Previous Post
Next Post


Earlier today, we reported on the story of a (white) man who tackled a (black) CHL holder after it was noticed that the CHL holder was actually carrying a gun. Shannon Watts apparently saw the story as well, and her response is perfectly in line with what we’re used to seeing from her and the Moms. Namely, it betrays an utter lack of respect for gun owners even as human beings, and a burning desire to do harm to those who avail themselves of their Second Amendment rights . . .

In the story, the man who tackled the CHL holder was arrested for assault. Which is 100% legal and perfectly appropriate — the CHL holder had done nothing wrong, and the attack was completely unprovoked. But Shannon Watts sees things differently. According to Shannon Watts, she apparently believes that this elderly black man should have been beaten without consequence merely because he was following the law and carrying a firearm. All she cares about is that a man with a gun was tackled, and she is apparently incensed that the guy with a gun wasn’t arrested. “Because America.”

Shannon Watts in this one tweet is promoting the beating of a law abiding black man.

Michael Bloomberg and his employees in Moms Demand Action aren’t just preaching “gun sense,” they are preaching hatred and violence. Their rhetoric promotes the idea that gun owners aren’t human, and that they are a disease that needs to be eradicated. Their words have real consequences, and what we see here today is proof that Shannon Watts and Michael Bloomberg simply don’t care. They want gun owners to be beaten, killed, and otherwise eliminated from society. And they don’t care about the human cost.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Im not saying Im all that, But I never met an Antigunner I couldnt take…so if they wanna start shit, I say bring it.. Self defense isnt limited to Just shooting the assailant.

      • That doesn’t mean anything. I’m 57 and a never smoker, non drinker and would have kicked the shit out of that guy. I would have hurt him. If he wants to run up and throw me down on the ground, well game on a– hole.

        • I’m 59, a non-smoker and a non-drinker, also. I, too, would have shown Foster how much this black man appreciates being tackled for obeying the law.

          As for Shannon Watts, she continues to earn my highest rebuke:

          No comment.

      • I’m 54, and though I had to retire from training a few years ago due to arthritis in my feet, I still know how to disengage a head lock from an a untrained attacker. Trained my be more challenging.
        But the one thing most people don’t think to do when someone grabs them like that is drop your weight. Most people try to stand up. That just makes it easier. But they aren’t strong enough to hold your dead weight.
        This guy was fat and appears to be out of shape. But the guy he attacked looks much lighter. Possibly quite fit.
        I wouldn’t be surprised if he could have taken the guy out easily but was making an effort not to over react. Someone yelling “he’s got a gun” probably tempered his response. Crazy guy over reacting.
        Whether it is wise to assume that because someone yells “he’s got a gun” and therefore is not really trying to rob you is another discussion 🙂 After all, people do break into home yelling “POLICE” to slow the response of the people inside.

        • I was thinking the victim realized what was going on somewhat and restrained himself. I know that my tendency would be to bite, claw, gauge his eyes, basically fight with full aggression. Might not be skilled, but against anything other than a trained fighter, I am sure I will give him a few marks. Especially if he was reaching for my gun. I think that would be knife comes out time.

          I only hope that I would have the presence of mind, if something similar happened, to realize this guy isn’t trying to kill me. That he is just a douch-nozzle want to be hero. Easier to sue him if I don’t hurt him

    • Since you brought it up, three words come to mind when I read about poor Shannon: bat shit crazy. That is all.

    • I’m, as they say, too old and too tired to fight. If a stranger tackled me, I would shoot him as quickly as I could get my gun out. If he did not then release me, I would shoot him over and over until he did. Then he could worry about whether his attack on me was legal.

    • Well, she IS the apparent racist in this one. Dirk already knows she is a bigot, but hope springs eternal I guess…

      • Why do you think I want to turn her out? I just want to see the look on her face. 😉

        But now you know why she won’t return my calls

        • Hey I don’t know why ANYONE wouldn’t return your calls, Dirk. It’s just unfathomable… 😛

  2. They want gun owners to be beaten, killed, and otherwise eliminated from society. And they don’t care about the human cost. At this point in time, the gun grabbers are mostly just one step below this. In the future, the Statists will step up the rhetoric and violence even higher.

    • Tom- You need to stop that truth telling now or you are gonna scare some of the middle of the roaders that people keep saying are needed for legislative solutions to the political ends of the statists. The statist whether they be republican or liberal are deep six invested in the continuation of trying to control other Americans and the infringements upon the second is the transparent plan disguised as compromise. These people want us dead for exercising our rights as free citizens of a Constitutional Republic and many of us are not comfortable with the reality of a civil war that would cost the lives of millions on American soil, but evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

  3. If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times. Scratch a gun control supporter, find an enthusiastic fan of violence.

  4. What would she be saying if this was an off duty cop? It’s unbelievable the inconsistencies in their arguments.

  5. Who cares what that brainless nobody SW says. I know one thing, had that guy grabbed me and threw me to the ground, he would have had his hands full. I’m just fine being on the ground and my ground work is clearly better than his. He would have lost some teeth and got his nuts kicked hard.
    Shannon Watts is, in my humble opinion, a blithering idiot. If she continues on this reckless path, I would think she’s opening herself up to legal issues. She’s a fool.

    This is my personal opinion and not necessarily shared by others or The Truth About Guns.

  6. Well if she wants this, then come to my home and try it. She and all her whining little friend who come will leave in body bags. Self defense is a God given right.

  7. Suit yourselves, “#gunsense.”
    Cross that line, grab me unprovoked, I can’t promise that I will show the same restraint as this guy. I can promise that you endanger me and mine, you bettr be prepared to pay that price. Because America.

  8. I noticed (from real experience) the more anti’s talk, the more they lose. So let ’em keep talkin’.

  9. Has no one posed this scenario, or did I read past it?

    Armed black man being accosted thinks that someone is going for his piece…
    Is able to draw while going to the ground…
    Fatally wounds assailant…

    Good shoot?

    As far as I’m concerned – why not? How could I determine the motive of a random stranger tackling me?

    • There’s a couple of issues with brawling while armed. While shooting someone could be questionable just because they throw you on the ground, having your firearm taken and losing control of it is clearly a real possibility.
      You NEVER EVER want to lose control of your firearm. If it’s not a lawful order by a clearly uniformed officer, well they can just die. Being disarmed puts yourself and others in immediate danger. With that being said, there are circumstances that using lethal force would be justifiable in that type of situation.

      • Throwing someone on the ground is a bit different than maintaining a choke hold from behind while they are still on the ground.

    • Indeed. ‘Kind of racist’ is on par with ‘kind of pregnant’. There isn’t a lot of middle ground there.

  10. What is it with TTAG this week? Why do you feel the need to keep pointing out the race of the abused?

    We have plenty of ammo against the anti gun folks. Why use Al Sharpton’s race baiting tactics?

    • I don’t think it’s at all improper to point out that a black man was lawfully carrying a gun for self-defense and peaceably going about his business, and was assaulted by a (white, presumably anti-gun) nutcase presumably because he thinks any black man with a gun is a gang-banger. Gun owners are routinely painted as rural, redneck, Confederate-flag waving OFWG. Calling the anti-gun crowd out on their not-so-closeted racism and bigotry is entirely appropriate.

    • Anti-gunners like Shannon operate under the notion that the folks they call the colored help actually carry concealed and legally. Not all CCW’ers are OFWG’s.

    • Because “Mom’s demand action” are bigoted Anti-gun racists. That’s why. I think we should call it how it is.

    • Gun control has it’s roots in bigotry. It was a tool for the elitists to oppress racial minorities. Racial oppression stopped being fun for the Dixie Dems when the oppressed started shooting back. See the Deacons for Defense.
      Now, the greatest weapon of our “betters” is to spread disinformation; that gun owners are racist/sexist/violent/all of the above. Shannon’s tweet proves that she is everything she calls us.

      • As is usually the case with liberals. No one is more racist than a doctrinaire liberal. No one is more convinced that women are lesser beings in desperate need of the support of the collective. And no one is more mean-spirited.

  11. According to Shannon Watts, she apparently believes that this elderly black man should have been beaten without consequence merely because he was following the law and carrying a firearm.

    Has anyone told Al and Jesse about this? They’re being AWFULLY quiet about it.

    • Simple: it involves a law-abiding black person with a firearm. Ergo, they want nothing to do with it. Don’t want to call attention to someone that doesn’t support their perpetual victim narrative, after all. It’s the same reason they didn’t step up for Shaneen Allen or John Crawford.

  12. To me this proves there is just as much racism on the left as their is on the right, and any claim liberals make that they are super sensitive to racial issues is just a bunch of bullshit designed to collect votes.

  13. White guy attacks Black guy… I hope they charge him with a Hate Crime. I really find fault with the term “Hate Crime” because of how it is used so unjustly in almost every circumstance, HOWEVER, in this case, it’s just fuel for the fire, so go ahead and pile on the charges and see how deeply they can bury this idiot under the prison.

    • I have always been against the idea of “hate crime” ever since I started hearing the term being used many years ago.

      Crime is already crime. The crime here was assault, that is already a criminal act. “Hate” is a motive for the crime. All crimes have motives, greed, lust, revenge, etc. We are merely elevating one motive above other motives as being criminal in itself.

      When you criminalize a motive, you are criminalizing thought. Think about that. Hate crime = thought crime. That’s why I’m against it.

  14. “… Shannon Watts and Michael Bloomberg simply don’t care. They want gun owners to be beaten, killed, and otherwise eliminated from society. And they don’t care about the human cost.”

    I agree.

    Can someone please tell me again why we are supposed to be nice to these people? Remember, gun grabbers are actively trying to force government to imprison and/or kill us for owning and/or carrying firearms.

    • Can someone please tell me again why we are supposed to be nice to these people?
      The practical reason: because by maintaining the moral high ground, we win in the court of public opinion.
      The ethical reason: because, unlike Shannon’s mom, our moms taught us to respect others.

        • +1. John strayed once w you Shannon. Your vjay ain’t that good to keep him from straying with a newer model with fewer miles on the odemeter. Just sayin

      • “we win in the court of public opinion.”

        When they consistently and often advocate and incite their followers to kill us, either directly themselves or by SWATTING or whatever, and begin unprovoked physical battery I think things might just be beyond the “court of public opinion.”

  15. Shannon Watts advocates assaulting black men for following the law. Cries of “RACISM RACISM RACISM” not heard.

  16. “And they don’t care about the human cost.”

    So all that… “If it saves just ONE life isn’t it worth it?” was all just talk then?

    Color me surprised.

  17. Did anyone else notice the wording?
    tackling man with gun
    That’s how the media describes it when an actual heroic person stops a criminal with a gun. Is it her intent to imply that the victim in this case was about to kill a baby, when the assailant selflessly threw his body in the line of fire to protect the baby? Or at least to associate the victim with the baby killer, and the assailant with the hero in the mind of the reader?
    I suspect it was.

    And her drones probably aren’t going to RTFA, so they won’t see the actual facts of the situation.

  18. If Obama had an EDCing uncle, would he look like the victim? (This is completely farcical, because Obama’s uncle is here illegally and can’t EDC.)

    • Are you talking about the Kenyan who was arrested for DUI or the Kenyan who is still living in a hut? I think the latter was his brother.

  19. Clearly this person thought he was being some kind of hero. He tackled the guy and shouted “He’s got a gun!”. He thought the guy was there to rob the place or shoot it up Charlie Hebdo style. That’s because the antis have put out so much rhetoric (aided by liberal media) that the average person now believes that anyone with a gun has to be a bad guy.

    I don’t know how to do it, but we somehow need to educate the public that not everyone who carries a gun is a criminal.

    • And now you know why so many people advocate for open carry during normal daily activity (preferably in pairs at least — to discourage the reaction cited in this article) as well as open carry demonstrations with signs. And, perhaps more importantly, now you know why gun grabbers are coming out so vocally against open carry.

      Try it some time. Bring a friend or relative along.

  20. I bet in the future the Good Samaritan won’t be blitzing up the middle just cause he sees a gun.

  21. Then Shannon agrees that off duty cops should also be tackled? how does one visibly discern between an off duty cop conceal carrying and a permitted gun owner conceal carrying?

  22. I like her tagline “Because America.” Yup, just another leftist that likes to be condescending to America.

    • I’m surprised she didn’t type it ‘Murica! Though I have to say I’m pretty fond of saying “Murica, F yeah”.

    • This twit is an outright fraud. She read the story and decided to not disclose the guy (victim) wasn’t arrested because as a CHL holder, he had every right to have a concealed gun on him. She read the same article every one else read, does she really think people are so dumb, that they would not notice her willful ignorance of this pertinent fact? She has no creditability. Would love to see if anyone on the Twitter feed called her out on this?

      • “…does she really think people are so dumb, that they would not notice her willful ignorance of this pertinent fact?”

        Yes, yes she does.

        “Would love to see if anyone on the Twitter feed called her out on this?”

        I don’t do Twitter so I don’t know but, don’t her people block all dissenting opinions?

      • She ignores it because she thinks conceal carry or any type of carry should be illegal. And if Shannon Watts thinks something should be illegal then of course there is no need to mention that it’s not actually illegal. I missed her coronation as Queen of America. I hope they had punch and pie.

  23. Then Shannon agrees that off duty cops should also be tackled? how does one visibly discern between an off duty cop conceal carrying and a permitted gun owner conceal carrying?

    Anti-rights, anti-freedom Shannon at work condoning assault on the basis of unfounded fear.

  24. “Because America.”

    Shannon your hate for this country is showing. That’s probably all I can say without the COMMENT MODERATED tag.

  25. So lemme get this straight; Shannon and her ilk actually believe assaulting gun owners should be legal, and she ain’t the first cretin anti to come out with this insane rubbish.

    You, first, Shannon baby!

    Slide on up here and assault this ol’ 61-year-old guy, anytime, hon.

  26. Somebody needs to let Shannon know that #BlackLivesMatter or whatever the kids are saying on the tweeter radio station.

  27. Isn’t this why we carry a drop weapon?…………………don’t tell me I am the only one………………. Can we all forget I said anything. Come on be cool! JK

    Really, this amount of racism this close to MLK day, with the movie Selma tanking under the weight of American Sniper.

  28. Y’know, for a supposed PR professional, Shannon really is good at screwing up her own message.

    Then again, her followers are so full of irrational fear and outright hatred of lawful gun owners, they probably don’t notice. It’s hugely odd that they focus all of their vitriol on people following the law instead of trying to change criminal behavior or address the causes of violent crime.

    It’s shocking to see how quick the followers of anti-gunners like Shannon are to flat-out call for violently assaulting, falsely calling the police on, and even killing lawful gun owners. I mentioned in the other TTAG article on this incident that I sampled some of their Facebook calls for violence against gun owners today, a jolting reading experience. (“Permit or not, nobody has any business bringing a gun into a public place! How can anyone be sure he wasn’t about to commit mass murder? He should have been shot and good riddance! OMG! OMG!”)

    Those responsible for stoking these people’s irrational fears into actual violence, all in the name of preventing violence, are beyond despicable.

    • I’ve never believed she was a “PR Professional” unless every stay-at-home mom is now calling herself a PR professional like some call themselves “domestic engineers”. If she were a PR professional she would have the good sense to know that the Kroger ad with the attractive woman carrying a gun standing next to a fat SHIRTLESS man standing in the produce section would NOT get the reaction she was hoping for. Herp derp, Shannon, Herp derp.

      • She’s only good at PR when “PR” means throwing huge amounts of money at politicians to get them to do the bidding of those she represents. She was quite successful during her time with Monsanto. But all she knows is throwing money at people. And for that, we should be grateful. I try to keep a finger on the pulse of the antis as much as possible, and only the most insane, hateful, vitriolic antis actually support MDA. Out of all the gun control advocates, they represent a rather small minority. It’s also great that they are so blatantly hateful, because (regardless of the MSM coverage), fence sitters DO see their insanity and can be swayed against them. That’s also why it’s important that we not respond in kind. Even if it doesn’t always feel like it, plenty of people without strong opinions on the matter of gun rights/gun control DO see this. They see that the antis (despite their claims that they are peaceful and rational and that we POTG are violent monsters) are hateful, horrible people who advocate violence against those they disagree with, while the supposedly violent POTG don’t even blink, let along responding in kind.

        • That’s a very good point about fence sitters. And you’re right, they are only going to appeal to their own choir of the most insane extremists. They don’t seem to have any idea how they come across to normal people. And when they are the ones inciting and encouraging violence against law abiding citizens simply for being different than them, while we are “obnoxiously law abiding”, I think people without an ax to grind can see the truth of things. We may have a long road ahead with regards to gun rights but at least popular opinion about the second opinion and gun rights in the country is heavily swaying pro-gun.

      • Actually, I think “PR professional” is probably more accurate than “stay at home mom” in Shannon’s case. I’m not buying that biz that she only jets off to here, there, and everywhere on Bloomie’s dime in between her turns at the ballet class carpool.

        • Well true. She’s in so many photos in so many different places that she probably lives out of a suitcase. The ballet carpool is going to have to go on without her.

        • Make no mistake: She is a PR pro/flack/whatchamacallit. She and MDA are Bloomberg’s attempt to “mom wash” his reputation as a hyper-controlling oligarch who lacks any relatability, credibility or public appeal.

        • Fair enough on the “mom wash” part. On that end, she’s doing a bang up job. But toward any other supposed end/goal they have, it’s just a big fat fail.

        • ^^^
          Agreed. Professional doesn’t mean competent. That was my thought when I commented about her screwing up her own message, come to think of it,

        • “On that end, she’s doing a bang up job.”

          Not even there, really. Here following is not that large. Look at photo’s of her events…not really teeming with concerned moms.

          She’s a big failure. Her entire message is lies and everyone, even her followers, see it. This was made abundantly clear when she accused Alan Brooks last year of “stalking,” yet no word to the police or anything like that. Her flip-out over that photo screwed her public-image pooch thoroughly and entirely.

          People are wise to the ‘echo chamber’ practice of banning dissenting comments, too.

          Her failure is quite possibly why Bloomberg went to the next try…’everytown.’ First mayors, then moms, then…screw it…just call it something people will associate with ‘everyone.’

          When was the last time Shannon testified at a legislative session in any state?

          My suspicion is she’s been taken off the Starting Team because she just was not getting the job done.

        • You may be on to something there, JR–that might account for the increasingly pathological tenor of her statements of late. Perceptive people probably knew Shannon’s time was up when “People” named her one of their “Women Who Are Changing the World”.

      • No kidding! The comments are loaded with flat-out incitement to murder, among other crimes. What happened to Facebook’s policies?

        • Fakebook’s policies only apply to political groups they disagree with. You know… like hunters and legal gun owners and moms who breastfeed.

  29. I wonder how bystanders reacted? It seems that if you WANTED to initiate an assault or robbery, all you’d have to do is yell “he’s got a gun” and then just run off while, in the confusion, they restrain the victim. The attacker, if caught, could justify by saying he “feared for his life.” The point is, this seems like a way to use confusion to attack anybody and get away with it. A similar instance would be home invaders yelling “POLICE” as they enter.

    • Bystanders jumped in on the gun owner. He was making descent progress fighting back at first, but then the do gooders came the rescue they sided with the lunatic screaming “HE`S GOT A GUN!!!”

  30. Boy, don’t we all love the left? They are all about tolerance and peaceful resolution, but only as long as you agree with them.

  31. The media must get every anti-gun org and pol on record as to whether they condemn Shannon Watts or endorse tackling innocent black men.

    Sauce for the goose.

  32. The thing that kills me, is that if it were LaPierre making such a racist, offensive, and just plain wrong statement it would already be ALL OVER the news. Instead this is going to be ignored at all costs.

  33. The #Justice4Trayvon crowd could not be reached for comment. They were too busy on the CSGV Facebook page, praising the attacker for playing a cop and taking the law into his own hands.

  34. I agree with a couple others comments above; lets not fall into the habit of nasty personal comments about Shannon Watts, right now especially when she is doing a great job of just completely trashing herself and Bloomberg with blatantly hypocritical tweets that reveal the racism thats been just under the surface of Progressivism since the 30s, and the desperation of the anti-gunners in general right now.

    Speaking of the truth- and recalling how truth devastated her lie before CNN about “DGUs not happening, the data prove it doesnt happen”

    Here is a good factual debunking of several myths tossed about by MDA and other gun-grabbers, conveniently dated Jan 16, 2015- worth bookmarking and using for the next article in the coordinated media campaign against guns.

  35. According to Shannon Watts, it’s perfectly acceptable, good even, to scream “gun” and point to her security people.

    Good to know.

  36. I’ll just leave this here, and then point to Shannon Watts and her legion of mewling psychopaths. It’s not hard to make the connection.

    Gun control is, and always has been, a racist and classist agenda — and is absolutely everyone who supports any gun control law whatsoever.

    I’m done “compromising” with the political and ideological descendants of the KU KLUX KLAN, and I will never allow them to contest that fact, either.

  37. I just detest racism and it raises my blood pressure to even think this was racially motivated. One has to wonder if the suspect would have done the same if it had been a white man walking along packing heat.

    I have a point to make. CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.

  38. Because you can find everything on the internet…

    The attacker was placed on a 72 hour mental health hold?

  39. Cool. The next time Shannon Watts shows up with armed body guards, we should just jump them and kick the shit out of them.

  40. From the arrest record, it appears the the attacker was placed on a 72hr mental health hold (Baker Act)

  41. Eventually, excesses such as this on Shannon Watt’s part will catch-up to her. Has anyone told Al Sharpton about this. It might be an opportunity for Al to actually make himself useful for once,,oh, but he doesn’t care about the 15-24 year old Black lads killing others of their age groups by the score over drugs and drug sales territory, he only cares that no Blacks got nominated for Academy Awards. I guess a 62 year old Black CHL holder in Florida doesn’t matter to Sharpton either. Wouldn’t it be great if Clarence Daniels turns out to be a Viet Nam War Veteran. Can’t find anything more than the news story about the incident on Mr. Daniels.

  42. “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”

    That didn’t end well for Thomas Beckett.

    It makes me wonder when the Watts will be held liable for inciting violence against peaceful lawful citizens? Isn’t promoting violence against someone for their constitutional rights a federal crime and a civil rights violation?

  43. As a guy who’s rolled and randori’d for fun, there’s no way I’m playing around with someone engaged in battery of my person. If I can draw I will if not I will after pulling guard, in either event it will be a miracle if I’m not forced to shoot. I know it might come as a surprise to most anti-civil rights control freaks that alot of religious CCW’s can effectively defend themselves in other ways.

    The assailant should be dead by rights, I hope some control freaks are able to balance their insane will to dominate and enslave against their own mortality after seeing this event in the news. Only when they see that there are personal consequences for their mental abhorrence, will they leave people alone and respect the rights of others.

    • “Only when they see that there are personal consequences for their mental abhorrence, will they leave people alone and respect the rights of others.”

      Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!! We have a winner!

  44. Madam Watts should beware filing her nails in public without proper protection; some may construe her tool to be an offensive weapon.

    • Her mouth is an offensive weapon. But she’s got Freeze Peach! We respect her first amendment. She needs to respect our second.

  45. I thought her comment was incisive and very intelligent, I don’t know what the problem everyone has with this fine woman and her magnanimous organization.

    • Briefly exposed while getting out of his vehicle. Perp followed him into the store and jumped him from behind.

      • haha

        I hope one of these fvck knobs decides to tackle a off duty police officer or plainclothes detective. By all means, go ahead.

        Or tackle a senior citizen carrying and get their DUMBASS shot.

  46. MDA is taking a page from the #handsupdontshoot crowd by inciting some mentally unstable anti to attack a law abiding gun owner and get killed in the process. Then they will use the “martyr’s death to agitate against legal carry.

  47. Notice how the media doesn’t cry “Racism!” when a racist act is done in the name of progressive values.

      • I had the same thought. Very revealing observation. Sad, but that is our reality when dealing with those opposing guns and gun rights. I am continually perplexed how very intelligent people who are progressive completely disregard the lessons of history when progressive views are implemented politically. What is it that I am missing about Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and other experiments in progressive ideology? There is a form of massive socio/psychological denial that keeps recycling itself.

  48. An armed person has not harmed anyone nor broken any laws — and a gun grabber advocates that people tackle the armed person? This is my surprised face.

  49. This person demonstrates she is pro-violence against nonviolent gun carriers. Isn’t the typical anti-gun rational based in anti-violence reasoning?

    Gun vilence = bad. Normal unprovoked violence arising out of baseless fear = good?

    • all violence is good and moral and just violence as long as it doesn’t involve anything that explodes in any manner.

  50. This situation touches on the emotion and hate that is created by those who oppose guns. I get that. It also begs the question, “If concealed, why was it visible at all?” In our world of media-driven hysteria around guns, we, as CCs, MUST be more careful to exercise our legal and constitutional rights. That is a fact and to think otherwise, is wishful thinking. It is perfectly plausible in the mind of the tackler that he was being heroic in view of our world affairs nightly drumbeat of the media that hammers us on terrorism and makes the association with guns.

    This situation, perhaps, also highlights a possible predicament for CCs who carry responsibly. I don’t know here what actually happened, but it made me think about difficult situations that arise when carrying.

    First, let’s address our responsibility as CCs. Responsible CC require us to “conceal.” That is not always done particularly well. Some CC arrangements are more effective than others in that regard. So that is one issue in the “responsibility” column that we should take very seriously and this incident makes that point in spades because the tackler would not have sprung into action if he had not seen the gun on the person.

    But let’s assume for a moment that a CC needs to transfer in a parking lot, the gun to the CC hoster from its locked (assumed) position in the vehicle. For me personally, its a small lockable safe under the driver’s seat. Just this week, I was headed to a restaurant to meet some people for lunch when I noticed the “Do Not Carry” sign on the door. So, I returned to my truck to lock up my HK USB Compact. There is a short moment when, if someone was watching me (a busy parking lot), they would have the opportunity to see me transferring my gun either from my body to the vehicle or visa versa. In Wisconsin, we have open carry so I don’t think having the gun in view would violate the law. Florida has an odd open carry law that may or may not cover a situation where someone sees the transfer as described. I think the CC would be covered though.

    The point is, both people in this situation probably had good intentions and were trying to do the right thing. And with the hysteria created by the media these days, I speculate that the tackler was rather heroic from his perspective. The CC person made the mistake of not being particularly responsible because …. the gun was not concealed (with the exception that he had to do a transfer, i.e., the predicament).

    This points again to the fact that CCs need to take it up an serious set of notches so that the public, prone to media hysteria around guns, are not provided more fodder to make our lives less free and more difficult.

    And I might add in closing, let’s not stoop to the opposition’s hate mongering by engaging in rhetoric that serves no purpose. We have the “right” and history on our side and as responsible citizens in this country, we need to take the high ground and demonstrate in everything we do, including the rhetoric, that we are “responsible”.

    • I think you are over complicating things. The 2A enumerates a right, not a privilege. The idea that one must go to lengths to hide the fact that you are carrying is anathema to the exercise of a right. You are pandering to the anti’s.

      • Thank you for your response. I am not speaking to the rights / privilege argument and do not disagree. However, I am addressing the political reality of our situation as gun owners and CCs.

        Daniels could do all of a great service by not pressing charges against Foster. We need a new approach towards the opposition that is engaging and not combative. Most fear guns out of ignorance and media propaganda indoctrination. We have history on our side in spades with nearly 100 million dead at the hands of tyrants in the 20th century.

        Here is what I hope and pray we do as gun owners. Let’s change our tone. Let’s engage the opposition by first starting a discussion around common ground and not dance around the core issue. Guns are tools designed to kill. Handguns are designed to kill people. As such, they are obviously very dangerous. Respect for this danger and recognizing openly the serious responsibility that entails is a start. And as owners and CCs, we need to step up on communicating the legitimacy of our responsibility by acting and demonstrating responsibility in all aspects of our lives including how we engage in the dialogue.

        • That is more of the same “it is our fault” thinking that has characterized our descent into second or even third-class citizenship.
          A handgun is no more deadly than an automobile or dozens of other items in everyday use. That it is designed to inflict serious injury or harm and yet doesn’t account for such a proportionally higher death toll says much already. Further inspection shows that when suicides and criminal usage is accounted for, the numbers are seriously low in comparison. Obviously someone determined to suicide will find another method, as will a criminal.
          No discussion is possible until the facts can be brought to the table. The gun, and gun owner, did nothing wrong here. The only thing worth discussing is how some are determined to attack others merely for exercising a right.

    • First, let’s address our responsibility as CCs.

      Other than State regulation of the manner in which we exercise our natural, God-given, and constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, how do we have responsibility as concealed carriers – rather than responsibilities as law-abiding citizens? Our only responsibility is not to do others harm with the tool with which we exercise those rights.

      See: this is part of the underlying problem with worshiping at the Altar of Concealed Carry.

      The man in question did nothing wrong. Perhaps his intended-to-be-concealed firearm became temporarily and inadvertently uncovered. Perhaps he transferred it to his carry holster when he exited his vehicle, and was seen in that act.

      The point is that neither of those things is illegal – nor should either of those things be considered inappropriate. They are normal occurrences in the lawful, day-to-day exercise of one’s rights.

      The only person in the wrong here is the psycho who stalked the man (too strong? hunted prey? pursued?) and assaulted him. And yet here we are, navel-gazing about what the law-abiding man may have done wrong, or what he may have done otherwise to contribute to the situation.

      • Sounds eerily like the “she was asking for it” rhetoric. Agreed, this man did nothing wrong, and he has no duty to “do everything to appease crazy people” so he can be a more virtuous victim. He’s the victim, full stop.

      • There is no more appropriate word than “stalked.” What a cowardly act to stalk someone, then surprise attack them out of nowhere. It’s no different than what a rapist does.

  51. This exposes more than anything the socially accepted climate of hate towards gun owners. While Bloomy may be losing in the legal arena, so far anyway, his campaign certainly seems to be winning public perception.

    • only on the extreme left. Recent polls show a majority (and the highest in a LONG time) of citizens support the 2A and think the right to keep and bear arms must NOT be infringed no matter what accidents or mass shootings happen. i.e. they think the right is more important than pretend safety. It’s just that loud crazy people are loud and crazy.

      • I take polls with a grain of salt, they can be slanted or results even manufactured, don’t underestimate the money being out into making gun owners appear as reasonable as the KKK. Time and money will tip the tide even if the polls you refer to are accurate.

        • Given that the response of the American public to this current administration was to buy a lot more guns, I’m reserving judgment on this.

  52. attacking gun owners and CCW folks, not good to make things hostile between the two sides. Sure no one got really hurt this time. But it could easily be different next time.

    • I think their goal is to create a lot of violent encounters involving conceal carry holders so they can point to it and say: “See? This is why the second amendment is outdated and we shouldn’t have anybody carrying guns. It’s just too dangerous! Bad things happen!” It won’t matter that the “bad things” happened because of anti-gun nuts and NOT the permit holders. They can shift the optics in the retelling.

  53. Go ahead. Lets see that course of action end unfavorably for the attacker.

    And if somebody tackled me like that, out of the blue, the only thing they would be seeing afterwards would be the inside of an ambulance…

    More proof of the “benevolence” and “good intentions” of the gun control crowd. When they cannot refute your arguments, when they cannot scare the public into getting what they want, they, like the spineless fvcking cowards that they are, will resort to violence.

  54. Oh. My. Gosh. — The crazy bitch. O_O

    Of course you would expect a comment like that from her, defending the attacker. Because Shannon Watts.

  55. The Queen B**** sure has a way about wording things to make it seem like gun owners are the criminals. Because Shannon… and, as we all know, Shannon=Deceptive.

  56. If Ms. Watts wants to throw down the gauntlet and physically wage war against law-abiding gun owners, then she’d better be prepared to face the consequences.

    It’s typical of #GunBullies like Ms. Watts and Mickey Bloomberg – They attack people who are minding their own business, then cry for “police action” when they are at the receiving end of a self-defense smackdown.

  57. Attention, TTAG-ers!

    Let’s not let her live this down for even a second, THE WHOLE WORLD should know about this! We should spread this image all over social networks and let it be known that Shannon Watts supports assault.

Comments are closed.