Previous Post
Next Post


“The incident began about 11:50 p.m. Friday in the 2900 block of North Milwaukee Avenue in Logan Square,” reports. “The Uber driver was parked on the east side of the street, while [22-year-old Everardo] Custodio was on the west side. . . A group of people were walking in front of the Uber driver on his side of the street when Custodio suddenly began firing at them, causing them to scatter. The Uber driver then pulled out a gun and fired six rounds at Custodio, striking him multiple times, according to court records.”

So let’s think about this. Gun control advocates say that your average American shouldn’t be armed because he’d, A) have his gun used against him, B) shoot the wrong person or, C) get shot by responding police officers. In this case…nope. Didn’t happen.

Custodio was at Advocate Illinois Masonic hospital, being treated for gunshot wounds to the shin, thigh and lower back.

Assuming one bullet per wound, the unnamed 47-year-old Little Italy concealed carrier had a hit ratio of 50 percent – which compares quite favorably with, say, the NYPD hit ratio of 34 percent. On a good day. On a bad day, not so much. Also, the Chicago armed defender didn’t hit any innocent bystanders.

We always upbraid the antis for presenting anecdotal evidence without statistical context. So we can’t say that armed civilians are better at taking out bad guys and creating less collateral damage than the police. Oh wait. Yes we can.

According to researcher Gary Kleck, “In defending themselves with their firearms, armed citizens kill 2,000 to 3,000 criminals each year, three times the number killed by the police.” [1993 stats via]. What’s more . . .

A nationwide study by Don Kates, the constitutional lawyer and criminologist, found that only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The ‘error rate’ for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high.

As Michael Caine claims he never said, not a lot of people know that. They should.

[h/t DC Studios]

Previous Post
Next Post


    • BOOM indeed.

      A Chicago Trib article published less than an hour ago claimed that, according to court records, the driver used a SHOTGUN (!) to shoot the perp.

      “The Uber driver then pulled out a shotgun and fired six rounds at Custodio, striking him multiple times, according to court records.”

      Now, if I had to choose between a NRA rep and a Chicago Trib writer on the subject of “accuracy of correctly describing guns and/or ammo”, I know how I’d vote. But if the Trib pulled the gun description directly from court records, that’s kind of hard to screw up.

      • Sorry if that last paragraph doesn’t make much sense. I copied the response from a similar one I wrote below, and then the friggen’ TTAG software never gave me any “edit time” option to fix it. My mistake, but this isn’t the first time I’ve been denied a chance to edit a new post. It seems to be happening more and more often, recently.

  1. This assumes that Custudio really is the bad guy. What if he was just a misunderstood youth who was just about to turn his life around?

    • Of course he was!
      I have it on good authority (his parents) that Custudio was enrolled in an on-line personal improvement program and was just ” ’bout ta turn his lif’ ’round”.

      • and was working hard to fulfill his dream of being an NBA star that spreads messages of love through rap music.

  2. So… a good guy with a gun DID, INDEED, stop a “mass shooting.”

    A bad guy firing into a crowd of people is a “mass shooting”….. Riiiiiiiiiight?

  3. One more reason for libs/progs to hate Uber.

    Threatens the job security of the union cabbies and now apparently also threatens the job security of “underprivileged youths” as well.

    The real reason they will hate this story though is that the hero prevented a potential “mass shooting” and resultant pools of blood for them to dance in and create witty one liners about how bad the gunz are on their Twitter feeds

    • Not to mention the Uber-driver’s “vigilante justice” which we don’t need!
      And, of course, If everybody does this it will put the police union out of business and it’s members out of work!

  4. Countdown to Uber terminating their association with him in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 . . .

    They can’t fire him since he doesn’t work for them, but I bet there’s something in their contract. Oh well, there’s always Lyft.

  5. Tiny Dancer and Supernintendo McStreetlights have to be defecating in their pants about this one. Not to mention Anita Alvarez, the State’s Attorney who doesn’t believe that private individuals should have firearms. I’m sure she has her minions scrabbling away to see if they can find something to charge the guy with-maybe littering?

    • “Looks like no charges will be filed against the driver:”

      And that is an official Martha Stewart “Good Thing”…

    • Shooting in Chicago? Not news.

      Shooting in Chicago stopped by someone with a CHL? News.

      Chicago prosecutor not charging the person with the CHL? Holy *hit.

      Never thought it would happen in my lifetime.

  6. What I would like to know are:
    1) range of shooting
    2) where all 6 impacts (not just the 3 on the body) impacted
    3) if there were any indications of the attack
    4) how the Uber driver was able to positively identify the offensive shooter
    5) where was the police

    • Seriously? Where was (or were) the police? Do you think they’re at every street corner in the city waiting for the bangers to open fire?

      None of it matters, thug got shot trying to shoot people, cops found his gun, he’s guilty and people are lucky a responsible, armed, citizen was there to stop the attack.

      I could see the smoke coming from the anti’s heads last night all the way from the suburbs as I read about this. It was even in the lefty Tribune without any bias I could see, I thought it was April 1 or something.

    • “What I would like to know are:
      1) range of shooting
      2) where all 6 impacts (not just the 3 on the body) impacted
      3) if there were any indications of the attack
      4) how the Uber driver was able to positively identify the offensive shooter
      5) where was the police”

      This happened three blocks west of where I live. Logan Square is typically not known for violent crimes; mostly your occasional vehicle break-in (I did run off some guy sawing off my neighbor’s catalytic converter at 5am a few weeks ago, when I came out to say hello with my 1911). But I keep up here and there with crime stats in the area. 90% of it is petty property crimes.

      Regarding your questions:
      1) I am not sure, but given that the Uber driver fired six shotgun blasts, and the perp is somehow not a pile of ground meat, leads me to believe that the driver is either a) a terrible shot at close range, or b) was firing bird shot (or something similarly ineffective) from the other side of the street, where he may have been pulled over or parked (5-10 yards maybe)
      2) I don’t know if this information has been released yet. If he was using bird shot, I wouldn’t be surprised if the police just tossed the rest of it after making sure there was no further injury or damage from the shots.
      3) The only “indication” of the attack that I’m aware of is the shooter walking up and indiscriminately opening fire on a group of innocent bystanders
      4) The Uber driver was present when the shooting started; he was sitting in his car nearby after having just dropped off a passenger.
      5) Police can’t be everywhere at once. Contrary to what a lot of non-Chicagoans think, many CPD officers support armed citizens. They understand that being primarily a reactionary force is not enough. Notice that the Uber driver is not being charged. Even Uber seems to have no problem with his actions.

  7. “According to researcher Gary Kleck, “In defending themselves with their firearms, armed citizens kill 2,000 to 3,000 criminals each year, three times the number killed by the police.” ”

    I’ve always hated this assertion. Its accurate and sounds good, but it uses an absolute number , not a ratio, and has the built in assumption that the Police face a similar number of lethal threats to non-police – which they don’t. In general, criminals do not rob or rape the police. Also, most crimes are never responded to in-the-act, so the claim is misleading, as it implies a inefficiency on the part of police that isn’t there. It also has a disgusting taste of score-keeping. Do you really want cops killing more in an effort to catch-up the score?

    • To say nothing of the widely reported fact that there is no official data base of police killings of civilians that are resolved as “justifiable,” and that the ones reported are substantially fewer than the actual number.

    • To amplify Bdub
      The police are called into a situation in progress while a citizen more often sees the situation develop and knows who the player are. The cops are icomming in cold to hot call. So the numbers are not fair in that way.

    • I view it a little differently. It’s a numerical refutation of the antis’ talking points about how …

      a.) Only the police and military should have guns
      b.) DGUs don’t happen (å la Shannon Watts’ “The data shows it never happens”)
      c.) (In California and Maryland) only the police need access to the national gun market, and the rest of the masses can only have 10-round mags and Firearms Determined Not to Be Unsafe.
      d.) There will just be Wild West shootouts and innocents will be gunned down
      e.) People will just have their guns taken away and used against them
      f.) The police won’t know who’s the good guy and who’s the bad guy

    • “According to researcher Gary Kleck, “In defending themselves with their firearms, armed citizens kill 2,000 to 3,000 criminals each year, three times the number killed by the police.” [1993 stats via].”
      The only problem I have spitting stats is using old stats. C’mon now, we shouldn’t cherry pick stats that are over 20 years old.

  8. This guy has TWO liberal bullseyes on his back. First he carries legally. Second he drives for Uber which lib cities are trying to kill to protect their cab fleet owning cronies.

    • “. . . . . which lib cities are trying to kill to protect their cab fleet owning cronies.”
      You mean the ones that contribute money (bribes) to their political campaigns?

    • Thankfully, Illinois protects those who defend themselves or others from lawsuits.

      Chapter 720. Criminal Offenses

      5. Criminal Code

      Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.

      (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.

      (b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of “aggressor” set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.

  9. This is a great story with an even better ending – a classic good guy with a gun stopping a psycho with a gun. I sent this public on Facebook, and everyone here should get this story out however they can. If this had been any version of Sandy Hook 2.0 we would be hearing about it nonstop for months.

    Instead, this is how Sandy Hook should have happened – the psycho gets shot up and can’t carry out any of his sick plans.

    • Great observation as usual, Accur81. I bet, though, that exactly zero news stories and whitepaper-style “reports” will begin with “In the 12 months/2 years/ 3 years since a lawfully armed Chicago Uber driver safely stopped a mass killing on a public street by shooting the attacker…”

      Compare that to the hundreds of news reports and editorials that lead off with “It’s been X years since Sandy Hook children-butcher-madman-assault-weapon-etc. and Congress has taken no action to reduce gun violence….”

  10. For those wondering, the concealed carrier used a Springfield XD .45 to defend his community, according to Todd Vandermyde of the National Rifle Association.

  11. The 34% hit rate for NYPD is artificially high. The report the article links to counted all intentional, non-training, weapon discharges, including officer suicides. Given the size of the police force, officer suicides make up a not insignificant portion of the shootings, and they have essentially a 100% hit rate. When those suicides are removed, the hit rate against other people is much lower.

  12. Just saw an unbiased local news report(Chicago) and it was remarkable for it’s evenhandedness. Amazing even. Times are achangin’…on the other hand an off-duty cop (at 1 in the morning) shot a woman to death and shot another with a CELL PHONE and was not charged with anything by a judge today. “But I was scared” And this was a slam-dunk….any non-cop would get a manslaughter /murder rap. BTW Logan Square is NOWHERE you want to be-day or night…

  13. I live outside of Chicago, and the first local news reports had headlines or spoken “teasers” that went something like this: “Uber driver shoots man in street.” Not kidding. I have been crazy busy since & haven’t seen any of the follow-up stories; it sounds like they may be more balanced, but those initial headlines are all that will stay with some folks. Here in northern Illinois the anti is strong…

  14. Well, how this event plays depends. For some folks it’s all about who’s on which team, or teams at all.

    – Blood on the street. None is best. If there’s gonna be blood, some say it doesn’t matter who’s. Some say bad guys beating on people less bad if that’s your last means to stop them.

    – Protecting their community. For some people, that’s OK if it’s cops or others under some kind of administrative control while regular people protecting their own community is just wrong. Others say, our community is ours to protect. (If the cops work for us, when they wield violence, we’re responsible for it. If the cops do not wield violence on our behalf, then on who’s, and what does that make us?)

    – Reality vs. better hypothetical choices. Hypothetically there were a million ways for Uber-guy, or anyone else, to stop this bloodletting without harming the guy shooting up a crowd. So yeah, whenever what actually happens has a down side – an active shooter got shot – there’s an imaginary alternative without that.

    – Reality vs. worse stuff that didn’t happen. There’s always an argument that the bad stuff didn’t happen this time, but might have.

    Grown up people take care of themselves and their community, look out for themselves and their community, knowing that to act is to choose in this case who needs protecting and who needs stopping, knowing that there’s risk of things going sideways if you do anything at all, and bad consequences along with the gains, whatever you do.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here