Patron in Restaurant pulls gun on armed BLM marchers

[cirus]

I have to point out that as small as it was (and not something I would ever care to carry), it did what he needed it to do. It convinced the one organizer to start pushing her crowd back out of the restaurant which avoided him having to shoot anyone.

I am a firm believer that if he had opened fire, most of the crowd, probably even those with guns, would have turned and run. Take the lead person out of the fight and most of the others will also leave.

I agree with the highlighted statement in large measure. That is the difference between troops and a mob; training and motivation matter, a lot.

I don't think so. Some or many would run but the folks with the AR15's would have opened fire. Unless they were the first two he shot. These BLM/Antifa protestors are on a mission. They see themselves as freedom fighters. They have a pretty high level of commitment. It is not the same as a couple ghetto stick up guys. Kenosha was a prime example of what is likely to happen. The only running was the poor kid trying to defend himself. How many on this forum would turn and run if someone fired in your direction and you were armed with an AR? And in the current political climate, it would have been called self defense if they killed the old guy.

If I'm fired on and armed with a AR I intend to win. If it gets so bad that I need a AR to defend myself I'm not worried about the law. They're may not be any law to worry about.

[03Lightningrocks]

I have to point out that as small as it was (and not something I would ever care to carry), it did what he needed it to do. It convinced the one organizer to start pushing her crowd back out of the restaurant which avoided him having to shoot anyone.

I am a firm believer that if he had opened fire, most of the crowd, probably even those with guns, would have turned and run. Take the lead person out of the fight and most of the others will also leave.

I agree with the highlighted statement in large measure. That is the difference between troops and a mob; training and motivation matter, a lot.

I don't think so. Some or many would run but the folks with the AR15's would have opened fire. Unless they were the first two he shot. These BLM/Antifa protestors are on a mission. They see themselves as freedom fighters. They have a pretty high level of commitment. It is not the same as a couple ghetto stick up guys. Kenosha was a prime example of what is likely to happen. The only running was the poor kid trying to defend himself. How many on this forum would turn and run if someone fired in your direction and you were armed with an AR? And in the current political climate, it would have been called self defense if they killed the old guy.

If I'm fired on and armed with a AR I intend to win. If it gets so bad that I need a AR to defend myself I'm not worried about the law. They're may not be any law to worry about.

Exactly how BLM/Antifa are thinking. The only difference is they have the commitment to fight for what they want and we don't have that consensus yet on our side. At some point we are all going to have to fight fire with fire. Like it or not. Otherwise, we will all still be yammering on, on this forum, while we are living in a communist country.

[cirus]

I have to point out that as small as it was (and not something I would ever care to carry), it did what he needed it to do. It convinced the one organizer to start pushing her crowd back out of the restaurant which avoided him having to shoot anyone.

I am a firm believer that if he had opened fire, most of the crowd, probably even those with guns, would have turned and run. Take the lead person out of the fight and most of the others will also leave.

I agree with the highlighted statement in large measure. That is the difference between troops and a mob; training and motivation matter, a lot.

I don't think so. Some or many would run but the folks with the AR15's would have opened fire. Unless they were the first two he shot. These BLM/Antifa protestors are on a mission. They see themselves as freedom fighters. They have a pretty high level of commitment. It is not the same as a couple ghetto stick up guys. Kenosha was a prime example of what is likely to happen. The only running was the poor kid trying to defend himself. How many on this forum would turn and run if someone fired in your direction and you were armed with an AR? And in the current political climate, it would have been called self defense if they killed the old guy.

If I'm fired on and armed with a AR I intend to win. If it gets so bad that I need a AR to defend myself I'm not worried about the law. They're may not be any law to worry about.

Exactly how BLM/Antifa are thinking. The only difference is they have the commitment to fight for what they want and we don't have that consensus yet on our side. At some point we are all going to have to fight fire with fire. Like it or not. Otherwise, we will all still be yammering on, on this forum, while we are living in a communist country.

The difference is they have the law on their side. When we start playing by their rules, which is none, we'll win. Like General Sherman said about war " the crueler it is the sooner it will be over "

[03Lightningrocks]

I have to point out that as small as it was (and not something I would ever care to carry), it did what he needed it to do. It convinced the one organizer to start pushing her crowd back out of the restaurant which avoided him having to shoot anyone.

I am a firm believer that if he had opened fire, most of the crowd, probably even those with guns, would have turned and run. Take the lead person out of the fight and most of the others will also leave.

I agree with the highlighted statement in large measure. That is the difference between troops and a mob; training and motivation matter, a lot.

I don't think so. Some or many would run but the folks with the AR15's would have opened fire. Unless they were the first two he shot. These BLM/Antifa protestors are on a mission. They see themselves as freedom fighters. They have a pretty high level of commitment. It is not the same as a couple ghetto stick up guys. Kenosha was a prime example of what is likely to happen. The only running was the poor kid trying to defend himself. How many on this forum would turn and run if someone fired in your direction and you were armed with an AR? And in the current political climate, it would have been called self defense if they killed the old guy.

If I'm fired on and armed with a AR I intend to win. If it gets so bad that I need a AR to defend myself I'm not worried about the law. They're may not be any law to worry about.

Exactly how BLM/Antifa are thinking. The only difference is they have the commitment to fight for what they want and we don't have that consensus yet on our side. At some point we are all going to have to fight fire with fire. Like it or not. Otherwise, we will all still be yammering on, on this forum, while we are living in a communist country.

The difference is they have the law on their side. When we start playing by their rules, which is none, we'll win. Like General Sherman said about war " the crueler it is the sooner it will be over "

[K.Mooneyham]

I have to point out that as small as it was (and not something I would ever care to carry), it did what he needed it to do. It convinced the one organizer to start pushing her crowd back out of the restaurant which avoided him having to shoot anyone.

I am a firm believer that if he had opened fire, most of the crowd, probably even those with guns, would have turned and run. Take the lead person out of the fight and most of the others will also leave.

I agree with the highlighted statement in large measure. That is the difference between troops and a mob; training and motivation matter, a lot.

I don't think so. Some or many would run but the folks with the AR15's would have opened fire. Unless they were the first two he shot. These BLM/Antifa protestors are on a mission. They see themselves as freedom fighters. They have a pretty high level of commitment. It is not the same as a couple ghetto stick up guys. Kenosha was a prime example of what is likely to happen. The only running was the poor kid trying to defend himself. How many on this forum would turn and run if someone fired in your direction and you were armed with an AR? And in the current political climate, it would have been called self defense if they killed the old guy.

When the Kenosha kid started shooting, the majority of the crowd immediately dispersed away from him. Only a handful of dead-enders continued the pursuit. Yes, the odds were still against him, but the odds had shifted more toward his favor at that point. I am firmly of the opinion that most of those terrorists are NOT as committed as they say they are. I believe they feel safe doing what they are doing because they have crowd numbers on their side, and they think that law enforcement will let them get away with whatever harm or destruction they want to cause. If their own injury or demise become apparent to those terrorists, I believe the overwhelming majority will find someplace else to be rather quickly. I further believe the "student radicals" (communists) in the late 60s and early 70s were much more committed to their cause than almost any of this current crop.
These kids are mostly in it for show. However, in this particular incident, I agree that those terrorists with firearms certainly presented a very serious threat to the restaurant patrons they attempted to attack, and the man with the little pocket revolver was at a serious disadvantage.

I live in a rural area of our state. I don't go down to the Metroplex much anymore, I only go to Wichita Falls on occasion, and even then, I have a proper-sized handgun of reasonable capacity with quality ammunition in it. I'm not saying I'm as tough as the guy in the video, nor how I would react to a similar situation, nor am I under any illusion that I will prevail. I understand that gunfights are chaotic events at best, and the outcome can depend upon luck as much as skill. Still, better to be prepared than not, at least that variable will have been reduced. And, by staying away from large cities, I also reduce my exposure to radicals as well as police officers who are beholden to Democrat Party politicians. IMHO, INAL, INAE, YMMV

[cirus]

I have to point out that as small as it was (and not something I would ever care to carry), it did what he needed it to do. It convinced the one organizer to start pushing her crowd back out of the restaurant which avoided him having to shoot anyone.

I am a firm believer that if he had opened fire, most of the crowd, probably even those with guns, would have turned and run. Take the lead person out of the fight and most of the others will also leave.

I agree with the highlighted statement in large measure. That is the difference between troops and a mob; training and motivation matter, a lot.

I don't think so. Some or many would run but the folks with the AR15's would have opened fire. Unless they were the first two he shot. These BLM/Antifa protestors are on a mission. They see themselves as freedom fighters. They have a pretty high level of commitment. It is not the same as a couple ghetto stick up guys. Kenosha was a prime example of what is likely to happen. The only running was the poor kid trying to defend himself. How many on this forum would turn and run if someone fired in your direction and you were armed with an AR? And in the current political climate, it would have been called self defense if they killed the old guy.

When the Kenosha kid started shooting, the majority of the crowd immediately dispersed away from him. Only a handful of dead-enders continued the pursuit. Yes, the odds were still against him, but the odds had shifted more toward his favor at that point. I am firmly of the opinion that most of those terrorists are NOT as committed as they say they are. I believe they feel safe doing what they are doing because they have crowd numbers on their side, and they think that law enforcement will let them get away with whatever harm or destruction they want to cause. If their own injury or demise become apparent to those terrorists, I believe the overwhelming majority will find someplace else to be rather quickly. I further believe the "student radicals" (communists) in the late 60s and early 70s were much more committed to their cause than almost any of this current crop.
These kids are mostly in it for show. However, in this particular incident, I agree that those terrorists with firearms certainly presented a very serious threat to the restaurant patrons they attempted to attack, and the man with the little pocket revolver was at a serious disadvantage.

I live in a rural area of our state. I don't go down to the Metroplex much anymore, I only go to Wichita Falls on occasion, and even then, I have a proper-sized handgun of reasonable capacity with quality ammunition in it. I'm not saying I'm as tough as the guy in the video, nor how I would react to a similar situation, nor am I under any illusion that I will prevail. I understand that gunfights are chaotic events at best, and the outcome can depend upon luck as much as skill. Still, better to be prepared than not, at least that variable will have been reduced. And, by staying away from large cities, I also reduce my exposure to radicals as well as police officers who are beholden to Democrat Party politicians. IMHO, INAL, INAE, YMMV