Woman with a pistol kills man armed with an AR15 style rifle who was shooting at a crowd

[Kaleva]

"Police said a woman who was lawfully carrying a pistol shot and killed a man who began shooting at a crowd of people Wednesday night in Charleston.

Dennis Butler was killed after allegedly shooting at dozens of people attending a graduation party Wednesday near the Vista View Apartment complex. No injuries were reported from those at the party."

https://wchstv.com/news/local/victim-hospitalized-in-charleston-shooting

Note to Texas police: It can be done.

[at140]

1. Was she the "good woman" with gun?

killing the bad guy with gun??

[haele]

6. Lawful Carry.

So she was trained and permitted for a CC. Probably police or some flavor of armed Security.
I have no problems with that.

Haele

[sl8]

20. WV is a "consitutional carry" state.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_West_Virginia

[haele]

22. Sorry, thought it was South Carolina. Didn't read the article due to distractions.

Too many Charlestons around. Lawful Carry has a different meaning depending on the state.
Which is a considerable problem as people move.

Haele

[Joenobody]

41. In wv

You don't need any permit at all to carry, either open or concealed.

Likely she had no particular training in relation to carrying.

[2naSalit]

2. BAM!

She chumped those good ol' boyz down in Texas real good.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

3. Good!!!!

One less asshole in the gene pool.

[Buns_of_Fire]

4. "Manly-Man With Chip on Shoulder Undergoes Maximum Attitude Adjustment"

Good for her.

[Ferrets are Cool]

5. Red meat for the gun humpers

See??? We should ALL be carrying guns.

[anarch]

8. I don't see it that way--more like, anyone who does carry should be licensed

and required to have training, periodic proficiency checks, etc. etc etc.

but Texas just recently decided to go ahead with "yee haw, anybody who wants to can carry--open or concealed, we don't care--with no qualification whatsoever"

[Zeitghost]

14. West Virginia has similar laws

No license is required to carry if over 21 and if you do want a license they are shall issue.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

23. AZ is the same way, but if you want to carry in other states that accept AZ CCW's

Arizonians are required to get a CCW.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

25. 25 states are now constitutional carry,

that's half the country.

https://crimeresearch.org/2022/04/twenty-five-states-have-constitutional-carry/

[The Bopper]

36. True but

Even in those states, the vast majority don’t carry guns. I guess it’s their version pf “pro-choice.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

37. +100. nt

[AntiFascist]

45. Are they registered with a well-regulated militia?

Otherwise its not "constitutional", sorry!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

48. There are differing opinions on that,

something I'm not willing to get into, but a lot of states call it constitutional carry, as does my state, so I call it what the states call it.

[AntiFascist]

52. I'm calling it what the founding fathers intended...

and that is a militia. There are no other gun rights empowered by the Constitution, other than the power of a State to organize a militia against a tyrannical Federal government.

[asa4ever]

54. Its constitutional because the Supreme Court says it is until the Supreme Court says otherwise.

The Supreme Court said that there are two parts to the 2nd Amendment. The first part says that a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free State. The second part says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Now you and many people may not believe that is what the 2nd Amendment means, but it is the Supreme Court that has the final say on what is constitutional.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

56. +100. nt

[AntiFascist]

60. That is just my opinion...

but in the future I could see a more liberal Court (if that will ever be possible) overturning Heller and any other such decisions, just as Roe vs. Wade may be about to be overturned.

There are other SC decisions that do support my interpretation:

In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendments [sic] means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government."[15] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not protect weapon types not having a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

[MarineCombatEngineer]

55. If you say so,

like I said, there are differing opinions on that.

Have a great weekend.

[Ferrets are Cool]

30. Your choice, but THEY will not see it that way.

AND, I do not feel safe with people I do not know walking around with loaded guns on their hips. YVVM
IMO, NO ONE (other than the police) should be allowed to walk around with firearms.

[anarch]

32. IMO you ought not to treat the police differently

a great many completely avoidable shootings have been done by the police themselves, so maybe just a total firearms ban?

[Ferrets are Cool]

53. IKR?

[lj332000]

49. Why do the police need them?

They just show up after the fact and investigate.

[live love laugh]

57. Or they cower and kill unarmed ppl or do nothing.

[at140]

62. I am not sure everyone needs training

First time I tried to use my newly purchased 9mm hand gun at the gun range,
I shot a dozen bullets inside a 6 inch diameter circle from 30 feet distance.
Looking at video's from YouTube, I was able to disassemble and reassemble this hand gun. After owning this gun for 7 years, there never has been any issue with safety.

So why people like me need more training? But I am a degreed mechanical engineer.
May be some people need training. But I do not see the need in my case.

[anarch]

66. it sounds to me like you have had training

video-based and self-instructed, but nonetheless...

and, I'm not sure if you carry your pistol when you go out in public, or if you just have it for self-defense at home or whatever, but I feel that makes a difference--for people who want to carry their guns around, I would strongly recommend confirmation of initial training and proficiency, and periodic re-inspection including certification of physical and mental health, limits on the amount of ammunition people are allowed to carry around with them (if you need more than let's say 30 rounds while you are out and about--so with most common handguns these days, one full magazine in the pistol, and one extra--I'd question what the hell it is you're doing).

while I am one of those "nomenclature" people that everyone here seems to hate hearing from, and don't think it's useful trying to ban some certain class of firearms without understanding exactly what you are banning, I also think it would be prudent to require more stringent training and licensing for "assault rifles" as they are called--and in a way that would prevent gun makers from just changing some small part of the design to get around the definition, which they will always do, they are very clever that way. So I think we should focus more on things like licensing, background checks, waiting periods before being sold the weapons, etc.

in other words, I don't think we're mostly worried about people like you, who have proven themselves to be capable of owning and operating a firearm relatively safely. We want to stop the madness and slaughter--I think focusing on people is the way to do that, and I think the fixation on banning some particular style of weapon is not helpful; in fact I think it's another symptom of the fetishization of guns that is no small part of the problem in the U.S.

[at140]

74. My rule for "carry"

No one needs more than half a dozen bullets to carry a firearm in public for defensive purposes. If I was in a restaurant or other public place indoors, and a bad guy starts shooting, I can take the shooter down with just a couple of shots. There is never a need for me to carry box full of ammo.

[at140]

75. I had zero training when I went to gun range

to practice. And I had zero safety issues. I searched for gun dis-assembly video's many months later, after a practice firing session each month, because I wanted to clean the gun.

Like I said, guns are not rocket science. All one requires is have common sense, and safety attitude. But that means only about half of adult Americans.

[anarch]

76. and then when you left, you had some training

or as you say, some practice, which as I said I think everyone who wants to own a gun should do--in addition to your criteria I also don't understand why we can't keep firearms out of the hands of people with clear histories of domestic violence.

[at140]

77. Yes, agree, practice is always helpful

But in my own case, I had not fired a firearm for 60 years before firing the hand gun. When I was in NCC (similar to ROTC) as a college freshman in India, we had an opportunity to fire Royal Enfield rifle .303 rifle. May be 3 or 4 shots.
But I am also exceptionally good at golf, which may explain my good target shooting at first try with a hand gun. I was at age 75 when I bought the 9mm handgun.

[PufPuf23]

71. Add insured. No insurance, no gun.

Practically maybe not all guns insured.

Rather see growth gun insurance and enforcement industries.

[Nevilledog]

18. I agree with you.

[live love laugh]

28. ✓ Exactly.

[NightWatcher]

7. Bad guys w guns. Good guys and gals w guns. Kids w guns. Notice a trend?

It's obviously video games and rap music.

[The Bopper]

38. Everyone is a good guy with a gun

Until they decide to not be one. That’s literally the NRA’s bread and butter. Of course not giving those “bad guys” the option of being bad is unconstitutional in their minds.

[Bristlecone]

9. This story will take priority by Rs as an example of why more guns are needed

[Emile]

10. So a guy was allegedly shooting at a crowd of people and no one was shot. An armed

woman shoots and kills the alleged shooter and that's her story.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

11. Yeah, and your point is............what???

[Emile]

13. I not about making excuses for murderers!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

19. And neither is the OP. nt

[hookaleft]

12. Yeah...stinky

[sarisataka]

15. Do you have

a different version of events?

[Emile]

17. Nope, just read the article and trying to make sense out it.

[sarisataka]

24. Seems fairly clear

A guy was mad for being told to slow down, came back with a rifle and fired shots. (2? 3? 12? don't know) A woman who was armed stopped him. Possibly one less mass shooting.

Multiple witnesses are corroborating the sequence of events.

[RaDaR63]

26. You didn't do very well.

Better luck next time.

[Emile]

27. Still trying to figure out a guy with a long gun could be that bad of shot.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

29. How many rounds did he get off before being killed?

1? 2? 5?

Maybe all he got off were a couple of rounds before being shot and killed.

[quakerboy]

40. Pretty easily

Anyone recall the stats on how often soldiers used to hit the opponents in war, before modern training was introduced?

Or, to cite a more recent example, there was a shooting in my neighborhood a few months back. Approximately 130 casings "recovered" by police. They fired at least 130 shots unto an occupied restaurant, with a retirement home directly behind it as a bullet backstop.

There were 0 injuries.

Training and will

[Ferrets are Cool]

31. Yeah, something just doesn't add up does it.

[Joinfortmill]

16. Good on her, but this is not the answer to our gun problems

[MarineCombatEngineer]

21. +100. nt

[roamer65]

33. +1000

[Kaleva]

44. No but now there's one less dangerous guy armed with an AR15 style rifle on this Earth

[world wide wally]

34. Let me get this straight...

If I have never touched a gun in my life, and I save up the money to buy an AR-15, upon purchase, I immediately become part of a well regulated militia?
Two questions, please.
1. What rank am I?
2. Where is a copy of my regulations since we are so "well regulated"?

[maxsolomon]

78. Having argued about guns for decades on DU, let me answer:

You are in the UNORGANIZED Militia no matter if you have a gun or not - per US Code, if you are male & between 17 & 45 years old: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246

1: No rank unless you are in the ORGANIZED Militia, the National Guard.
2. "Well-Regulated" only means that you have functioning equipment. It is an archaic term that doesn't mean what we think "regulation" means today. Yours is a common misinterpretation.

This Defensive Gun Use woman, however, is NOT a Militia member, because women have to be in the National Guard to be in the Militia. Sorry, ladies.

[wiggs]

35. So next time ANOTHER person with a gun hears shots and sees her shooting her

pistol and proceeds to shoot her, thinking she's the shooter?

[Butterflylady]

43. very good point. After awhile everybody will be shooting at each other.

In England approximately 4 in every 100 people own guns whereas in the United States there are enough guns purchased that every person in this country could have a gun. That is exactly why I am deathly afraid for this country if something isn't done.

[ManiacJoe]

63. In theory, yes. In practice, no.

For the folks at the scene when the shooting starts, it is easy to see who the good and bad guys are.

The folks who arrive late to the event (police, other civilians with guns) don't have that knowledge and need to figure it out as they go.

The police have the authority to take everyone down at gun point, put them all in cuffs, and sort the mess out at their leisure.

Other "good guys with a gun" do not have that option and have to be mindful about shooting the wrong people and thus unintentionally joining the Bad Guys. This does not happen often. Training helps with this.

[Meowmee]

39. What a horrible society to live in

When we must fear random crazy people with assault weapons at numerous locations and events and others have to shoot them. The “wild west” syndrome has never left here and most likely never will.

[Raine]

42. Good for her! nt

[PTWB]

46. Fantastic job!

Her bravery and quick reaction highlights just how shameful and cowardly the police officers in Uvalde were.

[Deep State Witch]

47. Good shot!

Someone offer her a job as a school resource officer in Texas.

[vercetti2021]

50. Good guy with a gun can't do shit

Good gal with a gun gets the job done. Once again proving women are extremely fearless

[Liberal In Texas]

51. Great, a society where we have real life OK Corral shootouts

as normal social order.

Do we need to now put up bullet proof windows in our homes? Have metal plating in our doors? Wear flak vest to the supermarket?

Frankly, I'd rather live in a world where guns are only carried by licensed law enforcement and the military.

[Kaleva]

58. You could if you moved

Depends on how strongly you feel about the issue

[Liberal In Texas]

59. Moving to another country at this point isn't an option.

This gun insanity can be reined in. We just need to get a legislature not bought and sold by a weapons industry.

[Kaleva]

61. It may be easier to move but who knows?

In the meantime, you'll have to deal with the situation you are currently in and may have to do so for decades.

[Liberal In Texas]

64. Where did you get the idea I didn't want to deal with it?

I don't like living in a society that worships guns and permits 18 year olds to buy WMDs.

[Kaleva]

67. So, if you can't move, how do you plan to deal with it and when will you have it dealt with?

Any idea of a ball park time frame?

[Liberal In Texas]

69. Your responses are getting weirder and weirder.

I never said anything about having some plan to personally deal with the issue of guns.

I have no idea what you're on about.

And this is my last post on the subject.

[Kaleva]

70. This is what you said that I first responded to

"Great, a society where we have real life OK Corral shootouts

as normal social order.

Do we need to now put up bullet proof windows in our homes? Have metal plating in our doors? Wear flak vest to the supermarket?

Frankly, I'd rather live in a world where guns are only carried by licensed law enforcement and the military."

You clearly said you'd rather live in a world where guns are only carried by licensed law enforcement officers and the military. I suggested that to be able to do that, you will probably have to move. You said that's not an option and the following:

"This gun insanity can be reined in. We just need to get a legislature not bought and sold by a weapons industry."

I asked for your plan on how you intend to accomplish that..

[Liberal In Texas]

73. Where did I say I had a plan?

[Ilsa]

65. Maybe the Second A should apply only to women? 🤔🙃 nt

[BlackSkimmer]

68. Wow, good for her for saving lives.

Scary situation.

[PufPuf23]

72. Good to note that the positive result in this situation is more the exception than rule and

not a solution.

[maxsolomon]

79. Indeed, DGUs are vastly overestimated.

The Gun Violence Archive estimates there are under 2.000 per year ( https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/ ) which is still about 6 a day. I don't read about 6 DGUs every day; this one is the only example that's made the news that I have seen this year.

In my anecdotal observation of DGUs I do read about, many were unnecessary, and some verge on crimes - brandishing - like the McCloskeys at the BLM protest march in St. Louis.

Gunners like to cite John Lott, who estimated that there are up to 2 MILLION a year over 20 years ago. That breaks down to >5,400/day, which is absurd. It would mean America is a constant hellscape of gun battles.

[llmart]

83. This is the sort of story the NRA likes to tout to prove everyone should carry a gun.

In just about every issue of their stupid magazine, American Rifleman, they always come up with an incident like this to get their members even more riled up about how they need to carry a gun everywhere.

There is always an exception to everything, so only those who want to validate their views on guns think this is a story to be lauded.

[rockfordfile]

80. Again ban AR-15. Easy one.

[Kaleva]

81. Local LEOs in much of the country probably won't enforce such a ban

Sheriffs are elected by the voters in their county and are not required to enforce federal law.

[rockfordfile]

82. That would be up to "local LEOs". Ban AR-15.

[Zeitghost]

84. Not really that easy

We did it here in CA, banned them by model and by features. The manufactures changed the model names and features and they are still for sale in every gun store in the state.