Dramatic video of Texas concealed-carry ‘hero’ saving woman from attacker the Washington Post headline proclaims. Notice the scare quote marks around the word “hero”? After watching the above news report, there can be no doubt that Southlake, Texas moviegoer Aaron Kreag is a hero. As the WaPo’s report on the reports reports . . .
Kreag told CBS DFW he saw “this large gentleman just pounding on this lady … My first gut reaction was, ‘Oh my god, this guy’s going to kill this lady.’ ”
According to local news reports, Kreag stopped, pulled his weapon and pointed it at the assailant.
Mistina Doland, who witnessed the confrontation and caught it on video, told CBS DFW: “It was intense not knowing whether bullets were going to start flying from either side of the street.”
“I was yelling commands at him to stop assaulting her,” Kreag told CBS DFW. “He turned his attention to the firearm and was saying, ‘Don’t shoot me, don’t shoot me.’ I said, ‘I’m not going to shoot you. Just stay still. Don’t do anything crazy. The cops will be here any minute.’ ”
Soon the police arrived at the scene and ordered Kreag to the ground and cuffed him, reported CBS DFW. He was released shortly after. The police identified the suspect in the assault as MacMichael Nwaiwu, who was arrested at the scene.
Result! A defensive gun use reported in one of the nation’s most resolutely anti-gun, pro-civilian disarmament media outlets. But no, they can’t leave it at that! Nor, apparently, can the Southlake PD.
According to the Southlake Police department, Kreag has a license to carry a concealed weapon — but his actions were ill-advised. Police Chief Steve Mylett said in a statement: “While we commend this citizen’s willingness to get involved in order to protect a victim of crime, the Southlake Police Department does not encourage the public to expose themselves in such a manner. Instead, we strongly recommend citizens who witness a crime in progress to contact the local police department by dialing the police emergency number 911.”
Sigh. While the WaPo is only reporting the facts here, there’s still that little matter of the quote marks around the word “hero” in their headline. Anyway, the report ends with a positive statement from Mr. Kreag that puts this one solidly in the win column.
Kreag saw drawing his weapon as his duty, he told told CBS DFW. “It’s my responsibility to protect myself and my family,” he said. “If I can help out another person in the process, so be it.”
He’s a hero. They’re “journalists”.
Ding-ding-ding! Winnah, winnah, chicken dinnah!
You sir or ma’am win the Intertubz today!
They’re not journalists, they’re propagandists.
Let’s all practice having the same feeling towards people who call themselves “journalists” that the Left has long had for those who call themselves “racists.”
Um, “… people who call themselves racists…”
The witness referred to him as a hero. It’s possible the paper was using the quotes to indicate it was a quote. I’ve seen that sort of thing many times in article titles.
oh, man, that was good!
At the Southlake PD, we prefer you call 911, then let us interview you as a murder witness….fail.
Yep. That’s the way that I read it.
We at the police department recommend that you allow the perpetrator to continue assaulting the victim even if the victim’s life may be in obvious danger of being lost while we get around to arriving at the scene.
We do not want our relevance in society to be challenged. We all just want to retire and enjoy the disgustingly lavish pensions you all pay for.
Well, they kind of have to say that sort of thing, right? Potential liability if they actually act like they might approve of such occurrences, you know…
That was my first thought also when I read the police statement. There has to be a lawyer whispering in his ear. Given the litigious nature of our society, the police can’t applaud him as a hero and say “we wish more would act like him” because as soon as the next person does so and is shot by police or the bad guy, they would sue saying that “I was only doing what you told me to do.” Whether it would make it far in a court of law it immaterial as it would be swiftly found valid in the court of public opinion.
Regardless of the lawyers… I mean polices statement;
Good on Mr. Kreag, I wish more people would act like him. The only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men/women to do nothing.
When the police show up to a victimization scene there’s a victim and a perpetrator There’s an investigation, the perp is found and arrested. Police spokesperson claims public safety is improved and the police are seen in a favorable light. In other words… profit.
When the police show up to a DGU scene there’s a victim and a perpetrator. There’s an investigation, the perp is arrested or buried. Police spokesperson explains facts behind the investigation and that the victim had a right to self-defense. In other words… no profit.
It’s still a win. Good guy with a gun saves a life.
Look, I’m sure the guy’s heart was in the right place, and I wasn’t there, so maybe there’s something I’m missing.
However, I’m having trouble imagining a scenario where I stop my car on Southlake Boulevard (I work in the area…it’s a very busy suburban thoroughfare), draw my gun, and point it across all lanes of traffic (per the video, muzzling passers-by (0:33) and possibly a busy shopping center on the other side of the road) at a suspected DV perp (and, ostensibly, in at least the general direction of the DV perp’s victim) to effect a “citizen’s arrest.” That’s just all kinds of nope. Nope-ity, nope, nope, McNopeistan. DV victim could just as easily have turned on Mr. CC and said Mr. CC was the aggressor or something. DV is a mucking fess.
Tail the guy. Get his digits. Call the cops (they’re everywhere in Southlake…it’s a money town).
Good points to keep in mind if one of us get’s into a defensive scenario. But in the end, the guy intervened successfully, stopped the bad guy and no one else was hurt.
Whole lot a win and no fail.
While the good Samaritan was only aiming across one set of lanes (you stated all lanes), I still tend to agree with your point.
I believe the best course of action would have been for the good Samaritan to position his car to block those lanes and then get out to intervene. That would made prevented any motorists from driving between his muzzle and the attacker. It also would have eliminated any propensity for playing real life Frogger.
Yeah, a valid point. Lanes, not all lanes.
And again, as has been stated, a good result was had, regardless of my Tuesday-afternoon quarterbacking. Guy certainly put himself at significant physical and legal/financial risk to help another person in need. Good on him.
Just not the way I would advocate anyone handle that particular situation.
Korvis- You are right about not intervening in clear cut cases of DV as the so called victim usually likes violence as much as the abuser, and will protect their violent master since he loves her and she has surrendered her will. This situation could have been a violent abduction instead of DV that this man stopped by being aware of his surroundings and helping not just caring about others in need. Tactically he didn’t have to shoot so it was a good plan that could use improvement especially when the cops show up.
“Guy certainly put himself at significant physical and legal/financial risk to help another person in need. Good on him” This is the definition between Men and Mice. Those people that would not have helped a person being clearly beaten after assessing a plan of action are the self-interested individuals that continue to erode the moral fabric of our society. A moral person would see this wrong being committed and show compassion for the victim by stopping the violence with superior force, and the moral person readily having a tool on them to prevent such a crime from occurring to themselves would be obligated to use said to the best of their ability.
Tactically- DROP or place the weapon on the ground the instant the first cruiser rolls up unless you would like to be legally shot. The cops responded so fast because it is a call of a man with a gun and the are adrenaline dumping knowing they are about to meet and armed man, and all the information doesn’t get passed identifying the good nature of the armed person. I would have been in the road closer 15′ so an impatient driver wouldn’t block my line of fire and I would be responsible by positioning myself to where I know my bullet would go upon exiting the black Irishmen. My passenger would have been rolling camera so if I had to fire I could protect myself from the state. If the guy had a gun when he stepped out of the car after beating upon a women my state laws says he won’t be long for his violent behavior and rehabilitation will come swiftly, as he just passed the threshold for use of justifiable deadly force by an armed citizen.
This seems to touch on an issue for many gun owners, and that is do you intervene when you see others in peril. And if so at what point.
That being said, this man is a hero and saved another from harm.
I think what he did was silly, incredibly risky. That does not detract from the fact that he is a hero, plain and simple.
If that was an abduction of one of your relatives that he was beating into compliance instead of some punching bag hoodrat would you still think that was silly. The mans situational awareness allowed him to see a woman being beat severely and he was compelled to stop the violence instead of film it or allow it to proceed. If you are afraid of the cops taking your EDC piece after a shooting limiting your EDC choices, resort to cowardice instead action out of fear of being sued for helping another human encountering violence, or blame the the victim of a crime for for not being concerned enough with their own safety to be armed as an excuse for turning a blind eye to a person in need of immediate help, You might not understand the truth about guns pertaining to the natural right of self-defense as the second amendment and moral foundations of America intended and stand for.
In the words of Oprah Winfrey, “if someone hits you, they don’t love you, leave!”
He was smacking the woman in broad daylight, not likely a first time thing. But still, kudos to the guy intervening
Yeah probably not the last time either. My money says she’ll probably be by his side in court sobbing about what a great and noble man Mr. MacDickweed is and then probably trying to sue the Hero here for trying to save her life as soon as her man is out of prison.
Possible. But in the end, an honorable person does what is right, regardless of outcome.
And if the outcome is as you describe, then that is the price one pays for doing the right thing. That the scenario is even possible/probable is an indictment of the times we live in.
I’m sure the last Roman Legionary standing alone on the ramparts as the barbarian hordes came over the walls as his fellow citizens ran in the other direction probably felt the same.
Honor, duty, country, G-d.
For many people, those words are considered old fashioned, even quaint.
Another reason dark ages happen.
Damn, I’d never do what that gun-owner did.
Draw for someone else you don’t even know when you’re not being directly threatened? No.
Maybe it’s because I’m a woman.
I go back and forth on this sort of thing.
On the one hand many people make extremely foolish choices which put them in very desperate situations. Why should I take on any liability for another person’s foolishness? They made their bed, now they get to lie in it.
On the other hand the attacker could attack me or my family in the future on their terms; I would much rather respond to the attacker right now on my terms. Additionally, some people have no ability to respond effectively — e.g. children who cannot legally be armed or people who are too frail (due to age or illness) to be armed. In those instances I would strongly consider helping out based on the Golden Rule. (If I were legally or physically unable to defend myself with a firearm, I would most definitely want someone else to intervene on my behalf. Therefore, I feel compelled to intervene on their behalf.)
Mina-By your logic women shouldn’t be police officers or in the military since they are weaker than we men, right. That is an excuse to not act as women can work for the police departments,serve their country in the military, and women also exhibit bravery in many different ways so what stops them from brave acts with handling a firearm as an American.
Responsible Americans believe in the awareness of your surroundings and having a gun readily handy is the best defense a person can mount against evil men, and armed defense is rarely successful without personal cost, but at least they don’t make excuses for their cowardice.
“Draw for someone else you don’t even know when you’re not being directly threatened? No.
Maybe it’s because I’m a woman.”
If you have kids, it could mean simply the risk you take would be a risk to your family.
When it comes to your kids, you’re a Momma Grizzly Bear.
And there’s not a damn thing wrong with that.
Taking the WAPOST seriously even for 1 minute could signal mental illness.
Not sure I would have drawn first before engaging with dialog. Drawing your weapon should be last resort. Granted I wasn’t in the situation but I would have alerted the aggressor that I’ve notified police. If the aggressor turns against me, then I draw and hope he has some level of self-preservation.
So while some of his actions were a tad reckless, there’s still little doubt the man’s a hero.
If the woman being hit were to say to an officer, “No sir, my boyfriend was not hitting me.” then Mr. Kreag is going to prison for a very long time.
I would never hold two strangers at gunpoint, especially two strangers who know one another.
It is crucial to consider possible outcomes like this. It’s not unusual for a victim to defend their spouse. Other scenarios might be stumbling onto a filming, or some kind of prank. Assess the situation and be clear on what’s going on before brandishing the weapon.
As for being a good Samaritan, I don’t think there is any real shame in simply running from the scene of say, an active shooter, as opposed to sticking around in case you get a chance to shoot the guy. All of the people getting shot at (excluding children) had the choice to take responsibility for their personal safety and they didn’t, so there should be no guilt for looking after yourself and not risking your life for irresponsible people.
Just sayin’. It’s a choice. If you want to be a hero after a clear assessment, by all means go for it.
Leave the sheep to be slaughtered by the wolves as long as it doesn’t concern your lively-hood.(Sounds like the new American Cultural slogan)
Bob- that is what is wrong with this country and you should re-evaluate your choices of inaction through cowardice if you claim to be a moral man, as moral men have a duty to act in order to prevent innocent people from being slaughtered ,since it wasn’t convenient for them or they didn’t have any skin in the game is not an excuse.
My clear assessment wont be for how to run away but how and where I have to get to stop an evil man with as much force as necessary.
They came for the sheep, and I didn’t act because I wasn’t a sheep.
Then they came for the dogs, and I didn’t act because I wasn’t a dog.
Then they came for the lone wolves… and I was all alone.
Visible, fresh injuries to the woman’s face and/or body would negate any denials she might make. (Reluctance by victims to press charges against their abusers is a longstanding problem. Because of this, police in many places are required to arrest the suspected abuser whenever there is evidence of abuse.)
I’m ok with the reporting, including the quotes around “hero.” After all, not everyone regards this man as a hero. Some will say him reckless and his actions ill-advised. So be it.
Reporting the ambivalence and perhaps opposition which may follow a DGU is part of the truth about guns, after all.
Tactically, given that distance, I probably would’ve used verbal commands to disrupt the attack, rather than drawing. I’ve done that before, actually, and didn’t have to draw. That was just a slap and not a full on beat down, so the legal justification wasn’t there in my case.
Had I drawn, though, in this case, as the cops arrived I would have placed the gun on the ground and backed away slowly with my hands up. Those cops came in hot with the hero in their sights. Waaayyyyy to easy for misunderstandings to turn deadly.
SHAME on the police for discouraging this kind of good Samaritan intervention. They should be savagely condemned for their position.
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)
A good man did something that day and evil didn’t triumph. I for one consider him a hero without qualification.
As an aside, ever notice that doing something heroic usually means doing something stupid? Run into a burning building. Pretty stupid. Throw yourself on a grenade. Really stupid.
Some people are just too smart to be heros. Thank God not everyone is…
There’s doing the right thing, and doing the smart thing and sometimes, if we’re lucky, the two intersect
First we need to know what it was she said or did leading up to the alleged physical assault. Then we need to investigate his past, as in what state of mind was he in and why. Was he a victim of a troubled childhood? Did he not have caring teachers? Did he not get enough hugs? There are a lot of things that could explain that poor man’s behavior that particular day. Thankfully he was not approached by a white policeman at the outset. Things could have gone badly.
Good guy with a gun. We need more of them.
If the women being savagely beaten was Chief Mylett’s daughter, I wonder he would prefer witnesses to stand aside and call 911 while the beating continued.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find out this was an off duty police officer -being the primary reason he wasn’t arrested. Due to recent events, the fact possibly being withheld as police depts are having second thoughts about the public being aware of them pointing guns at black males.
He is just an American citizen who stopped a violent assault and the responding officers used personal discretion to determine that they only crime committed was the black Irishmen’s assault on a woman.
You can tell the concerned citizen was baptized by fire in his career in the military by his coolness and his positioning of himself leaving the only option for advancing on target with violent action. If that woman beating piece of garbage would have moved threateningly, he would have found out the decision to shoot was already made before his advancing motion.
“Due to recent events, the fact possibly being withheld as police depts are having second thoughts about the public being aware of them pointing guns at black males.”
Model31- If you are white your guilt is showing and if you are black your racism is shinning through with that statement. Cops point guns at black males because black males are the most violent segment of the population in our society. If I am attempted to be robbed in my city or violently assaulted it will be by a young black males with a pack mentality, a white trash tweeker, or an intoxicated Indian, which are the facts and why I carry a gun.
I would not have done as the “American citizen” did without a badge, union and blue curtain to stand between me and a jury.
You are kidding yourself if you believe police have not reconsidered when it is appropriate to use each level of force -at least on an individual basis. None of them want to be the next Darren Wilson.
“the facts and why I carry a gun.”
Members from every race break the law, but I’ve only seen recently demonstrations when black males have died. Some are Constitutionally protected protests, while others are destructive riots.
Some police are starting to realize that optics matter. There is more to PR than the overweight career police chief going down to the local 1st grade class and telling ‘the chirun’ that “police are their friends, you can trust us and tell us anything. Remember, you should always obey us.” Everyone can see how it looks when police wrestle an overweight man to the ground during a “resisted” arrest when a citation/summons to appear in court would do. Honestly, that crap needs to stop anyway. Arrests on a warrant are one thing. Officers escalating a situation -leaving themselves no alternative than physical and eventually deadly force for many misdemeanors is BS.
@JasonMfromSoDakota: I am happy to let you wonder what my race happens to be.
One thing that really bothered me when I viewed the original unedited video, when the police arrived, had the guy flat on the street, an officer gave what was obviously a loaded handgun a good kick to move it away from the guy. I know handguns are not supposed to go off unless you pull the trigger, but?????????? Pretty dumb move from my perspective.
Once (in training) I was ordered to drop my weapon; I replied “No sir; that’s unsafe and might damage it. I will place it on the ground, now.” And so I did.
Dunno if that’d work with the полиция, but my gut says “yes;” invoking Safety is generally well-respected.
We are all the (not so) well-regulated Militia, and therefor the Militia stopped an attack on (presumably) a U.S. Citizen.
Granting that it could’ve gone down better, it certainly went down well enough.
I HAVE intervened when a woman was being attacked by her “boyfriend”. No gun either. I was much(30years) younger and faster. Now? I was at a local gas station a few years ago and witnessed a pit bull trying to kill a black couple as they beat the crap out of it inside a van. I called 911 and got all kinds of abuse-why are you calling? name , address and blah blah blah…also near Chicago a lot of altercations could be pimp/ho crap. I am much MORE LIKELY TO INTERVENE WHEN A CHILD IS INVOLVED. I don’t think I’d do what this guy did. I’d call the PO-leece and take the 911abuse…no easy answer to this one.
I am Aaron, the guy with the handgun in this story. There are a great deal of incorrect assumptions here that I can not address since I would be here all night. If you look up ICE Training blogs there is a good piece written by Rob Pincus on the event. Furthermore, I will be on the Armed American Radio program on sunday at 8pm central to critically discuss the event which will hopefully result in some solid take aways. Anyone is also welcome to message me on Facebook as I am the only guy on the planet with this name. Cheers!
Nice work brother. I read the ICE blog write up and the write up at fundamental defense. Ice water in those veins man.
Just out of curiosity, what were you carrying and what is making you reconsider it?
I never got the comment notice so sorry for the 6 month delay! The gun I had that day was a Heckler and Koch 45C…. Great gun. After the fact I had started to wonder if a decocked DA/SA hammer fired gun was the best pick. I started to seriously consider a striker fired handgun and after giving Glock a try settled on my brand of choice with a HK VP9 LE model. I now alternate between the two. Hope this finds you well. Aaron
I wonder if Chief Mylett would feel the same if the woman had been a police officer.
Eh, pffft. WAPO. The only reason I read it is for Volokh, and he has an opt out if they mess with his quality and independence standards. I thought Bezos had the biz savvy to fix things there, but its obvious they are still doubking down on progtard agitprop. The comments sectiin is amusing, now that DU has gone so predictably insane.