This guy most likely saved lives

[Natebishop3]

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html

Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, positioned himself behind a pillar.

"He was working on his rifle," said Meli. "He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side."

The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter.

"As I was going down to pull, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew if I fired and missed, I could hit them," he said.

Meli took cover inside a nearby store. He never pulled the trigger. He stands by that decision.

"I'm not beating myself up cause I didn't shoot him," said Meli. "I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself."

This guy had a shot, but chose not to pull the trigger because he was worried he might hit someone else. The thing is, the shooter saw him and took off. If he hadn't been there, perhaps the guy would have been able to unjam his gun and keep shooting.

Either way, I think this guy is a hero.

 

[julius]

just imagine if he didn't have the gun in the first place. or had access to the help he needed in the first place.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

What do you expect the guy to say? "I was really fucking scared. I had a gun but man I was shaking so hard I was afraid I'd miss and he'd shoot me."

To stand there and claim that he's the reason that the shooter's next move was to take his own life is a little hard to believe.

 

[Natebishop3]

just imagine if he didn't have the gun in the first place. or had access to the help he needed in the first place.

What does that have to do with the fact that this guy most likely prevented the shooter from taking more lives by his mere presence?

 

[Natebishop3]

What do you expect the guy to say? "I was really fucking scared. I had a gun but man I was shaking so hard I was afraid I'd miss and he'd shoot me."

To stand there and claim that he's the reason that the shooter's next move was to take his own life is a little hard to believe.

Not really, no. The shooter's gun jammed, he was trying to unjam it. He saw this guy and that he had a gun so he took off. Why is that hard to believe?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

What does that have to do with the fact that this guy most likely prevented the shooter from taking more lives by his mere presence?

That's what the guy is claiming. There is no way to really know that. If he had killed the shooter that's one thing. Good for him! But he didn't do anything so he can't claim that he had any effect on the outcome of the shooting.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Not really, no. The shooter's gun jammed, he was trying to unjam it. He saw this guy and that he had a gun so he took off. Why is that hard to believe?

How do we know the shooter saw this guy's gun? How do we know if the guy even took his gun out of his holster. The shooter is dead so this guy is free to claim anything he wants.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

That's what the guy is claiming. There is no way to really know that. If he had killed the shooter that's one thing. Good for him! But he didn't do anything so he can't claim that he had any effect on the outcome of the shooting.

tnt heok aimo nt hesh aim on the shooter makes a difference....

 

[Natebishop3]

How do we know the shooter saw this guy's gun? How do we know if the guy even took his gun out of his holster. The shooter is dead so this guy is free to claim anything he wants.

Because I heard stories on the day of the shooting about a guy with a CHL protecting people in a store. Why would he lie?

 

[RR7]

tnt heok aimo nt hesh aim on the shooter makes a difference....

???

 

[SlyPokerDog]

tnt heok aimo nt hesh aim on the shooter makes a difference....

Huh?

 

[Natebishop3]

So something good about a gun owner comes out about the Clackamas shooting and you guys feel the need to call him a liar to further your anti-gun agenda?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Because I heard stories on the day of the shooting about a guy with a CHL protecting people in a store. Why would he lie?

People lie all the time. Why? To look like a hero? To see his name in the press? To get laid? To have all his buddies buy him drinks? I'm just not ready to proclaim this guy a hero based on his say so.

 

[RR7]

So something good about a gun owner comes out about the Clackamas shooting and you guys feel the need to call him a liar to further your anti-gun agenda?

you guys?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

So something good about a gun owner comes out about the Clackamas shooting and you guys feel the need to call him a liar to further your anti-gun agenda?

Link? Where have I in any of this said I'm anti-gun? I'm actually very pro gun. I like guns, I own guns. I'm just not ready to proclaim someone a hero based on their say so.

 

[Natebishop3]

you guys?

Sorry, let me be more specific.

Sly, the heartless bastard who thinks this guy is lying to get laid.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sorry, let me be more specific.

Sly, the heartless bastard who thinks this guy is lying to get laid.

That's right! Heartless bastard!

And this heartless bastard is packing. Fear me!

 

[RR7]

not jumping to believe the guy makes him a heartless bastard?

 

[Natebishop3]

Link? Where have I in any of this said I'm anti-gun? I'm actually very pro gun. I like guns, I own guns. I'm just not ready to proclaim someone a hero based on their say so.

His story sure makes a lot more sense if you think about it. Why did the guy suddenly take off after only shooting three people and then kill himself? The police said they found a full mag on the ground. It makes sense that the guy spooked him because he saw a gun pointed at him and he ran.

 

[julius]

What does that have to do with the fact that this guy most likely prevented the shooter from taking more lives by his mere presence?

Because it's a hollow argument made trying to make it sound like if only everyone was armed this would never happen.

Well, it's just as likely that guy would've been nervous and misfired.

It's very easy to say as someone who hasn't fired a gun on someone (I'm assuming this guy hasn't, but I could be wrong) that he might not have a steady arm. You ask policemen wht it's like to shoot someone, and they'll point out that it's not like "aim, shoot, kill".

he could've killed someone else, could've wounded the guy, or worse, froze and had the guy take his gun and use it on him and others.

like I said, had this guy (the shooter) not had access to weapons in the first place and been properly diagnosed, it wuold've have happened.

The answer to this isn't more guns.

 

[Natebishop3]

not jumping to believe the guy makes him a heartless bastard?

If it's Sly? Yes.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

His story sure makes a lot more sense if you think about it. Why did the guy suddenly take off after only shooting three people and then kill himself? The police said they found a full mag on the ground. It makes sense that the guy spooked him because he saw a gun pointed at him and he ran.

Ummmmm.... I don't know, MAYBE BECAUSE HE WAS FUCKING CRAZY?!?

Why do you think this guy shot 3 people and then killed himself? Because he was sane?

 

[julius]

So something good about a gun owner comes out about the Clackamas shooting and you guys feel the need to call him a liar to further your anti-gun agenda?

Mine wasn't an anti gun agenda. Maybe if you had paid attention to what I said here AND in the other thread, you'd notice that I'm not against guns, I'm against certain people having access to them and certain types being legal to buy.

 

[Natebishop3]

Because it's a hollow argument made trying to make it sound like if only everyone was armed this would never happen.

Well, it's just as likely that guy would've been nervous and misfired.

It's very easy to say as someone who hasn't fired a gun on someone (I'm assuming this guy hasn't, but I could be wrong) would have a steady arm. You ask policemen wht it's like to shoot someone, and they'll point out that it's not like "aim, shoot, kill".

he could've killed someone else, could've wounded the guy, or worse, froze and had the guy take his gun and use it on him and others.

like I said, had this guy (the shooter) not had access to weapons in the first place and been properly diagnosed, it wuold've have happened.

The answer to this isn't more guns.

Wait, when did I make the argument above that everyone should be armed, or that this would never happen?

You're right, he could have killed someone else, which is why he didn't fire. He specifically said he didn't fire because he was worried he'd miss and hit someone else. But his mere presence, I think, spooked the guy and most likely prevented him from shooting more people.

But seriously, you and others like to point out that if he had not been able to gain access to guns, this wouldn't have happened. I'm just curious how you would go about making that happen. We already know he stole the gun from a friend who acquired it legally. How would you go about making it so that he couldn't gain access to a gun?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

His story sure makes a lot more sense if you think about it. Why did the guy suddenly take off after only shooting three people and then kill himself? The police said they found a full mag on the ground. It makes sense that the guy spooked him because he saw a gun pointed at him and he ran.

Serious answer, he sprays bullets all over the place. Gun jams. He fucks with gun, to get it unjammed. Gun ready to fire again. Looks around and everyone has run away. No targets. Hears sirens. Goes to back hallway and kills himself.

The End

 

[Natebishop3]

Ummmmm.... I don't know, MAYBE BECAUSE HE WAS FUCKING CRAZY?!?

Why do you think this guy shot 3 people and then killed himself? Because he was sane?

You're speculating just as much, if not more, than I am about the reasons that the shooting stopped.

 

[julius]

parental responsibility. not having the guns available in the first place. cost prohibitive prices for certain styles of guns.

people being responsible with their guns (locked up, and not easily accessible by people who aren't the owners).

the proper help he needed to begin with (the guy was obviously in need of help).

 

[julius]

it's not anti gun, as much as pro not letting people have semi automatic weapons because they really don't have any reasonable or rational reason to have one.

I would guess most people have guns for either hunting or for defense.

If you need more than a glock or 22 for defense, maybe a regular old rifle. Not sure an AR-15 is useful for self defense anymore than a 22 is or a hand gun.

If you feel you have to use one of the semi automatic or fully automatic guns for hunting, you need to seriously find a new sport

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Wait, when did I make the argument above that everyone should be armed, or that this would never happen?

You're right, he could have killed someone else, which is why he didn't fire. He specifically said he didn't fire because he was worried he'd miss and hit someone else. But his mere presence, I think, spooked the guy and most likely prevented him from shooting more people.

But seriously, you and others like to point out that if he had not been able to gain access to guns, this wouldn't have happened. I'm just curious how you would go about making that happen. We already know he stole the gun from a friend who acquired it legally. How would you go about making it so that he couldn't gain access to a gun?

Well first off I'm still not sure if that guy's gun was really "stolen". I haven't heard a complete story about this. When did the guy realize his gun was stolen. Did he file a police report? Did he have a idea of who might have stolen it?

Or is he just claiming after the fact that the gun was stolen?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

You're speculating just as much, if not more, than I am about the reasons that the shooting stopped.

You don't think the shooter was crazy? Honestly? I'm speculating that shooting up a shopping mall is not normal behavior?!?