Concealed Carrier Robbed of Weapon

Old Tex Mex: I'll bite. Your possible quiz choices are too limiting. My answer would be "whatever it takes to end the threat." Verbal commands are certainly not an option in this scenario. I'd shoot to end the threat, and go after whatever suitable target was available. Most of us have been trained to shoot to center mass, but that isn't always possible. Considering the fact that someone had forcibly attacked me and was pointing a gun at me, I'd want to end the threat as quickly as possible. If that meant going after the CNS as a viable target, so be it.
 
I am a Raiders fan and sometimes wear something to show it, but not much lately.

The people I never ever trust are the ones in three piece suits spouting campaign promises. It doesn't matter which team they support.

This whole incident sucks and I wasn't there so I don't KNOW as much as all the judges. Maybe he didn't conceal well, behind the back not to hot, poor awareness. All possibile. In reality we are all targets and if you thinkk you aree smart enough and good enough that it "CAN NEVER HAPPEN TO YOU" You are over confidant, and wrong. If the other guy is smart enough we all have our moment. A truly smart and tough guy will not be wearing a Raiders bandana or wait for the crapper. If I was going to be a criminal it would be suits, smiles, and helping old ladies across the street.

That was a joke. I don't even like football and couldn't care less about any one team vs. the other.

But you're right, there are different types of criminals. The ones with suits and campaign promises steal from us in different ways than Ol' Toothless Ruthless in the OP. You have to watch them with different eyes.
 
The same kind of genius who robs gun-carriers is the guy who "loiters around jails."
You can't make this stuff up.


SEE UPDATE:


Medford police arrest suspect in gun robbery - News - MailTribune.com - Medford, OR

OMG I wonder if he traded the gun for dope without performing the mandatory firearm transfer procedures. :eek:

166.436 Firearm transfers by persons other than gun dealers

(1) The Department of State Police shall make the telephone number established under ORS 166.412 (Definitions) (5) available for requests from persons other than gun dealers for criminal background checks under this section.

(2) Prior to transferring a firearm, a transferor other than a gun dealer may request by telephone that the department conduct a criminal background check on the recipient and shall provide the following information to the department:

(a) The name, address and telephone number of the transferor;

(b) The make, model, caliber and manufacturers number of the firearm being transferred;

(c) The name, date of birth, race, sex and address of the recipient;

(d) The Social Security number of the recipient if the recipient voluntarily provides that number;

(e) The address of the place where the transfer is occurring; and

(f) The type, issuer and identification number of a current piece of identification bearing a recent photograph of the recipient presented by the recipient. The identification presented by the recipient must meet the requirements of ORS 166.412 (Definitions) (4)(a).

(3)(a) Upon receipt of a request for a criminal background check under this section, the department shall immediately, during the telephone call or by return call:

(A) Determine from criminal records and other information available to it whether the recipient is disqualified under ORS 166.470 (Limitations and conditions for sales of firearms) from completing the transfer or is otherwise prohibited by state or federal law from possessing a firearm; and

(B) Notify the transferor when a recipient is disqualified from completing the transfer or provide the transferor with a unique approval number indicating that the recipient is qualified to complete the transfer. The unique approval number is a permit valid for 24 hours for the requested transfer. If the firearm is not transferred from the transferor to the recipient within 24 hours after receipt of the unique approval number, a new request must be made by the transferor.

(b) If the department is unable to determine whether the recipient is qualified for or disqualified from completing the transfer within 30 minutes of receiving the request, the department shall notify the transferor and provide the transferor with an estimate of the time when the department will provide the requested information.

(4) A public employee or public agency incurs no criminal or civil liability for performing the criminal background checks required by this section, provided the employee or agency acts in good faith and without malice.

(5)(a) The department may retain a record of the information obtained during a request for a criminal background check under this section for the period of time provided in ORS 166.412 (Definitions) (7).

(b) The record of the information obtained during a request for a criminal background check under this section is exempt from disclosure under public records law.

(6) The recipient of the firearm must be present when the transferor requests a criminal background check under this section.

(7)(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this subsection, a transferor who receives notification under this section that the recipient is qualified to complete the transfer of a firearm is immune from civil liability for any use of the firearm from the time of the transfer unless the transferor knows, or reasonably should know, that the recipient is likely to commit an unlawful act involving the firearm.

(b) If the transferor is required to request a criminal background check under ORS 166.438 (Transfer of firearms at gun shows), the immunity provided by paragraph (a) of this subsection applies only if, in addition to receiving the notification required by this section, the transferor has the recipient fill out the form required by ORS 166.438 (Transfer of firearms at gun shows) (1)(a) and retains the form as required by ORS 166.438 (Transfer of firearms at gun shows) (2).

(c) The immunity provided by paragraph (a) of this subsection does not apply:

(A) If the transferor knows, or reasonably should know, that the recipient of the firearm intends to deliver the firearm to a third person who the transferor knows, or reasonably should know, may not lawfully possess the firearm; or

(B) In any product liability civil action under ORS 30.900 (Product liability civil action defined) to 30.920 (When seller or lessor of product liable). [2001 c.1 §6]
 
Be Aware in the restroom, carrying or not, it's the easiest place to get ambushed. While you're preoccupied they can nail you from behind.
Ever wonder why women don't go to public bathrooms alone ? Now you know...you got someone to watch you're back !
 
Just make sure you trade out that ceiling fan chain for something more substantial, or you'll be using that neck knife still sheathed . . .

Never did use that "ceiling fan chain"...Most people use paracord...

Good advice for people thinking about getting a neck knife...
 
One of my rules is use the bathroom before leaving the house.

Great idea, and I'd imagine most people do. Should work for a short time absence from home, unless you have prostate/kidney/urinary tract issues.

Probably wouldn't work all that great, though, on a long drive, unless you use a pee-bottle. Or maybe a catheter running down through a hole in the floor board.


I cant believe we are now diacussing using bathroom stalls and not urinals.

Don't see why you'd have a problem believing it. It isn't any sillier than a lot of the other stuff gets discussed on this forum.
 
When I was an LEO in CA (many years ago), I went into a club in Malibu to talk to someone, finished, then went into the restroom to take a whiz. While I was standing at the urinal two guys came into the room. One pushed me hard against the urinal (the old kind that came up to almost chest level) while the other guy snaked my Model 19 4" out of its holster like he'd been practicing for years. I thought I was about to be shot. Suddenly one of them yelled, "Police" and started to cuff me. "Me, too," I said.

Despite the unbuttoned sport coat, shirt, tie, slacks, polished oxfords, these two officers (turned out they were vice squad guys from LASO) had noticed a bulge where there shouldn't be a bulge, and at that time CCW permits in CA were essentially unobtainable, so they made me as a BG.

They apologized, had a good laugh (they did, I didn't). brushed me off with paper towels, apologized again, offered to buy me a drink, etc.

Since then, I've practiced SA at a higher level. And I've become a small expert at spotting bulges in clothing.
 
The crime is not the fault of the criminal, huh?

Well, that's not quite what he said.
There is no point in declaring it was the criminal's 'fault'. Of course it was. But waving your goods around in front of a criminal is just not smart. After all, that's what criminals do. They commit crimes. And nowadays you never know who is standing next to you.
I have a feeling that many folks who carry open just enjoy swaggering around with a 'piece' on their hip. But now we are looking at the other side of open carry.
I might open carry while on a walk in the woods. But not in a crowded department store.
 
When I was an LEO in CA (many years ago), I went into a club in Malibu to talk to someone, finished, then went into the restroom to take a whiz. While I was standing at the urinal two guys came into the room. One pushed me hard against the urinal (the old kind that came up to almost chest level) while the other guy snaked my Model 19 4" out of its holster like he'd been practicing for years. I thought I was about to be shot. Suddenly one of them yelled, "Police" and started to cuff me. "Me, too," I said.

Despite the unbuttoned sport coat, shirt, tie, slacks, polished oxfords, these two officers (turned out they were vice squad guys from LASO) had noticed a bulge where there shouldn't be a bulge, and at that time CCW permits in CA were essentially unobtainable, so they made me as a BG.

They apologized, had a good laugh (they did, I didn't). brushed me off with paper towels, apologized again, offered to buy me a drink, etc.

Since then, I've practiced SA at a higher level. And I've become a small expert at spotting bulges in clothing.
Interesting. Is that even lawful to do? They never saw it and there was a small percentage of ccw permits. I feel like thats stop and frisk?
 
So a guy carrying a concealed pistol gets robbed, and that is your response?

I carry two, had he grabbed one of mine i would have shot him with the other before he could run off with it. I think a lot of criminals are good at spotting a concealed carry especially if they
are used to using other people as teller machines.
 
I carry two, had he grabbed one of mine i would have shot him with the other before he could run off with it. I think a lot of criminals are good at spotting a concealed carry especially if they
are used to using other people as teller machines.
Texas. I am asking out of ignorance. Say the guy punched you in the face and somehow got your gun and as he started walking away you shot him in the back. Would you be legally justified?
The situation I imagine is he has your gun and thrown you to the ground. He turns around to leave and you pull out your gun and shoot him walking away. Unless he somehow turns around or youre fast enough to pull out your bug with him facing you, I dont knowhow you wouldnt shoot the guy in the back.
 
Texas. I am asking out of ignorance. Say the guy punched you in the face and somehow got your gun and as he started walking away you shot him in the back. Would you be legally justified?
The situation I imagine is he has your gun and thrown you to the ground. He turns around to leave and you pull out your gun and shoot him walking away. Unless he somehow turns around or youre fast enough to pull out your bug with him facing you, I dont knowhow you wouldnt shoot the guy in the back.

Carry two guns AND a Taser.
If he grabs your gun and is still facing you, shoot him.
If he grabs your gun and turns around to run, taze him in the butt.:D
 
ClayCow:

Lawful? Who knows. Reasonable Cause comes to mind. In those days (1960) cops could do pretty much whatever they felt like doing.

A couple of examples:

Prevention of a Felony. If you felt that someone was going to commit a felony - let's say you thought the guy might go home and severely beat his wife - you could lock him up. The charge? Prevention of a Felony. But you had to let him out the next day because he didn't actually do anything.

The Vagrancy Code. PC 647-11. Common Drunk. You could arrest someone for that, even though "Common" was never clearly defined. How many times does a person have to get arrested for drunkenness before you could hang that tag on him? Who knows.

Wandering around from place to place without lawful business? Into the slammer with you, fella. (since repealed, and since California Indians had a tendency to do just that, oops.)

Not having any money on your person. Again, under the Vagrancy Code you could be arrested. (since repealed)
 
Always do the stall , still be ready to bury someone head in toliet bowl. Or urinal. If need be in public restroom.flush. and plunge. Too.
 
Well, that's not quite what he said.
There is no point in declaring it was the criminal's 'fault'. Of course it was. But waving your goods around in front of a criminal is just not smart. After all, that's what criminals do. They commit crimes. And nowadays you never know who is standing next to you.
I have a feeling that many folks who carry open just enjoy swaggering around with a 'piece' on their hip. But now we are looking at the other side of open carry.
I might open carry while on a walk in the woods. But not in a crowded department store.
Sorry if I offended your sensibilities, it was more of a joke than anything. So obvious that on this forum I didn't think it could be taken serious. Of course the criminal was committing a crime. The media would have everyone else believe that it was both the guns fault and the gun owners fault, without even knowing what actually happened. Do you? I don't, because I haven't seen a police report. There could be a hundred scenarios.
I personally think he made a stupid decision from what I have read from the news reports.
But he wasn't open carrying, was he. Was he "swaggering"? (Oh my!)
He was concealed carrying improperly wasn't he? Blame concealed carry, that's what the media is doing.
 
Last edited:
The anti-gun media around here are on a "campaign" of sorts. They report all gun violence, giving it the worst possible spin. In addition, they are running nightly stories about all the guns being stolen from law-abiding gun owners and ending up on the streets. This sort of story is designed to show that concealed carry people are "part of the problem" rather than "part of the solution." We know that is not true as we see instances of lawful gun owners using weapons to stop crime, often without firing a shot. Yet the media, our guardians of truth, will not report such a story because that works against the agenda.



Wow, I feel like a "conspiracy theorist," but it is brought on by these nightly news stories. The news here have been on this band wagon longer than they were on some of the terrorist stories. And that is saying something.

Shawn, I'm just re-posting yours so those who want to turn this into a convealed vs. open carry thread will realize the victim was a concealed carrier who screwed up in his method of concealment, and being careless.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top