“Not all of us are bad or crazy gun nuts. There are good people. We do good things.” That’s Marine vet Charlie Blackmore stating what should be painfully obvious about law-abiding citizens who carry concealed weapons, but isn’t. He was driving home early Tuesday morning when he came upon a man kicking a woman in the middle of the road. “When the man refused to stop beating his visibly injured victim, Blackmore pulled out his Springfield XDM 9mm.” . . .
buzzfeed.com has the story:
“I said ‘stop’ and he starts coming towards me and that`s when I drew on him. He started getting closer and I said ‘get down on the ground,'” he told Fox Milwaukee. Blackmore kept his gun on the other man as he phoned West Allis police and reported the incident. The attacker made several attempts to move toward the Iraq veteran as they waited for authorities to arrive.
The woman was badly beaten, but grateful.
Police quickly arrived on the scene and arrested the man. Officers checked Blackmore’s concealed carry permit, took his statement and thanked him, as did the badly beaten woman he rescued. The victim’s left eye was swollen shut and her nose appeared to be broken as a result of her injuries, allegedly inflicted by an ex-boyfriend.
And one of the best LEOs in the business weighed in on the incident, too.
Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. praised Blackmore Wednesday in a statement to the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel: “I want to get to a day when acts like this are viewed as a citizen doing their civic duty. Criminals have got to be reassessing things right now. They have to be asking themselves if it is worth it anymore, might they face resistance or be shot? That’s a good thing.”
And all without firing a shot.
All without firing a shot. All that practice and never fired a shot. A horrible bad guy, and never fired a shot. Ah well, I guess that’s good news, but somehow the BG having a few extra holes in him seems to satisfy me more. I guess I need an attitude adjustment.
One of the things that my CHL instructor hammered home was “shoot to stop; not kill”. In this case, he didn’t need to shoot to stop. IMO, this was a good thing.
Just think of the trouble that comes when you do shoot. Weapon confiscation, potential lawsuit from the criminal or his family, potential retaliation from criminal buddies, worrying about what the DA might do, all the waiting until you are cleared, etc.
Sure, if you need to shoot do so. But if a display alone will stop the problem…
Yeah, but shooting to stop can have its consequences too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Corey#Marissa_Alexander_case
Um… don’t most CCW trainers/lawyers/cops/etc generally say drawing a weapon on someone who did not pose you a threat to you or someone you know is a bad idea?
They don’t pose a threat when they are actively inflicting grevious bodily harm, as in the woman’s case, they were well past “threat”. When the guy stops inflicting gevious bodily harm on someone else and starts walking towards me, I would concider that a threat.
He was a threat to the woman, not the marine. And you have things backwards, the marine was advancing towards the suspect, not the other way around.
No, he was a immediate threat to someone right in front of the CCer. That makes it okay.
I do see your hesitance though. I used to attend a Pentecostal church down the way that had one of it members locked up for three years.
He and his wife were downtown and heading back to their car after dinner out. Five guys approached and surrounded them and started asking his wife what she was doing with him. They came closer and closer after repeated warnings so he drew his gun. They ran. A squad car came with three of the five guys and the husband was booked and locked up.
Self defense is a scary thing.
If one of your churches members was locked up for 3 years on a felony charge, then it certainly doesn’t make it ok does it?
If you just pull your gun on somebody randomly who poses no threat then yes that is a bad idea(not to mention where I live its considered assault to point a gun at someone). But Mr. Blackmore told the man to stop and only drew his gun when the individual who was just kicking the shit out of a woman started walking towards him. Bad guy starts walking at me after assaulting a woman… you can bet your sweet ass I’m gonna draw on him and tell him to stop, at that point he is considered a threat in my mind. Mr. Blackmore did everything right IMO and I commend him.
+1
Blackmore has no authority to tell anyone to stop unless they pose a threat to him or someone he knows. Blackmore was the one advancing towards the suspect, not the other way around, unless of course the woman on the ground was magically levitating towards Blackmore as well while she was being kicked.
And how do you know that the woman didnt initiate a assault on the man, and that the man was simply defending himself? It really seems youre simply saying what you are because a woman was involved.
Matt, what are you talking about? Authority according to whom? To Matt? I hope you aren’t a neighbor of mine, Matt. You sound like a serial non-interventionist, a man so hung up on his own dogmatic rules of (non-)engagement that he sneers at the righteous and proper neighborly and helpful intervention of a fellow citizen. Next time you get an ass kicking (and from your post, you probably have one coming) I hope for your sake you are not in the company of neighbors from the Matt school of civil responsibility.
Obviously authority under the law. And get off your high horse and answer my question:
And how do you know that the woman didnt initiate a assault on the man, and that the man was simply defending himself?
Well Matt it seems according to you Mr. Blackmore should have just kept driving and said “I don’t know who ever that is getting kicked so meh who cares what happens to them” I believe it is our responsibility as human beings to stop the kind of things that Mr. Blackmore did. Maybe the woman did attack the man and the man was defending himself, so he defended himself and fought the woman to the ground…. then started kicking her… is that how you defend yourself? Now I wasn’t there so I don’t know how it went down but in the story Mr. Blackmore told the man who was kicking the woman to stop and the man started to approach Mr. Blackmore. His gun was not drawn until the man started walking towards Mr. Blackmore in a threatening manner. Again I don’t see anything wrong with what he did. As for you saying I am only ok with Mr. Blackmore doing this because he was saving a woman is asinine. If one person is beating the hell out of another person it should be stopped. Even if it was a fight or the man was doing it in self defense how do you justify repeatedly kicking the person on the ground who has clearly already lost the fight.
“…no authority to tell anyone to stop unless they pose a threat to him or someone he knows.”
matt, WTF are you talking about? You have to personally know the person getting beaten to death before you’re allowed to help them?
“Blackmore was the one advancing towards the suspect.”
Precisely where did you get that? Neither this post nor the linked article (or the article that one links to) says that. They both say the exact opposite. Do you know something we don’t? Were you there? Perhaps you should contact the Milwaukee County Sheriffs office and tell them what you saw.
“And how do you know that the woman didnt initiate a assault on the man…?”
We don’t. That’s probably why the Marine didn’t get out of his car and just start shooting. He got out of his car and told the guy to stop kicking the woman lying on the ground. He didn’t pull his gun until after Billy Bad-Ass started walking towards him. Whatever fight might have taken place was clearly over when one of them is lying on the ground getting kicked in the head and torso.
Honestly, your blind hatred for everything military would be funny if it wasn’t so predictable and tired. Be honest, if the roles were reversed, if the CC’er hadn’t been former military and the dude beating his ex into coma had been, you’d be pissed he didn’t shoot. Wouldn’t you?
I see your point. I think the dilemma is like this:
-If you pull with no one is in danger, you have escalated a situation.
-If a victim is going to be killed, you pull to shoot, as you must.
-If you pull but don’t shoot, you didn’t need to shoot, so you escalated the situation.
I know it sounds funny, but I also can see that being a legal problem. I’m glad this all worked out fine.
“-If you pull but don’t shoot, you didn’t need to shoot, so you escalated the situation.”
I have to disagree, If a person is trying to attack you because he does not view you as a threat then pulling a gun on him would be a pretty good indication of you being a threat to him. The best gun is one that never has to be fired (aside from recreational use of course). That being said just the presence of a gun can change the situation for good or bad. If you pull a gun without the intention of using it then you made a huge mistake and put yourself and everyone around you in danger. But if you pull your gun with the intention of using it then you should be able to follow through, that does not however mean if you pull your gun you better shoot, it just means you should be able and willing to shoot if needed.
If the NRA ever wants to beat politicians at their own game by channeling Newtown, they need to do several things:
To debunk the “if it saves just one child’s life” statement
1. Compile a staggering list of successful DGUs where children’s lives were at stake they survived. Include the specific information on firearms used and people involved for every year counting backwards until before the Clinton AWB. Also include number of attackers and their tools.
To combat the high capacity magazine ban strategy
2. Compile an accurate list of unsuccessful DGUs where children’s lives were at stake and they were killed because the gun owners didn’t have enough stopping power and/or ammunition. Again, for every year counting backwards until before the Clinton AWB. Include number of attackers and their tools.
The goal: To remind people that our right to bear arms save lives every day. Adult lives and children’s lives.
The problem is to the gun grabbers this isn’t a defensive gun use because the bad guy wasn’t killed, according to them for every 1 DGU there are 70 people murdered with guns… They just ignore statistics that are inconvenient for them and skew and twist other statistics so they align with their gun grabbing goals. I have a great motto for them “We have a goal and we are not gonna let something stupid like logic or facts stop us!”
I think it’s good he didn’t fire a shot… do we really want another incident stereotyping gun owners as trigger happy? He’s a Marine vet, so I trust that he would have fired if the bad guy did rush him instead of staying put.
No one has to play the hero, but this guy obviously saw something wrong (woman getting beaten / curb stomped), and he made the decision to act. Glad it turned out well for the victim and him.
I’ll take this incident as a PR win for gun owners.
Unsurprisingly someone says it still doesn’t mean guns are good,
http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/herowithgundebate.html?33137
the writer in the highlighted article can’t see day for night 🙁
Guess he missed the fact that his two examples of bad gun uses were done in two places that have the worst gun restrictions in this country. “And usually, there are no heroes in sight.” I’m not saying everyone who has a gun will be a hero and stop something bad from happening, things aren’t that cut and dry. But you start putting heavy restrictions on exercising our constitutional rights( I dunno like in Chicago and New York!) and you might see more shootings by the bad guys and less hero’s trying to stop them.
How does this make him a “hero”? That word is tossed around so much it has lost all meaning.
In other news, feminist groups like are still silent as to why
they’re not loudly supporting the empowerment of
women.
He said stop and then the guy started coming towards him and then he drew. Either way concealed carry is meant to protect someone else’s life, doesn’t matter who’s.
Nice work, Devil Dog. I guess Feinstein was wrong about this Marine being unfit for concealed carry due to PTSD. I love hearing about Marines doing good things – I’ll see if my 0311 buddies in WI know Blackmore, and if he has an affinity for 18 year old scotch.
Good on that young Marine! There’s right and then there’s right. Good on the local police, sheriff and prosecutor for recognizing that as well. However make sure you know your state laws – concealed carry and citizens arrest, in particular. For example, some states, in a situation where a CCW holder has elected to defend a stranger from death or serious injury, require that the defender be able to articulate that they knew before hand that the stranger did not initiate the assault. That being said I trust most of us here would do the right thing regardless.
Happened less than 5 miles from me, The hole in the end of a 45 is a bit more scarry.// Like I said before about Clarke, when he talks someone should be carving his words in stone, Randy
While I don’t want to discourage or slander the honorable actions of this Wisconsin Marine, this story could have easily ended like this:
“Marine jailed for attempted murder.
Police responded to an incident involving a woman being assaulted by her ex boyfriend. While the Sanaritan claims he drew his gun to stop the assault, the woman claimed her ex bf was victimized by a vigilante with a gun. Milwaukee County DA is reviewing the case for potential criminal charges.”
This is why I will never try to break up a domestic, the woman almost ALWAYS defends her attacker after the fact.
A year ago he would have rode in the car with the beater for carrying illegally. Something to think about.
but if we all held to that point of view then we might as well just give all this up right now. We act(or hope we will) the way this Marine acted, to be part of the actual greater good, that is, good people with personal freedom and personal responsibility.
Yeah, I’d have to agree. I’d rather take a ride in a squad car and have to have things sorted out, then spend the rest of my life knowing I walked away from a rape/assault/murder victim without doing something to help them.
Good on you, Marine!
Agreed, my time and money over the years following such an event would be worth knowing I was man enough to do what I knew was right.
KUDOS for this Marine!
well, this is CT. civilian disarmament is very important, due to the high numbers of bankers and hedge fund managers in the state. wouldnt want angry middle class people to shoot the bankers. hey maybe this whole northeastern elitist disarmament is more class warfare.
Even in California, I know it sucks, but even here the law says we can carry a gun into the street from our homes to protect the life of an innocent victim. As for being arrested because the woman sides with her attacker. Her injuries and the condition of her “man” and the rescuer tell volumes to any cop that’s not a true Barney Fife.
I have, more than once, stepped in to help a stranger on the street. I had no gun on these occasions. I was raised in a time and place where you had to earn the right to be called a man. Simply being equipped with male genetalia wasn’t enough.