[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Rainger99

This link provides more information.

Police: Man fired shots into the air outside prior to deadly shooting inside The Villages Applebee’s

Well that seems to help the man who killed the guy who came into Applebee's.

[manaboutown]

So the shooting appears justified from what we now know.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

So there is a happy ending.

I would not call that happy for anyone involved.

[JGibson]

They can't find the gun but found the shell casings outside.

Something tells me he was acting threatening inside and FAFO.

[manaboutown]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

I would not call that happy for anyone involved.

It was a happy ending for the people in the closed restaurant (as well as their families and friends) the good guy likely saved from being robbed at gunpoint, shot and killed or wounded or criminally battered by the thug

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

It was a happy ending for the people the good guy likely saved from being shot or criminally battered by the thug.

Nothing suggests anything like that. He reached into his pocket and no gun was found by the police on the man killed.

The shooter has to live with the fact that he killed another human being and probably will be served with a wrongful death suit by that victim.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by manaboutown

It was a happy ending for the people the good guy likely saved from being shot or criminally battered by the thug.

The people weren't going to be shot (though they didn't know that). This article and others state the gun was not present.

Criminally battered? Now you're making things up.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

The people weren't going to be shot (though they didn't know that). This article and others state the gun was not present.

Criminally battered? Now you're making things up.

That happens a lot on these boards and those like it.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

That happens a lot on these boards and those like it.

I guess this knocks the "pie theory" off the table...

[Number 10 GI]

A big question that needs to be asked is, where is the gun? Witnesses say they saw the man shooting a pistol in the air while the car drove off and then enter the restaurant, but no weapon found. Did someone in the restaurant decide the pistol was theirs for the taking and pocketed it?
Now, as to the low life getting shot, perform dangerous actions and you are subject to dangerous reactions. Not anything near rocket science. What was the licensed to carry good guy supposed to think or do after witnessing the actions of the thug shooting outside the restaurant when said thug entered the building and demanded to know who called the police. He then reaches into his pocket, so what is a reasonable individual supposed to think? Oh, he has an itch and is discreetly scratching the itch or is he going to pull out his gun to threaten or kill other people? He has voiced his anger at having the police called on him. At that point in time, you don't have the luxury of Monday morning quarterbacking like is going on in this thread, you have to react in a manner that provides for your safety. This individual demonstrated that he was willing to use a gun.

[collie1228]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

The people weren't going to be shot (though they didn't know that). This article and others state the gun was not present.

Criminally battered? Now you're making things up.

Wait a minute. It's not enough to say "they didn't know that". The police report says witnesses say the deceased "reached into his pants", and the licensed good samaritan shot him. No one in the restaurant knew the gun was gone, so as far as they were thinking, they all could have been in grave danger.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by collie1228

Wait a minute. It's not enough to say "they didn't know that". The police report says witnesses say the deceased "reached into his pants", and the licensed good samaritan shot him. No one in the restaurant knew the gun was gone, so as far as they were thinking, they all could have been in grave danger.

Read what I was replying to. If Hudson had no gun in the restaurant (it has not been found) then the good guy with the gun did not save anyone from being shot. THAT is what I was replying to.

I'm still not sure how I feel about shooting someone because they *might* have a gun. This situation is a little different since Hudson appears to have been shooting while outside and was now inside and looking for someone to confront. Still, I would like the standard for use of deadly force to be higher than just thinking someone might be reaching for a gun, especially since it turns out there was no gun.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by collie1228

Wait a minute. It's not enough to say "they didn't know that". The police report says witnesses say the deceased "reached into his pants", and the licensed good samaritan shot him. No one in the restaurant knew the gun was gone, so as far as they were thinking, they all could have been in grave danger.

Most guns I have seen on people with pants are not in the pants pocket but under the pants-- half- in and half out.

And it looks like a pistol.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Read what I was replying to. If Hudson had no gun in the restaurant (it has not been found) then the good guy with the gun did not save anyone from being shot. THAT is what I was replying to.

I'm still not sure how I feel about shooting someone because they *might* have a gun. This situation is a little different since Hudson appears to have been shooting while outside and was now inside and looking for someone to confront. Still, I would like the standard for use of deadly force to be higher than just thinking someone might be reaching for a gun, especially since it turns out there was no gun.

He had already demonstrated violent behavior by firing a gun outside the restaurant. He comes into the building angrily demanding to know who called the police and then reaches into his pants. What would any rational person think about his reaching into his pants? When you are on the floor bleeding out, after being shot with the gun he had in his pants, are you going to be thinking that you were the better person for not shooting first?

As I asked in a previous post, where is that gun? He was seen shooting one just moments earlier in the parking lot.

[fishon]

“ Most guns I have seen on people with pants are not in the pants pocket but under the pants-- half- in and half out.

And it looks like a pistol.”

I guess you have a lot of television and movie experience.
Concealed means concealed!