From the Washington Post, “An attacker in a terrifying mask fatally shot after jumping a Little Caesars employee”. In Holly Hill, Florida, a man in some kind of Nosferatu-mask reportedly jumped Heriberto Feliciano, an employee at a Little Caesars restaurant who was locking up for the night; beat Mr. Feliciano with a board (until the board broke), then tried to stab him with a pair of scissors. Mr. Feliciano, who has a concealed carry permit, drew his gun and shot the assailant multiple times, fatally wounding him. Mr. Feliciano suffered some “injuries to his face and shoulders” and is reportedly also (understandably) pretty emotionally traumatized by the whole thing. The local police have indicated that the shooting appears to have been justified.
<post doorhinged>
Anyone else wonder about that mask being described as a “clown mask”? I mean, I hate clowns as much as the next guy, but that mask does not look “clowny” to me.
Never mind the clown mask - I was hoping he was wearing big floppy shoes and jumped out of a little car.
Regards,
Shodan
Is it actually just a tactical decision, or is it a legal decision to continue to pursue an attack against someone who is in retreat?
If you don’t chase the person down, they might get away before you are able to kill them.
And if you don’t kill them, they can testify against you.
“Tactical decisions” are best left to the cops who are trained to make and implement them, not to self-styled vigilantes - er, 'scuse me, The Good Guys.
This, and many other of these type of comments seem out of place in this thread, to me. As a result, no response from me here.
Continuing with the nature of the thread, and my habit of including a new item every time I reply, in other news, Joelton gas station clerk fights back, shoots robbery suspect:
DGU with no deaths. 3vs1 and the 1 prevailed, and even attempted to render aid to the injured attacker. I’d also recommend against the attempt to render aid - no idea if the injured attacker is being genuine - again a tactical choice in the heat of the moment.
They only seem out of place to someone who thinks chasing a guy down to shoot him again is a “tactical decision” instead of a “bad idea”
We even have the shooter’s own word that the robber pointed a gun at him. That’s certainly good enough, right?
Seriously? :dubious:
If the bad guy threatened the good guy, and being helped by the good guy means going to prison, the bad guy might rethreaten the good guy.
If you render aid, the guy might live to testify against you. Plus, you wouldn’t be able to say you killed a guy.
lose/lose really.
Well, that, and
Of course we don’t know for certain - maybe this felon in possession of a stolen firearm was collecting for the United Way. It was probably all just a misunderstanding!
Regards,
Shodan
If you’re infatuated with living out the fantasy world of “making tactical decisions”, go join a laser tag league, or maybe play Call of Duty. Real life involves real lives and real consequences.
How are you defining “out of place”? Comments that challenge your worldview, perhaps? Refusing to respond says all it needs to say, though.
Meaning what?
doorhinge has a habit of deleting the parts of a quote that he is not replying to and putting “[post shortened]” under it like that.
Maybe you should go back and read through some of the many moderator instructions in this thread. If you continue to disregard them you will start getting warnings.
<post doorhinged>
.
Apparently the Positive Gun News thread is for the purpose of posting anecdotes and running away, not for actually discussing how or if they’re positive. Seems odd, but there ya go.
In other news, Madison man identified as alleged intruder fatally shot in Trinity
Didn’t even bring a knife to a gun fight, had to get one at the house he broke into. DGU with one death. And what with the charges of kidnapping and domestic violence, that bond didn’t seem to work very well.
We’ll be having nun of that.