Sometimes as gun owners, we are our own worst enemies. There are too many chest thumping internet commandos, people with no clue about the law, and others who think that owning or carrying a gun is some sort of badge of badass manhood, and that shooting people is some sort of remote controlled punch.

There is a video going around of a chef being attacked in a commercial kitchen. Another employee enters the room, draws a gun, and the bad guy turns his back and leaves. The comments to the video are insane:

Sensible guy: Why shoot??? He walked away. Your life is no longer in danger. How many of y’all that say shoot paid attention in your LTC class??

Keyboard Warrior 1: Before he walked away, he was within reaching distance. You don’t draw unless you are prepared to fire. Should have dropped him

Internet Commando: Shoot! SHOOT UNTIL THE CLIP IS EMPTY. If that was my family member he’d be toe-tagged. Imagine what he’d have done if that woman wasn’t armed.

Sensible guy 2: I agree with you sir. No reason to shoot over a punch.

Internet Commando:  STAND YOUR GROUND.

Confused gun owner: She shouldn’t have it pointed at him if deadly force wasn’t warranted. Didn’t you pay attention in your class. He could have charged her and took it. If it was warranted she should have shot.

Confused gun owner #2: She should have shot as soon as she pulled the gun up on him. In the ECC class they teach do not point unless you plan to shoot. Now the SOB will wait till taller or do it to someone else.

Internet Commando: everybody second guesses and cites the manual. Doesn’t work like that in real life.

Divemedic: A lot of legal misconceptions in this thread.
1 “Stand your ground” is not a license to kill people because they ‘dissed’ you.
2 If someone isn’t presenting an immediate threat of death, serious bodily injury, or a forcible felony, you can’t just shoot them. Even if they are presenting such a threat, shooting them has to be the only REASONABLE way of stopping them. Shooting someone in the back is not it.
3 You can point a gun at someone and not shoot them, even if deadly force isn’t warranted. If he charges you, he is now presenting that threat from my second point.
This isn’t quoting “the manual” – it is merely stating the law. That same law that will be used to hang you when you don’t follow it.

Internet Commando: Let me punch your wife square in the face with all my 235 pounds behind it, you will hand me flowers? You’re a spineless Liberal.

Divemedic:  LOL. No, I just understand the law. A gun is not to be used to get revenge for past wrongs. That is the path to prison. I am guessing that, since you are not in prison, you don’t go around shooting anything off except your Internet commando mouth.

Apparently understanding self defense law makes me a spineless liberal.

Categories: Uncategorized


Miguel GFZ · February 24, 2020 at 7:29 am

I feel your pain. People think the law means what is convenient for them till they wake up wearing orange rompers.

The only reason I still argue is so people who do not know and want to be truly informed, do not make the mistake of "go gun commando."

Aaron C. de Bruyn · March 1, 2020 at 10:39 pm

"Even if they are presenting such a threat…Shooting someone in the back is not it."

"Your client was a threat."
"So you shot him in the back?"
"I shot at what was available to me to end the threat."

Divemedic · March 2, 2020 at 12:04 am

Good luck proving that an unarmed man who threw a single punch and is now walking away from you constitutes enough of a threat as to require him to be shot in the back.

Aaron C. de Bruyn · March 2, 2020 at 6:10 am

So now you're qualifying "Even if they are presenting such a threat…Shooting someone in the back is not it" with 'unarmed', 'single punch', and 'walking away'? 😉

Sure–in that case, it wouldn't be legally justified, and I would have a moral problem with it too.

Divemedic · March 2, 2020 at 11:30 pm

Here is the video in question:

Aaron C. de Bruyn · March 2, 2020 at 11:40 pm

I didn't see a shot taken in the video. I think she was perfectly justified in pulling her gun out. He was certainly close enough–even after turning his back and walking away, that if he decided to charge her she might only get one shot off…and she might miss.

Legally, I have no clue. But morally, if he's the kind of person that would attempt to murder over food being late, he's definitely a threat to everyone around him.

Comments are closed.