Gresham, OR man fires off his CCW illegally!

[WhyteCheddar]

This guy may be perfectly intelligent in other aspects of his life. In this case he was the picture perfect moron and just sheds more negative light on the rest of us. 'Trying to shoot out a tire'. Good freaking grief. If he had been successful taking out the tire and stopping the car, what was he going to do next? Use his mad kung fu skills to aprehend and detain the losers? My money is on he was going to hold them at gunpoint till the LEOs rolled up.
You just can't say enough about how wrong this was.
Major league fail.

 

[westernsky20]

This is a little off subject, but is it even possible to shoot out the tire on a moving car with a hand gun unless your some kind of supper marksman?

 

[CEF1959]

undertrained idiots make the rest of us look bad.

Excellent point. I would only add that there are other ways in which people can be idiots and thereby make us look bad. These things are bad for our gun rights.

 

[chemist]

There's a poll up in KATU this morning about the shooting, and it's absolutely shocking:
<broken link removed>
At the moment, the same number say "Shoot" as say "Let the police handle it." And less than a quarter of the respondents say "It was too risky."

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??? I thought the general public would be outraged at this reckless and illegal shooting, but apparently the MacGyver Complex runs too strong in the culture.

Maybe only responsible gun owners should be responsible gun carriers. I don't know - You can train and teach some people all you want, but you'll still just end up with a well-trained |D10T.

So I guess I disagree that only people with formal training in Defensive Handgun should be carrying. There are many ways in which good citizens wield power responsibly every day, who through experience have learned their personal limitations. Just as training is no substitute for common sense.

We used to call it 'common sense,' but few things seem to be less common these days. Call it 'horse sense' instead, and if you can figure out how to teach it, I'll support mandatory attendance.

 

[adipose]

There's a poll up in KATU this morning about the shooting, and it's absolutely shocking:
<broken link removed>
At the moment, the same number say "Shoot" as say "Let the police handle it." And less than a quarter of the respondents say "It was too risky."

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??? I thought the general public would be outraged at this reckless and illegal shooting, but apparently the MacGyver Complex runs too strong in the culture.

Maybe only responsible gun owners should be responsible gun carriers. I don't know - You can train and teach some people all you want, but you'll still just end up with a well-trained |D10T.

So I guess I disagree that only people with formal training in Defensive Handgun should be carrying. There are many ways in which good citizens wield power responsibly every day, who through experience have learned their personal limitations. Just as training is no substitute for common sense.

We used to call it 'common sense,' but few things seem to be less common these days. Call it 'horse sense' instead, and if you can figure out how to teach it, I'll support mandatory attendance.

Yes, Common Sense is becoming a lost art.

Whats funny and hasn't even been mentioned in all of the posts is the fact of this individual going after someone(s) taking cell phones.

Why would you fire your firearm at someone with a personel property of a company in a public setting, when you don't have anything to do with it.

As someone mentioned in other post, the results of getting a license number probably would get a better result. Unless the car was stolen, you might be able to trace this back to someone.

If one of his bullets struck one of the low lifes that were in the car, I guarrantee there would've been a lawsuit against him. The same would imply if the bullet struck someone out in the parking lot or streets.

When you draw your firearm out in public and start firing, there is a large responsibility that falls upon you.

 

[MountainBear]

Several of you bring up the excellent point that training doesn't necessarily mean people will act more intelligently or cease to commit stupid acts. This is, of course, very true. However, very few people could bring a reasonable argument that the likelihood of an act like this doesn't go down if someone has had use of force and other firearms training beyond the four hour class. Beyond the fact that things like this make me second-guess my thoughts on mandatory training (I'm conflicted on this, being in favor of small government), people should WANT to do more training.

I've worked in gunshops and done LEO work. A lot of my friends are LEO's. From my experience (and their shared experience) people seem to spend lots of money on toys. They buy an H&K, or the $900 Sig SAS, or some other expensive gun. They take a four hour class, get their CCW, maybe shoot a box of FMJ through their gun, and then start carrying. People need to realize what a financial commitment carrying a gun (either open or concealed) is. Its getting a gun, getting training ammo, getting enough carry ammo to function test it. Its getting enough training, or at least enough practice, to get competent with your gun. Its about trying a number of different carry methods and holsters to find what works best for you. Its about finding a way to secure the gun when you don't have it on your person. It's an expensive choice. Sometimes I think people would be better off spending 350$ on a Ruger or $400 something on a Glock rather than getting that mall-ninja special the gun-rag claims they have to have.

So rather than just rant, I propose a solution. We talk a lot about getting people involved in our lifestyle, which is a very good thing. We need to remember to let people know what carrying a gun means. The costs as well as the benefits. While not advocating mandatory training, we at least need to stress the importance of getting more training than a four hour class. Whether its a less expensive (but still excellent) class at Oregon Firearms Academy, or a multi-day class at Thunder Ranch or another place. Stress the importance of training. Stress the importance of practice. Let them know that they should be shooting their gun on a regular basis in order to become completely familiar with the controls and quirks of their particular gun. Perhaps most importantly, instill in them that whether they choose to carry concealed or open, they NEED to be familiar with the laws involved. Not only where they can and cannot carry, but what the realities are if they use their guns. Not to scare them (although we should all be scared of using our guns for defense, its forces caution), but so they know that if they do something like the gentleman did in the story that started this thread, they must be prepared for the consequences.

Those of you who don't support mandatory training, that's fine. But just because something is not mandatory, we need to remember that its important, in this case probably very necessary, never the less.

Long rant, I know, but those of you who know me in person know I'm opinionated and long-winded in person as well.

 

[chemist]

Amen, Mountain Bear.

It reminds me of the kids I used to see driving their rice rockets at the local tracks - they have more invested in their rims than I have in my whole car, but do you think they can keep it shiny-side up? No way.

I took an especially malicious pleasure at waxing the a$$ of somebody in his overpowered ride, who would invariably try to pass me back, and end up in the weeds.

It took many years of autox and driving classes before I had the reflexes and muscle memory needed to drive at the limit with confidence. But the most important thing that I learned was my own limitations - I never once got 'sucked in' by a more skilled driver.

 

[irehog66]

Long rant, I know, but those of you who know me in person know I'm opinionated and long-winded in person as well.

Nothing wrong with long rants if they make sense!

I'm with you . . . more freedoms - less government. It should be a no-brainer to take more training.

Granted, I have taken my initial and renewal courses at the same place, so I may be in a bubble, but why not advertise or expo training courses at the minimum courses? get them indoctrinated early.

I don't recall where I saw it . . .was on a news show . . . . probably FOXNEWS - they were talking about the make-up of the new generation of CCers. I can't quote the statistic but the lion share of them had never handled a firearm before. There has always been the group of hunters/sportsman that decide to take the plunge into OC/CC - but they already have the basic skills/common sense. For them, it is about learning tactics and the law.

For the NEWBIE is it much different. Now that I think back on that - we should be addressing that - the man or woman who has never owned or handled a firearm who feels compelled to own one to protect themselves - but has only seen them used in a TV show or a movie.

I'm conflicted with mandatory vs voluntary training myself - but something has to be done for/about these people. This idiot from Gresham is a good argument for that - from his actions . . .to even opening his mouth, not to mention the moronic things that are coming out of his mouth.

I'm all for a "scared Straight" approach to the 4 hour courses with a follow-up pitch for additional CQB/Self-defense courses. I think that some of these courses make it look all too easy.

 

[ZachS]

If one of his bullets struck one of the low lifes that were in the car, I guarrantee there would've been serious felony charges against him. The same would imply if the bullet struck someone out in the parking lot or streets.

Fixed.

 

[claypigeon]

Several of you bring up the excellent point that training doesn't necessarily mean people will act more intelligently or cease to commit stupid acts. This is, of course, very true. However, very few people could bring a reasonable argument that the likelihood of an act like this doesn't go down if someone has had use of force and other firearms training beyond the four hour class. Beyond the fact that things like this make me second-guess my thoughts on mandatory training (I'm conflicted on this, being in favor of small government), people should WANT to do more training.

You have some very good points in this whole post. I agree that people should want to do more training. I know I do.

We all have the opportunity to participate in twelve years of public education. Each one of us comes away with different levels of retained knowledge. Is this all due to not enough education? I don't think so. I know that I could have put a lot more effort into my education (I graduated but could have done better) and I know a lot of people I went to school with who put in less. People take the 4hr CHL course because they have to, not because they want to and many don't pay attention and don't put any effort into it. Making more training mandatory is not going to change that. You have those who want to learn and those who think they already know it all.


More mandatory training will make it difficult for people of meager means to obtain a CHL. I think we need to make examples of people who don't follow the rules instead of adding more. It is just like many other things....we don't need more rules or laws. We need to enforce the ones we have and make it undesirable to break them.

 

[irehog66]

Just saw this article pop-up on KATU's website. <broken link removed>

Akin Blitz an LE trainer on deadly force is quoted in the article.

"The person with the concealed weapons permit assumes a great deal of responsibility in terms of insuring that they're doing the right thing, at the right time for the right reason."

So, when is it justifiable to pull the trigger? The law is pretty clear, at least on paper. On paper, there are few crimes that justify using deadly force.

"If you wanted to use a gun out here on the street, and you didn't want to get into trouble, someone would have to be attacking you," said Akin Blitz, a former cop who is now an attorney training police officers on when to use deadly force. Or, he said, "you have to be protecting somebody else who's being attacked and you fear for their life."

In short, you must have a reasonable fear your life or someone else's life, and must be able to prove that your life or their life was in immediate danger. . . . .

I think that is pretty self explanatory . . . . sounds like good common sense to me . . . . leave Hollywood at home.:gun13:

 

[MountainBear]

More mandatory training will make it difficult for people of meager means to obtain a CHL.

Carrying a gun is a serious financial commitment. People who make this choice need to realize that. Instead of finding the cheapest way to do it, they need to find the safest way to do it or not do it at all. There are all kinds of things I would like to do in life, but I'm not a rich man. If I cannot afford to do something right, then I don't do it at all.

I don't like mandating rules or training either. But the fact is that there are some people just too dumb to realize that they need to know the things that training gives you. They think that they can just wing it. Then this happens. And beyond the possibility that this guy could have killed someone unjustly, he also makes the rest of CCW carriers look like idiots and set back our cause. So his actions do not only affect him, but the rest of us as well. Everybody learns at a different pace and in different ways. I understand some people will get more from a four hour class than others. People need to know how they learn and how to get the info they need. Since a lot of people don't seem to get that, I don't know...

 

[CEF1959]

It's one thing to express an aspiration (and who's going to disagree that people should be well-trained in firearms before they possess them?), but are you advocating greater government regulation of gun ownership and use? What does, "No one likes mandatory training but...." mean?

 

[irehog66]

Carrying a gun is a serious financial commitment. People who make this choice need to realize that. Instead of finding the cheapest way to do it, they need to find the safest way to do it or not do it at all. . .

I could not agree more ! !
It is a right that we all share . . . . because we have the right does not equate to all of us using it equally. The civil courts is a great example of that.

Any man or woman has the right to a CCW. Rights do not come without sacrifice or responsibility.

Lets be logical here . . .

1. A guy goes to his local gun shop and buys a modest fire arm - the first one he has ever owned, and buys a box of ammo, because it is what he can afford. To protect his home - this is the bare minimum.

2. He decides months down the road that he wants to get a CHL and carry his firearm as a CCW - so he saves up his money for the 4 hour mandatory course and the background check.

3. In a month or two his CHL comes in the mail. Now he is faced with buying additional equipment - holster, mag holster etc. HE STILL HAS HIS ONE BOX OF AMMO.

4. He practices maybe an hour a month at drawing his weapon (I would argue the average is a lot less)

5. He now feels reasonably safe in his daily travels because he is armed, and he feels confident - because he has a license in his pocket to carry a weapon that most people don't possess.

6. He occasionally sees references to firearms training in rags, websites, etc. but justifies ignoring them because he cannot afford it right now. "I'm a smart, reasonable guy, I feel like I know what I'm doing, the risks I'm taking". . .

7. Leaving a restaurant one night he sees a man across the parking lot rifling through his car, he rushes at the man while drawing his weapon, now almost face-to-face, the bad guy turns to run, stereo in arm . . . and the CHL holder fires his weapon blasting a hole through the bad guy's spine.

8. Our law-abiding CHL holder is now charged with at least 4 felonies. He pleas down on a couple of them and spends 1.5 years in jail because of it.
- he loses his job
- his wife and 3 kids now do not have their father at home nor his income, remember he is a man of small means to begin with.

9. the BG now is paralyzed and now has a lawyer. He prevails and takes what assets the now jailed man has left.

NOW WHAT?
He is now burdened with a record, the mental anguish, inability to provide for his family . . . does he still have a family? and for what? because he didn't consider the investment in time and finances.

Embracing the gun culture, SACRIFICING as needed to be a part of it, understanding the need for training, insuring himself against liabilities, and on and on . . .would have prevented this scenario.

THIS SCENARIO HAPPENS WAY MORE THAN IT SHOULD . . . I feel for these people, but knowing what you can do, and being prepared to do it, is a far greater investment than the firearm and the CHL.

People need to understand the investment/sacrifice that is required to make this a safe option.

AS THE CULTURE GROWS - AS IT HAS LATELY, WE SHOULD BE ADVOCATING FREE TRAINING, WORK SHOPS, AND THE LIKE TO HELP LESSEN THE BLOW FOR THOSE UNABLE TO PAY. BUT AT SOME POINT PEOPLE NEED TO CONSIDER WHAT RIGHTS THEY CAN TRULY AFFORD TO EXERCISE.

 

[ThemGunsThough]

Wow, good read. I'm glad that noone got hurt.

 

[claypigeon]

Carrying a gun is a serious financial commitment. People who make this choice need to realize that. Instead of finding the cheapest way to do it, they need to find the safest way to do it or not do it at all. There are all kinds of things I would like to do in life, but I'm not a rich man. If I cannot afford to do something right, then I don't do it at all.

I don't like mandating rules or training either. But the fact is that there are some people just too dumb to realize that they need to know the things that training gives you. They think that they can just wing it. Then this happens. And beyond the possibility that this guy could have killed someone unjustly, he also makes the rest of CCW carriers look like idiots and set back our cause. So his actions do not only affect him, but the rest of us as well. Everybody learns at a different pace and in different ways. I understand some people will get more from a four hour class than others. People need to know how they learn and how to get the info they need. Since a lot of people don't seem to get that, I don't know...

The problem is some people will never get it. Lets not punish all for the ignorance of one.

Peoples right to self defense should not depend on their ability to pay for a class.

 

[pchewn]

For Oregon CHL, this free online class is accepted as handgun training: http://www.mdgunsafety.com/

 

[ZachS]

The problem is some people will never get it. Lets not punish all for the ignorance of one.

Peoples right to self defense should not depend on their ability to pay for a class.

Socialist.

 

[A2theK]

And even a cop couldn't shoot in a situation like this...

..but they do

He should of said he thought they were going to back up over him like SPD does when they shoot someone after tasering them

 

[Ghost_Rider]

Doesn't this poll prove there aren't many common sense people around here???:huh:

<broken link removed>