Michigan woman with concealed carry permit opens fire at alleged Home Depot shoplifters

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: ~Lucidity


Hero? Vigilante? Off-duty or retired cop?

Absolute lunatic who needs to have all of her guns taken away and needs to do some time.

If she does time that would probably be the thing that does not allow her to have them legally anymore. If not then she should lose cc permit but not her guns.

originally posted by: crazyewok


Havent you heard? The solution for all problems is to just shoot it

originally posted by: Reallyfolks


If she does time that would probably be the thing that does not allow her to have them legally anymore. If not then she should lose cc permit but not her guns.

Yeah cool man, let her keep her guns if she doesn't do time, I mean she's CLEARLY not threat to anyone.... nobody was killed right?

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: Reallyfolks


If she does time that would probably be the thing that does not allow her to have them legally anymore. If not then she should lose cc permit but not her guns.

Yeah cool man, let her keep her guns if she doesn't do time, I mean she's CLEARLY not threat to anyone.... nobody was killed right?

If she is not convicted of anything under what specific law are you thinking she will lose her guns? State or federal , either would be fine.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I specifically worded that post to talk about a certain subset of gun owners, not all gun owners and not even all CCW holders.

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
The logic works as follows:

-Shop lifting does not put anyone's life directly in danger.

-Shooting at shop lifters in a public place puts everyone in the areas' life in danger.

The lady was irresponsible and in error and should be charged.

Concealed carry permit or no, some people are just too stupid to be allowed the ability to project lethal force over a distance.

She could not have been much more wrong. Bet she was using FMJ too....

To be fair, the act of shoplifting in and of itself typically isn't very threatening.

What shoplifters will do to get away is where the threat can potentially come from. I've seen store loss prevention people hit by cars, pepper sprayed, stabbed and cut with razors, have guns pulled on them, etc. The list goes on. Whether any of that happened here we don't know. But it does happen, so immediately declaring this incident to be threat-free without knowing those details is a bit premature.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
It's how these people roll. Most anti gun people tend to be the ones telling us making assumptions about any group of people is wrong as is linking the most extreme people of any group to the entire group is wrong, but we see the same hypocrites do it when it pertains to guns and owners. Should be use to it by now. You have to laugh at them is all.

You just made the same mistake that SlapMonkey is trying to call me out on. You are making an assumption about me, yet you know nothing about my position on gun ownership. In FACT, I am VERY pro-gun ownership.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
If she is not convicted of anything under what specific law are you thinking she will lose her guns? State or federal , either would be fine.

The specific law I'm stating is more of an international, don't let crazy people with no self-control own guns kinda thing... ya know, but hey, I know in America everyone can just do what they want and own whatever guns they want and everyone else be damned.

**** it.... whatever.

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
If she is not convicted of anything under what specific law are you thinking she will lose her guns? State or federal , either would be fine.

The specific law I'm stating is more of an international, don't let crazy people with no self-control own guns kinda thing... ya know, but hey, I know in America everyone can just do what they want and own whatever guns they want and everyone else be damned.

**** it.... whatever.

So basically nothing says she should lose guns if convicted of nothing but do it anyway. Interesting

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
It's how these people roll. Most anti gun people tend to be the ones telling us making assumptions about any group of people is wrong as is linking the most extreme people of any group to the entire group is wrong, but we see the same hypocrites do it when it pertains to guns and owners. Should be use to it by now. You have to laugh at them is all.

You just made the same mistake that SlapMonkey is trying to call me out on. You are making an assumption about me, yet you know nothing about my position on gun ownership. In FACT, I am VERY pro-gun ownership.

It was your words about the hero mentality. Not mine, not slaps. You are free to have any view on guns you want and be pro or anti, it's cool. They are here to stay regardless.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

So basically nothing says she should lose guns if convicted of nothing but do it anyway. Interesting

The fact that she may not get convicted of anything is staggering enough.... but the fact that will not lose her guns after shooting at people with live ammunition for NO REASON is just frankly mindblowing to someone who's not literally insane.

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

So basically nothing says she should lose guns if convicted of nothing but do it anyway. Interesting

The fact that she may not get convicted of anything is staggering enough.... but the fact that will not lose her guns after shooting at people with live ammunition for NO REASON is just frankly mindblowing to someone who's not literally insane.

Treating somebody who isn't convicted of anything as if they were convicted anyway is frankly mind blowing to someone who's not literally insane.

See how that works?

originally posted by: Shamrock6


Treating somebody who isn't convicted of anything as if they were convicted anyway is frankly mind blowing to someone who's not literally insane.

See how that works?

No.

My point makes sense to the sane.

IF she's not convicted for what she's done... that is insane.

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

So basically nothing says she should lose guns if convicted of nothing but do it anyway. Interesting

The fact that she may not get convicted of anything is staggering enough.... but the fact that will not lose her guns after shooting at people with live ammunition for NO REASON is just frankly mindblowing to someone who's not literally insane.

As written it seems that's what she did. If so lose the cc and she will likely be convicted and it's not arguable at that point about her guns. Not having all the details or myself being there not sure why she did what she did. But I am sure it will come out. If there's more to it , maybe she isn't crazy, but I'm sure we will find out

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: Shamrock6


Treating somebody who isn't convicted of anything as if they were convicted anyway is frankly mind blowing to someone who's not literally insane.

See how that works?

No.

My point makes sense to the sane.

IF she's not convicted for what she's done... that is insane.

"If you don't agree with me it's because you're insane!" What a cute argument.

Without knowing all the details of the incident you're still ready to convict her. How quaint. Insane, but quaint.

As the story stands, if the LP fella wasn't in any danger then yea, she should be convicted. But as of right now, we don't know that he/she was or wasn't.

Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts. Convict her.

How sane of you.

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

As written it seems that's what she did. If so lose the cc and she will likely be convicted and it's not arguable at that point about her guns. Not having all the details or myself being there not sure why she did what she did. But I am sure it will come out. If there's more to it , maybe she isn't crazy, but I'm sure we will find out

Well indeed, we'll find out in time.
Maybe the guys pulled their own gun and threatened her? We don't have that information but based on what we do have, this woman acted completely irresponsibly and I would have thought she's broken some laws.

I don't know, as I said... to sane people, shooting at people with live ammunition would constitute a crime, someone who did that would most certainly have to face the consequences.

But hey... who knows eh?

originally posted by: Shamrock6


"If you don't agree with me it's because you're insane!" What a cute argument.

Or..... "If you thinking shooting at people for "shoplifting" is acceptable, you're insane" (which is actually what I'm saying)
If lives were in danger, if she had guns pulled on her, fair enough.
If she saw an incident take place and pulled out her gun and shot at these people, with passers by and shoppers around, then she's insane and needs to be punished.

Without knowing all the details of the incident you're still ready to convict her. How quaint. Insane, but quaint.

As the story stands, if the LP fella wasn't in any danger then yea, she should be convicted. But as of right now, we don't know that he/she was or wasn't.

Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts. Convict her.

How sane of you.

As I said to the other poster above, we'll see when the "facts" emerge.

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: Reallyfolks

As written it seems that's what she did. If so lose the cc and she will likely be convicted and it's not arguable at that point about her guns. Not having all the details or myself being there not sure why she did what she did. But I am sure it will come out. If there's more to it , maybe she isn't crazy, but I'm sure we will find out

Well indeed, we'll find out in time.
Maybe the guys pulled their own gun and threatened her? We don't have that information but based on what we do have, this woman acted completely irresponsibly and I would have thought she's broken some laws.

I don't know, as I said... to sane people, shooting at people with live ammunition would constitute a crime, someone who did that would most certainly have to face the consequences.

But hey... who knows eh?

I wasn't even.thinking they pulled a gun too. I was thinking if anything possibly trying to hit someone, maybe loss prevention with the suv. All I can do is see. If nothing happened and she went dirty Harriet...game over. If not move on, she will keep guns and probably cc

a reply to: blupblup

Dude, talk out both sides of your mouth much?

Yea, shooting at somebody for shoplifting is plain stupid. Literally zero debate from me on that.

The fact remains we have no idea WHY she shot, so you sitting here ranting that that's her reason is...

INSANE.

Waiting for the whole story is fun

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: blupblup

Dude, talk out both sides of your mouth much?

Yea, shooting at somebody for shoplifting is plain stupid. Literally zero debate from me on that.

The fact remains we have no idea WHY she shot, so you sitting here ranting that that's her reason is...

INSANE.

Waiting for the whole story is fun

The thread title....

Michigan woman with concealed carry permit opens fire at alleged Home Depot shoplifters