Man arrested for tackling concealed weapon Walmart shopper

[Darrell KSR]

http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/article/sheriff_man_arrested_for_tackling_armed_fellow_wal mart_shopper_who_has_a_co/

I've seen people with weapons before, and it hasn't bothered me. I know people have them, so what difference does it make if I see somebody with one? You think in Walmart at any one time there aren't at least double digit numbers of people with a concealed weapon?

[suncat05]

Why would somebody want to tackle another person that is armed when he himself is not, and better yet, why, when the armed individual in question is not in the commission of an actual crime?

And there are certain WalMart stores that I most certainly would NOT walk into without a handgun being on my person, even if I was not in the occupation that I am in.
Like the WalMart in Clewiston, FL. Or in Ft. Pierce, FL. Or the WalMart in Louisville on the Outer Loop.
Have any of you guys ever just sat in the parking lot of any of these stores and just watched the humanity that comes and goes through the store doors? It can actually be pretty entertaining.........or scary as hell.

[Doc]

I was under the impression that in FL the gun had to be not visible at all times. And if it was visible it was in violation of the concealed weapons permit (since it is no longer concealed).

[suncat05]

Doc, I think the question here was not that is was or was not concealed, but that the attacker observed the concealed carrier putting the gun on prior to entering the store. Which, to me, still would not be an issue. Although I do believe putting the weapon on at home or at least prior to arrival would have been a better plan of action, I have to admit that I have done the same thing many times myself. As I am sure many here have done as well.
Just not a well thought out plan by the man that was arrested. Kinda dumb, actually.

[Darrell KSR]

Just not a well thought out plan by the man that was arrested. Kinda dumb, actually.

He is very fortunate he was not shot and killed. The concealed weapon holder may have viewed him as a threat to his life; a view that would have been reasonable under the circumstances.

[CitizenBBN]

He is very fortunate he was not shot and killed. The concealed weapon holder may have viewed him as a threat to his life; a view that would have been reasonable under the circumstances.

Absolutely. What else was he to think? Guy out of the blue wrestles him down? I think that's a big reason people carry concealed, to defend themselves in those situations.

[Doc]

I agree. How silly of this guy. If I understand correctly, he sees somebody stick a gun under his jacket in the parking lot of a store, enter the store and possibly comes to the conclusion that the store is going to be robbed or maybe this is some nut job about to start go off on a shooting spree. Wow, what an idiot! I mean why would somebody leap to that those conclusions???

[Darrell KSR]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eswHas7IhiE

[CitizenBBN]

I agree. How silly of this guy. If I understand correctly, he sees somebody stick a gun under his jacket in the parking lot of a store, enter the store and possibly comes to the conclusion that the store is going to be robbed or maybe this is some nut job about to start go off on a shooting spree. Wow, what an idiot! I mean why would somebody leap to that those conclusions???

I know you are being facetious, but honestly yeah, pretty much an idiot.

Florida has a large number of concealed carry citizens, I guarantee every time that guy has gone into a Walmart it's had people packing. Is he going to freak out every time he sees what looks like agun, only when he sees one for sure, what?

It's far more likely he was a legal carrier, or a cop, versus the incredibly statistically unlikely possibility he was there to do harm. NOt unusual at all for officers to carry, wouldn't be crazy to see one putting on his weapon. Indiscreet I agree, but hardly provocative enough to field tackle the guy out of nowhere.

next, the absolute smartest thing to do is to tackle the armed guy without him provoking anyone in any way, without telling security at the store, nada. Just fly at the guy and bring him down.

ANd boy what a suspicious looking 62 year old man. Maybe he should have just run him down or something, guys like that are just so very dangerous.

I get the guy was trying to do the right thing, but he jumped to a conclusion based on fear-mongering, acted irresponsibly even if he believed there was a legit threat by taking matters into his own hands without informing security, and in the end only made things more dangerous.

He's lucky the carrier was far more level headed or it could have ended much worse.

[Doc]

He is very fortunate he was not shot and killed. The concealed weapon holder may have viewed him as a threat to his life; a view that would have been reasonable under the circumstances.


So your opinion is the guy WITH the gun could have viewed being attacked by an unarmed guy as a threat to his life but the unarmed guy observing an somebody putting a gun on his person before entering a retail store shouldn't? See I see the other way. To me, being the guy without the gun seeing somebody entering a store WITH a gun would cause me concern, potentially the one fearing for MY life. As far as I know this guy is 1) a thief looking to rob the store (the most likely) or 2) some nut job get ready to kill some folks for the hell of it.

For me, I typically ask my wife before we head to Walmart, or especially Target (how ironic) if she is "packin heat" because you never know when a fire fight might break out in the tampon isle. Those ladies with PMS are pretty unpredictable at times. I mean that is way more likely than say a thug coming into the store and robbing it.

[Doc]

I know you are being facetious, but honestly yeah, pretty much an idiot.

Florida has a large number of concealed carry citizens, I guarantee every time that guy has gone into a Walmart it's had people packing. Is he going to freak out every time he sees what looks like agun, only when he sees one for sure, what?

It's far more likely he was a legal carrier, or a cop, versus the incredibly statistically unlikely possibility he was there to do harm. NOt unusual at all for officers to carry, wouldn't be crazy to see one putting on his weapon. Indiscreet I agree, but hardly provocative enough to field tackle the guy out of nowhere.

next, the absolute smartest thing to do is to tackle the armed guy without him provoking anyone in any way, without telling security at the store, nada. Just fly at the guy and bring him down.

ANd boy what a suspicious looking 62 year old man. Maybe he should have just run him down or something, guys like that are just so very dangerous.

I get the guy was trying to do the right thing, but he jumped to a conclusion based on fear-mongering, acted irresponsibly even if he believed there was a legit threat by taking matters into his own hands without informing security, and in the end only made things more dangerous.

He's lucky the carrier was far more level headed or it could have ended much worse.


Yes. FL does have a large number of conceal carry permits. My partner has one, and honestly needs one for a number of reasons. Makes me feel a little better at times knowing it. I don't know when he has his gun which considering the permits he has is called a CONCEALED carry permit, makes sense. If one can see the weapon then its not concealed. The fact this guys weapon was not concealed IMO was the initial problem. Had it been, had he properly transfer the weapon were it wasn't seen by somebody in the parking lot then this would not have happened. I can't blame a person for protecting himself. Gun advocates love to spout about they are just protecting themselves, right? Well what was this guy doing??? He sees an armed individual entering a store. A person he believes is a threat to himself and others. Why doesn't he have the right to protect himself against a perceived threat? Because he isn't armed? Only gun toters are allowed to protect themselves?

[suncat05]

I see your points, Doc. And I agree. And as I stated, I have also put my holstered handgun on in the parking lot of a WalMart several times, along with my Sheriff's badge. I usually put all of that on before I leave home, but not always. And I am pretty sure that, whether LEO or just a concealed carry holder, that is applicable across the board, as we all are forgetful, run late, some are sometimes absentminded, or just say the heck with it, I'll put it on when I get there. Should it be done like this? In all honesty, no. Should a handgun be put on and properly concealed at home, or at least prior to exiting your vehicle to enter the store? Absolutely. Yes. But once again, that little thing I talk about sometimes called the "human condition" comes into play. Should we? Yes, absolutely. But do we always? No, absolutely not.

[Darrell KSR]

So your opinion is the guy WITH the gun could have viewed being attacked by an unarmed guy as a threat to his life but the unarmed guy observing an somebody putting a gun on his person before entering a retail store shouldn't? See I see the other way. To me, being the guy without the gun seeing somebody entering a store WITH a gun would cause me concern, potentially the one fearing for MY life. As far as I know this guy is 1) a thief looking to rob the store (the most likely) or 2) some nut job get ready to kill some folks for the hell of it.

For me, I typically ask my wife before we head to Walmart, or especially Target (how ironic) if she is "packin heat" because you never know when a fire fight might break out in the tampon isle. Those ladies with PMS are pretty unpredictable at times. I mean that is way more likely than say a thug coming into the store and robbing it.

Yup. The guy would have been justified in killing the attacker 100%. Not a prosecutor in the country would blink before declining to prosecute.

For the attacker, there is no objective indicia of reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm. An unbrandished weapon doesn't suffice.

[Doc]

Thing I've notice is that its always the unarmed guy thats responsible, always the lucky he didn't get killed and always if there had been more armed folks the problem never would have occurred.

[Darrell KSR]

Basically, it's the attacker who is responsible. The one who is attacked is not.

[CitizenBBN]

I can't blame a person for protecting himself. Gun advocates love to spout about they are just protecting themselves, right? Well what was this guy doing??? He sees an armed individual entering a store. A person he believes is a threat to himself and others. Why doesn't he have the right to protect himself against a perceived threat? Because he isn't armed? Only gun toters are allowed to protect themselves?

You summed up the problem perfectly. He believed the guy was a threat simply b/c he had a gun. That's the problem right there.

If you believe black people are dangerous and one comes up to ask directions and you shoot him it's OK b/c you believed you were being threatened? Your premise is based on the idea that simply being armed is a threat, which is statistically in Florida and elsewhere about as solid as believing someone who "looks like a gang banger" is a threat.

In Ky you can't shoot a guy for just knocking on your door b/c you think he may be dangerous. He has to do SOMETHING proactive to establish a threat. Be coming in the window, trying to break down the door, something. In public you can't shoot a guy b/c you think he MAY be a threat.

What was he protecting himself from? What was a threat to him? the only threat was that someone in his vicinity was armed. Your position is based on the presumption that someone being armed is inherently a threat, and that's not true.

I'm not saying this guy needs to be thrown in jail. The person carrying should not have let his gun be so easily seen, and it was an honest and well-intentioned mistake, but "I know he's carrying a gun so therefore he's a threat to me" is not a viable defense or explanation, or even logical position. In many states the guy could have been open carrying right on his hip and there would not have been a justification, b/c a person carrying a gun is not inherently a threat to someone else.

I expect non-toters to live by the same rules as toters. I can't commit an act of violence against someone simply b/c I profile them in some way as a threat to me. If I do I have to answer for it.

The people who shoot the guy for ringing their doorbell, or for coming up to ask directions, are in the same group as this guy. Obviously they have done far more harm in most cases, and should be punished much harsher than this guy, but all of them have just decided in their mind that a person exhibiting a certain behavior is a threat to them, without any empirical basis or overt act by the person.

[CitizenBBN]

So your opinion is the guy WITH the gun could have viewed being attacked by an unarmed guy as a threat to his life but the unarmed guy observing an somebody putting a gun on his person before entering a retail store shouldn't? See I see the other way. To me, being the guy without the gun seeing somebody entering a store WITH a gun would cause me concern, potentially the one fearing for MY life. As far as I know this guy is 1) a thief looking to rob the store (the most likely) or 2) some nut job get ready to kill some folks for the hell of it.

For me, I typically ask my wife before we head to Walmart, or especially Target (how ironic) if she is "packin heat" because you never know when a fire fight might break out in the tampon isle. Those ladies with PMS are pretty unpredictable at times. I mean that is way more likely than say a thug coming into the store and robbing it.

Again, this post underscores the basic assumption of your position that is the problem: someone else merely being armed is a threat to you.

Well, that's just not the case. Also, the most likely scenario if someone is in the Walmart with a gun isn't a firefight in women's clothing, nor is it a robbery, it is law abiding people being armed, walking around minding their own business.

Again, it seems to underscore the unwillingness to accept that while you see no need to be armed in that store, others do, and that is their right and their exercise of that right, either open or concealed, is not an infringement on your rights nor is it a threat to you.

[Doc]

I don't know, maybe its just me but if I'm walking thru a parking lot into a retail store and see somebody in a parking lot putting a gun in their jacket or pants I tend tend to take it seriously. You might not but I do, and I can understand why a reasonable person would. In fact I can actually understand how somebody could see that as a threat to their safety. From a purely legal aspect, I don't know but from a reasonable stance I do. You want to be armed, fine. Be armed but do so as the law states. The law stated the gun be concealed. Concealed means not visible. If one can see it then its not concealed. Your ignoring that underscores your position that gun advocates do no wrong. Its a repeated position you take.

Your statement "someone else merely being armed is a threat to you" is a crock. Nowhere have I said that but in the classic tradition of a good gun argument you misrepsent the other side then argue against a false argument that you can win. In each and every post I have noted that the gun was VISIBLE. Carry a guy as the law intended is fine, with a conceal permit and the gun concealed.

[CitizenBBN]

I don't know, maybe its just me but if I'm walking thru a parking lot into a retail store and see somebody in a parking lot putting a gun in their jacket or pants I tend tend to take it seriously. You might not but I do, and I can understand why a reasonable person would. In fact I can actually understand how somebody could see that as a threat to their safety. From a purely legal aspect, I don't know but from a reasonable stance I do. You want to be armed, fine. Be armed but do so as the law states. The law stated the gun be concealed. Concealed means not visible. If one can see it then its not concealed. Your ignoring that underscores your position that gun advocates do no wrong. Its a repeated position you take.

Your statement "someone else merely being armed is a threat to you" is a crock. Nowhere have I said that but in the classic tradition of a good gun argument you misrepsent the other side then argue against a false argument that you can win. In each and every post I have noted that the gun was VISIBLE. Carry a guy as the law intended is fine, with a conceal permit and the gun concealed.

You claiming that highlighted part every time doesn't make it any more true, despite your repeated attempts.

I'm simply trying to use analogies to highlight the core issues involved. This one I can do without it.

You say "carry as the laws is intended". OK, fine. Florida law:

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 790.053(1). Florida allows a person who is licensed to carry a concealed firearm to “briefly and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense.” Id.

he was lawfully carrying CONCEALED in Florida even to have had it briefly visible. the law in florida was changed a few years ago to deal with just this kind of situation, like where someone takes off or puts on their gun when they get in and out of a vehicle, etc.


No analogies, no examples. Florida laws says you are NOT a "reasonable person" to presume that just b/c you see a gun you classify it as a threat to your safety. Florida law says it is perfectly acceptable for a person with a permit to incidentally display their gun and that it's not a threat to you to do so. Therefore there is absolutely no basis to act out aggressively towards that person merely b/c you found out through a brief display of the firearm that the person is carrying concealed.

But it gets more clear IMO if we consider that, using just the law as the ruler, there is even less threat or issue in most other states. using your standard, if you came to a UK game at Rupp and saw someone get out and put a gun right on their hip, in this state that's perfectly legal and OK, and again AT LAW not in any way a threatening act towards you. You may feel threatened, but you have no basis on which to act on that feeling.

Again, you make the point, and it's absolutely within your right to feel this way, but it is the point: for you, the mere carrying of a gun by another person is a threat to your safety.

That's the whole crux of it. And I respect your right to feel that way, I swear I do, but I think that it goes right to the basic difference. I see someone carrying and think nothing of it, if you were to see them you'd be worried. That difference flows through all the rest of our mutual positions.

You see this guy showing his gun as an aggressive act. I, and in this case Florida law, see it as a benign and normal situation like the guy talking on on his cell phone. For that this guy tackled him.

he's watched too many TV shows and network news broadcasts. there are people in that store every day, dozens in all probability, who are armed. The fact that one of them showed his gun incidentally didn't do any harm nor did it change the fact that armed people were there already going about their business.

[DanISSELisdaman]

IMO, the attacker saw what he thought was an opportunity to be a hero and took it. If I tackled every person that I know that carries concealed in Wal-Mart, I would be a very a very busy man, or more likely a very dead man. If the guy was really concerned, he should have notified the security, or the Police. He had no right whatsoever to take matters into his own hands.

[UKHistory]

I would say that if I saw a person in a walmart parking lot put a weapon in his jacket or back pocket, I would be alarmed. I might say something to someone in Walmart security or call the police.

Having the weapon out and hiding the weapon would be provocative to me. I would feel obligated to say something to Walmart about him. Largely in part because I spoke with a Walmart manager shared a horrible story. The manager told me that one of her employees was held up in the store and forced to load up a cart full of expensive tv and electronic stuff and bring those items to the robber's car. All ended well. But the walmart employee, young man in his teens, was threatened and the robber had identified where the young man lived and said he would hurt his family. This incident took place in Pennsylvania.

In Virginia where I live, it is open carry. I am for it and I am a big believer of the 2nd amendment. Having said that I have to tell you it is a little unnerving to see folks armed. I am surprised at my reaction but that is my initial feeling. Maybe it is because the people in question who were armed have looked a little rough. And I would rather know who is armed than not. But it something to get used to when you don't see it often.

I watched the video. I can see a person being nervous and concerned especially with everything that has taken place across the country with random shooting sprees. But the attacker was a misguided vigilante.

The man carrying the gun did nothing wrong other than to poorly conceal his weapon.

[jazyd]

The guy was stupid. Go to security and let them handle their job. Good way to get killed.

[KeithKSR]

I was under the impression that in FL the gun had to be not visible at all times. And if it was visible it was in violation of the concealed weapons permit (since it is no longer concealed).

It is illegal in Florida to open carry, though that law is currently in the midst of civil action. The CCW holder in question didn't visibly carry his weapon, the assailant witnessed it being concealed when the CCW holder exited his vehicle. While it doesn't sound that different it is quite different.

I have to question the mindset of the assailant. Florida has numerous CCW holders, one should not be shocked to find other citizens carrying concealed. How do you know it is not a store detective, who dress to blend in with the customers? Also, why the heck would you tackle someone with a concealed weapon who has not shown a nefarious inclination in a state that is pretty liberal on protecting one's self? Someone tackles you at Walmart definitely places you in a position to fear for your safety. You could very well be shot in that situation.

[Darrell KSR]

Oops, CBBN already posted the law. Sorry for duplication.

[CitizenBBN]

Oops, CBBN already posted the law. Sorry for duplication.

It's interesting this came up in Florida b/c prior to a few years ago they had an issue with their law b/c technically if any of the gun showed, even briefly, it could have been considered open carry, and illegal. Fl isn't the only state with that issue, some have had cases where even printing (for non-gun folks that's when the gun is concealed but poorly done so you can tell there is a gun under the clothes) was a potentially prosecutable offense as it wasn't "concealed" carry.

Florida was one of the examples I saw most cited until they made the change to allow brief exposure as a normal part of carry.

IMO it is certainly ill-advised of this guy to expose his weapon in this manner, in a parking lot in public about to walk into a store, but it's not illegal nor do I think of it as desperately threatening. I do think it attracts unwanted attention, issues and potentially assailants and is just poor practice unless absolutely necessary.

It does happen though, where someone may not be able to sit in a vehicle easily with a weapon concealed, or put it on in the car, etc.

[cattails]

Was he packing one of these!!!!!!!!!:confused0053: Be sure to watch it all..



https://www.youtube.com/embed/L_D9weITWDI

[suncat05]

Okay...........I guess because it's a Glock it's "different", somehow, but I have never, ever heard of running water into a hot gun before. I have heard of water-cooled guns, I have even seen guns being cleaned with soap-n-water, but that was when they were completely field stripped to be cleaned. This is the first time I have ever heard of a hot gun getting cold water run into its action to cool it off. I have always heard that you let a hot gun cool off by letting it sit and air cool. :533:

[KeithKSR]

I don't know, maybe its just me but if I'm walking thru a parking lot into a retail store and see somebody in a parking lot putting a gun in their jacket or pants I tend tend to take it seriously. You might not but I do, and I can understand why a reasonable person would. In fact I can actually understand how somebody could see that as a threat to their safety. From a purely legal aspect, I don't know but from a reasonable stance I do. You want to be armed, fine. Be armed but do so as the law states. The law stated the gun be concealed. Concealed means not visible. If one can see it then its not concealed. Your ignoring that underscores your position that gun advocates do no wrong. Its a repeated position you take.

Your statement "someone else merely being armed is a threat to you" is a crock. Nowhere have I said that but in the classic tradition of a good gun argument you misrepsent the other side then argue against a false argument that you can win. In each and every post I have noted that the gun was VISIBLE. Carry a guy as the law intended is fine, with a conceal permit and the gun concealed.

The argument falls apart when the assailant does not act as a reasonable person would when threatened. There was no immediate action, there was no flight or fight response that is typical when one is in danger. The assailant stalks the guy, then attacks him in what was obviously a premeditated action.

[cattails]

Okay...........I guess because it's a Glock it's "different", somehow, but I have never, ever heard of running water into a hot gun before. I have heard of water-cooled guns, I have even seen guns being cleaned with soap-n-water, but that was when they were completely field stripped to be cleaned. This is the first time I have ever heard of a hot gun getting cold water run into its action to cool it off. I have always heard that you let a hot gun cool off by letting it sit and air cool. :533:


suncat I remember in Vietnam that I could take my M-16 or my 45 and break it down and clean it and have it back to together in less than a minute. This gun I know nothing about, I don't have a single gun, not one. This is by choice. So I don't know about this.

[CitizenBBN]

FWIW this came up for me in a way a few days ago.

I was getting out of my car to run into Walgreens after work. I was carrying, and in this case had the gun IWB (inside waist band) but not tucked under my shirt b/c I had my jacket on. The jacket + pants of course would fully cover the gun, but this is a shorter cropped jacket and as I got out of my car the jacked rode up.

I don't know if the gun was exposed or not, but it probably was in part for a few seconds as I pulled the jacket back down. Had someone been looking at exactly the right time and place, they may have seen I was armed.

Would they have been OK to tackle me over it? When I didn't do anything provocative at all other than simply carrying as I'm legally allowed to do? Again, the only thing dangerous or provocative or alarming would be for someone who sees ANYONE carrying a gun as being inherently threatening and provocative. I simply cannot accept that basic premise, and neither does the law.

[bigsky]

Open carry is legal in MT. don't try to tackle anyone.

[CitizenBBN]

Open carry is legal in MT. don't try to tackle anyone.

Kentucky too. Go ahead and tackle the guy with the Glock on his hip, see how that works out for you.

I do find it interesting how the states vary on the issue generally. I get the leftist states having issues with guns, but among pro gun states there are interesting differences.

For example Texas had concealed carry but had to really battle over open carry (and concealed carry as well, but still before open carry). In Kentucky we have constitutional open carry with no permit required, but to conceal carry you have to take a 6 hour class and get a permit. Some states you need a permit for open, but not concealed. Some states the opposite. Just interesting how the individual variations work.

Florida was interesting b/c their law against open carry could be used against concealed carry for partially exposed weapons, until the law was changed.