‘Good Guy With A Gun’ Saves 100 In Kenyan Mall Siege

As the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre reiterated this week after the Washington Navy Yard shootings, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. A point which seems axiomatic to The People of the Gun. Predictably, for his trouble he’s come in for the requisite ridicule from members of the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex and the mainstream media. Yes, we realize that’s redundant. Be that as it may, LaPierre couldn’t have come up with a better example to illustrate his point than an un-named former Brit marine (above) who’s being credited with saving 100 people during the 4-day Islamo-fascist siege of a Nairobi, Kenya shopping mall . . .

The former soldier is said to have returned to the building on a dozen occasions, despite intense gunfire.

A friend in Nairobi said: ‘What he did was so heroic. He was having coffee with friends when it happened.

‘He went back in 12 times and saved 100 people. Imagine going back in when you knew what was going on inside.’

Given his background, the gun-grabber community will, as night follows day, attempt to shrug this example of heroism and effectiveness off as proof that only qualified military and policemen should be allowed to tote firearms. But for some reason, Michael Bloomberg, Diane Feinstein, Colin Goddard, Mark Glaze, Dan Gross, Josh Sugarmann, Shannon Watts, John Hickenlooper, John Morse, Angela Giron, Andrew Cuomo, Dannel Malloy, Leland Yee, Jerry Brown and Martin O’Malley were unavailable for comment.

51 Responses to ‘Good Guy With A Gun’ Saves 100 In Kenyan Mall Siege

  1. You might want to include the line, “With a gun tucked into his waistband, he was pictured helping two women from the complex.” for those who have images turned off or missed it in the picture.

  2. avatarJon says:

    I’m not sure the “average” civilian would have pulled off the same feat.

    • avatarSoccerchainsaw says:

      The “average” armed citizen may have “only” been able to extricate himself and a dozen others from the danger….
      Darn.

      • avatarvioshi says:

        But if you have a dozen armed citizens saving a dozen others, that’s 144 souls safe. Plus his 100 and you’ve probably cleared the mall. Not to mention ventalated a few bad guys.

      • avatarWilliam Burke says:

        I’m interested at how the figure of 100 saved was arrived at. How do you determine how many lives one man saved in a situation like that. You could say “about a hundred”, but any specific figure is wishful thinking.

        Don’t get me wrong; I’m glad he was there, and I’m very happy he did what he was able to do.

    • avatarJim R says:

      I don’t think anyone’s going to argue that this man is FAR above average.

    • avatarjwm says:

      Who is the “average” citizen? Look around you the next time you’re on the street. Who are x military? Who are experienced hunters? Who are paintballers?

      Who is the “average” man that has none of that experience but is willing to run into a burning building to help victims?

      The “average” woman in Fremont that when she and her toddler were attacked by a lose pit bull she stuffed her child into a trash can and took the brunt of the mauling to protect him?

      Who’s this “average” citizen you speak of? Maybe you see him in the mirror every morning.

  3. avatarShire-man says:

    Only qualified people. Like all those folks at the Navy Yard and Fort Hood. Oh, sorry, they arent qualified enough I guess.

  4. avatarthatoneguy says:

    Only I can’t carry on post. No matter how proficient I am or how much experience I have racked up over the last decade. That pimply faced 18 18 year old MP private fresh out school is definitely qualified though!

    • avatarNYC2AZ says:

      But your point is exactly the argument we should make with this example. Like Dan said, the grabbers will shrug this off to fit within their belief system. By directing our argument (in this case) that military personnel should carry on base and former military personnel should be allowed to carry once they return to a civilian lifestyle, you dent that belief system. If it would save just 1… err 100 lives and all.

      • avatarHowdy says:

        First of all, that guy has balls of steel.

        And you are all wrong about being permitted to carry on base. It should be demanded that all active military carry on base. If they can’t be trusted to carry, they need to be kicked out. All civilians on a military installation should be able to carry if they all so choose.

        I would have no problems with the government buying a million bajillion bullets if those people were directed to monthly training for scenarios for said ammo.

        Also,
        National Constitutional Carry NOW!!

        • avatarJus Bill says:

          I don’t think everyone should be forced to carry. Some of the incidents I heard about made me glad there was 50 feet of earth, concrete and steel between me and the carriers. All of our buildings had “extra” holes.

        • avatarNYC2AZ says:

          I agree, the guy is somewhere in the exceptional or above category. Yet this British national wouldn’t be allowed to carry a firearm at a mall in his home country (just as the anti’s want here). He also would be fodder if, for a random example, a couple of radical islamists hit him with a car and proceeded to chop his head off in front of a gathering crowd of disarmed people. And where did I say “permitted” in my previous statement?

  5. avatarPeterC says:

    I’d be curious to know, given Kenya’s gun laws, if this former Brit Marine was carrying legally. For whatever reason, it seems that those places where a gun is most needed, are the same places where a gun is most illegal.

    • avatarFug says:

      I am only speculating, but due to his profession he may be given special privileges or he may have even been working in the country. I read yesterday that there are Israelis assisting the Kenyan forces, but I haven’t heard anything about that since.

  6. avatarRoger says:

    Pictures broken for me on this post and the one below it.

  7. avatarCT Resident says:

    Better not bring that gun back to the UK like Nightingale did!
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9669410/SAS-war-hero-jailed-after-betrayal.html

  8. avatarJT says:

    It’s funny that they have his face blurred in the picture. That photo has been circulating for days without the blurring.

    • avatarFred says:

      I found that odd as well, but they probably just got word from the UK or whoever he is working for on OPSEC. Seems like he would be a pretty big target, saving 100 people from an attack while working in the area to stop UK citizens from joining the Jihad and gathering intelligence on activity in the region. It was fine until they figure out who they’re showing.

  9. avatarKCK says:

    I saw this photo of the dad before in other media but why is his face pixelated here in TTAG?
    Is that a mexican carry or is that something other that a gun in his belt.

    • avatarFred says:

      Both articles are from the Dailymail.co.uk. They pulled the first photo in the first article and only have that one up now. Probably for the aforementioned reason.

  10. avatarIng says:

    Not to rain on the parade, but I wonder how much the gun really had to do with it. I mean, he went back in 12 times…how many of those times did he actually need the gun to save himself or someone else?

    Still, a guy with a gun saving lives is a good thing.

  11. avatarold and scarred says:

    what we can to learn, from this picture? in addition to the pistol sans holster, he appears to have a mag in his front pocket, or is he just glad to be apart of a threesome? no, it is a magazine. i would speculate he did not go into the mall, originally with the pistol but ‘acquired’ it in the confusion. Why, do you ask i speculate that? why no holster? because he wasn’t carrying when his day started. i look forward to leaning more details of this sheepdog.

  12. avatarAccur81 says:

    An absolute hero. The world needs more people like this.
    (I’m sharing this amongst friends. Perhaps I’ll even write Feinstein another letter – not that it would do any good.)

    • avatarWerewolf1021 says:

      I can tell you exactly what response you would get: “Thank you for contacting my office but ,please, FOAD. Sincerely, The Demon Harpy”

  13. avatarDrVino says:

    As humbling as my recent experience at Front Sight was, I was also proud to be one of about 50 people on the line of whom at least 80% look proficient enough to be able to intervene safely and successfully in a similar situation.

    • avatarCliff H says:

      Congratulations on the success of your training, and I hope you are in the mall with me if anything ever goes down, but every person in a mass killing scenario like this who has a weapon and is willing to TRY to fight back is an advantage.

      In this sort of extreme situation the mere presence of the good guy is more important than training and proficiency since we cannot all EVER be trained to the competence of this marine, or you, since we do not have the time, money, or inclination. In this sort of extreme encounter safety is an extremely relative thing, considering the outcome if you do nothing, and success is only measured by whether or not you and/or some others come out alive who wouldn’t have otherwise. (Leaving behind a few dead terrorists wouldn’t be bad, either, but I think that should be secondary under these conditions.)

  14. avatarFrank says:

    Ever notice that NONE of the biggest disarmament proponents served in the military ?

    • avatarBillC says:

      It’s because there is a socialist cast system in the military, officers and enlisted. The officers are brainwashed to distrust the enlisted, essentially. The higher up the ranks an officer goes, the greater the distrust. It carries over into the civilian world. That’s why pretty much all the generals and retired generals are pricks and a$$-holes. They generate a superiority complex that is second to none.

      • avatarJason Lynch says:

        BillC,

        Maybe the US military is different, but in the Royal Navy we trust the lower deck a great deal. We have to: when push comes to shove aboard a warship during a Quickdraw alert (for example), whatever orders the Captain or PWO may issue, they’re carried out by a nineteen-year-old Able Seaman. If we can’t trust them to fire, accurately and effectively, when necessary (and only when necessary) then why are we putting them on the trigger of an automatic weapon in a situation where a mistake could cause anything from headline news, to the birth of a bouncing baby war?

        (And don’t even get me started on damage control: with a crew of 20 officers and 200 “other ranks”, if you can’t trust your ratings and NCOs to do their jobs very well and to adapt quickly and effectively to changing circumstances, be sure your ship will *not* continue to float, move and fight.)

        Remember also, that in the Royal Navy about a quarter of our officers are Upper Yardsmen (think the USN term is ‘mustangs’) who came in as ratings and were offered, and accepted, the chance to go for a commission. I know this happens in the USN, just not the percentage. For that matter, working with the USN, I haven’t seen any evidence of this officer-enlisted contempt – maybe it’s an Army thing?

        • avatarH.C. says:

          The whole “officer-enlisted-NCO rift” stems from incompetence in any of those billets. I dislike the “officers are lazy” or “enlisted cant be trusted”. I happened to have the best NCOs the army could provide. The BEST. Also, many of the enlisted personnel were spectacular. Many of the officers were great as well. That being said, I worked with many officers not worth a shit and NCOs that should have never been promoted. Polarizing any rank is absolute horse ****. People are people, leaders are leaders, and dirt bags are dirt bags… they exist at every level.

    • avatarJus Bill says:

      Too bad they abolished the draft. But then again, they would have been deferred somehow (I’m looking at you, Slick Willie).

    • avatarStinkeye says:

      Didn’t Frank Lautenberg serve during WWII? He’s dead now, of course, but he was a pretty loud voice for disarmament when he was kicking.

  15. avatarGregolas says:

    What a great man! He exemplifies Psalm 82:4, “Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.”
    How did he manage to have a legal pistol in Kenya, though?

  16. avatarDavid says:

    How do you “legally” own a gun in Kenya? Well, diplomatic immunity helps. There is a very good chance he is in the service of the crown even if he is a civilian. Also, he could have kept it in his car, got a few people out, then went back in to get more. Still illegal but he may have taken the risk of exposure knowing a terrorist assault was taking place. Another possibility – bribes. How does the saying go “sound as a pound”?

    A better question is:

    How to arm up in Kenya without reprisal.

  17. avatarRoscoe says:

    “Redundant” you say?

    You mean like the rhetorical overused and now expletive terms “common sense” and “for the children” and “scary” and the rest of the redundant labels used by the grabbers to demonize standard firearms and law abiding gun owners!

    Let the A-H gun grabbers stew and soak up the term “The only thing that stops a good guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”.

    For all the rhetorical false and misleading B-S they’ve put out, I’m certain they can handle Wayne’s simple statement of FACT.

    Keep it up, Wayne. Don’t let the antis’ and the leftist Medias’ stupid two faced cry foul objections slow you up even one little bit!

  18. avatarFederale says:

    Why cover his face? It is already all over the internet. You think that Al Sabab and Al Queda only read your blog? Other blogs have even said he is active duty SAS. A little old for that.

  19. avatarCKP says:

    Screw shopping malls. Really.

  20. avatarDave S says:

    Hero. A person in the wrong place at the wrong time, probably doing something he knows he shouldnt be doing.

  21. avatarJD says:

    1000 shoppers each armed with a .380 and only one mag.
    “5 to 16″ terrorists armed with AK’s and grenades.

    That latter wouldn’t have a chance, and the arms taken off them when dumped would be used against the remaining terrorists.

    problem solved.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.