Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:27 PM Sep 2012

Four thugs shoot at CCWer, shoots back, kills one, others flee.

Details are sparse. It appears that self-defense shootings are so common that they barely rate coverage in the papers. I googled trying to find more details but found little more than that the incident was black-on-black crime.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120917/NEWS05/309170030/Police-Detroit-man-shot-back-at-would-be-robbers-killed-teen?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cs

Police: Would-be robber killed

A 17-year-old youth was fatally shot Saturday night when he and three other youths began shooting at a 50-year-old man sitting in his car at a Detroit shopping center and the man fired back, police said.

The 50-year-old, who had a permit to possess a handgun, fired at the youths as they approached to rob him, Detroit Police Sgt. Alan Quinn said.

The incident occurred at 8:40 p.m. in the Grandland Shopping Center -- at Grand River and Fenkell on the city's west side -- when the older man was sitting in his Chevrolet Malibu, Quinn said. The 17-year-old died at the scene while the other youths ran off.

The man was being questioned by police. Quinn said there was no additional information available Sunday on the case.


I submit for consideration that the thugs were extremely anti-social as evidenced by their attempting to rob, and shooting at, an innocent 50 yr old man. The CCWer's actions were strongly pro-social as he saved his own productive life and removed from society a predatory violent criminal. Yet there are those here that would condemn the old guy as being anti-social for nothing more than being prepared to use violence in self-defense.

Further, there are those who claim that there is no need for a person to be ready to defend themselves. This guy did nothing worse than going to a shopping mall parking lot where he was violently attacked with gunfire from four thugs. Sometimes it is impossible to avoid violent crime. Sometimes it seeks you out. Sometimes, you have to fight or die.

It is sad that a young person's life ended so suddenly, but he chose to be a violent felon. Since past actions are the best predictor of future behavior, it is highly likely that if the old guy had been unarmed, then the dead teen would have gotten away and gone on to commit other violent crimes and victimize more people. The old guy, by being armed and fighting back, saved not only himself but future victims from this thug.

Further, notice that he had no difficulty identifing who the bad guys were. Some antis claim that in the stress of the moment it would be next to impossible to correctly identify whom is the bad guy. It was really quite simple. Duh - the bad guys were the ones shooting at him.

Notice that he didn't hit any innocents, just one of the thugs. According to some anti posters the old guy should have been incapable of accurate return fire, but would have spray fired the area hitting innocent people while missing the bad guys. So far the only ones that we have seen do that are the NYPD cops. He hit one of the thugs and nobody else.
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Speck Tater

(10,618 posts)
1. I don't like guns, and I don't want to carry one myself.
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:32 PM
Sep 2012

But, as reluctant as I am to admit it, this guy is lucky he WAS carrying a gun.

I know not everyone can do it, but my solution is to live in a place where stuff like that is less likely to happen, so that I don't have to carry a gun.

GreenStormCloud

(12,072 posts)
3. Then your solution is also not to go shopping at a mall.
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:34 PM
Sep 2012

This didn't happen at his home, but at a shopping mall.

 

Speck Tater

(10,618 posts)
5. Fine. Use logic on me. See if I care!
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:41 PM
Sep 2012


I guess if I lived in a city where that sort of thing happened I would either carry a gun or move, although moving would be my first choice.

spin

(17,493 posts)
12. You must be one of the fortunate few ...
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 02:21 AM
Sep 2012

who afford to take a significant loss on your home investment and would have no problem finding a job in a different area.

Many do not have that choice in today's economy.

 

Clames

(2,038 posts)
4. I wonder if circular motion has any commentary on this anti-social behavior.
Mon Sep 17, 2012, 10:35 PM
Sep 2012

I would suspect he'll state the 50 y.o. was the more anti-social element in this story since he had the audacity to not only carry a weapon but use it to defend himself too.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
10. I dunno about him, but at least one other poster feels that way:
Tue Sep 18, 2012, 12:31 AM
Sep 2012
http://www.democraticunderground.com/117272363#post3


It's hard to come up with more anti-social behavior than carrying a concealed handgun. Maybe using it would be more anti-social.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Four thugs shoot at CCWer...