Here you go DU, one of those good guy with a gun stories. Sarcasm warning.

[Comfortably_Numb]

KTRK. According to Houston Police, the man pulled into the restaurant to grab a shirt from his trunk. He said that's when a man armed with a gun walked up to him and tried to rob him.

Police said the victim went to grab his own gun to defend himself when the suspect started shooting him. The victim was shot a total of seven times, according to investigators, and was hit in his chest, both of his legs and his hand.

[Chainfire]

1. So instead of becoming a redneck hero

He gets to spend some quality time in surgery. He should have given up the billfold.

[LakeArenal]

2. Probably life long complications, too.

“All for a little bit of money”.

[Chainfire]

7. I really doubt that it was about the money.

It is, more likely, about macho-cowboy attitude. He was willing to shoot a man over the contents of his pocket book and it cost him dearly. We all make decisions every day and I bet he wished he had that one back.

I would never be willing to shoot a man over "stuff," but there are a lot of armed folks out there that are perfectly willing to shoot someone for attempting to steal their lawn furniture.

[LisaL]

11. The man (the robber) was perfectly willing to shoot him.

I don't have any problem with robber being shot. It looks like he was. I hope the victim got him good.

[Chainfire]

22. Do you have crystal balls?

You do not have a clue what the robber would have done if the victim handed over his billfold.
One thing certain, the robber fought back when the victim pulled a gun on him.

[LisaL]

25. Robber fought back?

I am amazed at the absurdity of some posts on this thread. You can't claim self-defense when committing a felony.

[Chainfire]

27. Yea, he fought back. No one said it was justified, but it certainly to be expected.

I assume that the robber had presented the gun in the robbery attempt. Old victim's best bet would have been give it up.

When the victim presented a gun it assured that there would be bullets flying. Do you think that the victim thought that the robber would have stood there and took his shots it like a man because he was in the wrong?

Maybe the victim thought he was Wild Bill Hickock when he was, in fact, more like Barney Fife.

This whole argument is over judgement. I think that the victim used poor judgement and paid the cost. End of story.

[LisaL]

28. You don't have to assume anything since it's all on video.

NT

[Chainfire]

29. I haven't watched the video and don't intend to

So I would ask, "Are you arguing with something I said or just arguing?"

Don't bother, I am done here. I think I have full measure of those that I have responded to.
I wish Hop Along a full recovery and more range time.

[ancianita]

38. Yep, you're right. I had to "do my own research."

Here's the link that didn't appear in the OP.

https://abc13.com/man-shot-7-times-fountain-view-houston-armed-robbery-fast-food-restaurant-crime-texas/10789250/

[LakeArenal]

20. The quote applies to either one.

[alphafemale]

3. Once someone already has a gun drawn on you.

You must be living in a Hollywood fantasy to think you can retake the advantage.

[RegularJam]

4. Idiot. nt

[doc03]

5. Don't think we will hear that one on Faux News. n/t

[sarisataka]

6. So a man minding his own business

Is shot multiple time by someone connected to other violent robberies.

But the victim was armed therefore... Cool? Or something?

[Chainfire]

8. No one is defending the robber

We are laughing at the victim for making a stupid decision that got him shot.....several times.

[LisaL]

10. I really don't know as to WTF is so funny here.

By the way it looks like he managed to shoot the robber too. I don't think the robber is laughing.
https://www.khou.com/article/news/crime/robbery-suspect-wanted-houston-fountain-view/285-4160307b-bf10-4b27-82e4-852d3970d0b3

[Chainfire]

23. Why is it "funny?"

Because almost all humor is based on someone else's discomfort.

Ironic may have been a better choice of words, but I am willing to defend "funny."

Karma bit the victim square in the butt, he tired to break bad and got his ass shot off. He decided to live by the gun and he almost died by the gun. I am laughing at him because he is a damn fool; it is the same reason I laughed over Trump's wardrobe last week.

Self defense is one thing, gunfighting over a billfold is something else. I just hope that he shootee had insurance so that I don't have to pay for his damn treatment. Would the victim have gotten shot after giving up his billfold? We will never know, but he sure got shot trying to keep it.

Make no mistake, I hope that the robber gets served up a full meal of justice and spends the main part of his remaining time on this earth behind bars just where he belongs. As far as I am concerned, the "victim" can be forever known as the slowest gun in the West.

[sarisataka]

12. Agreed, no one is defending the robber

Nor is anyone condemning his use of a gun. You know, to commit a violent felony and attempt to murder his victim.

"We are laughing at the victim" - victims of violent crimes are funny? Why has Clayton Williams popped into my head?

[LisaL]

14. Well, it sure looks like some here feel bad that poor robber got shot.

NT

[sarisataka]

18. I suppose

That poor man was just trying to honestly rob what he thought was a helpless victim. But rather than drop to his knees and beg the macho redneck decided to be a fool and fight back... the robber is the real victim here. Strangely he is not a gun fetishist nor apparently is his carrying and use of a gun objectionable.

Is there ANY other situation where it is acceptable to laugh at the victim's injuries?

[Chainfire]

24. Where do you see that?

[Thomas Hurt]

9. The gun fetishists think they live in a 50s western where...

they are good guys and they are the quickest to draw, always hit what they shoot at and never piss themselves.

[LisaL]

13. Victim was minding his own business, until an armed robber approached him.

That same robber was apparently involved in a previous robbery attempt, where he shot at people trying to run away from him.

[Thomas Hurt]

15. so you are saying if you are the victim of crime you can't do something fool hardy during it?

[LisaL]

17. Do you think that when approached by an armed robber, compliance is going to guarantee

you won't get shot?

[Dr. Strange]

34. Victim-blaming isn't a good look.

[sarisataka]

16. Perhaps it would have been better

If the victim died? It might have been a better lesson to the gun fetishists? It's much safer to passively piss yourself.

[Beastly Boy]

19. Perhaps it would have been better if neither one of them had guns.

Perhaps in this case neither the crime nor the response would have occurred.

It seems obvious to me that the OP was posted to illustrate the utter absurdity of the "good guy with a gun" vs "bad guy with a gun" myth.

[sarisataka]

21. Has no one ever been robbed except at gun point?

If it was a robbery with a knife, club, bigger person vs a smaller person there would be a host of posters praising the victim's bravery and wishing them speedy recovery from their injuries.

But the victim uses a gun? "We are laughing at the victim" (One of the most honest statements I have ever seen someone make, even if I find the sentiment reprehensible)

If the purpose was to disprove the myth, it failed utterly. True the victim was injured however without the gun he was at the mercy of a violent felon who may have decided it was a good evening to add murder to his resume. He was obviously not adverse to killing.

[Beastly Boy]

30. That's a pretty poor, although predictable comeback.

We are talking about a "good guy with a gun vs a bad guy with a gun" myth here. So diverting from the subject into a discussion of weapons of choice in robberies misses the point, even if the numbers of robberies committed with a firearm is likely to outweigh the number of robberies committed with all other weapons combined.

And, while this is obviously not a laughing matter for me no matter how hard you try to lump my response with other responses unrelated to me or my post, it absolutely illustrates the laughably (hence the laughing coming from some corners, I guess) ridiculous "good guy with a gun" narrative. I hope I am making myself clear: I am not commenting on the merits of the two parties using firearms for their own respective ends, nor am I passing judgment on either one of them. I, like the OP, am commenting on the outcome, which, clearly, did not go well for the "good guy with a gun". And, judging by the damage inflicted in the skirmish, the bad guy clearly came up on top. Please try to stay on subject.

[sarisataka]

31. The diversion began with your statement

Perhaps in this case neither the crime nor the response would have occurred.

I was responding to the implication that a gun is necessary to have a robbery. According to the FBI (2017 data) your speculation that guns outnumbered other weapons is true for armed robbery. Of approximately 101k armed robberies about 82k involved firearms. However the total number of robberies was 317k so clearly a gun is not required.

As for lumping you in with those who made the statements, I did not attribute any of the statements to you but you chose to interject yourself into the middle of a conversation on the "side" of those making such statements.

[Beastly Boy]

32. Don't be so modest!

The diversion began with your dive into speculations about the hypothetical death of the victim. It was hardly related to the post you replied to, which prompted my own hypothetical, a hypothetical that, despite being pretty obvious, didn't appear occur to you. I was trying, evidently in vain, to redirect your wondering thoughts back to the subject of the post you were replying to, which was, concurrent with the OP, about the "good guy with a gun" myth.. Well, no good deed goes unpunished.

And I did not imply that the gun is necessary for a robbery. In fact, the part you quote states explicitly, with no hint of being implicit, that a gun was both a motivating and an aggravating factor on both sides in the robbery and the violence that followed, to the demonstrable detriment of the "good guy with a gun". And, as you discovered yourself, the same sentiment applies to 82% of armed robberies. But that was not my point, I just happened to be right on the subject. Nor did I take "sides" with those who were, in your words, "laughing at the victim". Once again, I explicitly stated that my "side" only includes those who illustrate just how detached from reality the "good guy with a gun" nonsense is. Funny how hard you are trying to avoid THAT subject.

[sarisataka]

33. I rarely comment on anything the NRA says

Nor do I typically bother to refute obviously false statements.

However since you expressed interest- the "good guy with a gun" statement is, as most absolute statements, patently false. There are many instances of a person with a gun stopped by people using other weapons or even unarmed. Even if one has a gun there is no guarantee the "bad guy" will be stopped.

Also for some unknown reason people have mentally added a correlation that a gun prevents its user from being harmed. This case illustrates that fallacy.

OTH statistics show that if faced with an armed attacker, victims fair best if they have firearms themselves. Victims are less likely to be killed and injuries are less than comparable unarmed victims.

These big picture statistics however conceal some important caveats. Simply carrying a gun does not automatically equate to proficiency. As one quote said, the source escapes me, having a gun makes you a gunfighter the same as owning a guitar makes you a musician.

More important than even than skill is the willingness to use a gun against another person to defend yourself. All the skill in the world is useless if when faced with a threat you cannot pull the trigger. There are many people who, even in a life and death situation, are completely unable to harm another person. I don't fault anyone in this category, in fact they are probably some of the best of humanity, but I would say they should never carry a weapon they can never use.

[Beastly Boy]

35. It is refreshing to see a post that is not only to the point, but also,

if I understand you correctly, rejects the NRA propaganda. The presumption that a good guy with a gun is the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is, indeed, nonsense. I am not aware of any statistical data that shows rates of survival of an armed good guy being attacked by an armed bad guy, but logic suggests that the introduction of any gun, in anyone's possession, under any circumstances that may prompt its use, whether it ends up being used or not, significantly elevates the odds of injury to all parties, including unsuspecting bystanders, good samaritans and law enforcement.

As you correctly pointed out, who ends up being the bigger victim in such confrontations depends on many factors that are unknown at the time of a confrontation. The only known outcome is that there will be damage. This was exactly my point when I suggested that "Perhaps it would have been better if neither one of them had guns." As far as I can see, this is the only scenario that has a snowflake's chance in hell to minimize damage, if not prevent the crime.

[sarisataka]

36. The NRA and I parted ways after Sandy Hook

They were gifted an opportunity to take the lead on responsible gun ownership and rejecting gun violence. Instead of becoming the top organization in promoting gun related rights and control (at the same time!) they spouted nonsense.

IMO the biggest mistake the victim made was one far too common in our modern world- lack of situational awareness. He was oblivious to the threat until he was far behind the curve. At that point it may have been better to give up the wallet.

Personally I have faced two robbery attempts. Neither assailant displayed a weapon and both times i was armed. However since I saw the situations developing i was able to use de-escalation before all options were removed. In neither case did I give them anything nor were they aware they were facing an armed victim. A gun is always the LAST resort when everything else has gone to shit; the best option is to never reach that point.