[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Incidents such as the one at Applebees are “crimes of passion”, so to speak. Done in the heat of the moment, possibly drug- and/or alcohol-fueled, and with nothing aforethought except strong, unthinking emotion. No amount of surveillance is going to stop something like that from happening, nor is “more police presence”, unless already on the premises, going to be a deterrent.

Would heavier surveillance result, as stated, in criminals being “CAUGHT and found GUILTY…….”? Perhaps. And that is a good thing. But it scarcely needs to be pointed out that that being “caught and found guilty” means that the crime has ALREADY been committed.

The only thing that is going to slow crime down in this country is more people taking on the responsibility of assuring their own safety.

Prezactly...

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

First of all, he said he "felt that they would have all been shot"... Not a stretch at all...

Maybe it's me, but if someone bursts in, fires a gun into the ceiling, I'm in fear for my life.

There is ZERO rational reason to do this. Any sensible person would see that as a threat...

But sure, let's go with the "I'll have a piece of pie" theory...

What the neighbor of a woman in Delmar felt would have happened doesn't really matter.

If someone burst in and fires a gun into the ceiling you should be in fear for your life. but did that happen? Did he burst in? Did he shoot into the ceiling? Sure, it was on NextDoor so it *must* be true. No really, the neighbor of the lady in Delmar that none of us know said it happened, it *must* be true.

None of the papers that covered the story mentioned that Hudson had a gun. None of the papers mentioned anyone shooting inside the building other than the one person with the permit. The papers only mention that someone inside the building opened a door to let him in, there was an altercation of some sort, and the person with the permit shot Hudson when he reached inside his pants.

But I read it on the internet from a lady who has a neighbor who told her so it must be true.

[larbud]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

There is nothing in the facts given by the media that supports this.

FACTS? Media? What rock do you live under?

[airdote22]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Although, it does seem strange that the police report wouldn't state whether or not the dead man had a gun.

If the shooter had waited to make sure he he had a gun me likely would not have been the 1st shooter.

[gobuck827]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

Then we can make informed comments.

On TOTV?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Incidents such as the one at Applebees are “crimes of passion”, so to speak. Done in the heat of the moment, possibly drug- and/or alcohol-fueled, and with nothing aforethought except strong, unthinking emotion. No amount of surveillance is going to stop something like that from happening, nor is “more police presence”, unless already on the premises, going to be a deterrent.

Would heavier surveillance result, as stated, in criminals being “CAUGHT and found GUILTY…….”? Perhaps. And that is a good thing. But it scarcely needs to be pointed out that that being “caught and found guilty” means that the crime has ALREADY been committed.

The only thing that is going to slow crime down in this country is more people taking on the responsibility of assuring their own safety.

I agree with the last paragraph, but we will have to have differing views about the 1st paragraph. I believe that the presence of Police or surveillance in ANY area (Over Time) cuts down on CRIME.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by larbud

FACTS? Media? What rock do you live under?

Not everyone here dislikes traditional TV media. As a rough ESTIMATE, I would say that about 30% of TV Land watches traditional TV media and dislikes Foxy Loxey. And about 70% dislike traditional TV media and salivate greatly over Tocey Loxey. But, then we live in a HOTBED of deviant BubbleLand philosophy.

[New Englander]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Not everyone here dislikes traditional TV media. As a rough ESTIMATE, I would say that about 30% of TV Land watches traditional TV media and dislikes Foxy Loxey. And about 70% dislike traditional TV media and salivate greatly over Tocey Loxey. But, then we live in a HOTBED of deviant BubbleLand philosophy.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

What the neighbor of a woman in Delmar felt would have happened doesn't really matter.

If someone burst in and fires a gun into the ceiling you should be in fear for your life. but did that happen? Did he burst in? Did he shoot into the ceiling? Sure, it was on NextDoor so it *must* be true. No really, the neighbor of the lady in Delmar that none of us know said it happened, it *must* be true.

None of the papers that covered the story mentioned that Hudson had a gun. None of the papers mentioned anyone shooting inside the building other than the one person with the permit. The papers only mention that someone inside the building opened a door to let him in, there was an altercation of some sort, and the person with the permit shot Hudson when he reached inside his pants.

But I read it on the internet from a lady who has a neighbor who told her so it must be true.

Notice I said "IF" that happened...

And what the newspaper reported doesn't really matter, either... We've seen that time and time again...

I'm simply giving an alternative scenario based on what has been reported to counter the inane "he was trying to escape the shooting outside" scenario which has NO basis in reality...

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Notice I said "IF" that happened...

And what the newspaper reported doesn't really matter, either... We've seen that time and time again...

I'm simply giving an alternative scenario based on what has been reported to counter the inane "he was trying to escape the shooting outside" scenario which has NO basis in reality...

No, the newspapers all might have missed the detail about Hudson having a gun or the police might not have made that detail available yet. Or, he might not have had a gun and the lady from Delmar was making stuff up.

If the car had something to do with the shooting and had left then it would be odd for Hudson to try to escape into the building. But at the same time, it would be odd for people safely in the building to run outside towards the shooting yet that is what was reported. Who knows, that might not have been exactly true either.

My concern is praising the permit carrier as a hero before we have more facts. He may have done exactly the right thing and is a hero. Or, he may have shot an unarmed man reaching for a wallet or a cell phone.

Good guys with guns certainly level the playing field and have the potential to prevent catastrophes. Good guys with guns and quick trigger fingers have the potential to make innocent people dead. Praise those that deserve it but make sure they deserve it before doling out the praise.

Right now we need to wait for more information before condemning or praising anyone.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

No, the newspapers all might have missed the detail about Hudson having a gun or the police might not have made that detail available yet. Or, he might not have had a gun and the lady from Delmar was making stuff up.

If the car had something to do with the shooting and had left then it would be odd for Hudson to try to escape into the building. But at the same time, it would be odd for people safely in the building to run outside towards the shooting yet that is what was reported. Who knows, that might not have been exactly true either.

My concern is praising the permit carrier as a hero before we have more facts. He may have done exactly the right thing and is a hero. Or, he may have shot an unarmed man reaching for a wallet or a cell phone.

Good guys with guns certainly level the playing field and have the potential to prevent catastrophes. Good guys with guns and quick trigger fingers have the potential to make innocent people dead. Praise those that deserve it but make sure they deserve it before doling out the praise.

Right now we need to wait for more information before condemning or praising anyone.

From the reports I have read, the people ran outside once Hudson had gained entry INTO the building...

I have not praised anyone... Yet... My "good guy with a gun" comment was simply a commentary on our current news sources and the choices they make when reporting said news...

Could the customer who shot Hudson reacted too quickly? Most certainly. Could he have reacted properly? Again, most certainly. And I agree, we don't yet have all of the facts.

I'm willing to admit that. Unlike others, who do nothing but make up bizarre scenarios, trying to exonerate Hudson. That said, I think I'll have a piece of pie...

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

No, the newspapers all might have missed the detail about Hudson having a gun or the police might not have made that detail available yet. Or, he might not have had a gun and the lady from Delmar was making stuff up.

If the car had something to do with the shooting and had left then it would be odd for Hudson to try to escape into the building. But at the same time, it would be odd for people safely in the building to run outside towards the shooting yet that is what was reported. Who knows, that might not have been exactly true either.

My concern is praising the permit carrier as a hero before we have more facts. He may have done exactly the right thing and is a hero. Or, he may have shot an unarmed man reaching for a wallet or a cell phone.

Good guys with guns certainly level the playing field and have the potential to prevent catastrophes. Good guys with guns and quick trigger fingers have the potential to make innocent people dead. Praise those that deserve it but make sure they deserve it before doling out the praise.

Right now we need to wait for more information before condemning or praising anyone.

Prezactly.

[Taltarzac725]

The person killed is the victim. That is really all we know, for sure, right now. If the shooter had a fear for his own and others safety remains to be seen.

If he had his gun out and was shooting into the ceiling while angry that would go a long way in making a fear very reasonable.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

I agree with the last paragraph, but we will have to have differing views about the 1st paragraph. I believe that the presence of Police or surveillance in ANY area (Over Time) cuts down on CRIME.

Fair enough.

Don't get the wrong impression though. I am definitely a "more police presence" kind of guy, especially on our streets and roadways. More street and roadway surveillance too, as far as that goes. 46% of Americans admit to drinking and driving, and my guess is that it is higher than that here in The Villages. That fact coupled with the unfortunate eventuality that a person's physical abilities regarding driving diminish with age whether that person is drinking or not, and you have a very serious issue.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Prezactly.

My problem is that, "Why is it taking so long to get the facts out from the Police". It is like that old saying about "pulling teeth". Florida is SUPPOSED to be the SUNSHINE state ........so is it too much to ask to have a little SUNSHINE on this MURDER or justifiable homicide (maybe a trigger-happy, WHITE GUY). I hate to look for CONSPIRACY theories, but there is a VERY possible one BREWING here! What if the great and FREE state of Florida does NOT want ANY BAD publicity about GUNS that might SOUR the upcoming legislation to allow UNLIMITED OPEN carry just like in ALL our favorite Western movies? Florida will become like a scene from, "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" (and we have a lot of ugly here)! .........everyone BUCKLE UP those pistolos and cartridge belts.