This popped up in another thread recently and was used as a pro-gun argument. Since it's close to home, I looked into it in a bit more detail and I think it's a very interesting issue that deserves its own thread.

Article in the Miami Herald
Article on CBS

So it looks like some lowlifes were on a spree stealing cellphones. Around noon they stopped at the BK on Biscayne Blvd. and one of the criminals went inside and stole a family's phones at gunpoint. On his way out he was shot in the leg by one of the family members who had pulled out his gun. The robbers got away anyways but someone followed them and called police who then arrested them at a nearby gas station.

Now, this BK location is one block from a big public school:



Around midday the place usually full of kids grabbing lunch (I go by there almost daily so I know). The robber was fleeing when he was shot. He was armed and could easily have started a firefight right there (especially if the guy with the gun had missed).

For me, this is a prime example of why it's such a bad idea for people to carry guns in public. The robber was no threat at the time he was shot. The police was called and arrested them a short time later. The guy started shooting in a crowded place while his family was there and probably many other people, especially kids.

It's inconceivable to me how this story can be used as an example why people should carry guns - it seems like an example of reckless and highly dangerous behavior by a gun owner. I'd be more scared of the guy with the gun then of the robber...

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: The robber was no threat at the time he was shot.

You have much faith in the benevolence of an armed criminal in the commission of a crime.

Your argument the citizen could have hurt kids is no more valid or invalid than saying the citizen stopped the criminal from shooting kids as he left the BK. The difference is the citizen was not acting with malicious intent, so a resonable person would expect him to exercise caution not to harm innocents. The criminal was acting with malicious intent and there's nothing to suggest he wouldn't use the firearm he had at any moment. He had already shown a willingness to harm innocents, at least by robbing them.

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: (I go by there almost daily so I know).

Not to worry. You've never known anyone to be the victim of violent crime so there's nothing to be concerned about.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: For me, this is a prime example of why it's such a bad idea for people to carry guns in public. The robber was no threat at the time he was shot. The police was called and arrested them a short time later. The guy started shooting in a crowded place while his family was there and probably many other people, especially kids. It's inconceivable to me how this story can be used as an example why people should carry guns - it seems like an example of reckless and highly dangerous behavior by a gun owner. I'd be more scared of the guy with the gun then of the robber...

You've known me at least long enough to know that I have a serious problem with tact... so please try not to take offense to anything I write below this sentence.

This is the dumbest, most idiotic, obscenely asinine argument I have seen (in my entire life mind you) against the right to carry.

I mean, the fact that you even pulled a successful story with a happy ending even shows the unbelievably sheer stupidity of your argument. As comic-book guy said, there is no emoticon to express what I am feeling right now when faced with the assininity of your post.

There are so many things to counter your argument, that it's probably just best if I put it in bullet form (no pun intended):

- Do you think that when a criminal has a gun, that law abiding citizens should just be at their mercy, not fight back... and just accept it? I don't. I have no sympathy for criminals. We all have done dumb things in our lives... and sometimes, people have to learn things the hard way.

- You seem to be making assumptions that the place was packed and that there was no clear shot. If the victim was being held at gun-point to give up his possessions, I'm quite sure that everyone NOT being held at gun-point had hauled ass (this is pretty normal behavior). Your assumptions totally fly in the face of anything logical.

- It actually brightens my day that the guy got shot in the leg. There are two positives that came from this: 1. He now has a scar on his leg to remind him of his stupidity. 2. He survived this through the grace of the person shooting at him. The shot to the leg is more than likely intended to subdue, and not to kill. Which, by the way... it was his foot that was shot, not the leg.

- You seem to be ignoring the fact that a criminal came in with a weapon (which had been used previously in an earlier gun-point robbery), and focusing on the danger caused by the person who was legally carrying the gun??? I can't seem to understand this logic.


You want to make assumptions? Here's an assumption... this is the second (third actually) robbery at gun-point by this individual (he was charged with three counts). Had it not been for this law abiding citizen shooting the guy in the foot, he more than likely wouldn't have been caught, and it very well could have ended in yet ANOTHER robbery attempt at gun point that could have resulted in his own death (by cop) or to an innocent person that refused the demands of the attacker.

I applaud this guy for having a cool head and choosing only to disable the guy by shooting him in the foot.

Don't feed the troll.

If fast food was banned, there never would've been a place to have this happen...

Boom, deflection.

quote Originally posted by skuzzbomer: If fast food was banned, there never would've been a place to have this happen... Boom, deflection.

Damn... you've really been studying the ways of the liberal mind. I am VERY impressed...

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: This is the dumbest, most idiotic, obscenely asinine argument I have seen (in my entire life mind you) against the right to carry. I mean, the fact that you even pulled a successful story with a happy ending even shows the unbelievably sheer stupidity of your argument. As comic-book guy said, there is no emoticon to express what I am feeling right now when faced with the assininity of your post.

Thank you.

If anything, you're trolling my thread here...

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: Don't feed the troll.

[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 04-09-2013).]

the next item is:
will the "robber" bring legal action against the "hero" who shot him?

and - why did a "firefight" not erupt?
did the robber not have a real gun? no ammo? didnt want to take up precious get-a-way seconds?
I would hope it was the smart choice of not wanting to lose get-a-way time - but - more inclined to believe he did not even have a real gun....

I agree with the idea of the potential for bystander injuries. that is a serious concern. especially being a younger crowd at a BK. classic escalation. yes, the robber started the danger. but the "hero" notched it up. all we can go by is the outcome. which is: robber caught. no one else hurt.

and - to add: the "hero" did clearly wait for his shot. he did not create a confrontation on the spot. that would have been messy. he held his wits and picked his time. I agree there are many who would not have.

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: No problem at all. I think that your point of view is interesting, that's why I posted this. I'm not looking for people to agree with me, what's the point of a discussion then? I regret that others here do not extend that same courtesy, though.... I can't understand your argument (I can, linguistically, but it doesn't make sense to me). I think it shows how diametrically our points of view are opposed on this. While I agree that a criminals should be punished (and I have no pity on the idiot who got shot), this is not the way to do it, by putting other people at risk. It's the rule of the jungle...

You believe that two wrongs do not make a right, am I correct?

I don't see the shooting as a wrong, so much as a lesson.

Do you have any friends who are police officers? Knowing one or more officers that work "the beat" would certainly offer a different perspective to what you might consider right and wrong. There's a pretty good chance that this perpetrator will likely end up back on the street in a year or two with time served. The prisons are packed, much of it I believe as a result of oppressive liberal welfare policies that encourage failure and mediocrity. Of course, the non-maximum security jails are packed with drug users too, which I don't agree with either. In any case, the failures of our judicial system is as a direct result of well-trained lawyers, overworked officers, and indecisive jurors. What happens in most situations is the criminal will get off on a technicality, and just have "time served." I'm not in law enforcement by any means, but some of my friends tell me that they see the lowest of the low... people who neglect their children, beat their wives, and then go on a criminal spree like this one here, and the criminal ends up getting a lightened sentence due to overcapacity at the prisons, or completely off as a result of a clerical screw-up (usually because the criminal lied to the officer and he/she didn't follow-up on it). They're regularly overworked, even in places like Miami and Fort Lauderdale (BSO, etc) that don't have a shortage of funding.

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: If anything, you're trolling my thread here...

Yes, and you have been here long enough to know I am not above it yet honest enough to admit it. I will say that I have never started a thread to that purpose though.

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: It's inconceivable to me how this story can be used as an example why people should carry guns - it seems like an example of reckless and highly dangerous behavior by a gun owner. I'd be more scared of the guy with the gun then of the robber...

The flaw I see in this and in the mindset is "why people should carry guns" There is no requirement to carry a gun. There is a right to carry a gun. No one is forcing you or anyone else to carry a gun against their will if they want to be an essentially defenseless victim of someone who decides they want their cell phone, their wallet, their necklace or whatever else they may want from you.

You can frequent a high crime neighborhood if you want, and you can hang around a guns-free zone if you want, but you are only the victim of your own lack of defense, wherever you may go. It could very well come to be that one day you and your wife might be spared bodily harm by a person who is properly licensed to carry a firearm.

Delve even deeper into this news story and guaranteed you will find that the robbers weren't licensed and the BK customer was licensed. So what if the criminals were leaving when they were shot. It doesn't say if they may have turned around to point the gun back at the BK.

Please don't try to restrict other's rights to anything just because you don't wish to partake in that right.

Edited to add: There is a news anchor in Atlanta that came up from Miami. She and her husband were in what they thought to be a safe area. They were approached by criminals who wanted their valuables. They willingly gave them over. When the robbers had gotten everything, they pointed the gun at her husband and fired, killing him instantly. A gun might not have helped them, but it surely couldn't have hurt. But it was their right not to carry.

[This message has been edited by fierofool (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by fierofool: Edited to add: There is a news anchor in Atlanta that came up from Miami. She and her husband were in what they thought to be a safe area. They were approached by criminals who wanted their valuables. They willingly gave them over. When the robbers had gotten everything, they pointed the gun at her husband and fired, killing him instantly. A gun might not have helped them, but it surely couldn't have hurt. But it was their right not to carry.

You mean criminals are not polite and friendly people!? They followed Yellowstone's advise. How in the **** can I defend my life from criminals like that if I'm not armed? What am I supposed to do? Wait and die?

quote Originally posted by CoryFiero: You mean criminals are not polite and friendly people!? They followed Yellowstone's advise. How in the **** can I defend my life from criminals like that if I'm not armed? What am I supposed to do? Wait and die?

I can very well imagine that the criminals killed the guy because they didn't want to risk that he had a gun and may have fired on them as they fled. As I said in another thread, being armed starts an arms race and I think the criminal is usually at an advantage as he has the element of surprise and may be more prepared to use deadly force (even preemptively). Are you going to draw your gun while there's one trained at you or your family? Is the criminal going to take the risk of finding out if you are armed?

I think that there's a good chance that the BK perp, once he's out of prison and assuming that he continues his criminal career after that, will take no chances next time and shoot the victim over a cellphone... it's a vicious cycle that leads nowhere good.

[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 04-09-2013).]

Law of the jungle?
Hardly. Try "Law of the Land".
Criminals love the idea that individuals should have to give them an avenue of escape rather than confront them or take them down. Stand your ground statutes are hated by criminals. Florida has such a statute on the books as do other states.
The law in Florida provides for the use of force, immunity, and no duty of retreat as long as the shooter has a legal right to be where he is, and is lawfully carrying his weapon according to other state statutes.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Law of the jungle? Hardly. Try "Law of the Land". Criminals love the idea that individuals should have to give them an avenue of escape rather than confront them or take them down. Stand your ground statutes are hated by criminals. Florida has such a statute on the books as do other states. The law in Florida provides for the use of force, immunity, and no duty of retreat as long as the shooter has a legal right to be where he is, and is lawfully carrying his weapon according to other state statutes.

Exactly what I would call the law of the jungle. My mom taught me "the smarter guy retreats" (I hope that translates from German : "Der Kluegere gibt nach.")

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: I can very well imagine that the criminals killed the guy because they didn't want to risk that he had a gun and may have fired on them as they fled. As I said in another thread, being armed starts an arms race and I think the criminal is usually at an advantage as he has the element of surprise and may be more prepared to use deadly force (even preemptively). Are you going to draw your gun while there's one trained at you or your family? Is the criminal going to take the risk of finding out if you are armed? I think that there's a good chance that the BK perp, once he's out of prison and assuming that he continues his criminal career after that, will take no chances next time and shoot the victim over a cellphone... it's a vicious cycle that leads nowhere good.

Amazing. Interesting. I want to let this sink in. Criminals are more likely to kill people because that person might be armed.. I suppose that is why Chicago has the highest murder rate.. because of all those concealed carry permit holders. The argument has no valid backing or statistics that can be twisted to fit it. Real statistics show (you can argue cause and correlation) that concealed carry reduces violent crime.


Your solution seems to be to take the risk that a criminal won't harm you, and you seem to want to blame other's who choose to defend themselves if that criminal does harm someone when in fact the more people that are carrying in Florida, the safer you really are.

quote Originally posted by CoryFiero:You mean criminals are not polite and friendly people!? They followed Yellowstone's advise. How in the **** can I defend my life from criminals like that if I'm not armed? What am I supposed to do? Wait and die?

You need to become a ninja. Good luck! In my part of California, I have to store my gun in my trunk. Lucky for me I am a .....

quote Originally posted by CoryFiero: Real statistics show (you can argue cause and correlation) that concealed carry reduces violent crime.

Something that follows this train of thought.
A factual look at guns in America
They list all their sources as well.

[This message has been edited by Silentassassin185 (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: I think that there's a good chance that the BK perp, once he's out of prison and assuming that he continues his criminal career after that, will take no chances next time and shoot the victim over a cellphone... it's a vicious cycle that leads nowhere good.

http://www2.miami-dadeclerk...cjis/CaseSearch.aspx - TRAVIS TRENARD HARRIS

BTW he will continue to be a criminal. Why is this guy out of jail? I think this is the real problem. Can we agree on that?

Case Filed Date Closed Date First Charge
M-98-064235 12/15/1998 12/15/1998 TRESPASS
M-06-037896 07/11/2006 07/11/2006 PETIT THEFT
F-07-014137 04/24/2007 05/15/2007 BATTERY/AGGRAVATED
M-08-029746 05/29/2008 06/05/2008 ALCOHOL/CURB DRNKNG
F-13-008015 11/10/2012 OUT ON BAIL [RBRY/ARM/FA/DW - PBL
M-12-050126 11/10/2012 11/10/2012 TRESPASS/STRUC/UNOCC
M-10-021466 05/02/2010 05/02/2010 PANHANDLE/AGGR/OBSTR
B-09-070397 12/01/2009 02/03/2010 PETIT THEFT
F-11-021704 08/18/2011 09/07/2011 DEFRAUD INN/300+
F-10-010168 04/07/2010 04/27/2010 RETAIL THEFT/300>
F-10-003445 02/03/2010 02/23/2010 COCAINE/POSSESSION
F-09-006698 02/26/2009 03/27/2009 DWLS/HABITUAL
B-07-019441 04/06/2007 05/15/2007 PETIT THEFT
M-07-049532 08/29/2007 09/27/2007 SHOPPING CART/POSN
M-07-052651 09/13/2007 09/19/2007 DAIRY CASE/UNLAW USE
B-11-026072 06/08/2011 06/15/2011 ALCOHOL/CONSUM/STORE
M-12-003323-A 01/26/2012 01/27/2012 TRES PROP/AFTER
WARN-06-02839 08/26/2006 09/26/2006 GRD THEFT/3D/VEHICLE
B-05-000318 01/04/2005 04/12/2005 ASSAULT OR BATTERY
M-00-046018 08/09/2000 08/09/2000 CONCEALED WEAP/CARRY
F-00-035687 11/07/2000 11/27/2000 BATTERY/AGG/DWEAP
F-01-007938 03/12/2001 05/17/2001 GRD THEFT/3D/VEHICLE
B-05-029236 06/12/2005 06/12/2005 RESIST OFF W/O VIOL
M-00-036027 06/26/2000 11/08/2000 DISORDERLY CONDUCT
F-00-007390 03/04/2000 03/24/2000 BURGLARY/UNOCC/DWELL
F-95-027616 09/05/1995 05/07/1996 ASSAULT/AGG/FIREARM
Edit: He's been a career criminal since 1996, numerous aggravated assaults and firearms charges THREE grand theft auto charges yet he's still out and about taking cell phones from people at BK. Yellowstone, honestly I would be more concerned about people like this in my city than concealed permit holders. This whole gun control debate is focused on the wrong area. It's too bad the VICTIM in the original post didn't have slightly better aim, but I shoot low left under pressure situations too, it's the trigger pull and I'm working on it.

[This message has been edited by CoryFiero (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: Exactly what I would call the law of the jungle. My mom taught me "the smarter guy retreats" (I hope that translates from German : "Der Kluegere gibt nach.")

The meek shall inherit the earth--an 8 foot long plot of it anyway. Cemeteries are full of those who gave ground to those who would cause us harm.
I do not think either, that law enforcement should have to allow a criminal to escape if there is no way to apprehend him without lethal force, and most state lawmakers and many state appealate and federal courts have agreed. Disagree with it, but it is Law of the Land.

quote Originally posted by CoryFiero: BTW he will continue to be a criminal. Why is this guy out of jail? I think this is the real problem. Can we agree on that?

Based on the info you posted, yes!

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: My mom taught me "the smarter guy retreats"

Since you like to play the "What If" game...

If must comfort your wife knowing that "If" a guy was holding a gun to her head while he was raping her, you would run away. :Rolleyes:

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: My mom taught me "the smarter guy retreats" (I hope that translates from German : "Der Kluegere gibt nach.")

That explains much about your views and attitude.

The "ONLY" thing wrong with this story is that the Criminal was not killed.

BTW, I forgot to mention in the incident of the Atlanta news anchor. Her husband was killed while they lived and worked in Miami.

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: Based on the info you posted, yes!

Having now seen that list, go back and re-read what I just said in my last post above this one.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Having now seen that list, go back and re-read what I just said in my last post above this one.

I agree that what you pointed out is a problem but getting armed is not the solution to that problem.

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: To me, constant confrontation and chest-pounding is weird.

Now you are stereotyping based on a false perception. Sounds to me like you think that a law abiding citizen who carries a concealed weapon goes out picking fights. starting trouble and beating on their chest like an Ape to show their dominance.

quote Originally posted by JimmyS: Now you are stereotyping based on a false perception. Sounds to me like you think that a law abiding citizen who carries a concealed weapon goes out picking fights. starting trouble and beating on their chest like an Ape to show their dominance.

Well, you read Red88's post that I replied to?

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Damn... you've really been studying the ways of the liberal mind. I am VERY impressed...

Hardly. With all the straw man arguments and "what ifs" presented in this thread, my statement holds just as much water as the next.

Elaboration, if the aforementioned fast food establishment had posted a sign that read "Firearms not allowed on premises," this event could have just as easily not occurred, as the law-abiding CCW holder would've either left his weapon in the vehicle in which he traveled or could've easily chosen a different place to get a meal.

In either case, the guy who went into the building with the intent to rob people would've been able to walk away as he -more likely than not- would have been the only one armed. Savvy?


.........................................................
For what it's worth, I was taught to turn the other cheek but also remember "fool me once..." Makes me a cynic but I'm fine with that.

[This message has been edited by skuzzbomer (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: Well, you read Red88's post that I replied to?

I have read every post in this thread and no where have I ever witnessed behavior of this type from any law abiding gun owner. Trust me when I say that I personally know hundreds of gun owners and have never seen this behavior.

Now if your responding to a post he made in another thread, then no I have not read it. Please enlighten me.

[This message has been edited by JimmyS (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: I agree that what you pointed out is a problem but getting armed is not the solution to that problem.

Correct, getting armed is not a solution to the real problem. Though getting armed gives law abiding citizens a chance to live until the root cause of the problem is taken care of. Which it wont be. I submit that background checks, banning certain weapons, limiting magazines to 10 rounds, or the out right ban of concealed carry (Chicago, DC) is not the solution either. All that does is take away the possibility of anyone from protecting their life. It's the opposite direction of any sort of solution.

quote Originally posted by JimmyS: I don't agree with this assumption. Bringing a gun into a business that has a sign is not illegal in Florida. Florida Law specifies places where you can not carry such as bars, places of nuisance, government buildings and other. If a business has a sign up saying no guns, I just ignore it as long as it's not a place prohibited by Law. If I were in a business with a sign posted and ended up having to use it in justified self defense, I broke no law by being there with a gun. Best they can do is ask me to leave.

So you don't avoid businesses that basically say they don't want yours? I do.

I'm not a gun owner and I don't do any transactions with any place that openly says they don't support people's right to arms. Makes one ponder.

quote Originally posted by skuzzbomer: So you don't avoid businesses that basically say they don't want yours? I do. I'm not a gun owner and I don't do any transactions with any place that openly says they don't support people's right to arms. Makes one ponder.

For the most part I do not do business with these types of businesses. I have however entered one because there was no other viable option at that moment. I have yet to personally see a business, in my area, with a sign.

I also would not work for an employer who would not honor my right to concealed carry. Seeing how I'm a state licensed Armed Security Officer, that's not an issue.

[This message has been edited by JimmyS (edited 04-09-2013).]

quote Originally posted by yellowstone: I don't know, that's how my friends were brought up, too. To me, constant confrontation and chest-pounding is weird.

To me, it's strange to equate not wanting to be a victim with "constant confrontation and chest-pounding."
I also find it strange you are more afraid of an armed civilian who "might" injure someone rather than an armed criminal who's already in the act of committing a crime.

It might surprise you to know the vast majority of concealed weapons carriers go out of their way to avoid confrontation. You make it sound like the citizen at BK went there hoping a criminal would try to rob the place at gun point.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: I also find it strange you are more afraid of an armed civilian who "might" injure someone rather than an armed criminal who's already in the act of committing a crime.

I too find it strange.

Anyone who knows me knows that I carry concealed. I have never had a friend tell me they were uncomfortable around me. In fact they would all tell you that they felt a bit safer. I also carry open for work and the only people that are afraid are people who are up to no good IE Criminals.