Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Armed citizen shoots two hapless robbers in Memphis
Telegraph Blogs (U.K.) ^ | July 11, 2009 | Toby Harnden

Posted on 07/11/2009 2:06:26 AM PDT by Schnucki

The Second Amendment refers to the right of citizens to keep and bear arms as part of a “well regulated Militia”. As gun dealer Cliff Hunter pointed out to me today, the Bill of Rights doesn’t mention the use of guns for self defence. But it’s surely hard for anyone not to cheer when they hear the tale of a legally armed American taking out two armed robbers.

That’s what happened here in Memphis on Wednesday afternoon when a travelling jewellery salesman (sounds like a hazardous occupation to me), with a legal concealed carry permit from Alabama, was approached by four men intending to rob him.

At least two of them men were armed and the odds weren’t good for the salesman. But he managed to shoot and critically injure two of them, sending the other two scuttling into their white Ford Fusion and fleeing the scene.

While in Memphis, we did a story about gun sales soaring since the election of Barack Obama last November. To put it mildly, the gun lobby does not trust the new president.

The owners of the two gun shops we visited were elated at the jewellery salesman’s actions. “I love it,” said Hunter, of Tommy Bronson Sporting Goods in Memphis. “If more of that would happen, crime would stop. He had a permit. He had an appointment. Somebody had an inside tip on that.

“They jumped him and he had a gun and he cleaned house. You put that in the newspaper four or five times a year and it’ll slow crime down. Usually they put them in the jail and turn them out. You start getting bullets flying and it’ll stop.”

Jay Hill of Classic

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: crime; memphis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 07/11/2009 2:06:27 AM PDT by Schnucki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Schnucki

is this Toby Hamden night?


2 posted on 07/11/2009 2:07:09 AM PDT by GeronL ( Patriotic Insurrectionist is no longer a contradiction in terms!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
I got annoyed with his attempt to savage Sarah Palin, so I ignored him for a bit. This morning, though, sitting down for a late breakfast, I started reading about his travel in the U.S. and I thought, "whoa, he may hate Palin, but you won't see this kind of stuff in the NYT".

Anyway, I post what I'm reading at the moment and hope that it's interesting to others here. Sorry if it's a flood of the same author, but each of these were surprisingly kind and encouraging.

3 posted on 07/11/2009 2:11:01 AM PDT by Schnucki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki

New Hampshire Law
RSA 627:4 Physical Force in Defense of a Person.

II. A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when he reasonably believes that such other person:
(a) Is about to use unlawful, deadly force against the actor or a third person;
(b) Is likely to use any unlawful force against a person present while committing or attempting to commit a burglary;
(c) Is committing or about to commit kidnapping or a forcible sex offense; or
(d) Is likely to use any unlawful force in the commission of a felony against the actor within such actor’s dwelling or its curtilage.


4 posted on 07/11/2009 2:19:40 AM PDT by tiger-one (The night has a thousand eyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki
“white Ford Fusion”

Getaway cars just aren’t what they used to be.

5 posted on 07/11/2009 2:22:18 AM PDT by BigCinBigD ('When a man believes that any stick will do, he at once picks up a boomerang,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

By and large, the interpretation of "security of a free State," is accepted as referring to military defense, and in modern times that military threat is thought of as being external.

But to look at the situation of the 18th century, there were other, internal threats. Without going into the historical dissection of taking land away from the original inhabitants (another discussion for another thread, perhaps), Native Americans posed ongoing hazards to settlers living in outlying areas. The Founders fully realized independent farmers could not wait for help to arrive to defend their families -- they needed guns readily at hand.

Likewise, a "free State", and the way in which a free State protects rights, provides a lot of latitude for people who will operate outside the law before they are caught. I believe the Founders understood that there would be times when honest citizens would need to protect themselves against the predations of such criminals, without time to wait for law enforcement to arrive.

6 posted on 07/11/2009 2:35:56 AM PDT by Quiller (When you're fighting to survive, there is no "try" -- there is only do, or do not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki

Looks like a U.S. crime. Why would we want to read about it in a U.K. news article?


7 posted on 07/11/2009 2:39:08 AM PDT by tdscpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BigCinBigD

8 posted on 07/11/2009 2:39:53 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (AGWT is very robust with respect to data. All observations confirm it at the 100% confidence level.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki
The Second Amendment refers to the right of citizens to keep and bear arms as part of a “well regulated Militia”

Someone needs to tell this guy about Heller.

9 posted on 07/11/2009 2:40:57 AM PDT by SnuffaBolshevik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki
The salesman had a legal weapon and used it to protect his livelihood and maintain law and order. He also made sure that two armed robbers were taken out of circulation, possibly permanently. And perhaps some of their fellow criminals will think again next time.
Protect his livelihood? Maintain law and order? How about PROTECT HIMSELF???

Interesting that the writer left out the number one reason to own a gun: to save your own life and the lives of your family.

10 posted on 07/11/2009 2:41:33 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tdscpa
Looks like a U.S. crime. Why would we want to read about it in a U.K. news article?

I feel just the opposite. I'd much rather read about it from a UK pointy of view. The outside view suggests how rare and valuable the Second Amendment is.

11 posted on 07/11/2009 2:58:43 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SnuffaBolshevik

According to the Dick Act, you are a member of the militia if male, and between 17 and 45, or if you had military training to age 65, unless you are President, Vice President, or a government official.

Women to become part of the militia need to join the national guard.

Title 10, Section 311.


12 posted on 07/11/2009 3:04:55 AM PDT by donmeaker (Invicto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki

I am actually in favor of no police for a few years. Let the scum surface and let the citizens ‘thin out the gene pool’.


13 posted on 07/11/2009 3:50:45 AM PDT by Leisler ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged."~G.K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker

Dammit! I’m too old to be a dick? Or am I still young enough to be a dick, just too old to be a militia member? Can I be a “member” without being a dick? If I can’t be a “dick” or a “member”, can I still join the militia?

I’m so confused! Too many rules for us old guys!


14 posted on 07/11/2009 4:00:20 AM PDT by tdscpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki

Love That Headline. Stupid Brits.


15 posted on 07/11/2009 4:21:27 AM PDT by txlurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tdscpa

It’s a blog, not a local news article. ;) Toby is traveling through the U.S. and reporting on what he observes.


16 posted on 07/11/2009 4:45:44 AM PDT by Schnucki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
Like I said, a little later? HUH? (See next? post)

Why try to understand US news by reading a Limey? As stupid as being forced in some stupid college course like “Western Civilization”, trying to understand our own country by reading crap written by Alexis de Tocqueville.

What a great way to spend the time, fall semester, 1965, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, 7:30 to 8:30 AM. Now, how could I hate the French after that exposure to their worst writers?

17 posted on 07/11/2009 4:51:30 AM PDT by tdscpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Schnucki
As gun dealer Cliff Hunter pointed out to me today, the Bill of Rights doesn’t mention the use of guns for self defence.

It's part of the common law of England and the law throughout the history of mankind that a man ha the right to defend himself. The drafters of the constitution "naturally" knew that so there was no reason to put it in.

18 posted on 07/11/2009 7:14:39 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quiller

The founders also recognized the need to defend oneself from tyrannical government.


19 posted on 07/11/2009 7:16:54 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
The founders also recognized the need to defend oneself from tyrannical government.

True, that comes across in separate writings, and could be inferred from the 'security' aspect of maintaining a respectful government, thereby ensuring the security of a free (democratic) State.

20 posted on 07/11/2009 10:46:09 AM PDT by Quiller (When you're fighting to survive, there is no "try" -- there is only do, or do not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson