Wal-Mart Video of White Shopper Assaulting Black Legal Concealed Carrier

“A Lithia [Florida] man has been charged after he tackled another man Tuesday who had a handgun in a holster — and a permit to carry — at a Wal-Mart,” wtsp.com reports. “About 11:58 a.m., deputies responded to the store at 11110 Causeway Blvd. where Clarence Daniels had been taken to the ground by Michael Foster, according to the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office. Foster had seen Daniels getting out of his vehicle in the lot with handgun, under his coat and in a holster. Foster followed him into the store and . . .

attacked … Daniels, the sheriff’s office said. The report said Foster did not call 911 until he tackled Daniels.

Check out the above clip of the incident. The eyewitness account gives us an important, impartial perspective on the incident.

I reckon the battle for gun rights is the battle for the middle ground; a struggle for the hearts and minds of non-gun owners. Their apathy is our opportunity. If The People of the Gun can expose the antis’ violence, hatred and batshit craziness, if firearms owners can “sell” gun ownership as quiet yet determined concern for the life and liberty of all Americans, the fence straddlers may fall the right way.

On the other hand, Americans have a natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Nowhere is it written that they have to be genteel in the “discussion” of those rights. In other words, I value the Sipsey Street Irregulars “take no prisoners” approach to gun rights as much as the gun-owning silent majority. Both have their place in this never ending pursuit – and protection – of liberty.


  1. avatar Gbo says:

    looks like a pretty clear cut case of assault to me.
    And I think my back would hurt right between my new boat and my new truck…

    1. avatar CT Resident says:

      It looks like there is a new version of the “knockout game” has been instigated by the anti gun “thought leaders” .


    2. avatar Jack says:

      And the list goes on.

    3. avatar IdahoPete says:

      Definitely assault and battery. And can we add the Bloomberg Mommies as accessories before the fact? Or get them with conspiracy charges?

  2. avatar Don says:

    That guy deserves serious jail time. And the guy that helped him too.

    1. avatar TheBear says:

      I don’t know about serious jail time, that seems a bit excessive. He should definitely have it on his record somewhere and get the pants sued off him, though.

      1. avatar Missouri Mule says:

        Misdemeanor Assault – One Year in the County Jail

        1. avatar Glenn in USA says:

          The attacker also violated the CC’rs Civil Liberties. That’s State, Federal, and Civil violations. I guess IANAL.

        2. avatar Glenn in USA says:

          The attacker also violated the CC’rs Civil Liberties. That’s State, Federal, and Civil violations. I guess IANAL.

          Also the other guys that intervened should have been charged as well. Why?
          The tell us in Gun License classes that we have the right to protect ourselves, but if we intervene in another altercation, we step in the aggressors shoes.
          If the aggressor is wrong in the attack then so are we and so we take it upon ourselves the guilt or innocence of the aggressor.

      2. avatar Fred says:

        I think it needs to be jail.
        Anti-guns are suggesting that this is a viable way of protesting CCW. If the penalty is just money then they’ll find a way to settle or weasel out of paying the tab.This despite creating an extremely dangerous situation.

        If someones going to randomly assault someone else, or suggest innocent people be assaulted like this, they need to be locked up.

      3. avatar Hannibal says:

        I think an unprovoked assault on an older man just trying to go about his day deserves jail time. Serious injury can result from an attack like that.

    2. avatar Alex Peterson says:

      I don’t blame the guy that helped him. You have to believe that the guy who tackled him was shouting some craziness like, “he’s got a gun and is going to rob the place”. Any bystander would have to take this guy at his word in the heat of the moment.

      Ironically, the most dangerous part of the video was when these clowns disarmed him. You can see them digging around in the holster not knowing what they’re doing. Then they pass the gun around at least three times. Any one of these untrained persons could’ve accidentally pulled the trigger. Bad situation.

      1. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

        That’s a lot of transfers without Universal Background Checks.

        1. avatar outwardhound says:


      2. avatar Bob Wall says:

        As far as the white guys go, yup, it’s always the n******* with a gun who’s at fault.

        (No racial offense offered, just the way these guys were probably thinking – Moderator, feel free to edit as appropriate.)

        As far as damages go, there’s not only the assault, there’s the battery, reckless and/or intentional infliction of emotional distress, possible loss of consortium (always a fave), and anything else applicable to state law. Hell, I’d even push for a “hate crime”.

      3. avatar John L. says:

        “Any bystander would have to take this guy at his word in the heat of the moment.”


        Unless it is abundantly, unambiguously, pellucidly clear what’s going on, I believe one should stay the heck out of the fracas … Be ready to intervene if necessary but it’s far too easy to make mistakes when you come into the middle of something.

        The most obvious example – apart from this – might be coming across an undercover cop at the start of making an arrest. Shooting the “perp” would be a serious mistake.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Most action I would take as a bystander to what actually transpired would be to prepare myself to be the best witness possible, and to video if possible. If it escalated, that might change, possibly not.

    3. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      I’m with you on the initial attacker. Throw the book at him, and I mean for more than just assault itself. This is a civil rights violation case, though I’ll concede I don’t expect the U.S. DoJ to view it that way.

      As for the second guy, it’ll have to depend on the facts revealed in the full investigation, but I’m prepared to give him a pass based on his acting reasonably and in good faith.

      All I’m seeing is the second guy assist in holding an armed man down until the officers arrive; a man whom the initial attacker has tackled while screaming he has a gun. The second guy has zero opportunity to evaluate the threat independently, so he’s relying in good faith on the first guy’s alert and actions. That the second guy only assists in restraint and doesn’t beat the hell out of the carrier shows reasonableness and proportionality.

      This is similar to the old yelling fire in a crowded theater scenario. It’s just understood, in a civilized society, that nobody would incite such a panic unless there actually were a fire. The immediacy and gravity of that threat means others reacting without independently evaluating the threat is reasonably to be expected. The criminal liability, therefore, falls on the one who initiated the unwarranted chaos, either in the theater or Florida.

      It works both ways, though: reasonableness gives you a pass to act without full knowledge, but also limits that action precisely because of incomplete/uncertain knowledge. That’s why I say the second guy helping, but only in restraining and waiting for the police, is OK. The first guy needs to do hard time, as he could’ve gotten people killed with his criminal foolishness.

      1. avatar Gun_Chris says:

        ^ This!

        Also, seeing this video has made me think about and reconsider how I should react to such a situation unfolding in front of me.

        It also provided an interesting what-if, what if the carrier broke free and drew on the assailant before the bystanders were able to pile on, and how do we respond as a hypothetical bystander?

        1. avatar JasonMfromSoDakota says:

          If I were the victim in that assault I would have not hesitated in killing the person attacking me and any who joined in as then it becomes a gang assault intending me great bodily injury. There was enough time after being blind sided and with the wind knocked out of you to mount a devastating defense on the first guy negating the others. I would have to know where all of my bullets would end up and probably would have used my knife while the criminal thug tried to get my pistol, and it would have been using the knife in order for me to get my pistol out.
          If you do not know what is going on only assume the guy with the gun is a threat if he is walking over towards the other person and becomes a little executiony acting. Situational awareness is a must and you need more known facts then unknown before pulling the trigger. You will know what time it is after the first shot by the shooter’s behavior and through the law abiding citizen showing restraint in shooting to stop the threat and not delivering a settling shot for legal reasons.

          If I am ever defending myself from being attacked please do not shoot me out of ignorance of the facts, after all armed citizens aren’t supposed to act like police. In that situation I am scanning for more threats and you producing a gun on me would be a matter of the quick and the dead, especially if I saw fear that would make you pull the trigger in your eyes. I was taught to always shoot first if someone has shaky hands with a gun pointed at you, otherwise I would let you know I’m a “friendly”.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          As a bystander? I would duck, probably raising my empty hands at the same time. And continue to observe. Witnesses will be valuable.

  3. avatar actionphysicalman says:

    Whatever you do, don’t read the MDA Facebook comments about this. I am still twitching from coming so close to that quasar of insanity and stupidity.

    1. avatar General Zod says:

      Hardly surprising. I’ve never seen so much naked bloodlust as MDA throws at gun owners. But they’re not anti-gun, they’ll tell you that with a straight face.

    2. avatar Alex Peterson says:

      The comments under the news story more accurately portray the public. Most say the tackler was an idiot.

    3. avatar Tommyr says:

      F**K Facebook.

  4. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

    Isn’t it funny how they always claim gun owners don’t need CCW because we shouldn’t be taking the law into our own hands (mistakenly thinking we’re vigilantes or something…)

    Then one goes and assaults a legal gun owner, rather than just calling the police (not that I think that’s necessary) to handle the situation. Obviously recognizing that the police wouldn’t get there soon enough, had there been an actual threat…

    1. avatar TheBear says:

      That thought occurred to me as well.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Well, a few days in the Psych ward as an un-excused absence may cost him his job.

      I hope.

      1. avatar Daily Beatings says:

        The arrest report says he works at Home Depot as a Customer Service Rep. He should probable be fired as a precaution so he doesn’t attack their customers. Just imagine the litigation.

        1. avatar Heathen says:

          And in his off work hours,he pretends to be a “Heroic Sheep Dog”.

  5. avatar Korvis says:

    And Shannon likes it.

  6. avatar craig says:

    blunt objects kill 700 people a year. would this guy tackle someone at sports authority carrying a bat or someone at the hardware store looking at hammers???

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      It sure would have been nice to have audio with that video.

      Regardless, I hope the victim launches a civil case against his attacker. That should be good for $10k to $20k after attorney fees.

      The attacker, after spending 6 months in prison for battery and shelling out $10k to $20k to the victim will hopefully be more reserved next time. And hopefully others will be more reserved as well.

  7. avatar PeterK says:

    I try not to get too jaded. But it really does make me questions peoples’ principles and morals when they applaud crap like this. I mean this is clear cut assault. And for what? What if the guy with the gun had been a cop? That idiot’d be dead right now. No question.

    1. avatar TheBear says:

      Good point

      Then again, I have seen very little to refute my belief that most anti gunners are not exactly the deepest thinkers in the world.

      I’m not saying that to just be contrary or carelessly throw around hyperbole. My honest perception after engaging a large number of anti gunners is that most of them are “feelers” who have not learned to engage in or have rejected critical thinking.

      Quite a few of them have good hearts and mean well, but there is a reason why effective leaders are usually not on the feeling side of a Meyers Briggs test.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        For some of the antis you refer to, it goes well beyond not being the deepest thinkers to expressed outright antagonism, malice and bitter hatred wishing for and encouraging tragedy to befall their fellow citizens simply because of opposing beliefs.

        Wouldn’t it be an interesting case if it could be proved that some extremist thug acted on encouragement from particular anti’s persistent posts encouraging an act of mayhem, battery or murder that was subsequently carried out by the extremist who read them?

        1. avatar sagebrushracer says:

          this x1000 ^

          Anti-gun crowd is advocating harm and violence on those who are exercising a civil right. Its like Shannon Watts is the new face of the KKK and Bloomey is the Grand Dragon, cept they don’t care if you black, only if you have a gun.

          Also, OPSEC, if they don’t know you have it, they can’t go batshit crazy and make a scene.

          Anyone feel lake making a march on DC, with a single empty shell casing? No doubt we will all get arrested, but i bet it makes the news. (we can all ask for the David Greggory treatment)

    2. avatar Bob102 says:

      The attacker could have been dead regardless if a police officer or not. If the CCW carrier carried a backup gun, or if the attacker wasn’t successful with the attack, the attacker would have been mourned at the next anti-2nd amendment rally. But, looking at the police officer angle, if the CCW carrier had been a police officer, the attacker would be facing Assaulting a Police Officer charge, which is usually a very serious felony, i.e., time in the big house, loss of the right to vote and own a firearm, etc..

      1. avatar Thomas W. says:

        If the aggressor was as anti gun ass the video and information makes him appear, I don’t think loss of a firearm would be a big deal to him.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          He’d sure wish he had one while he was in prison!

    3. avatar Summer says:

      We are always one big disaster away from the mask of “civilized society” falling off. Human beings are not civilized. People prove this over and over again.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I did not think of that, and I agree completely. If he’d tackled a cop, he would be dead. And should be!

  8. avatar Jared says:

    Good link thanks.

  9. avatar slowermonkey76 says:

    About flattened those toddlers.

    1. avatar SteveM says:

      I’m all for charging him with reckless endangerment of four children. He became responsible for their safety the moment he decided to escalate the situation.

  10. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

    This gun owner is clearly guilty of carrying while black. Is the assaulter a fan of Zimmerman? I wonder. Please don’t wear me out b/c GZ was acguitted, we all know he was behaving like an A-hole……sorry evan….ttag,I’m Mike from St. Louis just noticed. I guess u have work to do

    1. avatar Evan in Dallas says:

      Ttag- above comment from Mike from St. Louis. Ya got work to do

      1. avatar TheBear says:

        I just emailed them about this. Luckily I was able to catch it before I posted as someone else.

        TTAG: I suggest dropping everything and fixing this.

        1. avatar Robert Farago says:

          We’re on it.

        2. avatar Rikoshay says:

          Its because all of this has to go through the NSA computers just like the EMR’s at your Doctors office before you get to the Pharmacy.

  11. avatar mike says:

    How freakin’ ironic….

  12. avatar Gwen Patton says:

    What’s worse, look at the people AROUND the concealed carrier when the man tackles him from behind. There is a small child crossing in front of the falling man, who narrowly misses being crushed under him. The idiot hoplophobe almost injured a CHILD with his stupid and illegal act. He’s lucky he’s only under arrest for battery. He could have been charged with endangering a minor, or the assault of a child as well as the assault of the carrier.

    1. avatar Summer says:

      Where is MDA with “think of the children” on this one? Because in everything else we’re supposed to just have our rights stripped if we don’t hate “the children”.

  13. avatar Gregory says:

    Is this a case of a gun hater attacking a person exercising his civil rights, carrying with a CCW or is it an idiot thinking he is going to save the day and stop a criminal with a gun? Either way the guy is an idiot, but I question his motivation.

    1. avatar Heathen says:

      ^ This. Are we certain the assailant is anti-gun & not an overly zealous wannabe hero ?

  14. avatar Mike Davis says:

    And we all know how prevalent it is for criminals to walk around with a weapon visible in a holster.

  15. avatar Blake says:

    The video is even worse than I thought. After the attackers take the gun away, they start waving it around just in time for someone to cross in front of the muzzle.

    All of the attackers need to face charges. They jumped in without taking any time to assess the situation.

  16. avatar Harold Puckett says:

    Am I the only one who thinks the victim resembles Colion Noir?

  17. avatar Jbug says:

    I have to put some blame on the guy with the gun. His weapon was spotted, then he was stalked by a perpetrator and taken down. In another not too distant scenario his piece could’ve been taken and he could’ve been killed with it, while the criminal ran free. So much for situational awareness. If we carry we need to be more vigilant.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Yeah, so much for minding your own business, too, right?

      Your post is exactly what’s wrong with the thinking on the ‘cultural front.’ It does not matter if someone else saw a gun.

      In a crime, the gun is not the problem. The criminal is. The attacker exercised zero threat assessment beyond “gun.” A lot of POTG make that mistake as well, all the while trying to argue “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”

      The problem rests with the histrionic response to “gun” and the irrational fear of inanimate objects that is nurtured by the anti’s and wiling buddies in the MSM.

      As for situational awareness….I get so sick of hearing this. No human being on the planet, regardless of training and experience, has 100%, 360 degree situational awareness 100% of the time.

      Here’s a little game I like to play when folks bring this up. Last time you were at a red light, how many people were in the car behind you? What were they doing? Could they have been a threat? Last time you were in line at the bank (or Wendy’s or where ever), where were the hands of the person behind you…pocket, side, holding a purse…? What was the color of the last car that passed you on the highway? How many occupants?

      Or…do you have children? If so…last time you were in a store and heard, “Daddy, can I have a candy bar?” (insert whatever your child asked for), were you watching the hands and demeanor of everyone around you? No? “SITUATIONAL AWARENESS FAIL!”

      Or…suppose you are “on” all the time…what do you do when you see someone that bumps up your alertness…something not quite ‘right?’ You focus on them, no? In that moment, you watching everyone else?

      Everyone has moments of focused awareness vs broad awareness. Blaming “situational awareness” is often a lazy cop-out.

      1. avatar Jbug says:

        Easy cowboy. You’ve been waiting to let that one out huh? I’m saying that if you’re packing you need to have your head more in the game than the sheep. You disagree with that?

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          I disagree with self-righteous criticisms and “blame the victim,” which is exactly how you opened your first comment.

          Deflect now if you wish.

        2. avatar Summer says:

          I think his comments are reasonable. And it needed to be said.

        3. avatar CGinTX says:

          JR_in_NC earns a +1: it’s simply not possible to have complete, perfect, 360 degree unassailable situational awareness at all times.

        4. avatar themysticgoat says:

          I’m going side with JR.

          Self defense is about defense, which is reaction, but just like sports, offense easily can prevail.

          You can’t see everything, all the time. What are you supposed to do, eye ball everyone you come across and draw down on any who comes in your space?

          The “awareness” nazis are like the “all accidents are preventable” nazis, people aren’t perfect, mistakes happen.

        5. avatar IAB2 says:

          I’m going with both JR and Jbug. Jbug said “some” blame.
          I think back to the Costco in Las Vegas, where someone spotted the CCW-ers sidearm and an overzealous store security person ramped up the cops, who also over-reacted. Was it fair? Did they have the right? No.
          Just like crossing the street in a pedestrian crosswalk- even if you have the right and its fair people stop for you, they dont, and you need to double check.

          If I am going to CCW, I am going to be very careful NOT to flash, just because of loose screws like Shannon Watts and her bugfuc4 crazy acolytes, and racists like this dude, and the other racist who SWATted the black guy fooling around with a bb gun in Walmart.

          Note- I am using the word “racist” inferring that was their psychological motive, and that is my personal opinion. I could be wrong.

          They could both just as easily be fascist mind-set progtarded gun-grabbers like MDA, who think along the same lines, in their own moral superiority and casual dis-regard for human lives who belong to “the other”. Remember Alinsky’s rule of ethics, numbers 1 and 2 here.


        6. avatar JasonMfromSoDakota says:

          @Jr– There is no way that somebody could run up behind me and attempt to steal one of my carry guns. It is my responsibility to not expose myself to become a victim as I give the criminal some serious firepower that I have worked hard for. I don’t place myself in positions of disadvantage and always know what is going on around or how I would react. It is about limiting your exposure to your physically known weak spots and utilizing your other senses to try and be aware of where possible threats could come from. I don’t avoid certain areas or anything of that nature as I am armed and am reasonably aware of my surroundings to where some folks would be playing against a stacked deck if meaning others around me harm, and that awareness is relaxing to my friends. I do look everyone I encounter in the eyes even if they do not reciprocate as a lot can be learned from a glimpse. Most of us are vulnerable from behind so when I’m in most places my back is to a wall or a shelf and I get uncomfortable with certain looking people behind me and I move or wait an extra minute for them to go first. I can see every person around me and if there is a glass surface I can see behind me. Every person but the young and old are viewed as people of interest until I’m satisfied they are of no interest to me.

          I relax when I am at home or around my chosen family, because somebody is suicidal to try and cause harm in those situations and knowing that is when I can relax.

        7. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Jason, dude, you sound like you’re lost in some kind of video game going on in your head while carrying deadly weapons. Not healthy. You need to ramp down a bit before you kill someone for nothing. Like, really, in your average year, how many people have you had to shoot more than once?

          Conversely, do de term “paranoid” strike a familiar note?

        8. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          “There is no way that somebody could run up behind me and attempt to steal one of my carry guns. “

          Yeah, I’m just going to go with “a lot of guys say this, and yet a lot guys that carry get jumped.” No way is about like “never,” and that’s some dangerous complacency, in my opinion.

          Also, I’ll leave this one here as it is very interesting (for a lot of reasons):

          Podcast: http://ballisticradio.com/2013/11/18/podcast-ballistic-radio-episode-36-november-17-2013/

          HTML Transcript: http://dsbscience.com/ballisticradio/BR20131117_JustinSchniedersWasShot.php

          PDF Transcript: http://www.dsbscience.com/download/BR20131117_JustinSchniedersWasShot.pdf

    2. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

      Yes, I stopped wearing hats because it covered up the eyes on the back of my head. Otherwise I would be unable to see the guy 180 out running up on me.

    3. avatar tom12121112 says:

      Wrong on so many levels. Pull your head out .

  18. avatar Alan Longnecker says:

    Someone should investigate whether this criminal follows “moms demand illegal action from everytown mayor” on facebook or twitter. I think inciting violence and criminal activity on as large as scale as bloomy does, warrants RICO charges

  19. avatar BDub says:

    So a 43 year old white-guy sees a 62 year old black-man with a holstered gun, panics, and then nearly crushes a little girl in his concerned fervor. WTF!, people? There are so many ways this could have gon from bad to horrifying, and all due to an idiot….wait for it…..without a gun!

  20. avatar Franko says:

    What kind of an idiot sees a guy with a holstered concealed weapon and decides to jump him, in Wal-Mart no less?
    Did he think he’d be a hero and be on TV?
    How did that work out for you?

    1. avatar Carbon says:

      I idiot that wanted to be a hero

  21. avatar Sian says:

    So now the attacker’s been Baker Acted? Anyone got more news about that?

    1. avatar Ronaldo Ignacio says:

      Just the info from the publicly available sheriffs office site,

      72 hour emergency health hold, Evaluation.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Now, THAT makes sense!

  22. avatar Sian says:

    Daniels needs to sue, sue, sue. He’s been publically outed, his reputation smeared, and could be the future target of more attacks from derranged peoples swayed by Watts’s rhetoric. Though somehow I don’t think the NAACP nor Morgan&Morgan will take his case.

  23. avatar J3W1 says:

    I think the Sheriff’s department should remove both the suspect and the victims home address from their website. I’d hate to see either of their families face unwanted attention in their homes over this incident.

  24. avatar Ray Ficara says:

    You just can’t make this stuff up!!

    Ray from De BARFia.

  25. avatar Daily Beatings says:

    If someone tried to do that to me they would either get a taste of Fox Labs 5.3, some missing teeth from a headbutt, an impalement in the eye with the pen I normally keep in my left shirt pocket, or just plain shot at close range. I’m a smaller person, so I don’t screw around when someone much larger than me attacks.

  26. avatar Matt says:

    I keep imagining the incredible stream of profanity that would be coming out of my mouth if this happened to me.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Me, too, but you wouldn’t be able to hear it over the gunfire.

  27. avatar J3W1 says:

    I see it differently. The gun was NOT concealed, and that’s how this “misunderstanding” got started.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      So, you are apparently saying the crime of battery = “misunderstanding” and that a non-concealed firearm is a justification for committing the crime of battery.

      Or, am I misunderstanding your point?

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Aw, he might have been saying something silly, but I didn’t see the word “justified” in his post.

  28. avatar retired para says:

    The attacker needs yo be fully prosecuted under the law. The attacker is damn lucky he wasn’t killed.

  29. avatar The Reluctant Nutmegger says:


  30. avatar Don in PA says:

    I love how the shamelessly race-baiting title effectively parodies what the likes of HuffPo and ThinkProgress were running with the other day with the whole “White homeowner shoots black cop, no charges filed”. I noted in the articles they trumped up the homeowner’s description as a “gun enthusiast” and a “survivalist” and stuff like that, yet made no mention that the police were in his home without a warrant.

  31. avatar Ron says:

    Concealed means concealed, I expect CCW classes to have a new training video.

  32. avatar Barney Fifenmiester says:

    I’d press charges for illegal imprisonment, and strong armed robbery. They stole someone’s lawful property by using force, and restrained him against his will, for committing no crime. Forget simple battery/assault charges.

  33. avatar John says:

    I’ve been grappling competitively for a decade. Anyone that pulls that shit on me will end up with broken limbs if they don’t get shot first.

    Sadly this is something I think about every time I’m in public. I carry every second of every day and thanks to this and other overreaction videos I am constantly watching my surroundings for lunatics like this. It’s sad that the anti-gun crowd has instilled this kind of irrational fear in the general populous.

  34. avatar 907sig says:

    Aaaaaand now my eye won’t stop twitching. So much stupidity

  35. avatar Hannibal says:

    He should do what the antis do- start suing the big pockets behind this crap. Shannon Watts, bloomy, and anyone else who enables this sort of violent assault.

  36. avatar LordGopu says:

    That white guy is lucky he didn’t get killed for that stupidity. Depending on where you pull a stunt like that, a lot of gun owners carry knives too. If he couldn’t get to his gun, there’s a good chance he could have pulled a knife too. When I was in Phoenix, every male in our group had a knife and we’re talking IT nerds not macho gun guys (only 1 had a gun). And I don’t mean Swiss knives, I mean good little folders with assisted opening mechanisms. Really dumb move.

  37. avatar Kahr .40 says:

    That idiot is lucky his ass didn’t get shot. You pull that shit on me and I get my gun unholstered your ass is getting shot. I would’ve been “fearful for my life.”

    Nothing worse than an overzealous wiener. Welcome to America dumb ass where a good majority of people CCW on a daily basis.

  38. avatar Rigeal says:

    Two things to say here:
    1. Is this a hate crime?
    2. Situational nearness is vitally important.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      1. I’m suspicious he would not have been so violent if the CC had been white, but who knows.
      2. I don’t know if I would ever be prepared for a complete stranger grabbing me from behind in front of a hundred people. I recover fast, though, I’d probably be pretty up to speed by the time I finished shooting him a couple times.

  39. avatar Judge Dredd says:

    Idiot ninny hammer citizen. I wonder if he is a shill of Mothers Demand Action? I hope he is convicted and does time in the jailhouse.

  40. avatar OakRiver says:

    Those seeking to restrict our rights have continually attempted to paint those exercising their rights under the Second Amendment as lunatics, murderers in waiting, as unbalanced, intellectually inferior. This assault is the direct result of their fear, mis-information, lies, and outright demonization of gun owners.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Very well said.

  41. avatar A. Rios says:

    Next time someone goes “why do you bother learning brazilian jujitsu, if you carry a gun?” or a variation of “I don’t need to know martial arts, I got a glock”.

    This video is gonna be exhibit A.

  42. avatar karlb says:

    I know that we are not to ever think it is about race here at TTAG because Sharpton, but why do many of you think this is about gun grabbing? If this was a 62 year old white guy, do you really think he would have been taken down like this?
    No, really?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Well, it’s at least possible we’re dealing with someone who is not wrapped real tight, so of course it is possible the same thing might have happened to a white man. But some portions of our population have been trained to see every difficulty they ever encounter as racism, and thus take a totally racist view of everything that happens on a given day..

  43. avatar Dennis says:

    this is one of the funniest things ive read/seen this year so far

  44. avatar Jason says:

    Seriously, I would have been in my right to kick this guy’s ass. Give me a chance to put those fight courses and lessons on maintaining control of your gun to work.

    Also, even in a loud place like Wal mart…always maintain aware of your surroundings, especially dumbasses tackling you

  45. avatar FreakinPeanuts says:

    I’m nearly speechless by the idiocy of this all. Nearly. This guy is probably insane. He thinks/wants to be a hero so badly he manufactured this “threat” in his head and couldn’t tell the difference between reality and fantasy. As for the people who blame the victim for not concealing properly…he didn’t break any laws or make any hostile actions. If you conceal a firearm every day… eventually someone will catch a glimpse by accident, its going to happen. No one is perfect. Lets blame the insane guy…..

  46. avatar Javier says:

    If it were me I’d sue for every dime I could and I would wan’t the attacker charged with civil rights violations.

  47. avatar Spaceman Brown says:

    I can’t say with any certainty what I would or would not have done in the same situation. However, I can say with absolute certainty that they would not have gotten my G19 or my 26 while I was still breathing.

  48. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    So, what about theft charges, and possession of stolen property for the idiot bystanders who became accessories by passing the stolen firearm around?

    NB how many people were muzzle-swept in that little game of stolen-firearm hot potato?

  49. avatar Brian says:

    Can anyone else not believe this guy didn’t get shot? I mean.. as the article says… this is text book why we carry.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email