I haven’t read all the comments, but I will say this… love it or hate it, it was a successful end to the situation, for everyone but those two.  Plus, the guy looks pretty well trained.  He easily could have killed those two, but instead he ran them off.  I don’t think I would have fired that last shot out the door, but who’s to say?  I don’t know what’s outside that door any more than most viewers do.See his actions at the end of the clip – he steps back into a better and safer position, looking out the closing door, he looks back into the room, and checks his weapon. That is some serious Three Stoogery, those two tripping over each other busting out the door.  LOL the crabwalk as one flees, he’s lucky to be alive.  And he didn’t shoot the glass! 

P.S.  Do you think the people of the State of Florida have to pay for their medical treatment?  Or did they have insurance?

Don’t I have a right to protect and defend myself (and others) from some old dude and his .38 and poor vision and a shaky hand? The logic fails at some point. More guns is not the answer… unless you work for the gun manufacturers.

Unless they happen to frequent illegal casinos, boozecans, whorehouses, crack dens, etc. Then they are a failing of two kinds, which do not cancel each other but are at least complimentary. 

By that I mean, the old man was just living his dream of being in a casino, strapped.

Florida is just stupid with that “stand your ground” asinine bullshit. Talk about a concept that promotes aggressive behaviour. 

Both places need fewer weapons and tougher restrictions on acquisition coupled with -lucrative- buy-back programs. No sub-tropical or tropical places should be so free and easy with weaponry.

For some reason boingboing is not letting me reply to you (reply link is hidden).

I am not saying it doesn’t happen. You are saying there are upwards to 50 times more legal gun carriers “snapping” than there are legal gun carriers doing something good. However, you continue to fail citing facts on this. You are using obvious statistics skewing by including all gun violence. If we include ALL gun violence, 50 times is not close.

Gun violence happens every day. However, gun violence by licensed carriers is kinda rare. Criminals are significantly less likely to follow the law to acquire a gun, let alone acquire license to carry it. This is the primary source of gun violence, and the only way your “50 times” statistic can work.

Now, if you still believe that there is 50 times more gun violence by licensed gun carriers than there is these “feel good” stories, please cite your sources.

BTW, in Texas, when a licensed gun carrier commits a crime involving a firearm, the instructor that signed off for his license is investigated. My instructor has been doing CHL courses for quite some time and had been responsible for licensing thousands of people in Texas. Up until the point where he signed off on my CHL, he had not faced any of these investigations. This seems to throw your point right back into your face.

I, personally, feel ENTITLED to my safety.  The only person I trust with it is myself.  I am highly trained, armed and unarmed, and fully capable of using either skillset in my defense, or the defense of others.

Aikido teaches (essentially) “fight without fighting.”  Tactical training teaches disciplined use of force with deadly weapons.  Both emphasize awareness and puissance over raw power.  

What we need is better training (for everyone), not “more laws.”

If you’re going to propose more laws, you really need to propose harsher PENALTY upon CRIMINALITY before you send up DEFENDERS OF THE PEACE for doing what I’m sure most of them believe is their CIVIC DUTY.  Misguided as his actions may be, the man stopping the robbery is automatically LESS GUILTY upon Her Scale than the perpetrators thereof.  Yes, absolutely penalize him – harshly – should he murder an innocent by his actions.  Yes, put him on home-arrest until the situation becomes clearer.  

But – don’t punish him simply for trying to stand up for what’s RIGHT.

Also, if robbery (or other crime) is “right” in your estimation, under any circumstance, then you are WRONG.  Period.  No debate.  There is ALWAYS a better way.

I would do the same, in that man’s shoes.  I am a defender.  I don’t carry, but I don’t need to – those chairs looked sturdy enough to serve as a distraction, at the least.  Chairs don’t generally break first; that would be the people hit by them.  Then I do have a gun (if it becomes necessary).  That one fellow turned his back for more than long enough.

The bottom line is that criminality is terrible.  I don’t care about your situation.  I don’t care about your upbringing.  Those are things you can change, if you swallow your pride long enough.

I guess it boils down for me into a broth of self-respect and quiet power:  I know that I could take the things I want – probably for a good long while; however, there is ALWAYS someone (or a gang of someones) “badder,” more powerful, meaner, more corrupt… than oneself.  In the end, it’s not worth meeting them (except perhaps to gloat at their trial).

You aren’t allowed to return fire on an assailant that isn’t a threat, but threat is determined deferentially in favor of defenders and even more so when the defender is a sworn citizen.

So… in brief, No, Nathan. If you are stupid enough to point a pistol (or a bat, for that matter) at a US policeman, your life continues at their discretion if you do anything other than disarm and capitulate to commands in very, VERY short order.

Running, though, could mean anything.

Canada’s stats only suggest there are more than one way to limit gun violence.
 One seems to be limiting guns, and the other, may be taking your agression out by watching hocky and drinking beek while eating maple syrup.   Or maybe its socialized medicine.  

They would probably grimace if you walked in intending to only play starcraft for $5 an hour