"The suspect did not make any statements but swung the hatchet at the customer and then went behind the counter and attacked the clerk," the sheriff's office said.
Then, the customer fired back, according to the sheriff's office. Paramedics tried to resuscitate the suspect, authorities said, but he died at the scene.
The customer, a 60-year-old man, had a concealed pistol license, according to the sheriff's office. He was not injured.
7-Eleven customer shoots man who attacked store clerk - CNN.com
Concealed Carry Story
Concealed Carry Story
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Concealed Carry Story
flopstock;1493699 wrote: 7-Eleven customer shoots man who attacked store clerk - CNN.com
Just to be extremely picky but how could he have fired back when he had not been fired upon?
Just to be extremely picky but how could he have fired back when he had not been fired upon?
Concealed Carry Story
Bryn Mawr;1493700 wrote: Just to be extremely picky but how could he have fired back when he had not been fired upon?
I think he fired back at the guy who swung the hatchet at him.
I think he fired back at the guy who swung the hatchet at him.
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Concealed Carry Story
flopstock;1493702 wrote: I think he fired back at the guy who swung the hatchet at him.
No, he fired at him, he cannot have fired back at him.
No, he fired at him, he cannot have fired back at him.
Concealed Carry Story
Fired back as in he reacted to the hatchet man, hatcheting. He didn't have a concealed hatchet license.
Have you never read a book where someone "called him an SOB" and he fired back "no you're the SOB"?
On another note: Chill Spot some of the grammatical errors were on purpose.. he he
Have you never read a book where someone "called him an SOB" and he fired back "no you're the SOB"?
On another note: Chill Spot some of the grammatical errors were on purpose.. he he
Concealed Carry Story
YZGI;1493708 wrote: Fired back as in he reacted to the hatchet man, hatcheting. He didn't have a concealed hatchet license.
Well, he didn't need a conceal permit for the hatchet, since he apparently was not concealing it.
Well, he didn't need a conceal permit for the hatchet, since he apparently was not concealing it.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Concealed Carry Story
LarsMac;1493712 wrote: Well, he didn't need a conceal permit for the hatchet, since he apparently was not concealing it.
Good point
Good point
Concealed Carry Story
Egads! You can't even go in for a cup of coffee these days! Kinda supports my feelings about concealed weapons for defense. Without it there might have been 2 beheaded people in that 7-Eleven
The discussion over the use of "fired back" prompted me to search for a more suitable verb and I found 'retaliated' which basically says the same thing but rarely could have a more particular meaning. Perhaps a better choice of words would have been "The customer, taking defensive action, took the hatchet man out, iced him, eliminated," etc..
British Dictionary definitions for retaliated
retaliate
/rɪˈtælɪˌeɪt/
verb
1.
(intransitive) to take retributory action, esp by returning some injury or wrong in kind
2.
(intransitive) to cast (accustations) back upon a person
3.
(transitive) (rare) to avenge (an injury, wrong, etc)
The discussion over the use of "fired back" prompted me to search for a more suitable verb and I found 'retaliated' which basically says the same thing but rarely could have a more particular meaning. Perhaps a better choice of words would have been "The customer, taking defensive action, took the hatchet man out, iced him, eliminated," etc..
British Dictionary definitions for retaliated
retaliate
/rɪˈtælɪˌeɪt/
verb
1.
(intransitive) to take retributory action, esp by returning some injury or wrong in kind
2.
(intransitive) to cast (accustations) back upon a person
3.
(transitive) (rare) to avenge (an injury, wrong, etc)
Concealed Carry Story
ZAP;1493744 wrote: Egads! You can't even go in for a cup of coffee these days! Kinda supports my feelings about concealed weapons for defense. Without it there might have been 2 beheaded people in that 7-Eleven
The discussion over the use of "fired back" prompted me to search for a more suitable verb and I found 'retaliated' which basically says the same thing but rarely could have a more particular meaning. Perhaps a better choice of words would have been "The customer, taking defensive action, took the hatchet man out, iced him, eliminated," etc..
British Dictionary definitions for retaliated
retaliate
/rɪˈtælɪˌeɪt/
verb
1.
(intransitive) to take retributory action, esp by returning some injury or wrong in kind
2.
(intransitive) to cast (accustations) back upon a person
3.
(transitive) (rare) to avenge (an injury, wrong, etc)
Being a simple soul I'd say "fired at" but "retaliated" is a nice, woody, word
The discussion over the use of "fired back" prompted me to search for a more suitable verb and I found 'retaliated' which basically says the same thing but rarely could have a more particular meaning. Perhaps a better choice of words would have been "The customer, taking defensive action, took the hatchet man out, iced him, eliminated," etc..
British Dictionary definitions for retaliated
retaliate
/rɪˈtælɪˌeɪt/
verb
1.
(intransitive) to take retributory action, esp by returning some injury or wrong in kind
2.
(intransitive) to cast (accustations) back upon a person
3.
(transitive) (rare) to avenge (an injury, wrong, etc)
Being a simple soul I'd say "fired at" but "retaliated" is a nice, woody, word
Concealed Carry Story
Shooting over one's shoulder could be regarded as firing back.
Concealed Carry Story
FourPart;1493757 wrote: Shooting over one's shoulder could be regarded as firing back.
lol
lol
Concealed Carry Story
FourPart;1493757 wrote: Shooting over one's shoulder could be regarded as firing back.
Oh dear, very good - I didn't see that one coming
Oh dear, very good - I didn't see that one coming
Concealed Carry Story
Bryn Mawr;1493745 wrote: Being a simple soul I'd say "fired at" but "retaliated" is a nice, woody, word
Like using a deadly weapon for vengeance retaliation is a criminal offence.
9A.16.010
Definitions.
In this chapter, unless a different meaning is plainly required:
(1) "Necessary" means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.
(2) "Deadly force" means the intentional application of force through the use of firearms or any other means reasonably likely to cause death or serious physical injury.
[1986 c 209 § 1; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.010.]
9A.16.020
Use of force—When lawful.
The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;
(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;
(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;
Wahington State
Like using a deadly weapon for vengeance retaliation is a criminal offence.
9A.16.010
Definitions.
In this chapter, unless a different meaning is plainly required:
(1) "Necessary" means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.
(2) "Deadly force" means the intentional application of force through the use of firearms or any other means reasonably likely to cause death or serious physical injury.
[1986 c 209 § 1; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.010.]
9A.16.020
Use of force—When lawful.
The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;
(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;
(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;
Wahington State
What happened to Kamala Harris' campaign?
She had the black vote all locked up.
She had the black vote all locked up.