• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Shootout in Walmart parking lot.

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's awesome. This guy risked his life (and possibly those of his family) to ensure that none of the four drug dealing, thieving, violent criminals got hurt.

If he had driven away, and the four of them killed each other the community would have four fewer drug using, drug dealing, thieving, violent criminals running amok. Crime would actually have gone down. Funny how it works.

He obviously couldn't have known they were all drug dealing, violent parasites on society, but it's funny how the reality works out.
 
Last edited:
Having not been there when things happened I have a couple thoughts.

Might be that he was close enough to see that there were two other parties in those vehicles that appeared unarmed and decided to try to protect them.
And the other is it might have been at the point where the two had started the fist fight that he made the decision to jump in as he felt better armed than they were and felt he could defuse the situation.

This was probably the wrong way to react if one is all for self preservation. I get that. Also I get that the local population up here (northern Maine) has a longstanding culture and tend to step in to help one another when the chips are down. Most others hardened by the real world violence see this as foolhardy, but some still have the drive to attempt to help another human being no matter the outcome. If everyone's reaction were to cut and run when presented with violence then we are no better than the folks in Paris France that had no choice of defending themselves or stopping the terrorists. Some will ultimately step up and try to make a difference and some of those ultimately prevail. Me, I do not know what I would have done in his shoes that day but ultimately would have make the best choice with on scene feedback. Heck if you are so afraid of dying at a strangers hand do not go for a drive as you are statistically more likely to be killed in a car wreck than a shootout.:scrutiny: Living life has no guarantee you will survive to old age.
 
As to the morality question or the fundamental 'do you help' undertone being mentioned...so far as I can tell this appears, as somebody above called it, to be 'mutual combat' between criminals. If that is the case it is a much different situation that stepping in to act in defense of an apparently (can never be sure) innocent third party.
 
This was probably the wrong way to react if one is all for self preservation. I get that. Also I get that the local population up here (northern Maine) has a longstanding culture and tend to step in to help one another when the chips are down. Most others hardened by the real world violence see this as foolhardy, but some still have the drive to attempt to help another human being no matter the outcome. If everyone's reaction were to cut and run when presented with violence then we are no better than the folks in Paris France that had no choice of defending themselves or stopping the terrorists. Some will ultimately step up and try to make a difference and some of those ultimately prevail. Me, I do not know what I would have done in his shoes that day but ultimately would have make the best choice with on scene feedback. Heck if you are so afraid of dying at a strangers hand do not go for a drive as you are statistically more likely to be killed in a car wreck than a shootout.:scrutiny: Living life has no guarantee you will survive to old age.

Thank you, I share that same sentiment. Given the problems we are having up here, and factor in those mug shots, I don't think there's an awful lot of us that wouldn't put two and two together and realize what's going down.

Now maybe it's just a Maine thing but I hope not.
 
For those that think that guy did the right thing, there's dozens of shootings weekly in St. Louis. We could really use your help here.


HB
 
For those that think that guy did the right thing, there's dozens of shootings weekly in St. Louis. We could really use your help here.


HB

If you show up on my doorstep I'll show you some nicer neighborhoods. :D
 
Well, as an at-risk (elderly, handicapped) person, I would like to thank all of you who would stick around to help, in advance.

To paraphrase someone, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to run away."

Someone close this thread. No generally acceptable solution will emerge, since it involves different personalities, unpredictable circumstances, and possibly the general policy of the board.

Terry, 230RN
 
Given the problems we are having up here, and factor in those mug shots, I don't think there's an awful lot of us that wouldn't put two and two together and realize what's going down.

Did he realize what was going down? Did he realize that these were four heroin dealers battling it out over money? Did he intervene to save the lives of four habitual criminals engaged in a drug deal?

I'm not sure. A lot of people have posited that he was attempting to defend an innocent from attack, but if so, he was incorrect and didn't put two and two together correctly.

If he had shot and killed one of them, I wonder what the police response would have been? It is easier to dismiss the idea of pressing charges when no one actually was hurt (and he didn't fire his gun). But if there were no innocent parties and he engaged the four and killed one of them, I wonder how his justification for use of lethal force would play out?

I remember something from one of Leslie Nielsen's Police Squad movies about getting a medal for killing someone who turned out to be a "druggie" but I don't think that's quite how it works in real life. :)

Even if they are criminals, if they aren't attacking you personally killing them is not without penalty. And having waded into the fight and started giving orders and presenting your own gun would likely cut out the heart of your defense claim as you certainly then had done something to provoke their attack on you.

A tough situation to see through, legally. Fortunately the good Samaritan here managed to get through this without firing at anyone. He should be very thankful for such cooperative criminals!
 
Just playing devil's advocate. You have to admit at least some people that lawfully carry firearms go out looking for trouble right? This guy found it. Could it be he always fantasized about playing the hero/using his firearm?

Something had to convince him to endanger his family to try to neutralize this situation.
 
Protection of others is covered under self defense laws.
"Covered"? Yes.

But it is only lawful when those others are lawfully justified in protecting themselves.
 
If he had to use that weapon, imagine the world of hurt he'd be in trying to explain how he's not a drug dealer and he doesn't know any of these people.

Police "So dealer A and Dealer B were just here arguing on their own when you shot Dealer B, and you expect me to believe you don't know Dealer A? You're just a good samaritan driving around snuffing out heroin dealers competition?"

It would totally look like he was involved in a drug buy that went sideways. Would be a fun night of Q&A. :)
 
"Covered"? Yes.

But it is only lawful when those others are lawfully justified in protecting themselves.

This varies by state, yes? With some allowing you to only use what force the person you are acting in defense of would be able to lawfully use and other jurisdictions allowing you to use what force you reasonably believe to be necessary and justified given what you know/observe
 
“From our standpoint,” Massey said, “everybody has a constitutional right under the Second Amendment to have a gun."

I am glad that a police officer acknowledges the Second Amendment in the interview to the media.
 
A somewhat similar incident reportedly happened years ago. I read this on a gun website back in '07 or '08.

Somebody described a guy with a CCW license driving by, or into a parking lot.
The driver suddenly sees a well-dressed, clean cut guy (in a business suit) exchanging gun fire with two very scraggly guys. All of them were taking cover behind cars. Who was the bad guy(s) in the firefight? It Could Not be the well-dressed guy...could it?

The driver who discovered this firefight decided to shoot the two scraggly guys.
Appearances were very misleading. The two rougher-looking guys who were killed were Undercover Narcotics Officers. The dude in a nice suit was a drug dealer.

Can anybody verify that this incident happened as described?:scrutiny:
 
Last edited:
Dude stops his car, with his entire family inside, to confront 4 armed dirtbags with a 6-shot .380 (Glock 42)? :rolleyes:

Too many details I'm unaware of for me to feel comfortable lambasting the guy, but on the surface, it seems like very poor judgement to me.
 
The [CCW] who discovered this firefight decided to shoot the two scraggly guys.

Appearances were very misleading. The two rougher-looking guys who were killed were Undercover Narcotics Officers. The dude in a nice suit was a drug dealer.

:banghead:
 
Well, I do know that if I'm in my car, and I heard shots, I'm not getting out to investigate, especially if my family is with me. Stupid, and very lucky guy. Nothing more than lucky and really stupid.
 
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...by-a-bullet-as-he-drove-through-central-area/

Here is a story of a man in Seattle who was shot in the neck as he minded his own business and drove his car. This is not directly analogous because he was just a regular driver with no CCW who I believe was unaware of the shooting that was about to occur. That said he's a prime example of who is going to die in a crossfire to errant shots. A father and a valuable member of society. Took the cops 7 minutes to show up, one can dump a lot of lead in 7 minutes and I bet there would be multiple dead and not all heroin dealers had there been no intervention.

If you hear shots, or worse SEE shots, in a parking lot protected by an aluminum car door and auto glass, you're liable to get shot whether you run or not so cowardice is no panacea.

I suppose you can argue the risk is far greater to fight than to run, but on the other hand once he intervened and the shooting stopped that risk dropped to zero so it's hard to say which is riskier in my opinion
 
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...by-a-bullet-as-he-drove-through-central-area/

Here is a story of a man in Seattle who was shot in the neck as he minded his own business and drove his car. This is not directly analogous because he was just a regular driver with no CCW who I believe was unaware of the shooting that was about to occur. That said he's a prime example of who is going to die in a crossfire to errant shots. A father and a valuable member of society. Took the cops 7 minutes to show up, one can dump a lot of lead in 7 minutes and I bet there would be multiple dead and not all heroin dealers had there been no intervention.

If you hear shots, or worse SEE shots, in a parking lot protected by an aluminum car door and auto glass, you're liable to get shot whether you run or not so cowardice is no panacea.

I suppose you can argue the risk is far greater to fight than to run, but on the other hand once he intervened and the shooting stopped that risk dropped to zero so it's hard to say which is riskier in my opinion

whoa there

It's a bit of a leap to proclaim "cowardice" if a [non LE non involved no relation to anyone involved no prior knowledge of the parties involved] person chooses not to interject themselves into an armed confrontation between pairs of drug dealing criminals...particularly when said person is driving a vehicle containing his family.

Plus as a practical matter I'm fairly confident that stopping the car/not moving the car, then approaching and getting involved yourself, is exponentially more risky to you and your family.
 
I'm not accusing any specific users of cowardice of course, and as always I want to make a clear distinction from seeking out conflict (playing hero, which we all dislike) and responding to a conflict you find yourself in.

In this case the guy was right there! Driving across the parking lot to run in and get involved would be a bad idea, but seeing as he was right there, I'd say he was exactly right to feel obligated to protect the sanctity of the community. This disintegration of neighborly behavior and concern for our common man is disturbing.

"Me and mine, can't wait to run if I see something bad going down and I'm fortunate to be farther away than those other poor people", "my gun is for me and I won't help anyone else", these are not noble philosophies and that's the definition of cowardice, ignoble fear in the face of danger or harm.

I posted that article to illustrate that he could have just as easily been killed trying to flee so maybe this was actually the safer choice.
 
I'm not accusing any specific users of cowardice of course, and as always I want to make a clear distinction from seeking out conflict (playing hero, which we all dislike) and responding to a conflict you find yourself in.

This guy was not in the conflict.

In this case the guy was right there!

Being nearby is not the same thing as already being a part of it.



Driving across the parking lot to run in and get involved would be a bad idea, but seeing as he was right there, I'd say he was exactly right to feel obligated to protect the sanctity of the community.

Protect the sanctity of the community? I'm not sure that is in the realm of use of lethal force by private citizens.

This disintegration of neighborly behavior and concern for our common man is disturbing.

Random drug dealers shooting it out in the Walmart parking lot are not my neighbors, probably not your neighbors, and don't seem to be this guy's neighbors, either.

"Me and mine, can't wait to run if I see something bad going down and I'm fortunate to be farther away than those other poor people",

What other poor people? The drug dealers who are shooting at each other??

"my gun is for me and I won't help anyone else", these are not noble philosophies and that's the definition of cowardice, ignoble fear in the face of danger or harm.

Bullcrap. Especially since you just made up a quote out of nothing. Some might say you are lying by putting that phrase in quotes. Some might be correct.

I posted that article to illustrate that he could have just as easily been killed trying to flee so maybe this was actually the safer choice.

But you're wrong. Already in your car able to immediately drive away, and doing so, doesn't make you "Just as easily" injured or killed as if you stop, get out of your car, draw your gun, and confront the armed criminals. Odds are definitely higher of being hurt or killed when you approach and intervene.
 
Warp, if you feel my paraphrased versions of the "me and mine" philosophy are disingenuous I would love to know what subtext you think is more appropriate.

You aren't obliged to act courageously in defense of your fellow man of course, but if you are present and able and choose not to act courageously... Well... I already used the word for what that is called and it's an ugly word that makes people feel bad and rightly so. If you felt personally attacked by what I wrote please know it wasn't directed at any individual user I just want to challenge the "me and mine" philosophy and the culture of normalizing and encouraging cowardly behavior as if it's virtuous to abandon your fellow man to the predations of the world.

Everyone has to make their own choices but I'd prefer it if people aspired to courage even if they wound up lacking it, rather than not even aspiring.
 
Warp, if you feel my paraphrased versions of the "me and mine" philosophy are disingenuous I would love to know what subtext you think is more appropriate.

You aren't obliged to act courageously in defense of your fellow man of course, but if you are present and able and choose not to act courageously... Well... I already used the word for what that is called and it's an ugly word that makes people feel bad and rightly so. If you felt personally attacked by what I wrote please know it wasn't directed at any individual user I just want to challenge the "me and mine" philosophy and the culture of normalizing and encouraging cowardly behavior as if it's virtuous to abandon your fellow man to the predations of the world.

Everyone has to make their own choices but I'd prefer it if people aspired to courage even if they wound up lacking it, rather than not even aspiring.

Who was being abandoned?

For starters, one must have some kind of attachment or duty to another in order for abandonment to be possible. An example of people you may have a duty towards would be your family.

If you think abandoning your family to sit there under the "protection" of a car door or window "right there" next to what is possibly a 5+ person shootout is the courageous and honorable decision I can't help but ask...do you have a wife and children?

And yes, the phrase you made up and put in quotes is absolutely disingenuous. Choosing not to abandon your family to rely on luck to not be shot adjacent to a gunfight is not saying you will never help another person.
 
You aren't obliged to act courageously in defense of your fellow man of course, but if you are present and able and choose not to act courageously... Well... I already used the word for what that is called and it's an ugly word that makes people feel bad and rightly so. If you felt personally attacked by what I wrote please know it wasn't directed at any individual user I just want to challenge the "me and mine" philosophy and the culture of normalizing and encouraging cowardly behavior as if it's virtuous to abandon your fellow man to the predations of the world.

Everyone has to make their own choices but I'd prefer it if people aspired to courage even if they wound up lacking it, rather than not even aspiring.

Ahhh courage. Courage is one of those special words. It means so much to so many, and for entirely different reasons.

Just think of all those courageous men and women who so selflessly give their last full measure of devotion and abandon all claims to this world to blow themselves up and try and kill the enemies of their religious persuasion. Or all those very courageous soldiers of the Wehrmacht who gave their lives to advance the glory of their fatherland, or the intensely courageous pilots of the Divine Wind who gave their lives for their Emperor by flying a plane across leagues of ocean to dive gloriously into the deck of an American warship.

So, hey, you can have your courage, however you see it. Sometimes it comes with (or because of) a healthy helping of stupidity, or blindness, or stubbornness, or gullibility, or brainwashing, or social pressure, or fantasy, or "nobility" which is, generally speaking, a concept through which those with a certain degree of self-pride are duped into acting against their own best interests.


Now, having dispensed with that misty notion: Sure, as somebody somewhere once said, "a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do." Right?

Our discussion here may not persuade a particular member not to pull a gun and wade into a gunfight in progress. But perhaps it can give all of us a bit of perspective and a chance to consider these things before the opportunity arises.

Every armed encounter is fraught with dangers of a wide variety, but a situation where you are not directly involved, and indeed where you intervene specifically to stop a crime and a disturbance of the peace you must know, understand, and accept that:

1) There is a very good chance that you will not act fully within the rather archaic and usually completely misunderstood laws of your state which cover a citizen's rights to act to enforce laws ("preserve the 'sanctity'" if that's how it makes you feel good to phrase it). So, you MUST accept that through your actions in trying to do good you may break the law, be prosecuted for it, and go to jail. The road to hell certainly is paved with good intentions, and we see monthly reminders about "good guys" who sure as shootin' THOUGHT they were on the side of the angels...but now are behind bars.

2) You stopped and left or even lead your family into the danger zone and the "innocents" who are highly likely to catch a bullet are those directly behind you in the car you just vacated when you decided to draw your gun and start issuing commands to the guys who are ALREADY firing weapons. You MUST accept that the dead child who's face will be appearing in tomorrow's paper may be your own son or daughter who you didn't lead to safety.

3) What are you going to DO with that gun? Are you really going to shoot them if they don't acquiesce to your commands? You do realize that you are not necessarily an infallible shot, especially under that tunnel-visioned, adrenaline flowing moment. Now you're firing a gun, TOO, in a public place full of cars and shoppers. You MUST accept that there is a good chance you will shoot someone you didn't mean to. And maybe you'll kill them.

4) You MUST accept that there's a good chance that the guys who already have their guns out and firing will KILL YOU. But hey that's easy. Every man among us likes to talk about how they're not afraid to die in the heat of battle and how their wife and kids will be SO PROUD at their funeral. Yaaay. Your wife and kids will be less proud when they have to make the rent without your paycheck. Your wife will be less proud when she's trying to get all the housework, chores, maintenance, shopping, etc. done without you around. Your kids will be less proud when they have to be tucked in and kissed goodnight by the big hunk of man whom your wife finds to be her new partner in your household. But maybe he'll be generous with his paychecks and will help send your kids off to college. Could happen.


And for what? Saving the lives of a few heroin dealers? Trying to stop stray bullets in a gunfight in progress? (Your gun doesn't stop THEIR guns, unless they decide to stop.)


Living up to your version of "Courage"? If your self image can't survive the hit of making a smarter choice than to run to battle instead of taking care of the only people who will ever love you ... you need to think really, really hard about that.
 
Last edited:
Just playing devil's advocate. You have to admit at least some people that lawfully carry firearms go out looking for trouble right? This guy found it. Could it be he always fantasized about playing the hero/using his firearm?

Something had to convince him to endanger his family to try to neutralize this situation.
If going to Walmart is looking for trouble then we've degenerated much farther than I've realized.

While I may not have done the same thing out of concern for my family, I don't really fault a citizen for attempting to bring some sort of order to his area when the government system isn't being effective at keeping the peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top