Posted on 12/15/2025 4:11:43 PM PST by naturalman1975
The second hero seen throwing items at one of the Bondi gunmen as Ahmed Al Ahmed wrestled the gun from his hands has been identified as 62-year-old Reuven Morrison.
Mr Morrison, a Jewish man and member of the Chabad Synagogue, ran toward the danger on Sunday evening as Sajid Akram fired across Archer Park, throwing bricks at him in an attempt to stop the killings.
Dressed in a white t-shirt, he is the hero seen alongside Ahmed Al Ahmed in viral videos of the attack.
Mr Morrison’s family said he ran in to help Mr Ahmed after the gun jammed as he pointed it at the terrorist.
He then picked up a brick from the ground, throwing it at Sajid, before he was tragically shot. Videos show him falling to the ground, clearly in pain, yet he gets back up, huddling next to Mr Ahmed.
He too has been labelled a “true hero” by family and friends, after he died in hospital on Sunday night.
Mr Morrison had fled the Soviet Union to escape antisemitic persecution five decades ago and lived in Melbourne, often travelling to Sydney for work.
Instead of running from the bullets that flew toward his community, he instead chose to shield a family friend, who also lost her life.
It was a member of his family who found his body among the bloodied casualties strewn across Archer Park.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailytelegraph.com.au ...
A lot of people on here have speculated as to why Mr Ahmed didn't shoot the terrorist after taking his gun. I won't say this is definitive, but it's the first time I've seen any explanation of this in the Australian media.
The video I saw showed Mr. Morrison being shot. I wondered if he survived. He tried to get the shotgun to work, but was unable to do so before he was shot.
It is possible the terrorist who rearmed was the one who shot him. Hard to know without an autopsy.
A very brave man.
The same ones that will arrest you for correctly identifying the murderers.
The consequence of disarming the population is that politicians are safer from assassins, but the hoi polloi are more vulnerable to random murder sprees. You can always count on pols to look out for Number One over the commonweal. An Australia armed as it was during Great War would have caused these men to duck, then hunker down for a siege, after they went amuck. The lack of return fire is what caused these casualties. The gun seizures Albo is ginning up will make future such incidents even bigger bloodbaths. Astonishing that Aussies on both sides of the aisle keep voting for this.
“I wondered if he survived.”
It’s in the article.
It’s in the headline.
Some police do not seem to have responded well.
Others definitely did.
Two officers were critically wounded.
I’ve also seen footage of the moment another officer fired and took out one of the terrorists.
From what I’m seeing, there was actually a lot more return fire (from police not civilians) than may be immediately obvious.
Unfortunately, most of it didn’t seem all that accurate. I would like to know - and I think we probably eventually will - how often the bridge was hit, and if shooting had been a little more accurate, how much sooner this could have ended.
I try to avoid being too critical... but I do think there are questions to be asked how about how accurate NSW Police officers are and whether that reaches the standards it could.
the dope of a pm there is saying str5icter gun laws are needed AND that ‘extreme right wing” is responsible for what happened-
How could the terrorist in the white pants have been STOPPED BY A HERO when AFTERWARD HE PROCEEDED TO SHOOT PEOPLE WHILE ATOP THE BRIDGE THEN WAS GUNNED DOWN DURING HIS RAMPAGE?
FULL FOOTAGE: Police NEUTRALIZE TWO SHOOTERS at Bondi Beach | SYDNEY MASSIVE SHOOTING
Mr. white pants was disarmed then REARMED himself so he could continue to kill people!!!!
Go screw yourself. I shared an excerpt. Not my fault that so much news is behind paywalls.
Yes, he was disarmed and then able to get another gun when he returned to his companion.
According to reports I’ve seen this morning - which are mentioned in the article - the gun that was taken off him jammed when Mr Ahmed tried to use it to shoot him.
This is tragic, but it doesn’t seem to me much of a puzzle.
And at the very least, Mr Ahmed delayed him from shooting for approximately two minutes while he wasn’t armed.
The elites have armed security and police protection. They are fine with “acceptable losses” of regular people, because they want these things to happen, in order to use and exploit them to keep regular people disarmed and banning even more self-defense tools from the average person.
I’ll post what I like.
Ever heard of free speech?
It’s illegal to use firearms in self defense in that craptocracy.
Should have been hurling bullets at the gunman but it is Australia where only the police and criminals have guns.
No, it isn’t actually.
Under Australian law, if you have a gun you absolutely can use it in self defence.
The issue is that it is definitely legally difficult to actually have a gun on you unless you are actually out on a hunting trip or something.
But you can use any method available to defend yourself if you need to.
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.