A place for sharing news stories related to armed citizens, law enforcement & 2A/CCW topics.
Please note that when linking to an article you must cite the source URL and provide no more than a brief preview of the article to ensure fair-use standards are met.
NO DOCUMENT DUMPING.
Posts in violation of these rules are subject to immediate deletion without warning.
As much as I believe no training should be required to exercise your 2A rights, we have people pulling stupid stunts like this, that provide fodder for those on the other side of the argument. The lack of a training requirement doesn't mean you should skimp on training both in marksmanship, as well as legal matters surrounding the proper application of self defense.
"One girl was going to buy a notebook. There was one left, some pushing resulted," Baetens says. "They began to argue who was the rightful purchaser of that notebook."
Both duos of women were not backing down, as police and witnesses described the two women pulling the younger woman's hair. That mother got shoved out of the way as the three continued to fight. That mother then pulled out a gun.
"She's a valid CPL holder," Baetens says. "She pulled out her firearm and tells them to stop attacking her daughter while pointing the gun at them."
Really ? a sale on a stupid notebook computer and you get into a physical altercation that escalates to pulling a firearm ? Idiots..
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
Bruenor wrote:
Really ? a sale on a stupid notebook computer and you get into a physical altercation that escalates to pulling a firearm ? Idiots..
Agreed. But, Detroit.
"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788
Bruenor wrote:As much as I believe no training should be required to exercise your 2A rights, we have people pulling stupid stunts like this, that provide fodder for those on the other side of the argument. The lack of a training requirement doesn't mean you should skimp on training both in marksmanship, as well as legal matters surrounding the proper application of self defense.
The training requirement didn't seem to help this woman, or did they change Michigan law?
American Society isn't exactly giving out lessons on DE-escalation like water (sorry Flint/Texas/Louisiana).
Many, however, are well versed in screaming obscenities and getting theirs.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908
Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.
"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
In the end, Baetens says he's unsure who got the notebook.
"The right to keep and bear arms is rooted in both self-defense and insurance against government’s propensity toward tyranny. The right pre-existed the Constitution. Thus, the Second Amendment is not its source. The right to keep and bear arms is natural and inalienable; the Second Amendment protects it, and Congress has no legitimate power to restrict it." - Senator John Cornyn (R., Tex.), as reported in the National Review on July 4, 2016
Bruenor wrote:As much as I believe no training should be required to exercise your 2A rights, we have people pulling stupid stunts like this, that provide fodder for those on the other side of the argument. The lack of a training requirement doesn't mean you should skimp on training both in marksmanship, as well as legal matters surrounding the proper application of self defense.
The training requirement didn't seem to help this woman, or did they change Michigan law?
Looks to me like the same minimal requirements Ohio has, NRA Firearms safety course. that course and reading through the AG's handbook hardly constitutes adequate training. more like just checking the box. Training, check !. so I doubt she got much if any guidance if that is the only course she took.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
Bruenor wrote:As much as I believe no training should be required to exercise your 2A rights, we have people pulling stupid stunts like this, that provide fodder for those on the other side of the argument. The lack of a training requirement doesn't mean you should skimp on training both in marksmanship, as well as legal matters surrounding the proper application of self defense.
I think you're being quick to assume the CPL holder acted improperly. The police haven't charged her yet. We don't know whether she was involved the instigating the fight, and although it's a silly thing to fight over, before the gun was drawn it escalated to a 2-on-1 fight.
I'm not saying that it was justified, but it could have been, especially if the young woman were knocked to the ground and the other 2 continued to hit her.
Bruenor wrote:As much as I believe no training should be required to exercise your 2A rights, we have people pulling stupid stunts like this, that provide fodder for those on the other side of the argument. The lack of a training requirement doesn't mean you should skimp on training both in marksmanship, as well as legal matters surrounding the proper application of self defense.
I think you're being quick to assume the CPL holder acted improperly. The police haven't charged her yet. We don't know whether she was involved the instigating the fight, and although it's a silly thing to fight over, before the gun was drawn it escalated to a 2-on-1 fight.
I'm not saying that it was justified, but it could have been, especially if the young woman were knocked to the ground and the other 2 continued to hit her.
it takes two to argue, being armed isn't it better to just walk away if things are turning ugly ? it's possible there was no other choice, but I can't think of any sale item in a store I'd get into an argument with someone over, even if it was the last one.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
The way I read it is that the argument began and escalated to an assault. The mother got shoved out of the way and it became a 2 on 1 fight. She drew the gun to stop the assault NOT to take the notebook. As the article says she drew the gun and said stop attacking my daughter. Besides joining the fight I'm not sure what other choice she had