Open carry incident

[sig-guy]

No parents seem to be around or show up.
Worker gets agitated and asks the guy to leave.
Manager/worker takes child to the back.

Could it be the managers child?

 

[Hammerhead]

Mackey, I think you're missing the point. It's not that the people here on INGO are so callous that they believe that kids SHOULD be elbowed in the head, but in this case, the incidental contact of the elbow to the head was only due to the physical reaction from the motion of the arm.

It's unfortunate that the kid was hurt, but what is a normal human physical reaction just happened to end with a knock to the noggin.

The hope, however, is that the unfortunate knock to the noggin is a learning point for the kid.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Mackey,

I'm not quite sure how to start this.... I'm tempted to say, "Sorry, but...", but the truth is, I'm not sorry at all. IMHO, you're dead wrong with the points you make in this thread. Had the gent with the cool looking holster not been aware of his weapon, he'd not have felt the contact. Had he not felt the contact, the kid would not have caught the elbow to his head.... but quite possibly, the gun could have been taken from its owner and possibly misused/abused. The owner took responsibility for securing it quickly and effectively.

Are you familiar with Kathy Jackson's website, corneredcat.com? In her introduction, she describes how a cat reacts when trapped in what she feels to be a bad situation. To wit: She leaves. Quickly, efficiently, effectively, and while she's not intentionally trying to maliciously cause any harm to anyone, she also doesn't let that someone else is in her way stop her or even slow her down. If her claws are used, it's solely in an effort to remove herself from whatever situation she sees as "bad". I'm not a big fan of feline pets, but I da*n sure respect that attitude.

This gun owner found himself rapidly placed in this situation; I imagine that it probably went from something like, "Hmm... hungry... hey, cool, McD's. I'll grab a Big Mac." to something that doesn't require conscious thought, but amounts to "Hand on gun! Cover! Defend!" and that's what he did. One of my co-workers had similar happen to him in a walmart, and his training ended up putting someone in a wrist lock. The upshot of it all is, "You are NOT getting my gun without a fight, but if you're not trying to, you won't get the fight, either."

As someone else alluded, this kid was 10-ish. Presumably, if an 18 year old hand ended up on your gun, you'd react to it and prevent it being taken. From your posts in this thread, doing the same to a 10 year old is unacceptable. I have to ask you, then, when does it become OK to quickly, efficiently, and effectively, by the least-violent-possible means, stop someone between ages 10 and 18 who is attempting to possibly take what is yours?

Or is it simply that you disagree with OC and are looking for a way to demonize someone who engaged in that practice? If so, we have a whole long thread for that. IIRC, it's at the top of this forum.

I do not normally OC. One reason for that is that I didn't, for a very long time, have a retention holster that I considered a bare minimum necessity to OC. In short, I'm not comfortable OCing most of the time. That said, I support 100% the right of people to do so, and especially to do it without someone self-righteously proclaiming them to be morons, show-offs, or other similar terms.

This gun owner used the necessary, and only the necessary force to end a threat. I can't even fault him for leaving, if he was told by someone who worked there to "leave. Now.", as to not do so invites a criminal trespassing charge. The fault in this case is not his for not securing, nor is it his for entering a place he had as much right to be as anyone else. The fault is not his that the kid was entering his personal space and committing a battery upon his person, possibly with ill intent. (we'll never know on that last point.)

The fault rests clearly with the guilty party here, or with those responsible for him, and that is the young person and/or his parents who should have taught him better. His ignorance could have resulted in harm befalling him, and if it had, they'd have had no one to rightly blame but themselves.

And for what it's worth, I'd say the same if it was his gun, his Bible, his wallet, watch, or his Gay Pride rainbow necklace, if he had one. No one has any business messing with someone else's property, and if you don't know that by age 6 or so, then your parents should (figuratively speaking) have the crap smacked out of them.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[Harleyrider_50]

The kid deserved it?
Seriously. It's a kid for God's sake.
He was probably brought up by loving parents and was not use to violence.
Perhaps he's parents should have warmed him about gun nuts??!!
This gun owner should have been more aware of his surroundings.
He was in a place where they have Happy Meals and "Play Places" ... Kids all around.
Good job letting someone sneak up on you dumba$$ and not securing your weapon.

I won't stand in line to defend this dummy. Sorry.

This is not an OP CC issue. This is a stupid gun owner issue.

The kid may have deserved a stern warning, punishment from parents ...
but not a friggin elbow to the head!
A kid that age could have serious issues from this. This blow would be enough, easily, to cause a sub-dural hematoma which could cause DEATH among other things.

And some of you think he deserves it.
You are messed up.

An adult, criminal or other BG may deserve something like this ... but an innocent child?

I am not suggesting.
I am stating that the gun owner was at fault for not being aware of his surrounds.


Also, we don't know the kids actual age. The OP stated he was 9 or 10 ... that's his guess.
Are you sure the kids was not mentally challenged?
Again, what I'm saying is that the fool with the gun was at fault for not securing his weapon but especially for not being aware that someone was making a move towards his piece. The dummy needs some remedial training.

The stupid decision was to open carry in a McDonalds full of kids and not be aware of your gun. The gun has no business carrying if he can't stop and thing, "Hey, maybe I'll make sure my weapon is secure in this place filled with kids.


He Should be aware of anything or anyone coming near his weapon or he should secure it properly I didn't say he need to have 360 degree awareness. Please don't put words in my mouth.


We all know it's not acceptable to touch someones stuff. But it's a child for GOD's Sake. If you would take the time to try to understand my position, it was that I was miffed that some think the child DESERVES an elbow to the head. Maybe a whipping with a belt but an elbow to the head no.


Obviously the OCer should not be carrying in a McDonalds. Either we need to pass laws against kids being in McDonalds or gun owners need to wise the hell up.


If he was aware who had touched his gun, I'd hope that he wouldn't plant an elbow on a kid's forehead and knock him down. Clearly he was not aware.


You don't have to be an ass about it. There's no need to disparage a member here. Unless you have arguements that are that weak.
I expected more from you.

And my point is that I have a problem with gun owners stating that a kids deserves an elbow to the head. Some of these quotes in this thread would make great fodder for anti-gunners in articles promoting a national prohibition on OC.

FAIL,dude........all points..........


Leave you EDC @ home ,now on out................

 

[futurefrogman]

I would guess this kid had terrible parents. At that age, they should know not to touch a stranger or their property.

This^^ I wouldn't be surprised if he grows up talking about how dangerous guns are and how they hurt him either...

 

[churchmouse]

Mackey,

I'm not quite sure how to start this.... I'm tempted to say, "Sorry, but...", but the truth is, I'm not sorry at all. IMHO, you're dead wrong with the points you make in this thread. Had the gent with the cool looking holster not been aware of his weapon, he'd not have felt the contact. Had he not felt the contact, the kid would not have caught the elbow to his head.... but quite possibly, the gun could have been taken from its owner and possibly misused/abused. The owner took responsibility for securing it quickly and effectively.

Are you familiar with Kathy Jackson's website, corneredcat.com? In her introduction, she describes how a cat reacts when trapped in what she feels to be a bad situation. To wit: She leaves. Quickly, efficiently, effectively, and while she's not intentionally trying to maliciously cause any harm to anyone, she also doesn't let that someone else is in her way stop her or even slow her down. If her claws are used, it's solely in an effort to remove herself from whatever situation she sees as "bad". I'm not a big fan of feline pets, but I da*n sure respect that attitude.

This gun owner found himself rapidly placed in this situation; I imagine that it probably went from something like, "Hmm... hungry... hey, cool, McD's. I'll grab a Big Mac." to something that doesn't require conscious thought, but amounts to "Hand on gun! Cover! Defend!" and that's what he did. One of my co-workers had similar happen to him in a walmart, and his training ended up putting someone in a wrist lock. The upshot of it all is, "You are NOT getting my gun without a fight, but if you're not trying to, you won't get the fight, either."

As someone else alluded, this kid was 10-ish. Presumably, if an 18 year old hand ended up on your gun, you'd react to it and prevent it being taken. From your posts in this thread, doing the same to a 10 year old is unacceptable. I have to ask you, then, when does it become OK to quickly, efficiently, and effectively, by the least-violent-possible means, stop someone between ages 10 and 18 who is attempting to possibly take what is yours?

Or is it simply that you disagree with OC and are looking for a way to demonize someone who engaged in that practice? If so, we have a whole long thread for that. IIRC, it's at the top of this forum.

I do not normally OC. One reason for that is that I didn't, for a very long time, have a retention holster that I considered a bare minimum necessity to OC. In short, I'm not comfortable OCing most of the time. That said, I support 100% the right of people to do so, and especially to do it without someone self-righteously proclaiming them to be morons, show-offs, or other similar terms.

This gun owner used the necessary, and only the necessary force to end a threat. I can't even fault him for leaving, if he was told by someone who worked there to "leave. Now.", as to not do so invites a criminal trespassing charge. The fault in this case is not his for not securing, nor is it his for entering a place he had as much right to be as anyone else. The fault is not his that the kid was entering his personal space and committing a battery upon his person, possibly with ill intent. (we'll never know on that last point.)

The fault rests clearly with the guilty party here, or with those responsible for him, and that is the young person and/or his parents who should have taught him better. His ignorance could have resulted in harm befalling him, and if it had, they'd have had no one to rightly blame but themselves.

And for what it's worth, I'd say the same if it was his gun, his Bible, his wallet, watch, or his Gay Pride rainbow necklace, if he had one. No one has any business messing with someone else's property, and if you don't know that by age 6 or so, then your parents should (figuratively speaking) have the crap smacked out of them.



Blessings,
Bill

Well said and I agree.
What was a young (8/10ish) doing un-chaperoned.
Children need boundary's and attention at that age.
If they are not confined to those boundary's things like this happen.

Mentally challenged....then where in the hell was his parent/guardian??????

As stated......a wrist lock would have been the minimum this foolish youngster would have received. Could have been far worse.
In our regular training we use this scenario and what to do in defending personal space/firearm. Muscle memory from regular training is a real biatch when you are on the receiving end of it.
If one is silly enough to trigger your training then, well, they win the stupid prize.

 

[Pyriel]

Aside from the man having to go somewhere else for food , this really was the feel good story of the morning. Nothing like lurking INGO to start your day.

 

[dusterboy49]

If someone is attempting to take your weapon from you from behind, would you attempt to turn around first and identify whom it was?
No, you would react in a positive manner to discourage the person(s) from doing so!
Sorry Mackay, can't agree with you on this one.

 

[Mark 1911]

The only thing the OCer did wrong in my opinion is to leave. I wish he would have taken his food to his seat and eaten his lunch. The kid should know better than to touch anything belonging to a stranger. I expect something very similar may have transpired had the kid laid hands on a woman's purse.

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

Sorry for asking if it was a spoof, YSYEO. I meant no harm. Been a bunch of that going on here lately and then add in the Vincennes thread...

Anyway, no excuse and I apologize.

No, it's my fault. I was misunderstanding you and was oblivious to boot. I thought people were thinking that I made this up and couldn't understand why. I apologize to everybody for going off half-cocked. I made a crack about the paranoia zone and then find that I am talking about myself! I did say "some people"..... There is room for me in that statement.

 

[Mark 1911]

The kid deserved it?
Seriously. It's a kid for God's sake.
He was probably brought up by loving parents and was not use to violence.
Perhaps he's parents should have warmed him about gun nuts??!!
This gun owner should have been more aware of his surroundings.
He was in a place where they have Happy Meals and "Play Places" ... Kids all around.
Good job letting someone sneak up on you dumba$$ and not securing your weapon.

I won't stand in line to defend this dummy. Sorry.

This is not an OP CC issue. This is a stupid gun owner issue.

The kid may have deserved a stern warning, punishment from parents ...
but not a friggin elbow to the head!
A kid that age could have serious issues from this. This blow would be enough, easily, to cause a sub-dural hematoma which could cause DEATH among other things.

And some of you think he deserves it.
You are messed up.

An adult, criminal or other BG may deserve something like this ... but an innocent child?

I must respectfully disagree with you on this one. The elbow to the head was not intentional, it was accidental. I think the OCer reacted correctly. What else was he supposed to do, take the time to turn around to see who was messing with his weapon? A reaction like that one could be much more dangerous for everyone in the vicinity if someone was really intending to disarm the OCer. A 9 or 10 year old should know better than to reach out and touch anything belonging to a stranger, gun or not.

 

[Caleb]

The only thing the OCer did wrong in my opinion is to leave. I wish he would have taken his food to his seat and eaten his lunch. The kid should know better than to touch anything belonging to a stranger. I expect something very similar may have transpired had the kid laid hands on a woman's purse.

No...if you were in this guy's situation, and were ask/told to leave, you better do it.

 

[Mark 1911]

No...if you were in this guy's situation, and were ask/told to leave, you better do it.

I believe the OP described that he was asked to "walk away now" by the employee serving him, which is not the same thing as being asked to leave. Besides, if someone is going to ask you to leave, it should be the manager, although if I were in that situation, I would likely leave on the request of an employee.

 

[nakinate]

So Mackey, we should not OC in McDonald's? Why not? Honestly, I still don't see how the OCer did anything wrong. The gun was holstered and he reacted swiftly to an attempted gun grab. You're forgetting that the OCer was the victim of an attempted disarmament. Without eyes in the back of his head, he reacted appropriately. It's too bad that is was a kid that did it and received the elbow, but that's life. And BTW, a belt to the backside can get you thrown in jail nowadays.

 

[olhorseman]

I can't imagine how much worse this situation would have been if the kid's parent had been present and had looked up just in time to see their child take an elbow to the head from someone standing over the kid with a holstered gun. They had not seen the child reaching for the gun - only the elbow head shot and the child on the floor.

 

[billybob44]

Can see it now...

I can't imagine how much worse this situation would have been if the kid's parent had been present and had looked up just in time to see their child take an elbow to the head from someone standing over the kid with a holstered gun. They had not seen the child reaching for the gun - only the elbow head shot and the child on the floor.

+1 on this ^^...Here is how that would go down:

"Mama I don't do nothin-THIS MF cracker het me in the heid fo no rasin at all--I's jst standing ther and he heet me in the heid"

(This IS the language use that IS proper, and condoned in Indianapolis Public Schools "Children".)

Yes, this IS what you would hear in THAT McDonalds--I was in that same place last week. I, as normal was CC, with a jacket over, the whole time that I was @ the order counter, I had my right hand in my pocket with my right elbow 'tucked' against my carry piece.

I would say-MY opinion ONLY-that OC would have increased the interest of the 'Locals' to my weapon...Again MY opinion ONLY!!..Bill.

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

People could be tempted to say that the open carry of a firearm precipitated this happening. I can't help but wonder if concealed carry is the real culprit. Let me try to explain the concept that is dawning on me.

Lots of people are carrying guns. They could be more common than we realize, but most people (including me) conceal their gun. To see a gun in public is really quite a novel experience. I am thinking that the novelty of seeing a guy who is strapped just like Marshal Dillon is the real culprit here. I am not talking about the presence of the gun, I am talking about it being so unusual. If this kid saw as many guns hanging out as he did wristwatches, for example, then there would be no fascination or temptation upon seeing it.

We all agree that the kid should know to keep his hands to himself. Even still, I didn't see him reaching out to finger a nice wristwatch or a big cowboy belt buckle. Both of those things are commonly seen in any crowd, but a nice leather holster is not. Perhaps the kid was incredulous at the sight and just had to prove to himself that it was indeed a real gun. That doesn't excuse what he did, but it does explain it.

Now the soccer moms might say "See there? Everyone should hide their guns!". But wait up, We don't hide our flashy watches or our macho belt buckles. If guns were as commonly seen, then the effect would be the same as with the watches...... Nobody would care. The open carry guy didn't precipitate what happened by packing his gun into McDonalds. I precipitated it by having mine in my pocket. I was sitting right there with a gun too, But nobody knew that.

There are places that prohibit concealed carry of a firearm. I have considered that strange, but now I am reconsidering. Those places don't prohibit carrying a gun, they prohibit hiding one. I still have questions regarding the constitutionality of telling me how to carry my gun, but I am beginning to understand better why they do so. To carry a gun in those jurisdictions you need to be committed to it. People like me who conceal mainly for laziness are banned.

Just some thoughts that are dawning on me. I haven't figured out what the bottom line is, but I am studying on it.

 

[olhorseman]

+1 on this ^^...Here is how that would go down:

"Mama I don't do nothin-THIS MF cracker het me in the heid fo no rasin at all--I's jst standing ther and he heet me in the heid"

(This IS the language use that IS proper, and condoned in Indianapolis Public Schools "Children".)
And in My opinion Only - your way is the responsible way for a gun owner to exercise their right and protect all gun owner's rights.
Yes, this IS what you would hear in THAT McDonalds--I was in that same place last week. I, as normal was CC, with a jacket over, the whole time that I was @ the order counter, I had my right hand in my pocket with my right elbow 'tucked' against my carry piece.

I would say-MY opinion ONLY-that OC would have increased the interest of the 'Locals' to my weapon...Again MY opinion ONLY!!..Bill.

And in My opinion Only, your way demonstrates the responsible way of exercising (and protecting) our rights. With any right comes great responsibilities!

 

[eldirector]

AHA! NOW we are on to something.

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

AHA! NOW we are on to something.

Wise elder with eight thousand posts, What are we onto? I have been looking for somebody with insight on the hidden lessons to be learned here! You know something, spill it!