply had a fistfight with the guy, just remember, all it takes is one lucky punch to daze you and your shirt comes up, the dude has easy access to your firearm.

Hence why you may want to walk away from a non-violent verbal exchange between two people, especially if you are open carrying.

It doesn't always work like you think. A good example is this one that happened in my home town recently. The man who lost his life was only trying to do the right thing and give the guy a ride. He was an acquaintance of mine, and a step-brother of a friend. http://www.kfvs12.com/story/31413861/20 ... to-walmart

Solaris wrote:

JALLEN wrote: In any event, we are taught to stop the threat.

I wasn't.

I was taught, and it was emphasized in my LTC class to de-escalate.

An argument between a customer and clerk is a non-event IMO, nothing to see here, MYOB. Why the instructor felt the need to insert himself, well, he gets to live with the consequences of that.

If you believe you can deescalate any situation, even an innocuous one, then why even carry?

drjoker wrote: Evil is not perpetrated by evil people alone. Evil happens when good people do nothing. That's how 6 million Jews died because good people did nothing. There were only 80,000 NAZIS at the start of WWII.

You want a better world? DO SOMETHING.

Are you from New York?

Godwin's Law For The Win!

Equating a non-violent verbal argument with a Holacaust

Keith B wrote:

Solaris wrote:

JALLEN wrote: In any event, we are taught to stop the threat.

I wasn't.

I was taught, and it was emphasized in my LTC class to de-escalate.

An argument between a customer and clerk is a non-event IMO, nothing to see here, MYOB. Why the instructor felt the need to insert himself, well, he gets to live with the consequences of that.

If you believe you can deescalate any situation, even an innocuous one, then why even carry?

No I do not believe that, nor did I say that.

So you think shooting the guy was inevitable, and there was no opportunity for the Instructor to handle it differently, that would result in no deaths? How about call 911, How about leave, How about let the clerk handle it, he handles guys like that every day?

Previously I wrote, "I looked hard, but I cannot find anything the instructor did right ... I would say this a a textbook training video of what not to do when open carrying.". Are you in the opposite camp, thinking everything he did was correct?


ETA

Watch the video again. The clerk had it handled. It was over. The dead guy was LEAVING until VicMackey followed him to his car and escalated the situation!

Solaris wrote:
Watch the video again. The clerk had it handled. It was over. The dead guy was LEAVING until VicMackey followed him to his car and escalated the situation!

You don't know that. There is no audio, the guy goes out of the video, he comes back in the store for some reason. etc. There are too many unknowns to way that the shooting could have been avoided.

Solaris wrote:Godwin's Law For The Win!

Equating a non-violent verbal argument with a Holacaust

LOLs.

And the DA and Police Chief say the guys was 100% in the right http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/201 ... _made.html

Keith B wrote:

Solaris wrote:
Watch the video again. The clerk had it handled. It was over. The dead guy was LEAVING until VicMackey followed him to his car and escalated the situation!

You don't know that. There is no audio, the guy goes out of the video, he comes back in the store for some reason. etc. There are too many unknowns to way that the shooting could have been avoided.

No I do not. But neither do the folks who claim the pushing would have led to a beating, gun take away, and VicMacKey getting killed.

Keith B wrote:And the DA and Police Chief say the guys was 100% in the right http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/201 ... _made.html

Yes that was mentioned in the article the OP posted

District Attorney Warren Montgomery said in a news release that his office will not pursue criminal charges based on the evidence. He noted that the Mandeville Police Department concluded Breland was the aggressor in the incident and that it didn’t arrest the shooter, who was lawfully armed.

We were originally talking about this from a "tactics learned" point of view (again as the OP stated, "Watch the video and let's discuss what you think the armed citizen did right, and/or wrong.") I followed the OP lead and pointed out I did not think he did anything right, but somehow it turned into the Nazis killing the Jews, and it being my fault because presumable I am from New York and watched Kitty Genevese get murdered while I watched eating popcorn.

Solaris wrote:

Keith B wrote:And the DA and Police Chief say the guys was 100% in the right http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/201 ... _made.html

Yes that was mentioned in the article the OP posted

District Attorney Warren Montgomery said in a news release that his office will not pursue criminal charges based on the evidence. He noted that the Mandeville Police Department concluded Breland was the aggressor in the incident and that it didn’t arrest the shooter, who was lawfully armed.

We were originally talking about this from a "tactics learned" point of view (again as the OP stated, "Watch the video and let's discuss what you think the armed citizen did right, and/or wrong.") I followed the OP lead and pointed out I did not think he did anything right, but somehow it turned into the Nazis killing the Jews, and it being my fault because presumable I am from New York and watched Kitty Genevese get murdered while I watched eating popcorn.

If you read the article posted, it was stated that there was way more than the video used as evidence. According to the article, the investigation included several witnesses who were interviewed and all had the same story. So, just looking at the video, you can't definitively say the guy did wrong. Just because you choose to not get involved in something doesn't mean no one should. Some people choose to help others, which IMO and others is what the firearms instructor did.

Also, according to the report, after being shot in the torso, he continued to advance.

Keith B wrote: If you read the article posted, it was stated that there was way more than the video used as evidence. According to the article, the investigation included several witnesses who were interviewed and all had the same story. So, just looking at the video, you can't definitively say the guy did wrong. Just because you choose to not get involved in something doesn't mean no one should. Some people choose to help others, which IMO and others is what the firearms instructor did.

Yes again in an earlier post I acknowledged there was obviously more to the story than a non-audio single video:

So based on that tape alone, it was not justified, IMO. Yet he was not charged, leading me to conclude there were other aggravating factors we are unaware of, for example, he was shouting "I am going to take that gun from you and kill you", etc.

However all we have is the non-audio tape, so that is all we can comment on, and for whatever reason nobody really wants to talk about tactics right/wrong, but on just some how justifying a shooting none of us will ever have all the facts to.

Solaris wrote:... neither do the folks who claim the pushing would have led to a beating, gun take away, ...

The very reason I chose not to OC. I fear someone will take my weapon from me and use it on me and maybe others too. If I get cold cocked when carrying concealed my weapon may not remain concealed when I go down, ...see my first concern. If a BG backs you into a corner you must act to defend yourself and ensure your weapon remains under your control.

What if the BG had beat up/disarmed CHL Instructor and used the gun to shoot the store clerk?

Solaris wrote:However all we have is the non-audio tape, so that is all we can comment on, and for whatever reason nobody really wants to talk about tactics right/wrong, but on just some how justifying a shooting none of us will ever have all the facts to.

The tactics look fine to me. I don't know why CHL went outside to get a tag number. Maybe BG promised to go get his gun and come back and settle things? Would that justify trying to ID the guy?

Solaris wrote:However all we have is the non-audio tape, so that is all we can comment on, and for whatever reason nobody really wants to talk about tactics right/wrong, but on just some how justifying a shooting none of us will ever have all the facts to.

Maybe the BG was drunk. Maybe the instructor has had a family member killed or hurt by a drunk driver. Maybe he wanted to call this idiot into the police so they could get him off the road?

Maybe...maybe...maybe...

Lots of things we don't know. But some things we do. We do have more than just the non-audio tape. We do have the text of the linked article that states unequivocally, "Ron Ruple, assistant chief of the Mandeville Police Department, said evidence from the scene, including statements from witnesses, video evidence and the shooter’s own account, pointed to a justifiable act of self-defense."