Yes because shooting for the legs is exactly how it works.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Man with Concealed Carry defends himself from Thugs...
- Thread starter sonicfan
- Start date
- Status
Yes because shooting for the legs is exactly how it works.
You are not entitled to an acceptance of an apology.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Yeah..someone yelling nigger at me would get hands, but not shaking ones.
Nappuccino
Member
I wouldn't have shaken his hands because I would have no reason to believe he wouldn't take that opportunity to catch me off guard and hit me anyway.
Jacksinthe
Banned
I wouldn't call it luck, in all honesty. Williams showed amazing restarint and level headedness both before and after the shooting. He made all the right moves, didn't completely unload his weapon randomly, hesitated to use it the first time he was attacked, etc.
Luck had nothing to do with it. Guy had nerves of steel and logic seemed to be on his side every step of the way from the way he handled the situation before it escalated to how he handled it after. That's a guy I'd feel completely safe around packing heat, unlike most other "AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!" gun nuts.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
lol..
Subpar Spatula
Banned
Justified to me. Enough information to see there was a threat against his life.
Yup, because a guy outnumbered and backed into a corner is guaranteed to only have a black eye or broken nose.
There are no guarantees in fights, you can leave with a black eye or be seriously hurt.
ryutaro's mama
Member
Yeah, people seem to be missing this point. He didn't shoot crazily. He didn't mindlessly keep firing or even pursue them after they ran. He ended the threat and put the gun down, responsibly.
And called 911. He did everything right, imo.
Williams told them at least 6 times he didn't want no problems. But drunken racists will be drunken racists.
And alcohol is a blood thinner
What amazes me, is how people are acting like he was just supposed to assume that a dude running back into the place would NOT be packing heat, as he came running up on him.
Yup - no reason whatsoever to be afraid.
He should have just waited to see if the second guy had a gun or knife, then carefully assessed the situation around him, assumed his Gun-Kata, and gone for a flesh wound.
Yup - no reason whatsoever to be afraid.
He should have just waited to see if the second guy had a gun or knife, then carefully assessed the situation around him, assumed his Gun-Kata, and gone for a flesh wound.
Not even if he was armed. Just the fact it was a 2nd person. He just been jumped on by one dude, and here comes a another one. More than just cause
ryutaro's mama
Member
But he should have done MORE to accomodate their racism...if only he had just shook their hand...c'mon Slayven.
FunkyDealer
Banned
Then why did you bring a gun in the first place? It's never not a risk.
So a headshot is better than potentially pissing someone off?
Shots to the torso are generally more risky both in terms of the actual shot, but also when factoring in medical care. Of course there's no disabling shots with a gun, that doesn't mean you should actively maximise damage.
Not bringing a gun in public is how it works.
Look, I'm not defending the idiot racists that attacked. But carrying a gun, and firing three shots? That's escalation and endangering everyone. It's all a really sad situation, the gunner shouldn't have had to carry a gun to feel safe in the first place.
You only shoot a gun to kill.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Common has no sense..
This is a perfect example of why people carry. If he wasn't, he may have been jumped by a group of racist idiots.
I'm really not understanding what you're arguing against. You don't want people carrying...so what would you have had happen in this outnumbered situation? Why would this man have had to endure an ass kicking by some racists?
The escalation happened when he was getting racist insults thrown his way why simply eating. Another escalation happened when he was sucker punched by one of the racists because he didn't wanna shake a racist's hand. A third escalation happened when he was attacked by another racists.
The de-escalation happened when he shot that racist because only then did they leave this man alone. Who was simply getting something to eat.
Folks watch too much Person of Interest. There are no kneecap shots in real life.
I agree.
If he had shot the guy who punched him, I might have something to say about it. As it was he was rushed by an unhinged drunk that was clearly looking for a fight. Even the other man sitting next to Williams was waiting for them to leave because he was afraid he would get jumped in the parking lot.
I'm pretty critical when it comes to using lethal force, but this situation was completely one-sided. How is there even a debate?
Williams should not have flashed his gun. As a CCP holder you are taught never to let anyone know you have a gun and your responsibility to de-escalate any potential situation is above and beyond what it would normally be if you weren't carrying a deadly weapon. I'm not sure he should be charged, but I think it's possible this could have been avoided.
The guy was warned he would be shot to death and still came after him. He deserves it at that point.
Does this "don't flash your gun" rule of thumb apply after you are already being attacked?
People keep saying this. HOW? How could he have stopped these guys from threatening him even after one had already struck him? Offer a scenario where you know you could've stopped these racists from committing any further harm after one had already struck and another had rushed him in the corner of the waffle house.
He was outnumbered.
Already attacked twice and yet its still on him to make sure the situation doesn't go any further against some drugged up racists.
Yeah, the racist pieces of shit could have not started anything.
Byakuya769
Member
People doing their best to expose their true feelings on the matter.
I'm not an expert on American weapons laws or gun culture, but I imagine not calling someone a nigger then trying to attack him would generally result in everyone living.
If I'm being attacked by multiple assailants....yes.
You are never supposed to flash your gun. You are either in immediate danger of death or grievous bodily injury, in which case you pull the gun ready to use it, or you are not in which case flashing it only escalates the situation. So yes, not every punch should escalate into a CCP holder brandishing his weapon.
It's one of the downsides of being a concealed carry holder. Even if someone else is the aggressor you can't assert yourself like you could if you weren't carrying. You have to at all times work to de-escalate the situation.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
I'm not a Second Amendment supporter, by and large. I think it's poorly written and outdated. However, it is the law of the land. That's something many people still need to come to grips with. Those saying "the shooter shouldn't have brought a gun," or similar nonsense, are living in a dream world.
In reality, people are going to carry guns. Our best hope is that those who carry guns will buy, sell, carry, and discharge those guns in a lawful and responsible manner. According to all information I've seen for this case, the shooter did absolutely everything he was supposed to. He didn't start the fight and he didn't escalate it. He also didn't fire a single shot until an angry, intoxicated, and threatening man charged at him at full speed (after the man's friend punched the shooter in the face with zero provocation).
Don't get me wrong: the fact that the attacker later died is terrible--though it should be noted that he died not as a direct result of the gunshots, but because he and his friends were driving while extremely intoxicated and rammed into another car (involving even more innocent people--who were hopefully unharmed--in their fuckery). But his death is just the epilogue to a story that started when he and his friends got drunk and high, then decided innocent people needed to suffer the wrath of their blind racism and impotent rage.
Tldr: he didn't deserve to die, but he absolutely begged to be shot. I mean, really, who charges head first from outside a building back inside to get at a man holding a gun?
In reality, people are going to carry guns. Our best hope is that those who carry guns will buy, sell, carry, and discharge those guns in a lawful and responsible manner. According to all information I've seen for this case, the shooter did absolutely everything he was supposed to. He didn't start the fight and he didn't escalate it. He also didn't fire a single shot until an angry, intoxicated, and threatening man charged at him at full speed (after the man's friend punched the shooter in the face with zero provocation).
Don't get me wrong: the fact that the attacker later died is terrible--though it should be noted that he died not as a direct result of the gunshots, but because he and his friends were driving while extremely intoxicated and rammed into another car (involving even more innocent people--who were hopefully unharmed--in their fuckery). But his death is just the epilogue to a story that started when he and his friends got drunk and high, then decided innocent people needed to suffer the wrath of their blind racism and impotent rage.
Tldr: he didn't deserve to die, but he absolutely begged to be shot. I mean, really, who charges head first from outside a building back inside to get at a man holding a gun?
What if he got knocked out with that first punch? Then thug #1 could have seen it, taken it, and shot up the whole place. Sorry, getting punched in the head is the perfect excuse to bring out out.
So you shouldn't pull out your gun until after you are being attacked - potentially by a group of people?
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
Admittedly I'm a bit shaky on Florida law, but under Stand Your Ground, I believe it's lawful for a CCP holder to not only flash, but also fire their gun if they feel their safety and well-being are threatened (which I think being sucker-punched in the head is a sign of).
We get too obsessed with the occasional justifiable use of guns and forget about 12,000 people were murdered in a normal year, and that the benefits don't nearly outweigh the cost. I don't see many threads harping on that, largely because it is has become normalize. Threads like these are really about allowing some posters to vent their political views more than anything else.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
Then create that thread. This thread is about the lawful use of a firearm. I agree that the murder of a single innocent person by a gun is a travesty. But this isn't the place to vent those frustrations.
This. I am really happy this case turned out so well for everyone except the assailants, but in a statistical and societal view, there is so much more harm being done by guns being readily available than otherwise.
I hope nobody tries to bring this case in future gun-crime threads. It is a one-in-a-million happy incident.
I'm pretty sure the mods frown on threads like those these days, even though it should be the much bigger discussion than threads like these.
This thread is entirely about venting frustrations.
you watch way too many movies
EdibleKnife
Member
With some people's pairing down of the point in which the shooter would have been justified you'd think that he'd only be in the right if he was lying knocked out on the floor with the racist thugs cocking his own gun to shoot him.
timetokill
Banned
Well, it sure is for you.
I think plenty of people here are just commenting on a story.
A couple of people are also here testing the thickness of the racism ice as they skate delicately around it, tapping the odd euphemism skate here and there.
Sounds to me that you got some frustrations to vent yourself.
I'm merely pointing out that this thread is about people trying to justify their existing political views. Call that whatever you like.
I definitely understand that shooting at the legs isn't exactly practical, but I never get this argument. You also can miss center mass and shoot a bystander directly.
Red Mage
Member
Plenty of cops have this mentality that citizens should never use deadly force or own a gun, etc. Though they would never say it, they basically believe in what amounts to a caste system, with the police as the superior group. They see themselves as the Public's rulers rather than their servants.
- Status