Quote :

"^^^ Or the robber would have been shot in the back by the CC permit holder, as he can't have eyes looking everywhere at all times. If more than one permit holder had been there it really would have been over quickly."

No one was harmed (except for the original guy with the gun). Pretty much the second best case scenario (best case would be nobody getting hurt).

If someone would have been carrying in the bank and tried to be a hero like you are advocating, then who knows what the fuck would have ended up happening.

So THANK GOD you aren't making laws.

2/11/2011 10:24:31 AM

crazy story. Def won't be robbing any banks in cary ever. They don't put up with that shit

2/11/2011 10:25:31 AM

Considering in high school I was stopped by a cop while riding my bicycle on the sidewalk at night, Cary is the LAST place I'd consider trying to rob a bank.

2/11/2011 10:27:41 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26tSbes8IIA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

2/11/2011 10:54:04 AM

why is everybody saying he got shot for robbing a bank?

2/11/2011 2:33:19 PM

um...did you even watch the video? dude definitely got shot.

2/11/2011 2:36:47 PM

Quote :

"No one was harmed (except for the original guy with the gun). Pretty much the second best case scenario (best case would be nobody getting hurt). If someone would have been carrying in the bank and tried to be a hero like you are advocating, then who knows what the fuck would have ended up happening. So THANK GOD you aren't making laws."

why do all of you morons always think that people carrying 1) will always play hero and 2) don't know how to shoot.

ya know, between private citizens and police officers, the choice to use deadly force is very similar, cops just tend to get better legal protection afterwards; and many citizens have just as much training and/or experience, if not more, than cops.

2/11/2011 2:41:13 PM

because we assume that people who feel the need to keep a gun on them at all times [that aren't required to do so for their job] are a few beers short of a six-pack.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 2:46 PM. Reason : HAPPY NOW?]

2/11/2011 2:45:30 PM

good to know cops are a few beers short of a six pack

2/11/2011 2:45:56 PM

I fixed it for you, bud.

2/11/2011 2:47:00 PM

Dude was shot for taking a hostage and threatening the lives of himself, the hostage, and everyone around him. Just so happened he also (?) robbed a bank.

In reference to above posts.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 2:50 PM. Reason : also my troll/sarcasm meter may be off]

2/11/2011 2:49:20 PM

^^^^ what about me? i dont drink beer. where do i fall in?

Quote :

"um...did you even watch the video? dude definitely got shot. "

he didnt get shot because he robbed a bank. he got shot because he had a gun to a lady's head.


[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 2:50 PM. Reason : ..]

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 2:51 PM. Reason : ...]

2/11/2011 2:49:51 PM

Quote :

"also my troll/sarcasm meter may be off"

it may be

2/11/2011 2:50:52 PM

so being prepared and exercising a basic right makes you a few beers short of a six pack?

do you think that if cops weren't required to carry (not that all PDs require this anyways) that cops would just quit carrying? or would they continue to do so in order to be prepared?

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 2:53 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 2:51:00 PM

^^motherfuck

2/11/2011 2:52:38 PM

^^just like those kooky people who refuse to quarter soldiers during times of peace.

THEY CRAZY.

2/11/2011 2:54:24 PM

Everyone knows he only got shot was because hes black.

2/11/2011 2:55:18 PM

Quote :

"why do all of you morons always think that people carrying 1) will always play hero and 2) don't know how to shoot. ya know, between private citizens and police officers, the choice to use deadly force is very similar, cops just tend to get better legal protection afterwards; and many citizens have just as much training and/or experience, if not more, than cops."

Why can't you understand that the best possible scenario is what actually happened? What makes you think that a normal citizen in a bank with a handgun would have done any better than a dozen plus cops outside of the banks who's profession it is to deal with situations like this??

At least when the guy is outside surrounded by cops, he can expect shit to go down. You pop that guy's kneecap in the bank and he probably starts spraying bullets everywhere.

I don't even know why I'm arguing...you'd probably piss your pants once the guy brought out a gun anyways. Fucking DnD dweebs with gun permits ITT.

2/11/2011 3:03:53 PM

1. why would someone shoot him in the kneecap?
2. what would happen if he started shooting people before the cops got there, can you see how cc might have been beneficial in that situation?
3. why do you assume that cc would escalate the situation?

2/11/2011 3:15:10 PM

Quote :

"so being prepared and exercising a basic right makes you a few beers short of a six pack? do you think that if cops weren't required to carry (not that all PDs require this anyways) that cops would just quit carrying? or would they continue to do so in order to be prepared?"

I have no problem with gun ownership, or even the CCW laws for that matter.

I just assume that someone who thinks they need to have a gun on them to go to the grocery store is paranoid as fuck. Anyone that paranoid is probably not 100% mentally stable in my opinion. Being prepared means remembering to take your wallet with you, not a fucking gun to get formula for your kid. This isn't Johannesburg.

2/11/2011 3:19:01 PM

I never forget to strap on my kevlar when I roll to Trader Joe's.

2/11/2011 3:21:10 PM

i don't trust random people in a random high pressure situation, but then again, i don't know what goes into it. i'm sure there's lots of training and it makes you feel like you're ready, but if you pull a gun and you're not really ready, then it could make everything a lot worse.

2/11/2011 3:21:45 PM

if you don't carry, then whats the point of having a ccw? you can't know when something bad is going to happen, if you had that kind of foresight then there wouldn't really even be a need for ccw. is it paranoid to wear your seat belt? even if you've driven hundreds of thousands of miles without ever getting into an accident? is it paranoid to lock your front door even if no one in your neighborhood has ever had anything stolen?

2/11/2011 3:22:48 PM

I also keep glowsticks on me at all times in case a flash mob breaks out. Don't want to be caught unprepared.

2/11/2011 3:25:33 PM

Quote :

"1. why would someone shoot him in the kneecap?"

I don't know...where are you going to shoot him?? Maybe the shoulder, the arm, I don't know...I'm not trained by the armed forces or police department. I picked a non-lethal spot.

You going to shoot him in the head?? Knock yourself out Rambo.

Quote :

" 2. what would happen if he started shooting people before the cops got there, can you see how cc might have been beneficial in that situation?"

You want to play a million what-ifs?? What if the cc flinched and shot somebody else? What if the guy moved, and the cc accidentally someone else?? What if the cc didn't hit him dead-on and he ended up spraying bullets and shot someone else?? You see what I'm doing here?

I'll give you a what-if...what if the guy didn't shoot anyone inside the bank, took a hostage outside, and was shot by the police and nobody got hurt...oh wait, that's not a "what-if", that's exactly what fucking happened.

Quote :

" 3. why do you assume that cc would escalate the situation?"

Why do you assume that cc would not escalate the situation. I'm saying that the best case scenario actually happened...so either the cc does the exact same thing OR he/she escalates the situation. Probably a decent chance they don't do a better job than the people that are actually trained to do that particular job.

2/11/2011 3:26:16 PM

Quote :

"I don't know...where are you going to shoot him?? Maybe the shoulder, the arm, I don't know...I'm not trained by the armed forces or police department. I picked a non-lethal spot. You going to shoot him in the head?? Knock yourself out Rambo. "

center mass, why would anyone try to go for a shoulder or arm? you shoot them where you have the largest target, in their chest, and you put them down. if a situation requires deadly force then that is exactly what you do, you don't piss around and try to take non-lethal shots that are just going to make the situation even more unpredictable and dangerous.

Quote :

"You want to play a million what-ifs?? What if the cc flinched and shot somebody else? What if the guy moved, and the cc accidentally someone else?? What if the cc didn't hit him dead-on and he ended up spraying bullets and shot someone else?? You see what I'm doing here? I'll give you a what-if...what if the guy didn't shoot anyone inside the bank, took a hostage outside, and was shot by the police and nobody got hurt...oh wait, that's not a "what-if", that's exactly what fucking happened."

you are assuming that a cc'er is going to go rambo, when really that is the least likely thing for them to do. spraying bullets? really?

2/11/2011 3:30:17 PM

Quote :

"is it paranoid to wear your seat belt? even if you've driven hundreds of thousands of miles without ever getting into an accident? is it paranoid to lock your front door even if no one in your neighborhood has ever had anything stolen? "

If you really think those are good analogies...then you are exactly the type of person that should not be able to carry a gun.

Quote :

"you are assuming that a cc'er is going to go rambo, when really that is the least likely thing for them to do. spraying bullets? really?"

Rambo was an intended exaggeration, however, you just said you would shoot someone in the chest. Spraying bullets?? If a crazy dude robbing a bank has an automatic, I don't see why it's not a good possibility that they will squeeze the trigger. Even if it's not automatic, I don't see how you couldn't say that they won't discharge their weapon.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 3:32 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 3:30:25 PM

they are not perfect, but they are applicable. you can't know when something bad is going to happen, if you could you would just avoid it and not ever have a need for ccw. i was responding to someone saying that they were ok with ccw, but didn't understand why someone would carry just to run errands. why wouldn't you? it's your choice to decide how to defend yourself, and you can't know that nothing bad is going to happen at the store. is it unlikely, sure, but that doesn't mean doing something that adds no additional time or discomfort is crazy simply because it is unlikely to be needed. constantly in our lives we do little things that take no time and have no associated cost to make ourselves more safe, even if they are unlikely to be needed.

^first, automatic weapons are rarely used in crimes. second, a cc'er doesn't have to pull out their weapon. that's the benefit of it being concealed, they don't have to use it if they are outmatched or beat and think that trying anything would just cause problems.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 3:37 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 3:35:34 PM

I guess I just don't understand the mindset of a neurotic headcase.

2/11/2011 3:38:26 PM

Quote :

"I don't see why it's not a good possibility that they will squeeze the trigger. Even if it's not automatic, I don't see how you couldn't say that they won't discharge their weapon. "

if that's the case there was a good chance he would have shot his hostage when the cops took him out.

personally if given the choice in a situation like this...i'd always rather someone, "on my side" so to speak, have a weapon than not have one. that guy was in total control while in the bank, had he wanted to take everyone out, he could have...cops could do nothing until he came out. At least there would have been some balance of power with a cc there.

2/11/2011 3:39:58 PM

Quote :

"I don't know...where are you going to shoot him?? Maybe the shoulder, the arm, I don't know...I'm not trained by the armed forces or police department. I picked a non-lethal spot. You going to shoot him in the head?? Knock yourself out Rambo."

in order to prove in a court of law that you felt it was right to use deadly force, you have to shoot to kill, not injure or detain....

2/11/2011 3:40:53 PM

it's really only neurotic if there were some cost or trade-off that counter-balanced the benefits of carrying. sure, the benefits are small because they are unlikely to ever be needed but there is no additional cost of carrying so it doesn't fail any kind of rational test.

2/11/2011 3:40:58 PM

Quote :

"there is no additional cost of carrying"

What about the social stigma attached to it? Everyone thinks you're a fucking loon.

2/11/2011 3:43:48 PM

^ i know several friends that carry, they aren't considered outcasts or strange in any way, and 99.9% of people don't even know they are carrying

2/11/2011 3:45:36 PM

only if they know you are carrying, which they wouldn't unless you needed to use your weapon, and at that point no one probably gives a shit if someone thinks they are a loon

2/11/2011 3:46:01 PM

Quote :

"in order to prove in a court of law that you felt it was right to use deadly force, you have to shoot to kill, not injure or detain...."

Was this a joke?

2/11/2011 3:52:44 PM

Quote :

"if that's the case there was a good chance he would have shot his hostage when the cops took him out."

Understandable. I would just rather have the cops make that decision and be responsible for it than your every day citizen with his belly on the floor in a bank.

2/11/2011 3:54:46 PM

^^ I can see that. If you're firing a gun at someone, you have to believe you're going to kill them. Shooting someone in the arm/leg is pretty hard.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 3:56 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 3:56:11 PM

its not entirely accurate, but its pretty close. if you shot someone in the shoulder the argument could be made that deadly force was not needed and you could end up defending yourself against criminal charges or a lawsuit. its concealed carry 101, any concealed carry class is going to cover it.

basically, if you don't need to shoot to kill, you might not have needed to shoot at all and you might get pwnd

2/11/2011 3:56:29 PM

If the person is waiving a loaded gun around, then you don't have to worry about whether or not you shot them in the pinky toe or right between the eyes. You guys are thinking too much on this one.

Quote :

"I can see that. If you're firing a gun at someone, you have to believe you're going to kill them."

It's not about your intent to kill, it's about protecting yourself from being killed. You don't have to kill someone to do that.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:02 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 4:01:15 PM

Quote :

"If the person is waiving a loaded gun around, then you don't have to worry about whether or not you shot them in the pinky toe or right between the eyes. You guys are thinking too much on this one."

actually you do, because generally your first responsibility is to retreat, so if you shoot the guy for waving around a gun you're gonna want to make sure all your t's are crossed and i's dotted or you are likely to come out with some legal bills at the very least.


^precisely. the best way to protect yourself is shooting at the best target you can which is center mass.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:06 PM. Reason : this should be common sense]

2/11/2011 4:05:01 PM

hey shitbricks, if you believe deadly force (read: use your firearm) is needed to diffuse a situation then you shoot center of mass (aka shoot to kill). that's basic principal, even cops follow that route. though it hasn't been tested, shooting anywhere not to kill (if it could be proved; i.e. legs) could be construed as an act showing deadly force wasn't necessary because you tried to not use deadly force when you fired and thus could be liable for damages.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:07 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 4:06:31 PM

suicide by cop

i hate the fucking police but this guy wanted to die

i do not fault the cary police

2/11/2011 4:15:38 PM

You idiots are not getting the point.

Shooting a gun constitutes deadly force....PERIOD. So follow me here...I'll take it slow so it doesn't go over your heads....

In violent situations, you, as a citizen, are allowed to protect yourself. If someone tries to punch you, you can punch them back. If someone tries to punch you, you can't pull out your 9 millimeter and shoot them in the face.

If someone is waving around a loaded gun in a bank, if they point it at someone, point it at you, or take someone hostage with the gun to their head...then you have a right to use a gun.

That's where the argument ends. If you want to shoot them in the head, shoot them in the head. Fuck, if you want to run up to them and pistol whip them in the head...then you can do that too. But you don't have to aim to kill. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION.

Actually...no it's not. Here is the question all you numbnuts can answer...

If there is a bank robbery taking place and some crazy guy with a loaded gun is holding someone hostage and you shoot that guy in the leg, he drops the gun, cops come in and diffuse the situation...do you honestly think you will get charged with something?? And if you do...please find me a statute or example where that has happened.

Quote :

"hey shitbricks, if you believe deadly force (read: use your firearm) is needed to diffuse a situation then you shoot center of mass (aka shoot to kill)."

That's not the legal argument...which is why you aren't getting this.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:17 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 4:16:05 PM

actually if you shoot him in the leg he will probably shoot the hostage

but generally i think civilians that carry guns to the grocery store are nutjobs

2/11/2011 4:18:10 PM

Quote :

"actually if you shoot him in the leg he will probably shoot the hostage"

I agree.

But every cc in this thread is an expert marksman and can hit a guy in the sternum from 300 yards away.

2/11/2011 4:21:04 PM

i doubt this guy wanted to die.

sounds like a poorly conceived plan to jack a bank, then shit went out of control and he seriously thought that with sheer balls he could get himself out of the situation.

and yes, self-trained rednecks carrying guns at the grocery stores and wal-marts is just what this society needs.




[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:25 PM. Reason : ]

2/11/2011 4:23:45 PM

^^^^ If they can prove you were aiming for the leg, then yeah. If you were aiming for the body and just missed, then no.

[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:25 PM. Reason : .]

2/11/2011 4:24:03 PM

Quote :

"If they can prove you were aiming for the leg, then yeah. If you were aiming for the body and just missed, then no."

NO. Doesn't matter. Shooting a gun is deadly force...you don't have to shoot for a kill spot for it to matter. Why are you guys not understanding this??

nvm



[Edited on February 11, 2011 at 4:28 PM. Reason : fuck it, I'm done with thread and you idiots....although that V, is fucking hilarious]

2/11/2011 4:26:00 PM

most of these cc people have a sick hero fantasy where they get to shoot the bad guy and then a bald eagle swoops in and drapes an american flag over their shoulders as the cops, their dad, and their high school gym teacher pop champagne bottles and cheer

Quote :

"i doubt this guy wanted to die. "

he never asked for money

he told his hostage in the parking lot to duck

i took this to mean he wanted the cops to have a clear shot

2/11/2011 4:27:16 PM