Old Dude vs Two Armed Thugs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Independent of the attaboys and not to be critical of the good samaritan - notice the lack of use of the sights except maybe for the first shot. Then there was a good deal of unsighted trusting the gun forward, bringing up in a movie type reaction to recoil and then trusting it out again.

One handed shooting and a strange two handed forearm grip for the off hand.

Could be stress or lack of training. Many videos show under stress folks going one handed and just point shooting at speed.

Given the lack of decisive hits, I find the tape interesting as to the shooting dynamics. As far as the last shot by the door, that's still in the active incident. He didn't go after them, I think.
 
ScottRiqui said:
I think this may be one of those times when your idea of what is "right", "just" and "moral" doesn't agree with the law.

Historically, the law has taken a *very* dim view of shooting a fleeing suspect based on what they *might* do. Now, had they actually been shooting at other patrons while running away from the "good guy", then the good guy would still have a solid case for "defense of others". But shooting someone who's running scared just because they might shoot someone else on the way out would be a hard sell in court.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I don't think the perp with the (rusty) firearm dropped it when he was shot. Since the older gentleman had no way of knowing the perp's gun was rusty and unloaded, the apparent threat was still real and active as long as the perp had the gun in hand or within reach.

[EDIT] Just watched the video again, full screen. The perp DID retain the gun -- it was still in his right hand as he exited stage right outside the door in the final frames of the video.

Still an active threat, and therefore a justifiable target.
 
Watch the video before commenting. The old man did not run after them once they exited. He first fired at the one holding the gun, then fired 2-3 more shots as they were running for the door. Once the criminals exited the cafe, the old man did not follow them, nor did he continue to shoot. This is one of those examples where the media is a little too creative when telling the story. They can say whatever they want to say, but the video says it all.

The video is on youtube, but I won't link to it because of a few racist comments that have been made by several youtube users. Just type "old man internet cafe shooting" and it should come up.
 
While you are correct that he did not follow them outside, he did shoot once through the door at the guy on the ground.

As you said, "the video says it all."
 
Fine Jimpeel, call the special prosecutor here in Florida that's handling that high profile case we all know about, and have her charge the old man. But if I'm on the jury (a possibility since I live in the same area where the shooting happened) if this video is all the evidence you have, I won't be convicting the old man...and I doubt anyone around here will either.

Yes, one of the criminal thugs got run over by the other criminal thug and he was shot as he was getting up to finish running out the door, but until they finally cleared that door and ran off, they were still a threat to all (the criminals had weapons and there were innocent people inside the cafe.)
 
robhof

The gentleman's best defense against any charges is his age, as I don't think any grand jury would want to process a 71 year old gentleman, the public outcry would end any politician involved.
 
Still an active threat, and therefore a justifiable target.
Click to expand...

I disagree. They two knuckleheads had turned to flee and were running away. They had even exited the building and Mr Williams continued to fire. Fleeing the scene, the two perps were no longer an imminent threat. Mr Williams should have broken off the engegement especially since it appears that he was not taking particularly careful aim and could very easily impacted an innocent bystander.
 
Let's get real folks...we all applaud Mr. Williams for his actions but his skill level leaves a lot to be desired.

Let's learn from this...to some extent he was lucky that the bg's had an inert firearm. They were stupid and careless - turning their backs on the crowd demonstrating a lack of control on their part permitted Mr. Williams to go on the attack.

If he were better trained and more skilled he would have gotten better hits.
At those distances he would not have had to use his sights but training in point/flash shooting should have gotten better hits.

What are the shooting requirements to get a CCL in his neck of the woods?
 
Aftermath __ Keep your mouth shut !
It's best not to say anything to the media or anyone else .You may be confused ,upset , etc and say things you didn't mean to say. Your words may be distorted and used against you.
Later when you've calmed down then with your lawyer you may talk to the police.
Never assume you may be treated like a hero ,especially when minorities are involved .I'm sure that the racemongers [Sharpton etc] will be on the case immediately .
 
What are the shooting requirements to get a CCL in his neck of the woods?
aphdmansoc is online now Report Post
Click to expand...

Take a class by someone "certified"
send in a check, fingerprints and photo

This wasn't TOO far from my house - most of these "internet cafes" (aka video slot parlors) are inhabited by a lot of the retired folks that live here, so not only are they cash cows, most "guests" are older and not as strong or likely to fight back - except for this gent.

No charges to be filed from what I saw; although one of the "disadvantaged youths" had to be flown to the hospital in Gainesville via helicopter - hope they bill his family - don't know why, there's a medical center just down the street and another hospital 4 miles the other way
 
I disagree. They two knuckleheads had turned to flee and were running away. They had even exited the building and Mr Williams continued to fire. Fleeing the scene, the two perps were no longer an imminent threat. Mr Williams should have broken off the engegement especially since it appears that he was not taking particularly careful aim and could very easily impacted an innocent bystander.
Click to expand...

I think Fl. has the same laws Ms. does. They could have thrown their guns away and ran away screaming like 9 year old girls and he could have chased them down and shot them anyway without fear of going to trial for it.
 
Let's drop the blood lust - like he should have killed them.

Also, can we avoid technical mistakes? The little 380s do have some kick to them due to the blowback nature.

Move beyond the attaboys, please.

We want to learn from it.

Did he shoot well?
Should he have shot at all?
Was the last shot at the door legit?
Equipment issues - yeah - he should have carried a 1911.
 
I think Fl. has the same laws Ms. does. They could have thrown their guns away and ran away screaming like 9 year old girls and he could have chased them down and shot them anyway without fear of going to trial for it.
Click to expand...

Okay. So he may be within his legal rights to have done so in your state.

But I do not believe that this makes it 'right'. I firmly believe Mr Williams went too far. As we view the surviellance footage, it is pretty obvious that the robbers turned and fled, and that the threat had seemingly ended. We all know that as responsible citizens, we must cease engaging bad guys when there in no longer and imminent threat.

I contend that his continued shooting was irresponsible and could have very easily resulted in a tragic situation where an innocent bystander could have been injured or killed. I contend that Mr Williams SHOULD have stopped firing his weapon, especially since we all seem to agree that he wasnt particularly taking careful aim during the incident. I am pretty sure that i would not have continued firing my weapon at fleeing robbers.
 
But I do not believe that this makes it 'right'. I firmly believe Mr Williams went too far. As we view the surviellance footage, it is pretty obvious that the robbers turned and fled, and that the threat had seemingly ended. We all know that as responsible citizens, we must cease engaging bad guys when there in no longer and imminent threat.
Click to expand...

I haven't a clue as to why you believe the robbers were no longer a threat. Previously on TFL we have discussed various circumstances where purportedly fleeing robbers have injured and killed people. Given that both were still armed, they were still a threat, especially to occupants of the business.

I contend that his continued shooting was irresponsible and could have very easily resulted in a tragic situation where an innocent bystander could have been injured or killed.
Click to expand...

I would contend that his continued shooting could have prevented a trajic situation where the robbers opted to harm others on their way out.

I contend that Mr Williams SHOULD have stopped firing his weapon, especially since we all seem to agree that he wasnt particularly taking careful aim during the incident. I am pretty sure that i would not have continued firing my weapon at fleeing robbers.
Click to expand...

I contend that he should have stopped shooting when the threat was no longer a threat. As for him not taking particularly good aim and contrary to Glenn's observations, it looks to me that most of his shots were indeed aimed.

Gosh, we should probably disarm the cops because Williams is apparently much more accurate with his "irresponsible" shooting than most cops. :rolleyes:

I did like this comment from one of the robbers. Remember that Florida is a state with concealed carry for the last couple of decades or so and pro-gun folks have claimed that crime drops because the robbers fear somebody may be carrying a gun. In short, Florida has had concealed carry longer than each of the robbers have been alive. This comment was classic...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sur...arry-holder-opening-fire-on-would-be-robbers/
Hours after his release from the hospital, Henderson, who talked about the pain he feels in his buttock and hip, said the plan was to “barge in, get the money and leave.” He said “he never expected anyone to be armed.”
Click to expand...

This was also classic...
And even though Henderson seems to be carrying some remorse, he still has a bone to pick with Williams, the elderly man who shot him, for firing while he (Henderson) was on the ground.

“I was down, and I’m not going to continue to shoot you,” he said.
Click to expand...

Just because folks are down or moving away from you does not mean that they are no longer a threat. It would be naive to assume so.
 
I am being fussy about his technique and the first shot looked aimed, the rest were point shooting and looked stressed.

Of course, being an internet denizen, I would have shot like William Tell and Annie Oakley and Jerry Miculek.

I don't think his shooting was out of control but wasn't the best technique. :rolleyes:

I don't think the last shot was out of bounds. Yeah, he could have pulled back but they were still an active threat. I agree with that.

Those little 380s, like snubbies, take a bit of practice. I can fire a decent group through one but under stress - that's an empirical question.
 
Considering how often bad guys herd unarmed people into a back room and execute them, the notion that a fleeing robber might pause at the door or even outside the door and pop off a shot or three hardly seems outlandish to me. The video CLEARLY shows that the dude with the gun held onto it right up to where he disappeared from view outside the door at the very end of the video. He was a robber, actively engaged in an armed robbery and still holding the weapon. As far as I'm concerned, he was an active threat and even the shot through the door was completely legitimate.

JMHO.

As for the punk's view that the "old man" shouldn't have shot him again when he was on the floor, the statement that "I was down, I wasn't going to shoot you" has zero credibility. If the kid had thrown the gun across the room and put his hands up, then maybe he would have had a point. An armed robber with a gun in his hand is an active threat -- period. Don't want to get shot? Don't engage in armed robberies.
 
I think Fl. has the same laws Ms. does. They could have thrown their guns away and ran away screaming like 9 year old girls and he could have chased them down and shot them anyway without fear of going to trial for it.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious:eek: By your description the threat is over the minute they fled. Murder charges to follow.:rolleyes:

Just like the incident here in Sanford Florida. Give me a break with the chase them down/pursue them and shoot them dead. Surprised at GM's reply
 
GM - moi? I don't think he left the place after them. He shot from inside at the guy scrambling through the door. They were still in close proximity and certainly hadn't surrendered.

If he chased them down the street shooting, that would be troublesome. That last shot at the door, I wouldn't regard that as trouble.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top