Greenwood Police Chief James Ison speak during a press conference at the Greenwood City Center in Greenwood, Ind., Monday, July 18, 2022. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy)
Previous Post
Next Post

During the recent attempted mass shooting at the Greenwood Park Mall in Indiana, a 22-year old man who was lawfully carrying a pistol stopped the killing. For this heroic action, he’s been called “good Samaritan” by local law enforcement. Even the owners of the mall, (who ban guns on their properties praised his actions. That got under the skin of anti-gun activists.

Why? If they were forced to be honest about it like the main character in the 1997 film Liar Liar, they’d have to admit that a quintessential case of a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun is utterly devastating to their case against civilian gun rights.

Sadly (for them) the facts keep coming in, and they continue to be very bad for the gun control industry’s agenda. Not only does Greenwood Park clearly demonstrate that permitless carry (a.k.a. constitutional carry) saves lives, but one of the key arguments against permitless carry was also destroyed.

Constitutional Carry Allowed Lives To Be Saved

Recent reporting from WRTV News sheds light on an important detail in how this mass shooting was stopped . . .

According to [Greenwood Police Chief James] Ison, [Eli] Dicken did not have a permit for his handgun, but due to the passage of the “Constitutional Carry” bill in Indiana, he was legally carrying the weapon.

“I am 100% certain that many more people would have died last night if it wasn’t for his heroism,” Ison said.

If there’s a more devastating message for the forces of gun control, I don’t know what it would be.

If Indiana hadn’t passed its law allowing permitless carry — which went into effect as of July 1 — the man who stopped the killing wouldn’t have been able to legally carry a firearm. If he would have carried anyway (under the “better to be tried by twelve than carried by six” theory), knowing that he would have faced charges could have pushed him to head for the fire exit when the shooting started rather than stepping up to save others’ lives.

So it’s extremely difficult to argue now that constitutional carry didn’t save lives (perhaps dozens of them) this past weekend in Indiana. That’s damning to the anti-gun case against unfettered Second Amendment rights.

The Un-Permitted Good Samaritan Clearly Knew What To Do

Another common argument thrown up against constitutional carry laws is that it eliminates the requirement any training in order to carry a gun. Therefore, they say, untrained people who are carrying guns will be a danger to the public with their poor marksmanship and knowledge of the law.

Again, the mall shooting incident puts the lie to that one, too . . .

“I will say his actions were nothing short of heroic. He engaged the gunman from quite a distance with a handgun,” Ison said. “(He) was very tactically sound as he moved to close in on the suspect, he was also motioning for people to exit behind him. He has no police training and no military background.”

Ison explained to WRTV, Dicken’s first shot at the gunman was from 40-50 yards away and it appeared the very first shot hit the gunman.

Dicken was able to hit the gunman with additional rounds.

Dicken was carrying a 9-MM Glock, according to Ison. After confirming the shooter was no longer a threat, Dicken approached mall security and cooperated with officers, according to Ison.

The good guy here not only showed great presence and emotional control, but he was able to shoot a would be mass murderer from over 40 yards away, hitting him on the first shot and connecting with several more shots from his GLOCK. Law enforcement described his actions as “tactically sound” and he knew how to cooperate with police after the shoot.

Eli Dicken
Eli Dicken (courtesy WRTV) 

If you poke around YouTube, this is better gunfighting than a lot of what we see from police and people who have taken the required carry permit coursework. Clearly, then, a person can be not only skilled with their pistol, but behave safely and professionally without taking a mandated — and frequently useless — state-mandated training class, let alone having the benefit of any prior law enforcement or military training. You know, the only people the gun-grabbing community thinks should be allowed to own and carry guns.

Eli Dicken not only shot the bad guy here and saved lives, but he also shot down the anti-gunners’ agenda in a big way. And he deserves our endless appreciation and respect for doing it.

Previous Post
Next Post

115 COMMENTS

  1. This is NOT an argument FOR Permitless Carry. It Might be closer to an argument for Condtitutional Carry though.

    What this situation actually IS is an argument in favor of carrying a firearm.

    Wether it’s carrying with a state issued license or under any other form of law, the only point that means anything is wether or not your carrying.

    • He had chosen not to get an LTCH, for reasons known only to him, but which are irrelevant to our discussion. As a result of not having a LTCH, prior to July 1, 2022, he could not lawfully have carried a handgun. As a result of Indiana passing permitless (constitutional) carry this year, as of July 1, 2022, he was able to carry a handgun lawfully, even without having an LTCH.

      So, yes, this is precisely an argument for permitless carry.

      • no.
        It’s a choice he made.

        People just simply NEED to arm themselves. Find a legal way to do it and do it. That’s just simply all there is to this.

        • Right … but specifically in this case, if the constitutional carry hadn’t been in effect, on that day that individual wouldn’t have been legally carrying and innocent blood would be shed (and the MSM and hoplophobes would lap up the blood).

        • @Nope
          Then we would not be talking about him as a hero. He could have obtained a license. Why he didn’t doesn’t concern me. What concerns me is that too many people that need to be carrying (and could legally be), don’t. When you hedge your bets on state law makers and take it to the edge, your risking much. If the option is there, take it. I understand if you can legally carry without a license, then fine. We need focus here.

        • two things can be true at the same time guys.

          Yes, This is an argument for Permitless Carry
          Yes, This would be an argument for Constitutional Carry
          Yes, Everyone who wishes to do so, should become proficient with a handgun and lawfully carry one.

          This isn’t a zero-sum game. Everyone wins when any and especially all of the above take place.

        • This is an example to all of those who think that there are too many guns in our society. Actually, there are too few guns out there and that is why mass shooters are very often successful in carrying out their evil deeds.

        • A lot of people won’t carry because they object to being treated like a criminal in order to be allowed to exercise a God-given right. Getting a “permit” to carry concedes the left’s position that keeping and bearing arms is actually just a privilege.

        • Raymond: Exactly! None of us should need permission to exercise any right in the Amendments. You shouldn’t have to get permission from some pol to not talk to the police when accused of something. The cops have to get permission to search your house. You don’t need a permission slip for them to not search your house. Same with armaments.

        • Correct. Initial reporting was inconsistent, but his attorney, Guy Relford, confirmed that he has an LTCH.

    • As more information comes in, this entire discussion becomes moot. Eli’s attorney today issued a statement that he indeed was issued a CCP in Aug, 2021.

    • Well, the ‘Bruen’ decision makes a strong argument someone like LWP isn’t a necessary part of the organization.

      Send him packing, NRA. A lot of folks would like to rejoin, but will not, until his ass is long gone… 🙁

      • I would join but they aren’t no compromise like I Would like and the current head of the NRA is about as useless as he seems.

  2. Greenwood Mall shows you are your best first responder.
    Uvalde shows 400 cops can’t save anybody.
    Greenwood + Uvalde shows the whole “how can the cops tell who’s a good guy?” thing is total B.S.. By the time the cops show up the problem will have been solved for 20 minutes and you’ll be enjoying an Orange Julius in the food court.

    • Shire-man,

      I came to echo your comment–that the Good Samaritan shattered yet another gun-grabber false canard: cops will show up, won’t know who the “good guy with the gun” is, and shoot the “good guy with the gun”.

      In something like 99% of attacks when an armed defender actively fights back, the attack will be over well before police arrive.

      • Agreed. The average response time in our small town is 16 minutes. That’s when the cop shows up at the mall, not when he has gone into the mall and tried to help. How long did it take law enforcement to show up at Uvalde? Not very long. How long did it take them to take active action? Way too long.

  3. I spent four years in the U.S. Army. Airborne Infantry. 25 years in law enforcement. Won the Top Gun trophy in my academy class. Between the two I learned more about shooting, especially defensive shooting, from a private citizen that never had formal training from either. He did have some pretty extensive private training from some well known names of the time. Everyone needs training. Uncle Joe Bob is usually not the instructor you want and it is definitely not yourself. I only thought I was a good shooter before I had real training. Get some. If the instructor knows what he’s doing you will learn something.

    • We’re not arguing against training. We’re only arguing against state-mandated classes. People should get excellent training.

      • This incident turned out close to ideal.

        How would it have been reported if during his first shot (reportedly 40 yards) had missed, and he struck and wounded or killed another bystander at that mall? Imagine what a DA in a state that hates the 2A would have done to him.

        Thank God it turned out like it did. Like it or not, the question I posed is a legitimate question… 🙁

        • One thing on the side of the Good Guys: In a situation such as this the innocent are no longer bystanders liable to get shot by your return fire.

          They are either down already by the killer’s actions or have hit the ground by their own actions or are running as far from the shooter as they can get as fast as they can.

          I would say that in almost every case the killer is focused on those running away and there is no target near him that you need to be overly concerned about.This was especially true in this case since he seems to have had the wall for the restrooms immediately behind him making him a perfect target even for a quick shot from 40 yards (yikes!).

          I’m curious. Did the Mall cops who showed up (too late) carry sidearms?

        • “This incident turned out close to ideal.”

          As far as the mechanics? Perhaps. But….gun-grabbers are now using the shooter as an example of a private citizen exercising his Second Amendment right.

          The media focus is on the murders, not the containing of the murders. CNN pointing out that since 2000, there have been 437 mass shootings, and citizen defenders have been effective in only 5% of the cases. Of course, the implication is that armed defenders are available at every mass shooting, and failed to stop all of them. As someone pointed out, the media narrative is the same as declaring that, “In 1000 burglaries, the burglar was eaten by a tiger only once; tigers are ineffective deterrents to burglary.”

  4. Once again. You should be adding the practice of making long range shots, to your training regiment. In a public setting like a shopping mall, A “sheep dog” will most likely have to make a shot beyond 15 yd.

    It’s good to celebrate this good guy with a gun. But his shots didn’t go into a bathroom and kill an innocent child. Like what happened in California. He connected with every pull of the trigger. This guy’s Marksmanship was outstanding.

    • Chris, you are absolutely right about long range shooting with a handgun. I like to practice it. One of the best matches I ever shot I lost. The first shot was a 40 yard Pepper Popper. I put it on the ground with one round prone and continued to smoke the match until I got to the second mover, which someone had forgot to reset. I was just a little pissed. You can see that in the video. I was given a choice. Eat the penalty, or reshoot. The penalty wasn’t my fault. I chose to reshoot. I’m at the ready. In the video you can hear Jack ask, “Think he can do it again?” Buzzer, draw, bang, ding. Noel, “And he did!” I came in third. I shoot street guns, in street leather. Long range handguning is a useful skill. I’m about to order a new Freedom Arms revolver. I will use it at what most consider long range for handgun, but I intend to use it within 100 yards. After all, it will only be a 5″ .44 Mag with a couple of other specs. Learn to shoot/hit at 50 yards with your defensive pistol. From different positions. It’s not easy, but it is a necessary skill.

      • I’m very fortunate to live where I do. There are two outdoor ranges where I can practice out to 400 yards. And one out to 175 yards. Also there is an indoor range about 40 minutes away. That has a 57 yd target indoor air-conditioned range!!!

        It used to be a movie theater. And there are several smaller indoor ranges that are very close as well.

      • Sounds like his grandfather might have been a Firearms instructor in the military. Or perhaps a Firearms instructor for a police department somewhere. His grandsons shooting is far superior than the average grandson being instructed by their grandfather.

        I wonder if Grandpa was a competitive shooter back in the day?

    • Chris, mostly just growing up in the N FL pine flats with a .22 Ruger 10/22, various shotguns and a Marlin 30-30 and a Remington 30-06. I bought my first center fire revolver, a 4″ S&W 19 when I was 18. Followed a year or two later by a 7 1/2″ Colt SAA New Frontier in .22LR/.22MAG. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I took your comment as slightly derisive. I did not descend from a line of military or law enforcement firearms instructors. I did descend from a line of military men, buy not professionals. They did their service and went home. Uncle Leland was at Pearl Harbor. Uncle Willie followed Patton across N Africa and Europe. Uncle Jeff was an anti-aircraft gunner on the N Atlantic convoys. As long as I knew him he was deaf in one ear from the impact of a German U-boat deck gun shell. His son. My cousin. Gunnery Sergeant. U.S.M.C. Uncle Johnny didn’t serve in WWII. He was working in Oak Ridge, TN at the time. Ever heard of that place? Dad didn’t serve in WWII either. He had contracted Polio when he was 8 y.o. He couldn’t walk. You really want to get me started on my Mom’s side of the family? All those men I mentioned were Mississippi small game hunters and taught me a lot about shooting. However, and as I said, the man that taught me more about defensive shooting than anyone I’ve ever known had neither law enforcement or military training. He was just plain good. I learned a lot from him. It’s to his credit that I can shoot.

      • to Gadsden Flag
        You are so fortunate to have grown up around men who became highly skilled with Firearms, just from always shooting and comparing notes to each other.

        Most Americans will never attend an expensive shooting School. They’re going to learn from a relative. Like it always has been historically.

        And I believe that is one of the reasons why the Left hates the traditional family. Is because the father is the protector of the family. And he is the one that will pass on the skills of protection to the children. That is why they support the Welfare Industrial Complex.

        And they replace the father’s guns with the guns of a big city police department. And the replace the father with a welfare check.

    • The only thing we know is that it wasn’t police or military training, but he was definitely trained.

  5. The Far Right are crowing their heads off about an isolated incident that the statistics prove only happens in less than 3% of mass shootings.

    The reality and real truth is that without training someone carrying a handgun is likely to shoot innocent people. Even the cops often do this and they at least have some training but sometimes fail to use it.

    Also without training in the laws of your state many people would not know when they could even use deadly force. I am not speaking of a mass shooting incident but an incident where the use of deadly force is not legal which happens all the time.

    In many mass shootings the maniac uses body armor rendering the use of a handgun highly problematical as to whether the citizen could stop the shooter. The shooter would simply blow him away with a high power assault rifle.

    It isn’t common for mass shootings to be stopped in such fashion. From 2000 to 2021, fewer than 3% of 433 active attacks in the U.S. ended with a civilian firing back, according to the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University. The researchers define the attacks as one or more people targeting multiple people.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/rare-in-us-for-an-active-shooter-to-be-stopped-by-bystander/ar-AAZHRfd?ocid=U143DHP&pc=U143&cvid=1d409e14d5424dd49457adeabbac883b

    • darcydodo…Thankfully you were not there in place of the armed gun owner. What a pathetic sight that would have been, you crapping your pants on the national news.

    • Thank you duckspeaker:
      “likely to shoot innocent” — but without any such incidents to cite
      “even the cops do this” — plenty of those! But they’re immune, which makes a difference
      “simply blow him away” — duckspeaker for “I have no idea how these things work but I can regurgitate talking points!”
      “fewer than 3%” — if you’re going for stats, how many of the events occurred in “gun-free” areas? Oops. How many by persons on 1/several psych meds? Oops. How many “known to police” but nothing happened? Again, oops.

      The facts, not the rhetoric, state clearly that the people, not the government institutions, provide safety.

      • In this particular shooting incident the citizen, Mr. Dicken just got damn lucky that he did not accidentally shoot an innocent bystander. Obviously the nut case was not wearing body armor either otherwise he would have blown Mr. Dicken out the door with his assault rifle.

        Flag waver is always bragging about what a great pistol shot he is but never tells the truth about how problematical it is to make a shot connect at 40 yards and under stress unless you practice shooting thousands of rounds a year, something that very few people do because of the expense, and the time involved which today most working people just do not have in regards to the extra large amounts of cash needed and the time needed.

        Flag Waver like most of the Far Right Nut cases live in a fantasy world devoid of all reality.

    • Mainly it shows how devastating ‘gun free zone’ laws really are. Law abiding citizens are preventing from exercising their rights in these ‘target rich zones.’ That is why only 3% of mass shootings are stopped by law abiding citizens.

    • “From 2000 to 2021, fewer than 3% of 433 active attacks in the U.S. ended with a civilian firing back”

      Sounds like an argument for Constitutional Carry to me!

    • I wrote this, and I’m a lesbian who drives an electric car. I’m the worst right winger ever 🤣🤣

      All you have is whatabouts and statistics that exclude shootings that get stopped fast, combined with a bunch of hyperpartisan sneering.

      There is more to life than politics and defending your side.

      • Unfortunately the mainstream straight or gay media are not interested in you. But because there is there are many alternatives like TTAG. We can pass along your example along to others.

        TTAG is an example of what is becoming “a parallel economy”.

    • “The Far Right are crowing their heads off about an isolated incident that the statistics prove only happens in less than 3% of mass shootings.”

      The vast majority of mass shootings take place in gun-free zones, where there legally ARE no “good guys with guns”, so… duh? Take those out, and that 3% gets a **LOT** bigger.

      Then, you can check the numbers on “active shooters” stopped by private citizens versus the police and note the body count differential, and you find that a good many would-be mass shootings simply *don’t happen* when there is an armed citizen to stop the active shooter before the body count gets high enough.

      You are cherry-picking your data, HARD, to make that claim. Look at the whole picture.

    • How many of those “mass shootings” were committed by criminals targeting other criminals in areas which law abiding gun owners go out of their way to avoid? And with that number removed, how many “mass shootings” took place in municipalities or on properties where gun possession is prohibited or severely restricted (Democrat run cities & school grounds) making it a crime – often a felony – for a law abiding citizen to be in a position to intervene? Suddenly your inflated number gets a lot less noteworthy.

    • Actually, that 3% of mass shootings are stopped by armed citizens is proof that armed citizens are amazingly effective. Why? Because over 95% of mass shootings take place in “Gun Free” zones. This means that when a killer is doing his thing in a place where a law-biding citizen is allowed to be armed, well over half the time an armed citizen does the job.

  6. “The Greenwood Mall Shooting Should End Claims of the Tacticool training industry that If You Don’t Train like a High-Speed, Low-Drag Commando, You Are Incompetent.”

    FIFY

    (Anti-gunners view anyone with a gun as a “bad guy”, a vigilante even)

  7. Think about the ammo used here. The defender fired 10 rounds and the bad guy finally went down.

    What if the bad guy was not down by 10 rounds?

    What if more were needed?

    So let’s say the defender had to keep firing until his magazine was exhausted… and he did not have another magazine and the bad guy is wounded but still able to keep firing. Guess what happens then…yep, the bad guy has regained kill zone dominance and their killing continues.

    Always carry extra magazines. You never know… its better to be prepared and not need it than to not be prepared and need it.

    • apparently he hit him with the first shot, but they didn’t say where. but 10 shots from 40 yards isn’t bad at all. that being said, given this gentleman’s skill, I daresay he had spare mags.

    • I remember that well. Fairchild AFB is just up on the west plains of Spokane where I live. Same AFB that Col. Bud Holland crashed the B-52 while practicing for an airshow. He banked too steep and stalled the craft at low altitude. Videos all over of that.

      • I’ve heard Andy Brown interviewed on several Second Amendment podcast over the years. Including one by Massad Ayoob.

        I’ve seen that B-52 video. That pilot was doing what is known in the aviation Community as “cowboy in his aircraft”. He got himself and the rest of the Air Force crew killed. He had a terrible reputation when it came to flying. Unfortunately the people who have the power refused to ground him.

        • IIRC, the commanders who should have grounded him were also in the aircraft. The navigator was the chief of navigation; innocent casualty.

    • Training is great. Engaging the bad guy/gal is everything. Would I be willing to engage a 20 year old punk with an AR? At 40-50 yards?!? Probably not especially at 68. So young Mr. Dicken is even better than we think! And it’s made it quite EZ to decide to move east with no muss it fuss constitutional carry.

      • Out-numbering the shooter by over 400(!) to one, the entire Uvaldi police presence combined didn’t have the gonads that this kid showed, and THEY were mostly armed up with rifles and wearing gear. What do I think they oughta be calling him? I believe SIR is appropriate.

      • You certainly have to have the skills. But having the Lord’s help does not hurt.
        There certainly is a biblical story we can refer to. When aiming your weapon, a slingshot, accurately and hitting your small target at a great distance.

  8. So I will be better trained by an instructor that took some classes to be an instructor than by my kin that live it. I guess nobody told the hillbillies from Kentucky and Pennsylvania when they would snipe redcoat officers from 300 yrds. Dacian how do you know so much when you haven’t fired a handgun? I guess you gonna tell me how to raise a garden without fertilizer even though you haven’t grown anything! That’s why you want the guns, so no one will be armed during the food riots caused by the Green New Deal!

    • to Redneck

      ———quote—————Dacian how do you know so much when you haven’t fired a handgun?————–quote

      Statements like this prove how out of touch the Far Right really is. Now you are telling me you have a crystal ball into my private life or perhaps the voices in your head gave you that information.

      It never ceases to amaze me and make me laugh hysterically when I read statements from the far right like that. In reality millions of Liberals and Independent voters own guns but that is something the Far Right refused to believe because they do not realize that it is “they” who are a minority in the U.S. Only 37% of people own guns in the U.S. and only 3% own 90% of the weapons which is by and large the Far Right Paranoid nut cases.

      Hint: Jethro I bought my first handgun in 1962 when I was 14 years old from my next door neighbor and no one thought anything about it. Things were very different back in those days. It was an H&R double action .22 revolver that you had to pull out the cylinder pin first to remove the cylinder to load it. I eventually replaced it when I got older and bought a swing out cylinder H&R Model 929 and later traded that off for a Model 999 break open .22 revolver.

      And yes your moniker “Redneck” is commensurate with your intelligence level.

      • And this makes you an expert on firearms, dacian? You are a good example of the feminization of our young men.

      • Still telling those pathetic lies, herr dacian. Like your lies about education. We already know you’re not old enough to remember 62.

        You are a pathological liar, a troll, that would tell a lie if the truth would save your life.

        Your mental illness is only getting worse since your side lost.

  9. Big difference between how Jennifer responds to a situation and Grace Stevens who knows nothing about firearms and the issues. One uses logic, common sense and facts and the other writes based on pure emotion and bias. Great job Jennifer!!!!

    • Stevens was quoting someone else’s looney article, not writing it. Take a second to read any attributions before jumping down to the comment section. Right shot, wrong target. 🙂

  10. Eli did what was needed to be done. Those who want to disparage the man do so in the blood of the victims and those who would have been victims had Eli not responded.

    What we should all do, regardless of ideology is be thankful there are those among us willing to protect the defenseless.

    Living in reality, I know regardless of what legislation we sponsor and make law, there are those who will prey upon society. I do not subscribe to the mental illness that feels more laws will make us safer. What makes us safer is understanding reality and doing what we can for our neighbors and ourselves to those who prey.

    • to Storm Trooper

      quote————– I do not subscribe to the mental illness that feels more laws will make us safer. ————quote

      Again you make a pathetic attempt to lie your way out of reality. Japan had just 1 gun homicide last year and just 1 this year. In the same time period Capitalvania, where life is considered cheap and expendable, had 80,000 gun deaths. Only a demented paranoid would ignore that horrific reality and still claim tough gun laws do not work.

      • its easy to have a country with a low gun homicide rate when the country lets its population indulge in the sexual exploitation violence outlet for those violent urges and not call it murder when one of the victims dies of violence inflicted by the exploiting person.

        • Booger Brain you really went over the top on that racist comment. Any normal person right now has a churning stomach after reading your racist diatribe against the Japanese.

          Booger brain you would have been in your glory as a commandant at Auschwitz or waxed ecstatic when 150,000 Japanese Americans were put in American Concentration Camps during WWII. And do not mouth off it was Roosevelt that did it, I am well aware of history.

      • “Again you make a pathetic attempt to lie your way out of reality”

        I wrote: “I do not subscribe to the mental illness that feels more laws will make us safer.”

        That is not a lie.

        “Only a demented paranoid would ignore that horrific reality and still claim tough gun laws do not work.”

        Gun laws do not work. Most laws do not work. People break laws daily, you probably broke a few yourself today. Most people break at least one law a day. I am sure you aware of that fact with your vast education.

        What does work is effective punishment for breaking laws. Punishment must be swift, consistent and evenly applied.

        Only a complete moron thinks a law solves any issue. And you are not only a liar, but a utterly clueless moron.

        • 2 years and 2 deaths in Japan and 2 years and 80,000 deaths in Capitalvania. No Storm Trooper you failed miserably to lie your way our of the truth that tough gun laws do not work. See a psychiatrist.

        • Enforcement moron. Japan has a better record of enforcement. They also have a compliant society.

      • The number to compare is how much ‘gun violence’ per gun owner. By that measure, the U.S. is outstanding.

  11. The “Danger of Permitless Concealed Carry” by the law abiding is the danger it poses to the criminal

  12. Just saw this update: “The surveillance video shows Sapirman exit the restroom at 5:56:48 p.m.,” [Police Chief] Ison said. “He was neutralized by Dicken at 5:57:03 p.m.”

    Fifteen seconds! At 40 yards! Obviously he didn’t hesitate in the slightest.

  13. The anti-gunners have shifted their focus: claiming that the defender was the first law-breaker (thus, not a hero), and the shooter was the second law-breaker. net result, the defender was not a good guy with a gun. The implication seems to be that allowing the shooter to exhaust his ammo supply would have contained the event to a single law-breaker. The anti-gunners also claim that the shooter was “exercising his constitutional right to have a firearm”.

    • The defender was not a ‘law breaker’.

      1. He was armed legally

      2. The mall policy prohibition on firearms does not have the force of law behind it in Indiana, thus no law was broken by the defender carrying his firearm in the mall. The most it could have possibly been was the mall asking him to leave, and then only if he did not it would have been trespass if when after the cops arrived and asked him to leave and he didn’t then at that point he would have been arrested for trespass and become a law breaker then. The mall did not ask him to leave, no cops were called to get him to leave, he was legally armed and was not violating any laws.

      • You are responding to an assertion not made by me….but, to play along, facts are always inferior to “truth”.

        The public can be counted on to react to GFZ policies as if they are law. So, the public will not care about the legal niceties. The non-average member of the public, might, maybe, reason that carrying a firearm into a private business is trespassing, thus breaking the law.

      • Maybe there should be fewer gun-free zones in this country. Only in Utopia or a Liberal’s head do gun-free zones work. Gun-free zones are really killing zones, but that bit of common sense is always lacking in the loony Liberal’s heads.

  14. I hope this begins a trend, Scumbag shooters be afraid, be very afraid. Not of the police, but of the citizen next door. We will take America back, slowly but it’s starting to happen. Do not give the anti-gun liberals an inch. We need to shut them down with facts every time they open those pie holes.

    • “We need to shut them down with facts every time they open those pie holes.”

      Facts never shut them down. Facts have already been declared irrelevant; only truth matters. Logic and facts cannot deter committed power seekers.

  15. He was NOT ‘lawfully’ carrying a weapon on ‘private property’ (the mall) and the govt cannot authorize weapons being carried on private property. You may choose to do as I and refuse to enter/spend money on mall properties that seek to keep me from my 2nd Amendment Rights.

    • “He was NOT ‘lawfully’ carrying a weapon on ‘private property’ (the mall)…”

      Yes, he was. His carry was 100% lawful in Indiana.

    • “You may choose to do as I and refuse to enter/spend money on mall properties that seek to keep me from my 2nd Amendment Rights”.

      “Concealed” means concealed; go where you wish.

  16. Fewer than 3% of mass shootings are stopped by a bystander with a firearm. Yet 99% of mass shootings occur in so-called gun-free zones. What does that tell you? If you have even an ounce of common sense, you will figure it out.

  17. Well Surprise-Surprise, Americans can shoot! Hey Joe, Gavin, Eric (Swalwell) are you paying attention? Taking our guns might prove harder than you think.
    If folks would hang around the range more, and the internet less, they would know that hitting a target half the size of a shooter (bad guy) at double that distance is not only possible with a handgun, it is practical. Now, add in the stress of being shot at by said bad guy, and the numbers change significantly, but that is not the limitation of the weapon; It’s the limitation of being human and having a functioning limbic system.
    Kudos to that kid (I’m almost 3-times his age, so he’s a kid to me) for being calm, cool, and collected enough to pull this off with such skill. That comes from practice and training — neither of which are high priorities in American Law Enforcement these days, so I’m not surprised his shooting skills amazed them.

  18. This latest incident exposes the ‘Big Lie’ about ‘gun control’, gun-free zones, and any other phony anti-Second Amendment issue. The anti-gun crowd wants to disarm us, plain and simple. They don’t care about crime, our safety or the illegal use of guns. Their agenda is to disarm American citizens so that they can control us without the threat of an armed revolution. That is the EXACT reason our Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment. It gives ‘We the People’ the means and ability to overthrow a tyrannical government by force if need be. Simple as that.

  19. @FormerParatrooper
    “Japan has a better record of enforcement. They also have a compliant society.”

    The first sentence looks quite a bit like, “Better enforcement of gun control laws will lead to a safer society; no private gun ownership needed.” I know that would not be your intention.

    As to the second sentence, we are so ignorant (by design) of our own history. So few in the US understand the influence of the “non-compliant” peoples who explored and built colonies here. Japanese peoples are not regarded as great adventurers, explorers, seafarers. Our ancestors were a restless lot.

    To make a long story short, comparing cultures is risky, and almost entirely is used to show one or more attributes inferior…without regard to context/circumstance.

    In short, remove all the firearm-related death, injury and crime, the US has a violent crime rate greater than Europe, and much of Asia. And this bit of information doesn’t even consider that sans guns, criminals would resort to other weapons…again increasing the disparity between cultures.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here