Sounds legit to me. The definition of a “good guy with a gun” is the guy that is still standing when the shooting stops.
In case anyone is wondering and would like some stats: Florida Homicide Rate Increased After Passage of ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law, Study Finds:
ETA: Evaluating the Impact of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” Self-defense Law on Homicide and Suicide by Firearm: An Interrupted Time Series Study is a direct link to the study itself.
Gee, what a surprise. Enabling assholes leads to more assholish behavior. Who would’ve thunk it?
I can see how, if you are worried about being beaten up, you would not initiate or escalate a confrontation.
But if you have a gun, and know that you are allowed to kill anyone you perceive to be threatening, then initiating and escalating confrontations becomes simply a way to get an excuse to kill someone.
And none of these cases will ever be premeditated set-ups…
The waitress in Savannah, GA who was recently assaulted and then took down her assailant could likely have shot and killed the man and faced no criminal charges had this happened in Florida and had Miss Holden had a gun nearby. I am having a hard time finding myself in agreement that this is a valid response and outcome for this crime, but it seems that at least in Florida, that’s how it is.
I hope I’m not alone in saying that the current state of our society, in many aspects, is quite a bit different than how I would prefer.
Man shoots 3 people, killing one. Police are unable to catch him, fortunately, one of the victims, after being shot in the chest, manages to return fire.
Good on the good guy with the gun to stop the bad guy with the gun, but had the bad guy been stopped from having a gun, there’d be one less innocent dead victim, 2 less innocent wounded victims, and one less dead assailant.
Some would call this positive news for guns, at the very best and most generous, I would call it a draw. One dead victim, one dead assailant, 2 injured victims using scarce medical resources.
Guns did more harm than good in that scenario, hard to see otherwise.
So by this logic it was a positive gun news story when Stephen Paddock was shot dead in Las Vegas…
Was that a bad guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun? Or a bad guy transforming momentarily into a good guy in order to stop the bad guy who was actually now the good guy?
Or can we just blame that whole thing on bad pharma?
Oh, sorry, I didn’t know there had to be a good guy involved - after all it’s not a positive good guy news.
All I’m saying is that in Las Vegas a bad guy was shot dead - with a gun, you see. Apparently a bad guy shot dead is enough for some people to fit the bill. All collateral damage is just a cheap price for a possibility that a bad guy gets shot down by somebody. Also notice that the shooter is defined as a ‘good guy’ only because he shoots the bad guy - before that he might have been known as a town drunk, village idiot or wife-beater. Not exactly your poster boy for a good guy, right ? Indeed, previously he might have been known as a lot worse person than the bad guy ( who just had a momentarily nervous breakdown and would’ve been submitted to treatment by sympathetic people, only he happened to own a gun because he was a real American ). And so on…
How else they can explain aforementioned Spring Hill case being a positive gun news?
( For me positive gun news would be somebody armed stopping a bad guy ***before *** he does any damage. )
( I had to use Google translate for some parts - but I think you get what I’m saying… )
Americans’ freedom to possess guns, in and of itself, makes it a culture that is more prone to violence. A person who walks about town carrying a loaded firearm is presumably prepared to use it in any sort of confrontation, which makes him more confident about confronting people, and makes it more likely that a simple argument that easily be could deescalated with the right choice of words or behavior instead turns into a fatal encounter. This asshole, just like Zimmerman, never had to confront anyone; he could have called the police. He could have taken a picture of the license plate and sent it to the police. He could have taken a picture of the license plate and the offenders and embarrassed them on social media. Instead, he initiated a hostile confrontation, and this was the outcome that he probably predicted, and I suspect that this is what he wanted. He didn’t seem to give it much thought to killing a man, so it’s hard to believe that he didn’t somehow have a desire to do so.
Yes, it is a perfect plan for any mob hit-man. Instigate an argument, wait until the other guy pushes you, then kill him = self-defense, no charges.
You’ve all heard how New York alone had more murders at the time than the whole wild west combined. I’d bet that it’s because so many obvious murders were written off as self-defense.
Premeditation.
But under Florida law, as long as you aren’t the one escalating a heated verbal confrontation into a physical one, you can claim you were ‘afraid’ and then pull out a concealed firearm and end someone’s life.
This law is all kinds of fucked up. Even the Sheriff seems to think so.
Definition of a Good Guy with a Gun:
And that’s the Fox version of the story.
Defensive Gun Use with 2 deaths.
BTW, apparently NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch removed all references to the NRA on her Twitter account this weekend.
In any of the libtard gun-grabbing states, these courageous white men could have been arrested for standing their ground. 
I think these stories belong in the MPSIMS “My wonderful gun makes my cock so hard I don’t even need a sex doll” thread.
I am NOT defending Loesch in any way, but she apparently removed the NRA tag from her bio in 2017. Looking at captures on the Wayback machine, it looks like she removed the tag between 11/9/17 and 11/14/17. I’m not sure it means much since AFAICT she has still acted as a spokesperson since then.
I really wish she and others were running scared from the NRA because it’s about to be revealed as a Russian front. But that doesn’t appear to be the case.
Yet.
I looked at the WB machine and wasn’t able to get a previous review of her twitter profile. Appreciate the clarification and correction!
Even so the sheriff could certainly have arrested the shooter and let the courts sort it out. Instead he wouldn’t lift a finger.
He’s not allowed to. The 2017 SYG expansion makes it very, very difficult for law enforcement to charge or even arrest anyone with a plausible SYG defense.