Veteran With Concealed Carry Permit Shoots Back At Chicago Gunman

[KG1]

Well looky here.

Veteran With Concealed Carry Permit Shoots Back At Chicago Gunman

 

[The Keymaster]

In the usual fashion it appears that the media chose to ignore this incident. There is no mention of it in this article.

9 dead, 53 wounded over holiday weekend - Chicago Sun-Times

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Somebody places a container of alcohol on a vehicle that doesn't belong to them.
The owner (probably a little and rightfully PO'd), says something.
The shooter gets so mad because somebody is ticked off because somebody else placed something on their vehicle...
You go get a gun and open fire.....man, oh, man...Good for the vet-guy. I'm sad one of his companions got shot though.

 

[cobber]

Not only did the original thug open fire, but his posse did too. Sounds like a gang that need charged.

Let's see what the Cook County State's Attorney actually does.

I'm guessing pled down charges on the shooter, and no charges on the other dolts who fired on the vet and friends.

See plenty of folks coming out of Chicago with all sorts of offenses 'stricken with leave to reinstate'. Credit the city, however, they often forfeit the bond. Whew.

 

[Que]

"Had Friday’s shooting occurred a little more than a year ago, the veteran would not have been legally permitted to conceal carry his firearm."

 

[cobber]

BTW, did the initial attacker have a permit? His pals? Hmm....

 

[KG1]

"Had Friday’s shooting occurred a little more than a year ago, the veteran would not have been legally permitted to conceal carry his firearm."

That's the money quote Que.

 

[cobber]

"Had Friday’s shooting occurred a little more than a year ago, the veteran would not have been legally permitted to conceal carry his firearm."

That's the money quote Que.

Well, he could have used a shovel...

 

[KG1]

BTW, did the initial attacker have a permit? His pals? Hmm....

We all pretty much have an inclination that there was only one person involved that was legally able to carry a gun.

If it were still up to the antis that person would have most likely been the only one without a gun and they all could very well have been victims.

 

[KLB]

BTW, did the initial attacker have a permit? His pals? Hmm....

As it was in Chicago, IF the attacker had actually had one that is all we would be hearing about.

 

[Mark 1911]

Here is an example of an armed citizen changing the outcome and the mainstream media doesn't even tell the story. The police and the politicians have their answer, they just don't want to hear it. They are afraid to relinquish some misguided sense of control which they simply do not even have - the city is obviously out of control. How many more people need to be slaughtered before they listen?

 

[looney2ns]

Few things that come to mind.
Don't hang around stupid people doing stupid things. Especially at 2am.

Bottle on your car, remove it, keep your bacon hole shut, and move on.

Don't be an ass hat and cause other ass hats to get their panties in a wad.

Don't go to parties in the Chicago war zone.

Good for the vet in the end.

 

[ModernGunner]

If we let law-abiding citizens have guns, there'll be blood in the streets, I tell ya!!

Yeah, for a time, but fortunately it WON'T be the blood of the law-abiding citizen any longer. But, the scumbags will learn pretty fast that the good guys have guns, too.

I'm actually shocked the Vet hasn't been charged with... something, being it's Chicago and run by the liberal-loon democRATS.

for the Veteran.

 

[NyleRN]

Few things that come to mind.
Don't hang around stupid people doing stupid things. Especially at 2am.

Bottle on your car, remove it, keep your bacon hole shut, and move on.

Don't be an ass hat and cause other ass hats to get their panties in a wad.

Don't go to parties in the Chicago war zone.

Good for the vet in the end.

^^^This^^^

And just use some common sense. I know common sense isn't too common anymore. People would be amazed at how much nonsense wouldn't have to take place if they'd just keep their mouth shut and move on.

 

[pudly]

This can't be. I've been assured that no legal gun owner has ever stopped a criminal. This is pure fiction.

 

[Ericpwp]

This is not in the Chicago media. The tribes had an article I found when searching Google for the perps name, but I couldn't find it browsing or searching their site.

 

[jblomenberg16]

This is not in the Chicago media. The tribes had an article I found when searching Google for the perps name, but I couldn't find it browsing or searching their site.

While it is clear the media is very left leaning, and thus has an agenda to push, you also have to realize that many of these incidents that get plastered all over the national networks are done for one reason, and one reason only... to generate advertising revenue.

Just like INGO makes some money from the advertisers here, CNN.com, and all the other sights do as well. So, If you put your "business" hat on, the way to increase revenues is to increase traffic since many advertisers pay by the "click" so to speak (Greatly over simplified of course). The way to increase traffic is to have content that attracts visitors. What content is that? Well, it will certainly be any major national news types of stories (weather, natural disaster, politics, major global events, etc). But when those aren't enough to bring in the necessary hit volume, they turn to additional stories and emotional issues, such as the "great gun debate" that for all we know died last year some time, although it could come back up late in Obummer's final term, depending on how these mid-term congressional elections turn out.


Think for a minute, how many of us would have clicked on a story on CNN.com titled: 60 people died of natural causes in Chicago over the holiday weekend. Doctors examining patients to find out the leading cause of death, but no foul play is expected.

Pretty uninteresting story, right? But now change that to 60 people SHOT in Chicago over the weekend, and BOOM...instant hit volume. Put a follow up headline up that says "Chief blames gun laws" and now you have everyone in such a froth they can't wait to see what the latest claim for more gun laws might be.

People on the "left" hope this might be a tipping point to pass stricter gun laws that apply to everyone. People on the "right" don't understand how a city with some of the strictest laws around can possibly think more laws would really help!! People in the "middle" read the article and form an opinion about it based on the slant of the article.


What is interesting is that Chicago's chief wasn't asking for more gun laws , but rather:

McCarthy, reciting the criminal histories of several of the suspects in this weekend's violence, noted gang members face tougher consequences for losing their guns from their gangs than from authorities.

"These offenders need to be held fully accountable for violent behavior to prevent them from ending up back on the street too soon," he said, adding, "There's too many guns coming in and too little punishment going out."

In other words, he's saying that we need to either enforce the laws we have, or make sure the laws are tough enough on CRIMINALS that commit crimes with weapons.



So, I leave you with this...the reason you won't see a story about a Citizen that stopped a forcible felony with his legally owned firearm, is because 1) It won't sell adds, and 2) it doesn't help stir the pot and push their agenda.



Chicago's top cop: Blame weak gun laws for violence - CNN.com

 

[Ericpwp]

I think it has more to do with #2 than #1. They would click, I just don't think they want them clicking.

 

[Spike_351]

"Had Friday’s shooting occurred a little more than a year ago, the veteran would not have been legally permitted to conceal carry his firearm."

The wording in their statement made my head hurt....

Should have read " have not been permitted to carry his forearm" ok so he couldn't conceal carry it a year ago....wtf ever conceal carry is ( carry concealed maybe?) But what about carried a year ago, their lack of proof reading annoys me to no ends.

 

[Ericpwp]

I don't know what I would do if I wasn't permitted to carry my forearm.