In Britain, man afraid of retaliation can't use gun to stay safe...all he did was defend himself....

[2aguy]

Nice course! So the instructor intentionally introduced unrealistic parameters into the course in order to get you to fail. Sounds very political.

That's because you're a dumbass. Intelligent people understand the deck was unrealistically and needlessly stacked against you to make you make those errors. They must raise you Brits to be stupid, loyal subjects.

Thank you for your reply, the course was an eye opener indeed. It was run by representatives of a private security company that specialises in providing bodyguards and other private security functions for VIPs, most of the employees are either ex-special forces or paratroopers or Royal Marine Commandos. The idea of the run around was to artificially create an adrenaline rush and the shouting at us was designed to induce a level of distraction that would come from shouts and screams of nearby bystanders.

As any shooter will tell you, controlling your breathing and heart rate is important when trying to shoot with any degree of accuracy. Short of them shooting live ammunition at us, it was about as realistic as you could get in a simulation.

Interestingly, the gentleman who came top was himself a retired army officer who had seen action in the Falklands, and he only managed 8 bad guys and 3 innocent bystanders!

It stacks the deck in favor of a violent criminal, who has more experience with it.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

I’ve no objection to people owning guns for recreation, but if they want to use them for “self defence” they should have extensive training and be certified accordingly; if only to avoid the number of innocent bystanders shot accidently by any budding “Rambos” who want to show how macho they are.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

And yet, you are wrong. Criminals run away from armed victims, we know this from experience here in the U.S. The victims here who use guns and fight off criminals are rarely Navy SEALs or DELTA operators.....you really don't understand firearms and how they are used in actual self defense......

Here are just a few stories of average people, with little to no training with guns, using them to fight off attackers.....notice the outcomes...

Suspect Puts Gun to Man's Head Only to Flee Scene Under Barrage of Bullets

A suspect put a gun to a man’s head on Thursday only to flee under a barrage of bullets after the would-be victim pulled his own gun and opened fire.

The incident occurred in Philadelphia’s West Oak Lane.

According to 6 ABC, Rahkeim Kelly was “headed home from buying a soda” when the suspect in a hoodie approached and put a gun to his head. Kelly managed to move away quickly, take cover behind a car, draw his own gun, and open fire.

The suspect, 22-year-old Osirus Lester, fled the scene.

Kelly said, “I fired two shots first, then he tried to take off running. I fired one more, then he ended up dropping the gun. He ran off and I just went and secured the weapon.”

Lester was arrested within minutes with a gunshot wound to his wrist.

Philadelphia Police Capt. Sekou Kinnebrew said, “[Kelly] does have a valid permit to carry. We checked that out. He’s the victim of a robbery. He did attempt to retreat, taking cover behind a car. But the offender continued to aggress, and (the victim) had to defend himself.”
=====================


11/25/17

Auto shop employees credited with taking down accused Rockledge gunman

ROCKLEDGE — A man armed with a .45-caliber handgun and a lot of ammunition wandered onto an auto repair shop property and began firing in the parking lot Friday afternoon, police said.

The gunman killed one employee and paralyzed a second. That's when the employees at Schlenker Automotive fought back with equal force, Rockledge police chief Joseph La Sata said.

"The manager, who was a concealed weapons permit holder, came out and engaged in gunfire in the parking lot," La Sata said. "The manager fled back inside the building, being chased by the gunman. Another Schlenker employee, who also had concealed weapons permit, engaged in gunfire with the suspect."

Police said the suspect in the homicide is Robert Lorenzo Bailey Jr., 28, of Cocoa. He was shot twice and was in critical condition at Health First's Holmes Regional Medical Center in Melbourne. Officers are keeping him under watch.
===================
11/15/17

Good Guy with Gun Stops Sex Assault on Hiking Trail

According to The Blaze, Josh Williams, 39, nearly left his handgun at home when heading out to the hiking trail on a dark morning back in September, but he felt the nagging sensation that he should take it anyway. That turned out to be the right call because while on the trail at 5:30 a.m., Williams heard a woman scream loud enough to get past his music-blaring earbuds.

In the darkness, Williams shined his flashlight and discovered a woman being sexually assaulted and approached the perpetrator.

“I came up, pulled my gun and told him to get off of her,” Williams recalled. He then asked the man to get on his knees and asked to see his hands: “That way I knew he didn’t have a weapon. And at that point he was no threat, so I didn’t feel the need to shoot him.”

The perp ran away but thanks to a good description from both the victim and Williams, police were able to later apprehend 22-year-old Richard McEachern and charge him with sexual assault.

The victim was very glad Williams decided to carry that day and used a gun to save her from a dangerous situation. That was the first time Williams ever pointed his weapon at another person, but it confirmed for him the importance of the Second Amendment:

“It’s dark, and I don’t know what’s out there, so I have it to protect myself and other people. That’s what it’s all about anyway — to help other people with it, not just myself.

“I didn’t think I’d ever have to pull it. Did I want to? No, not at all. But just … right place, right time.”


====================

11/11/17

81-year-old homeowner fatally shoots armed robber

A suspect was shot and killed when he tried to rob an 81-year-old man at gunpoint outside of the man’s home in Genoa, Arkansas, on Thursday afternoon.

Buddy Cates told KSLA that he walked outside of his home around 1:30 p.m. and came face to face with the suspect, who authorities are still working to identify.

Cates said the suspect was holding a “big pistol,” but Cates also had his hand in his pocket, gripping his own gun.

“The battle was one,” Cates recalled, noting that, between the two, at least a dozen shots were fired.

“Whoever got the biggest gun and fastest will be boss when it is all said and done,” Cates said. “In this case, it was me.”

Cates was uninjured, but the suspect died after he was taken to a hospital in Texarkana, not far from Cates’ home.

After the attempted robbery and subsequent shooting, three women were arrested in connection to the crime, according to reports from the Texarkana Gazette. Kiana Keshaun Montgomery, 21; Shaynesha Martin, 19; and Ke’Erica Turner, 20, are all facing charges for aggravated robbery and are being held at the Miller County Detention Center. Authorities did not say what part the women played in the robbery or whether they are believed to be responsible for other crimes.

 

[2aguy]

Nice course! So the instructor intentionally introduced unrealistic parameters into the course in order to get you to fail. Sounds very political.

That's because you're a dumbass. Intelligent people understand the deck was unrealistically and needlessly stacked against you to make you make those errors. They must raise you Brits to be stupid, loyal subjects.

Thank you for your reply, the course was an eye opener indeed. It was run by representatives of a private security company that specialises in providing bodyguards and other private security functions for VIPs, most of the employees are either ex-special forces or paratroopers or Royal Marine Commandos. The idea of the run around was to artificially create an adrenaline rush and the shouting at us was designed to induce a level of distraction that would come from shouts and screams of nearby bystanders.

As any shooter will tell you, controlling your breathing and heart rate is important when trying to shoot with any degree of accuracy. Short of them shooting live ammunition at us, it was about as realistic as you could get in a simulation.

Interestingly, the gentleman who came top was himself a retired army officer who had seen action in the Falklands, and he only managed 8 bad guys and 3 innocent bystanders!

It stacks the deck in favor of a violent criminal, who has more experience with it.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

I’ve no objection to people owning guns for recreation, but if they want to use them for “self defence” they should have extensive training and be certified accordingly; if only to avoid the number of innocent bystanders shot accidently by any budding “Rambos” who want to show how macho they are.

This woman....would you prefer that she not have had her gun with her when she was attacked.....? The outcome for this woman in Britain would be her body found by a passerby.....here, she is alive and well...

What I want you to know on Gun Violence Awareness Day | Fox News

I correctly listened to my instincts; I had a feeling that my life was in danger in that elevator and prepared myself mentally for what was potentially to come.

I ran to my car in an attempt to escape and, before I could even get my entire body in my car, I was tackled by my attacker.

This man quickly overpowered me, stabbed at me with a knife, clamped his hand over my mouth multiple times, and repeatedly tried forcing me in the passenger seat of my car while telling me, “We’re going.”

The entire time this was happening, a rusted, serrated knife was being stabbed towards my abdomen and held at my face.

I had been hit in the face, thrown over my driver’s side console, and had rips in my tights from his hands trying to force my legs up and over into the passenger seat.

There are some individuals that think gun owners are “trigger happy” and wanting to pull their weapons out at the first opportunity. There is nothing further from the truth.

The night I was attacked, I fought like hell for my life before reaching for my gun. I kicked, I screamed, I had all ten fingernails ripped off and bloodied from scratching and trying to fight my way out of a literal life and death situation.

Ultimately, I accessed my gun, shot my attacker multiple times, and saved my life. He will be spending years in prison for what he did to me.

Using a gun in self-protection is not a decision one makes lightly; in fact, I never dreamed that I would be forced into a situation where I would have to do so. However, I also never imagined such evil existing in the world so that I would be powerless, wounded, on my back and unable to physically force my attacker off of me.

I owned a gun and had been trained on how to use it. I know how to safely carry and that a gun is a serious and significant weapon; it is not to be used carelessly. Naysayers and people with opposing opinions may try to undermine my situation with hypotheticals. I cannot answer these questions. All I can do is tell the facts of my story and the true account of how I saved my own life.

What I want you to know on Gun Awareness Day is that a gun in the hands of a potential victim is not improperly placed; it can be the only thing keeping her from being brutally raped and murdered.

Without my gun, I would not be alive today.


Guns are not the problem in America; men like my attacker -- who are willing to violently change one person’s life for no reason except for pure evil – are the problem.

Be safe at all times. Be aware of your surroundings. Trust your instincts. Always be able to protect yourself. Refuse to be a victim, and instead be a fighter and a survivor. Live to tell your tale and make a criminal regret the day he chose you as a “soft target.” My gun saved my life, and one could save yours too.

 

[2aguy]

Nice course! So the instructor intentionally introduced unrealistic parameters into the course in order to get you to fail. Sounds very political.

That's because you're a dumbass. Intelligent people understand the deck was unrealistically and needlessly stacked against you to make you make those errors. They must raise you Brits to be stupid, loyal subjects.

Thank you for your reply, the course was an eye opener indeed. It was run by representatives of a private security company that specialises in providing bodyguards and other private security functions for VIPs, most of the employees are either ex-special forces or paratroopers or Royal Marine Commandos. The idea of the run around was to artificially create an adrenaline rush and the shouting at us was designed to induce a level of distraction that would come from shouts and screams of nearby bystanders.

As any shooter will tell you, controlling your breathing and heart rate is important when trying to shoot with any degree of accuracy. Short of them shooting live ammunition at us, it was about as realistic as you could get in a simulation.

Interestingly, the gentleman who came top was himself a retired army officer who had seen action in the Falklands, and he only managed 8 bad guys and 3 innocent bystanders!

It stacks the deck in favor of a violent criminal, who has more experience with it.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

I’ve no objection to people owning guns for recreation, but if they want to use them for “self defence” they should have extensive training and be certified accordingly; if only to avoid the number of innocent bystanders shot accidently by any budding “Rambos” who want to show how macho they are.

This is a neat one.....3 male robbers, one woman with a gun.....do you see how this turned out.....?

CCW IN ACTION: Armed 22-Year-Old Woman Stops Three Men Attempting To Rob Her In Store Parking Lot – Concealed Nation

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA — A concealed carrier successfully thwarted the efforts of three men to rob her late at night outside a Dollar Tree. According to police reports from the scene, the woman was exiting the Dollar Tree and heading to her car when she was approached by a man and asked to walk with him. When she refused, he point-blank told her he was going to rob her of her purse.
At this point, according to KOCO, she was presented by two other men backing up the first. She withdrew her concealed carry pistol from her purse and threatened to use it to protect herself. All three men quickly exited and fled the scene.

 

[2aguy]

Nice course! So the instructor intentionally introduced unrealistic parameters into the course in order to get you to fail. Sounds very political.

That's because you're a dumbass. Intelligent people understand the deck was unrealistically and needlessly stacked against you to make you make those errors. They must raise you Brits to be stupid, loyal subjects.

Thank you for your reply, the course was an eye opener indeed. It was run by representatives of a private security company that specialises in providing bodyguards and other private security functions for VIPs, most of the employees are either ex-special forces or paratroopers or Royal Marine Commandos. The idea of the run around was to artificially create an adrenaline rush and the shouting at us was designed to induce a level of distraction that would come from shouts and screams of nearby bystanders.

As any shooter will tell you, controlling your breathing and heart rate is important when trying to shoot with any degree of accuracy. Short of them shooting live ammunition at us, it was about as realistic as you could get in a simulation.

Interestingly, the gentleman who came top was himself a retired army officer who had seen action in the Falklands, and he only managed 8 bad guys and 3 innocent bystanders!

It stacks the deck in favor of a violent criminal, who has more experience with it.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

I’ve no objection to people owning guns for recreation, but if they want to use them for “self defence” they should have extensive training and be certified accordingly; if only to avoid the number of innocent bystanders shot accidently by any budding “Rambos” who want to show how macho they are.

Notice that this woman was hit in the face by the attacker........and still managed to use her gun to drive off the attacker...

Woman Scares off Assailant With Stick. Just Kidding, it was a gun.

Just before 7pm on Wednesday night, a 29 year-old woman had gathered up her dog and headed outside to… well, to let her dog do what dogs do.

Upon her first step outside her Minot, North Dakota home, she was hit solidly in the face with a blunt object, knocking her backward down the stairs and into her home.

Her assailant followed her into her home and started to approach her, but the woman had made it to a cabinet where she retrieved a handgun to protect herself and her home.

When confronted with the firearm, the violent intruder and would-be robber/rapist/murderer fled the scene.

The smart, independent, gun-owning woman did not require medical attention, most likely due to the fact that she was able to pull a weapon on her assailant to end the attack.

 

[2aguy]

Nice course! So the instructor intentionally introduced unrealistic parameters into the course in order to get you to fail. Sounds very political.

That's because you're a dumbass. Intelligent people understand the deck was unrealistically and needlessly stacked against you to make you make those errors. They must raise you Brits to be stupid, loyal subjects.

Thank you for your reply, the course was an eye opener indeed. It was run by representatives of a private security company that specialises in providing bodyguards and other private security functions for VIPs, most of the employees are either ex-special forces or paratroopers or Royal Marine Commandos. The idea of the run around was to artificially create an adrenaline rush and the shouting at us was designed to induce a level of distraction that would come from shouts and screams of nearby bystanders.

As any shooter will tell you, controlling your breathing and heart rate is important when trying to shoot with any degree of accuracy. Short of them shooting live ammunition at us, it was about as realistic as you could get in a simulation.

Interestingly, the gentleman who came top was himself a retired army officer who had seen action in the Falklands, and he only managed 8 bad guys and 3 innocent bystanders!

It stacks the deck in favor of a violent criminal, who has more experience with it.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

I’ve no objection to people owning guns for recreation, but if they want to use them for “self defence” they should have extensive training and be certified accordingly; if only to avoid the number of innocent bystanders shot accidently by any budding “Rambos” who want to show how macho they are.

Here is another good one.......again, not a Navy SEAL...

Police: Concealed Permit Holder Saves Officer Surrounded By Mob - Breitbart

On February 5, an armed citizen saved an Upper Darby police officer who was under assault and encircled by a mob of onlookers.
Upper Darby Police Superintendent Michael Chitwood said “there is no doubt they would have attacked” the officer without the armed citizen’s intervention.

According to Philly.com, the officer was breaking up a fight between two Upper Darby High School students–after school had let out for the day–and one of the students jumped the officer. Superintendent Chitwood said, “As he breaks up the fight, he takes one kid and then the other jumps [on] him. Now he’s fighting two of them and he’s calling for an assist officer at the same time. There’s a crowd of 40 or 50 kids watching the fight, and they all move in towards the officer.”

An area resident with a concealed carry permit saw the officer struggling and the crowd closing in, so he grabbed his gun and ran to the officer’s defense. The resident ordered the kids to get away from the officer and kept them away until sufficient backup arrived. Chitwood said, “He had the gun in his hand, but he didn’t point it at the kids, he just told them to back off. If this guy didn’t come out and come to the aid of the officer, this officer would have had significant problems.”

The officer who was under attack suffered “significant hand injuries” and the first officer to respond to calls for backup “suffered a major injury to a leg when he was kicked by one of the teens in the fight.”

 

[2aguy]

Nice course! So the instructor intentionally introduced unrealistic parameters into the course in order to get you to fail. Sounds very political.

That's because you're a dumbass. Intelligent people understand the deck was unrealistically and needlessly stacked against you to make you make those errors. They must raise you Brits to be stupid, loyal subjects.

Thank you for your reply, the course was an eye opener indeed. It was run by representatives of a private security company that specialises in providing bodyguards and other private security functions for VIPs, most of the employees are either ex-special forces or paratroopers or Royal Marine Commandos. The idea of the run around was to artificially create an adrenaline rush and the shouting at us was designed to induce a level of distraction that would come from shouts and screams of nearby bystanders.

As any shooter will tell you, controlling your breathing and heart rate is important when trying to shoot with any degree of accuracy. Short of them shooting live ammunition at us, it was about as realistic as you could get in a simulation.

Interestingly, the gentleman who came top was himself a retired army officer who had seen action in the Falklands, and he only managed 8 bad guys and 3 innocent bystanders!

It stacks the deck in favor of a violent criminal, who has more experience with it.

Very good point which also makes my argument for me, thank you. Armed or not, a violent criminal will always have more “experience” than a normal “civilian” and be more likely to win in either a “shoot out” or a “punch up”. Very few average people have the skills of a Chuck Norris or a Steven Segal in either fire arms or unarmed combat.

I’ve no objection to people owning guns for recreation, but if they want to use them for “self defence” they should have extensive training and be certified accordingly; if only to avoid the number of innocent bystanders shot accidently by any budding “Rambos” who want to show how macho they are.

I have to say..... you should really study gun self defense and how actual people use guns to stop violent criminals..... it might change your mind on the topic.....like this woman.... 3 men, all have guns...but she has one too....they first beat her with a gun

DGU of the Day: Trotwood Ohio Woman Defeats Three Home Invaders - The Truth About Guns

Three men break into a home in Trotwood, Ohio. [Click here to watch the video.] They’re all armed. It is before 6 am, just three days after Christmas. One of the men is armed with a Tec-9 pistol. He enters last. The other two hold what appear to be conventional semi-auto pistols. They bypass two sleeping children to find the mother. The surveillance video shows the three following the mother after they pistol whipped her in the laundry room.

The man directly behind her has the Tec-9. Presumably holds her at gunpoint while the other two attempt to drag off a safe, in a room with two more children. While the two men are occupied with the safe, the woman breaks free from her captor, accesses a hidden pistol, and starts to fire.

All three run, but the Tec-9 gunman, Azikiwe Presley, is mortally wounded. His body is found 100 yards from the house. From wdtn.com:

“I got my gun and I started shooting and they ran,” the female caller told dispatchers. “They all three had guns, I’m confused … they must not have had bullets because after I pulled the trigger they just took off, instead of firing back. I don’t know if I hit one or not, I don’t see blood anywhere.”

In this case, the recipient of female dedication to protecting innocent life ran a hundred yards and died. It is not uncommon for a man who is fatally shot to run that far, even with a heart/lung shot. As he was likely the one holding the woman at gunpoint, and the closest, greatest, threat with the Tec-9, it is not surprising that he drew the lethal ticket. Whether through choice or happenstance, the mother made the right tactical decision.