Upper Darby High School (courtesy Google Maps)

Judging from this account at philly.com, Upper Darby High School has a severe and ongoing problem with juvenile delinquency. “About 3 p.m. every weekday, from six to eight township police officers patrol the area near Upper Darby High School as nearly 4,000 kids pour out of the building on Lansdowne Avenue near School Lane. Most kids and most days are good, [Upper Darby Police Superintendent Michael] Chitwood said. Friday was not. That afternoon alone, police responded to three fights in three locations near the school.” One of those fights got badly out-of-control . . .

The most egregious of the incidents took place on Wayne Avenue near Marshall Road, less than a mile from the high school.

An officer who broke up a fight between two teen boys that had attracted a large crowd at that location was holding one of the combatants at bay when the teen’s opponent attacked the officer, Chitwood said.

“As he breaks up the fight, he takes one kid and then the other jumps [on] him. Now he’s fighting two of them and he’s calling for an assist officer at the same time,” Chitwood said. “There’s a crowd of 40 or 50 kids watching the fight, and they all move in towards the officer.”

That’s when the good Samaritan, who lives on the block, came out of his house with a gun in his hand and told the teens to get away from the cop, Chitwood said.

“He had the gun in his hand, but he didn’t point it at the kids, he just told them to back off,” Chitwood said. “If this guy didn’t come out and come to the aid of the officer, this officer would have had significant problems.”

The 35-year-old gun owner, who has a concealed-carry permit, kept the group of teens at bay until responding officers arrived, Chitwood said.

The officers were injured, a group of teens arrested. No shots were fired. Which makes this another example of armed self-defense that never happens, at least according to gun control advocates.

41 Responses to PA Armed Citizen Saves Two Cops from Brutal Beat-Down, No Shots Fired

  1. If that had been over in NJ, the homeowner would have been locked up for having a gun within x number of feet of a school.

    • Appears to have been about a mile from the school, but I think New Jersey would have found a “loophole” in order to prosecute.

      • Unfortunately, they wouldn’t need a loophole. The person wouldn’t have a CCW, (rarer than Unicorns in NJ) and not being on his own property, he’d be charged with at least brandishing. I hate to say it, but if the kids were minority, he’d get slapped with a “hate crime”.

        • Magic 8 Ball sez: the good samaritan was black, too. Don’t see some yuppie downtown Philly white owning a gun, and going out on the street with it in hand to help a cop (who was possibly black himself) vs a crowd of vibrant yoof. Or living near such vibrant yoof, either.

    • Rob,

      And thus armed people will not lift a finger to help the very police who are more than happy to ruin good people’s lives for the “crime” of having a tool to defend themselves. That is the down side for cops who blindly carry out the will of the ruling class to the detriment of good people. Eventually, that stuff comes back to bite them.

      • If you think the cops serve only the ruling class you need to change your kool aid flavor cause the artificial flavors are affecting your brain.

        • Joe,

          First of all, I was mainly referring to police in the People’s Communist Republic of New Jersey. Go ahead and carry a handgun out onto the street in New Jersey and tell me the police will not promptly arrest you for the “felony” of having a handgun in public without the mythical New Jersey concealed carry license.

          Now let’s look at the more general case. A person can carry a handgun concealed or openly without any licensing in Arizona and police WILL NOT arrest them for any crime. Do that without any license in California and police WILL arrest them for a “crime”. Why is a perfectly harmless activity totally okay in one instance and a “crime” in another? Answer: for no other reason than because the ruling class says so. Adding insult to injury, those police in California, New Jersey, etc. are violating their oath of office and the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution … which just so happens to be the Supreme Law of the Land — above the whims of the ruling class.

          Oh, and if you are still clinging to the notion that police are on your side, go make your own suppressor and full auto sear … then call the police and tell them that you have a suppressed full-auto rifle without an ATF tax stamp. When the nice policeman drives out to your location, do you think he will ask to join you at the range? Or do you think he is going to tell you to put your hands behind your back and arrest you?

          Now tell me again how all the police are public servants rather than servants of the ruling class?

      • Nah, cops out in NM have been unfailing in their acceptance of my OC. All the sherriffs dept’s (except one) have said they would not enforce an AWB if one was passed.

        I would do the same for a cop if I saw the same thing happen..

        For someone that’s from the BATF? I would think about it.

        • How about acceptance of allegedly clinching ones butt cheeks followed by 14 hours of anal cavity search including x-ray and colonoscopy? Even Ayoob is quite fond, dare I say overflowing with acceptance of the fine service to the public by these NM LE. Rumor has it they are not nearly as happy about the total of $1.6 million awarded to this butt clinching menace to society.

      • sadly, I would be very much torn between doing what I feel is right (aiding) versus doing what is best for my legal safety. Except for very select few members of my local department, I’d land on the latter nearly every time.

  2. And that is the way it used to be many years ago, and the way it should be today: Good guys working together to maintain order and keep the peace regardless if the good guys wear a uniform or not.

    • I have some concerns that now the two combatants and 40 or so other students are upset with this guy and know EXACTLY where he lives. Yikes!

      • They had their chance to break bad and pissed themselves and waited for the cops to show up. These are high school punks, not hollywood super villians.

        • And once they cool down they might realize the guy was doing them a huge favor. You pile in on a cop and you will undoubtedly be doing some real jasil time.

      • Also if these punks were scared when it was 40 on 1, how eager do you think they’ll be to come after the armed citizen in his own castle with just a handful of their compadres as backup? They don’t want to break into a well-armed house any more than you do.

  3. Wow, in hand and at the ready according to the article. See Texas Truck guy you don’t need to point the gun with the finger on the trigger.

  4. Heh, that story is just so typical of Upper Darby. That’s why I carry when I go to shows at the Tower. Thankfully none of the good guys got hurt. Unfortunately, most of those yoots could probably benefit from some baton field testing, which will never happen courtesy of the SJWs.

  5. 40 to 50 teens and NO VIDEO? There should at least be one low res vid from a crummy angle that BLM can say shows this cop slamming his face into the teen’s fists, in a blatant attempt to oppress the socially disadvantaged. Expect a multi million settlement to be payed to the familyof the kid whose knuckles were injured, effectively transforming him into the batman of juvenile delinquents.

    • If there are 30 videos showing the kid acting a fool we won’t see any of them.

      If there’s one of the cop using profanity it’ll be all over youtube, though, don’t worry.

  6. As of the 2010 census, the township was 56.6% White, 27.5% Black.

    I guess the Amish yoots were starting trouble again…..

  7. I didn’t read the source article, but I’m just assuming that the good Samaritan was gunned down in a hail of bullets? You know, because it’s impossible for responding officers to identify a good guy with a gun in a chaotic crime scene. The poor bastard. In lieu of flowers, please send a donation to Moms Demand Action.

  8. In my jurisdiction, the armed civilian would have been arrested for brandishing a gun. The cops he rescued would likely have been the ones to arrest him.

  9. They were calling it “fight week” in the local papers. Great way to add notoriety to stupidity. I can see stupid like this becoming an annual school tradition unless and until some heads get busted.

  10. “Teen” is journalism code for young and black. Thank goodness the good armed Samaritan stepped-in for two reasons: One, nobody got killed; and two, we don’t have to see another “white cop kills unarmed black teen” headline in the news constantly for the next three months followed by “protests,” AKA riots conducted by black urban males for an additional three months.

    Breathe if you agree…

  11. What Hellbilly said – Code words/Phrases
    “surrounded by ….***a large group of teens.***”
    *** Six more youths ***

  12. I graduated here in 1984. To say it’s changed would be an understatement. Classmates of mine are on the school board today and they refer to UD as the UN.

  13. Well, that’s just un-possible. We all know that:

    1) Defensive gun use by citizens never happens,
    2) Citizens assisting cops never happens, and
    3) Should an armed citizen interact with the police, inevitably it escalates into a firefight.

    I propose correctly tagging stories with #un-possible, then appropriate sub-tags. In this case: #nodefense, #copsonlygoodguys, and #inevitableescalation. There will be other tags like: #canthitnothin because citizens are inevitably bad shots, or the general #untrainedcivilians.

    Also, can’t TTAG doing good journalism, follow-up with each of these stories. Send an email to the original publisher, asking for the source, and supporting evidence. Then publish that email & their evasions – that should be fun. This baseless agitprop needs to be called out.

    Oh, wait.

  14. I am fairly certain the Michael Chitwood quoted in the article is the same Michael Chitwood, who as Police Chief in Portland, ME was extremely anti-gun and ultimately lost his job because of it. I also think that while serving previously with the Philly PD he spoke often of restrictions on the private ownership of firearms. Ironic isn’t it. Correct me if I’m referring to a different Michael Chitwood.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *