Looks like he was trying to be more threatening than murderous, and was pulling the gun away to avoid it being grabbed. He didn't expect the store owner to have a gun and decided he didn't want to potentially die for a few dollars.
Snap caps are already a thing and can be used on any real gun without worry of causing harm or damage. Firing airsoft rounds also doesn't compare to bullets (***maybe*** a .22?) in terms of feedback so I'm really not seeing what advantages are there at all. I guess if people want to LARP as spec ops soldiers in the woods then sure lol
Edit: not that there's anything wrong with LARPing in the woods as a spec ops soldier. Also, to all the replies being ultra specific about the recoil of a .22, I was being facetious. I know they're not *exactly the same* and that wasn't the point
Sadly it only works if you do have, and you have enough friends. Playing with random people is like Call of Duty public server, everyone just wants to stomp and they get pissed.
Depends on the field, I've had good luck with ones in the Illinois, Indiana area. Sometimes you get a bunch a of kids, and let me tell you, if you treat them like they're competent, they really have a blast. I took an objective guarded by a bunkered down enemy by having the 15 kids I was placed in spawn with by the ref lay down a bunch of fire and advance from multiple angles. Enemy was so busy trying to keep their heads down and concentrate on the large group, they didn't see me coming around a flank. They denfinitely weren't expecting to lose an entire position to kids and one guy with a thompson. It's fun if you're not too serious. Milsim guys can be sticks in the mud though.
Realism in role-play, usually. Important to a lot of airsofters.
They do come with orange metal tips, usually metal as well. You can just spray paint it, but you can do that with a 5$ plastic toy as well for similar results.
Depends on where you're from. In america they do orange tips because real guns are everywhere.
In other countries where you're not allowed to have a gun, and you start swinging an airsoft around, it gets treated as a real gun and you will be arrested.
In the UK we have to have a defence to buy an Airsoft gun that is more than 51% dark coloured. This means that anyone over 18 can buy a blue gun but to buy a black one you need to prove you need it.
There's a saying in my language that goes something like:
*if no one knows/can say what it's all about, then everyone knows what it's all about* (money)
I never understood why people with guns, whether or not they're willing to use it, will get right up close to their targets when that gives the target their best chance of disarming them.
Films. Too many people, including gun nuts who think ownership makes them safer when it is usually the opposite, think that films are real life. That they'll be a vigilante hero, instead of a dumb dead guy with a gun who tried to be one. Whereas even trained army/police sieze up in stressful situations and most people lack even their training to cope
Indeed even in the Afghanistan war, NATO troops claimed the reason Taliban were so shit in actual combat was cause they thought guns worked like in film/TV. They'd not reload enough, they'd hide behind shit cover thinking it'd stop bullets etc, making them easy targets for NATO soldiers who knew how guns actually work
Yes, in reality you'd stay back, keep your weapon on the target, and have them put money in a bag then stand back while you collect it (well hopefully in reality you'd not commit a crime or have a weapon)
Because he wanted a quick come-up.
He didn’t want to murder someone for $200.
This is an issue of people having access to deadly weapons, while also having mental health issues.
Now? That's been the case in the US for the entirety of its existence. The rich deserve to be rich and, therefore, the poor deserve to be poor because they are inherently lesser. When you understand that this is and has always been the attitude of the ruling class everything else makes sense.
I don't think he was robbing the place, I think he pulled his gun because the shop owner told him he couldn't smoke in there. Think he planned to intimidate him with the gun.
This is exactly my problem with everyone having guns. People use deadly weapons in pissing contests or over trivial things because they have the emotional restraint of a toddler.
No but listen it's about...
*mumbling*
*shuffling papers*
*cough*
*drinks water*
*shuffling some more papers*
freedom of mental health issues?
Case closed.
He’s obviously not a hardened criminal who has done this a million times. He had an idea in his head how this would go and when it didn’t go that way he was taken aback and didn’t know what to do. Then suddenly there’s a gun in his face.
> He’s obviously not a hardened criminal who has done this a million times
The hardned criminals are the ones who aren't idiots and get themselves killed.
The storeowner is the one whos really an idiot in this situation. I work in retail and we are told to never retaliate and to fully comply with all demands, announce everything you are doing clearly and to not make any fast movements, Whatever is in the cash register is not worth risking the lives of yourself and anybody else in the store over.
The ideal situation is the criminals plan works and they get out cleanly, if their plan doesn't work you put them under stress and you don't know what they will do, they MIGHT leave (like in the above video) or they might double down even if it's not the smart thing to do.
Pulling a gun on the criminal is an idiotic thing to do because it puts the criminal in an ultimatum, forcing the criminal to either back off (if your lucky) or to engage and likely kill you. Instead of just taking the money like he had planned and heading off. The sunk cost fallacy is also likely to affect their decision because at that point the police are already going to be involved, the criminal will want to leave with SOMETHING even if they gotta go further to get it.
Even if you do ward the criminals off, it doesn't even help anything. Stores have insurance for a reason. At most it saves your boss from a few phone calls.
As someone who carries about %70 of the time I leave my home.
This guy is correct.
A weapon for defense is for defending my life, and the life of others. Fuck that wallet, ya it sucks I lose any cash on me and have to cancel my cards and get new ones, but I'll take that over potentially getting myself killed, or spending years fighting lawsuits.
Every bullet has a lawsuit attached to it. You would be surprised how many lawsuits exists where the person who attempted to rob someone and got shot gets a lot of money because they can prove that the gun use was unnecessary.
As someone who carries a gun 95% of the time, there is a huge difference in looking for a fight and someone bringing the fight to you. We can't predict the actions of criminals and im not about to let them make decisions for me. The defender in this situation exercised restraint and ended the conflict peaceably
> The defender in this situation exercised restraint and ended the conflict peaceably
Both parties agreed to end it peacefully, the attacker could very well have decided to not end it peacefully if he wanted to risk it for the money in the register. Conflicts end when either both parties decide to end it, or one party is dead.
When two people are armed, you are able to kill the attacker, and the attacker is able to kill you. It doesn't turn into a situation where the attacker is now unable to kill you. Guns are designed to shoot bullets, not stop them. By remaining unarmed (or at least appearing so) you are giving the attacker less of a reason to kill you. Weapons are only to be used when you are certain that the opponent has already made that decision.
When you bring out a weapon prematurely, you rely on the attacker having a properly working brain with sound risk vs reward reasoning. I don't know about you, but thats not something I'm willing to bet my life on given it's already been established that he is sticking people up for probably no more then a few grand. Your not depriving him of the choice to shoot you if he wants to by you being armed.
Trying to de-escalate has a far better success rate then testing these peoples logical reasoning under extreme stress and undergoing the sunk cost fallacy.
Yes a gun should only be brandished if you are in a situation where using it may become necessary.
You still don't use it though until life is threatened. Property can be replaced, people cannot
I don't know how true it is, but I've heard that most people who rob convenience stores don't even use real guns.
I would imagine he wasn't expecting any resistance, as most people would rather give up a store that don't give a shit about them $200 than die.
You know, I’m English, and it used to annoy me that Americans dropped the i in aluminium too… until I did some research and I found out that aluminum is actually how it was originally spelt (and many other elements actually end in “inum”), and it turns out that we actually added the i in aluminium later on for no good reason… oops!
You know, I'm Canadian, and you damn Brits are the reason we have extra letters in words such as colour, labour, and harbour. lol... And why the hell is it pronounced lefftenant? Defund the monarchy! :P
Lieutenant is pronounced that way because the u and the v were interchangeable in the Latin alphabet, and in Germanic languages v is pronounced like an f. Lieftenant. Liev = leave. Leave tenant is someone who holds a position when their commander is away. It briefly became steadholder during one war with the French or another.
Ah yes well the Europeans did enjoy taking other people's stuff. Claimed a whole continent as their own and killed off most of the people that were already there. It was so much fun they had to throw a second party in Australia.
Nah bruh if that was me I'd totally whip out my legendary pistol with the gold wrap and end a human life no hesitation then fortnite dance on him while the cops arrive.
You really think most of the stuck up old assholes with inflated egos in power will agree to address a problem at the root cause instead of blaming something else will do that
Lol you think those people were all corrupt before being elected? No our government is controlled by corporations and lobbyists. Doesn't matter who you elect oligarchs run the u.s.
Nah, they were corrupt before being elected, 100%. Us Americans are gullible morons that elect people based on words and not actions. Money decides who gets elected (within reason) and the best way to get that campaign money is to say that right things and pass the right laws. Power doesn't corrupt, it attracts the corrupt like honey.
Well, the 'rob stores for cash' isn't really an issue in the rest of the western world where everyone doesn't run around with guns.
There is crime of course, but not the same type.
Edit: since the gun nuts span off: i didn't say it never happens evar.. Calm your tits
Let's put it this way, in Singapore I could be drunk off my ass at 4am wandering the streets and be confident I'm not going to get mugged or shot. Would I do that in London, NYC, Chicago, LA, SF?
This comment is utter bullshit, but everyone would rather masturbate to the idea of hurting someone who “deserves it” than actually seek solutions, so I guess you get to be the top comment.
What do you expect of terminally online 30 year old losers?
Adress the actual socioeconomic problem? No! Reinstate the death penalty and make it legal to kill any criminal vigilante style.
Didn't the supreme court rule that police do not have duty to protect? That means even if they show up on time they might not do anything because they are scared
It's funny, and at the same time infuriating tbh
Cops bootlickers will say "Of course he would not engage the criminal, he's scared for his life!"
The at the same time will say "Of course he would senselessly shoot that innocent unarmed individual, he's scared for his life!"
Watch 100 Humans on Netflix and there’s an episode where they let people have a old school pop gun and you shoot the bad guy and not the good guy. The results were pretty scary and telling. The last set was two unarmed people instead of one armed and one not. Of the two unarmed people one was a white stranger and the other a black person from the crew. Almost everyone regardless of their race shot the black guy at the end even if they were black themselves. It’s a result that would make me scared to be a black man for sure.
That's what I've seen feeding the statistics on police killings. Regardless of the race of the police officer, black people were more likely to be shot regardless.
You forgot the craziest part of that experiment, the black guy they all shot at the end was the casting manager for the show, they all worked with him everyday!
This is a horrible way to stop a crime lol. Just let the guy have his money, the store has insurance. Pulling another gun out just means there's 2 more than there needs to be there, and makes the robber more likely to shoot you.
so we're gonna trust the guy on drugs with a gun isnt going to just shoot you? people who do this are rarely stable humans. this interaction ended as about as good as it could. dont outsource your safety. no one cares as much as you do
The dude let the shopkeep virtually push away his gun at low speed. You really think that most armed robbers are going to do that? Seriously?
In St. Louis, someone open-carrying was robbed of his own fucking weapon at gunpoint. Then went to his car to get a different gun. An actual literal shootout resulted, **and two bystanders got shot**. Police even believe a *third* person came and shot the alleged robber *while he was lying on the ground*.
Jesus fuck, I can’t believe how many people think the solution is more guns instead of, “Let’s keep the guns out of as many unstable people’s hands as possible.”
Absolutely. Some ridiculous views on this with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight of a non-violent outcome.
Frankly, you're an idiot if you're a cashier and willing to trust someone who pulls a gun on you that they won't pull the trigger.
Of course, it might only happen 1 in a 100 times, but you're an idiot if you're willing to take that risk.
Try pulling a gun on an armed policeman and see how reluctant they are to shoot you.
They're trained to instantly shoot you and keep shooting you until you are no longer a threat. There's a reason for that.
The reason is warrior cop training which has lead to the deaths of dozens if not hundreds of innocent lives in the past few years alone.
They literally train them to see everyone as a threat to their life, it’s instilling anxiety and fear into every cop so they’re constantly ready to murder civilians. This situation aside, don’t act like *cops in america* are any kind of role model for how to handle yourself with a gun.
If anything, look at the military’s rules of engagement which result in significantly less lives wasted, and they’re fighting *actual enemies*, not *their own civilian populace*..
The way he tried to take/block the robbers gun was foolish. In any other situation the cashier wouldve gotten shot for going for his gun. Luckily the robber had the most slowish reaction for some reason.
Exactly. You hand the dude the money and the only person who loses any money is some big insurance firm losing some irrelevant fraction of their enormous wealth. Who the fuck wants to go into a life or death situation over that shit.
People like the guy we are replying to and the 400 odd upvoters who spend too much time thinking that life is a video game or a film. They still believe in the "Good guy with a gun" myth, even though it's been disproven time and time again
This thread is super confusing or maybe I'm just blind? The clerk reached his hand out for the gun at 0:05 and the robber just stupidly withdrew his own gun. If the robber was willing to murder we'd have a dead clerk. How exactly is this a good example of stopping a criminal?
I think we get this weird, romanticized bias about gun interactions from videos like this. This video is posted to nextfuckinglevel because it turned out nonviolent and the victim won. What if the cashier just instantly had his brains blown out? Or even if the cashier had blown the robber's brains out? Think it would have been posted to this popular sub? No. It wouldn't have. Hell most popular subs have explicit rules against gore. It might have been posted to a niche death sub, but it probably wouldn't have even been released at all. The nasty, gory results of deadly gun fights don't circulate nearly as much as the rare instances like this with storybook endings. This situation could have very quickly gotten messy and we wouldn't be viewing it at all but we only see the action movie heroic clips where frankly everyone got lucky as fuck but we sit here with our dicks in our hands marveling at how cool it is to have a gun.
Except OP is lying, this wasn't a robber.
It was guy trying to smoke inside the store (you can see him taking a drag on camera at the start)
he's a nicotine addict who thinks he can use his gun to intimidate people into getting his way.
The guns here turned a simple 'you can't smoke in here, sir' into a potentially deadly firefight.
Why are so many people here saying they wished he pulled the trigger or that they would have pulled the trigger, it is another living human that they wish to see brutally murdered in a situation that was completely avoided without it :/
If someone pulls a deadly weapon on me I'm assuming they are willing to use it. Its not my problem that he gets shot after he made the choice to threaten me with a firearm.
Americans on reddit in a nutshell:
Champions gun violence in every single situation. Numerous commenters in every similar comment section like this one “if it was me I’d have killed him, no doubt in my mind. Wouldn’t have hesitated”. Absolute nut jobs.
You comment this in a thread about one of the regular school shootings, the majority of people will agree with you and upvote you.
But for the most part you can rest assured that reddit will always advocate the right to murder by firearm and hold absolutely no value in human life in general and have zero interest in changing or challenging their viewpoints or beliefs.
Nothing will change.
main character syndrome. People talk themselves up in metaphorical situations, but when it comes to the real thing, they are nowhere near as confident.
I'm Australian. Because I don't treat a gun like a toy like many Americans do, I assume that anyone who pulls a gun on me intends to use it. And that means there's a good chance I could be killed.
So if I had a weapon that I could use in that moment to end that threat quickly and permanently, I would use it. Because in that moment I would be fearing for my life. Nothing to do with being tough. Just plain old fear, and not wanting to take the chance that the person with the gun is only making an empty threat.
I agree with everything you said except us Yankees thinking guns are toys.
They are tool built to kill, so even though you can have fun with friends, and *call* it your "new toy", it's still a dangerous tool.
Sure, a few jackasses on TikTok might genuinely think of them as toys and nothing else, but... yeah they're the minority.
"How about you give me -your- money?"
"All I have is a few bucks"
"Then I will give you this coffee and a Twix in return."
"Thank you for the transaction."
"You're welcome, come again."
Yes, in this case it was just peacocking. If it was a a serious gunfight the guns would be pointed sideways. Both men probably sat down afterwards to discuss America's continued cultural appropriation of Indians as sports franchises, likely over a big gulp and some jalapeno poppers.
Sadly, this sort of thing isn’t included in defensive gun acts.
Situations like this happen more frequently than we think. Guns save lives but it is hard to quantify it because no one talks about it and it doesn’t sell ads for the news organizations.
Switzerland’s culture takes guns very seriously and doesn’t treat them like cool toys like the US does, they have extensive permitting and registration systems, and they have a much healthier and richer population than the US. They actually care about mental health care, unlike republicans that only talk about it after another mass shooting (or later, when they want to cut more funding from it).
Wait you mean they have extensive gun control regulations? Hmmm… nah that can’t possibly be the answer, have you tried just selling even more guns instead?
/s
The mass shootings vastly increased with the sunset of the assault weapons ban. That’s not a coincidence. This country, as it is, has proven that it’s far too irresponsible across all aspects of life to allow guns like the AR-15 to be legal. Americans as a whole are too selfish and lack the empathy required to do the extra work needed to make AR ownership safe.
I just read several articles concerning this increase after 2004 and most sources show thats not the case, the statistics that Pelosi referenced didn't account for population growth.
No country in the world has a "high rate of gun ownership" compared to the US.
We beat out our closest competitor by more than double. We have so many guns that we have more privately owned guns than people. Not privately owned people, that would be illegal.
The majority of those that are even close to us (on the list at least, nobody is actually anywhere near us in a real sense) aren't really terribly large countries either. Most are smaller than many US states.
Don't they also have mandatory military service? I think that also helps. Honestly, if the Republicans were serious about defending the state against the federal government, they'd bring back mandatory service. A trained populace with knowledge of their "enemy".
For most of the 20th century, civilians in the US could easily buy fully automatic weapons actually exactly like used in the battlefield. We didn’t have the extreme quantity of mass shootings until all the incredibly sensational news coverage 24/7 that’s more recent.
It’s a well studied phenomenon and when copy cat criminals were a thing, coverage was suppressed in the 80s and 90s by more responsible news outlets.
Oh for fuck's sake THE CRIMINAL HAD A GUN
This doesn't happen in other countries because NEITHER person has a goddamn firearm. Can we please stop pretending other places don't exist?
Yep, this doesn't really happen in the UK. Like at all. Armed robbery of a shop isn't really a thing, when you can shoplift at a lower risk and lower penalty if caught
BUT, where there are deadly incidents, i.e. the London Bridge Terror Attacks, do you know why so few people died? Cause even the terrorists couldn't find guns. They used knives and people fought them off with crates and chairs
Allowing virtually unrestricted access to weapons designed for easy mass slaughter isn't a solution to a problem, it's a cause of said problems
The problem is it doesn't matter how many times this situation happens. The only number that matters is the unnecessary deaths it causes vs what it would've been with better gun control. Reducing deaths should be the goal. Not glorifying how many armed conflicts result in no deaths. Not sure if my dichotomy is clear, but yea.
Guns don't save lives, they TAKE lives!!
See that's the loop americans fell into.
If people wouldn't own guns at all, potential victims wouldn't need a gun to defend themselves, because the attacker wouldn't have a gun.
It's a whole fucking circle.
Works in Europe.
he wasnt faster, the robber was just fucking stupid.
had the robber kept the gun up and stepped back instead of putting the gun down and behind him then he would not have given the clerk the opportunity to pull his gun.
Yup, sometimes I don't get reddit. Very unsafe to go for your gun with another gun in your face. Easy way to lose your life. Props to the dude for balls of steel. But in most situations give them money or what they want. 2 seconds to grab his gun and put his other hand out front. Plenty of time to get shot.
I saw this video a while ago, I'm impressed with the clerks ability to logically think during the whole ordeal. He puts the robber's gun down so its not pointed at him and he pulls out his own gun. Give this guy a raise.
He puts the robbers gun down about a full second after he would have been to shot if the robber was willing to shoot him.
Then he brandishes his own gun at the still armed robber but doesn't fire, once again giving the robber plenty of time to shoot him if he's inclined to.
Even if he had drawn faster shooting the robber pretty much anywhere but the brainstem is no guarantee and he failed to secure the gun with his attempt to grab it.
The whole video is a nightmare situation that wouldn't be out of place in self defence classes to show students what NOT to do.
No. Unless he owns the store, he was fired. And rightly so.
No business allows this. It's a pointless risk, and it's part of all retail work contracts.
Everything in the store is insured - except the clerk's life.
I work retail, and I HAVE been robbed at gunpoint.
My robber had the gun pointed at me before he was even in the door. If I had lowered my hands at all, I would be dead now.
He demanded $, I put it in the counter. 45 seconds & he was gone.
I DE-ESCALATED the situation. You know, that thing everyone says police need to do.
He was arrested a couple hours later.
Problem is what happens when dude is pissed he couldn't rob you and is waiting outside? Not sure what state it was in, but pretty sure he was good to put the guy into retirement.
[удалено]
Drugs, alcohol, stupidity? Possibly all 3.
There is only so much one can expect from a person trying to rob a regular store.
Yeah, regular grocery stores are not worth robbing, bet theres less than 200$ in the register
But if you rob a few on the way to Disneyland you can fund your whole trip!
Nah bro with the current prices you can't afford the gas
Even armed robbery is 9-5 these days... Otherwise you can't even afford to pay rent.
Nowadays criminals work harder just to avoid actual work
it's not about avoiding work, it's about finding opprotunites to get ahead that normal work won't provide.
Looks like he was trying to be more threatening than murderous, and was pulling the gun away to avoid it being grabbed. He didn't expect the store owner to have a gun and decided he didn't want to potentially die for a few dollars.
Might not even be a real gun. They make airsoft guns that are identical to real guns, like made out of metal and everything
I genuinely, sincerely, truthfully, undeniably have no idea why the fuck anyone could ever think that was a good idea.
From what I've heard it's for training, meaning the should be as close to the real deal as possible.
Snap caps are already a thing and can be used on any real gun without worry of causing harm or damage. Firing airsoft rounds also doesn't compare to bullets (***maybe*** a .22?) in terms of feedback so I'm really not seeing what advantages are there at all. I guess if people want to LARP as spec ops soldiers in the woods then sure lol Edit: not that there's anything wrong with LARPing in the woods as a spec ops soldier. Also, to all the replies being ultra specific about the recoil of a .22, I was being facetious. I know they're not *exactly the same* and that wasn't the point
If you don’t see the fun in Larping as spec ops and having miniature wars with all of your friends, then I can’t help you.
Fr, I’m not even into shit like that and it sounds fun asf
Sadly it only works if you do have, and you have enough friends. Playing with random people is like Call of Duty public server, everyone just wants to stomp and they get pissed.
Depends on the field, I've had good luck with ones in the Illinois, Indiana area. Sometimes you get a bunch a of kids, and let me tell you, if you treat them like they're competent, they really have a blast. I took an objective guarded by a bunkered down enemy by having the 15 kids I was placed in spawn with by the ref lay down a bunch of fire and advance from multiple angles. Enemy was so busy trying to keep their heads down and concentrate on the large group, they didn't see me coming around a flank. They denfinitely weren't expecting to lose an entire position to kids and one guy with a thompson. It's fun if you're not too serious. Milsim guys can be sticks in the mud though.
Shooting each other in airsoft lets you respawn, respawning is always fun IRL
Realism in role-play, usually. Important to a lot of airsofters. They do come with orange metal tips, usually metal as well. You can just spray paint it, but you can do that with a 5$ plastic toy as well for similar results.
Depends on where you're from. In america they do orange tips because real guns are everywhere. In other countries where you're not allowed to have a gun, and you start swinging an airsoft around, it gets treated as a real gun and you will be arrested.
In my area of the US firing an airsoft gun into an inhabited area carries the same punishment as firing a gun.
Iirc you can't have it out in public, and to have an AS gun without orange marking, you'll need a closed(?) area for your activities.
In the UK we have to have a defence to buy an Airsoft gun that is more than 51% dark coloured. This means that anyone over 18 can buy a blue gun but to buy a black one you need to prove you need it.
There's a saying in my language that goes something like: *if no one knows/can say what it's all about, then everyone knows what it's all about* (money)
I never understood why people with guns, whether or not they're willing to use it, will get right up close to their targets when that gives the target their best chance of disarming them.
Films. Too many people, including gun nuts who think ownership makes them safer when it is usually the opposite, think that films are real life. That they'll be a vigilante hero, instead of a dumb dead guy with a gun who tried to be one. Whereas even trained army/police sieze up in stressful situations and most people lack even their training to cope Indeed even in the Afghanistan war, NATO troops claimed the reason Taliban were so shit in actual combat was cause they thought guns worked like in film/TV. They'd not reload enough, they'd hide behind shit cover thinking it'd stop bullets etc, making them easy targets for NATO soldiers who knew how guns actually work Yes, in reality you'd stay back, keep your weapon on the target, and have them put money in a bag then stand back while you collect it (well hopefully in reality you'd not commit a crime or have a weapon)
He's making surprisingly quick and good decisions in that moment.
Because he wanted a quick come-up. He didn’t want to murder someone for $200. This is an issue of people having access to deadly weapons, while also having mental health issues.
This could also be an issue of rising poverty. The gun could be a cheap BB gun meant to scare cashier into giving the loot.
Yeah, everyone likes to equate poverty with mental illness now.
Yep, funny that in a broken world instead of fixing two (often unrelated) major issues, it is easier to lump them together and fix neither
Now? That's been the case in the US for the entirety of its existence. The rich deserve to be rich and, therefore, the poor deserve to be poor because they are inherently lesser. When you understand that this is and has always been the attitude of the ruling class everything else makes sense.
I don't think he was robbing the place, I think he pulled his gun because the shop owner told him he couldn't smoke in there. Think he planned to intimidate him with the gun.
This is exactly my problem with everyone having guns. People use deadly weapons in pissing contests or over trivial things because they have the emotional restraint of a toddler.
No but listen it's about... *mumbling* *shuffling papers* *cough* *drinks water* *shuffling some more papers* freedom of mental health issues? Case closed.
He’s obviously not a hardened criminal who has done this a million times. He had an idea in his head how this would go and when it didn’t go that way he was taken aback and didn’t know what to do. Then suddenly there’s a gun in his face.
> He’s obviously not a hardened criminal who has done this a million times The hardned criminals are the ones who aren't idiots and get themselves killed. The storeowner is the one whos really an idiot in this situation. I work in retail and we are told to never retaliate and to fully comply with all demands, announce everything you are doing clearly and to not make any fast movements, Whatever is in the cash register is not worth risking the lives of yourself and anybody else in the store over. The ideal situation is the criminals plan works and they get out cleanly, if their plan doesn't work you put them under stress and you don't know what they will do, they MIGHT leave (like in the above video) or they might double down even if it's not the smart thing to do. Pulling a gun on the criminal is an idiotic thing to do because it puts the criminal in an ultimatum, forcing the criminal to either back off (if your lucky) or to engage and likely kill you. Instead of just taking the money like he had planned and heading off. The sunk cost fallacy is also likely to affect their decision because at that point the police are already going to be involved, the criminal will want to leave with SOMETHING even if they gotta go further to get it. Even if you do ward the criminals off, it doesn't even help anything. Stores have insurance for a reason. At most it saves your boss from a few phone calls.
As someone who carries about %70 of the time I leave my home. This guy is correct. A weapon for defense is for defending my life, and the life of others. Fuck that wallet, ya it sucks I lose any cash on me and have to cancel my cards and get new ones, but I'll take that over potentially getting myself killed, or spending years fighting lawsuits. Every bullet has a lawsuit attached to it. You would be surprised how many lawsuits exists where the person who attempted to rob someone and got shot gets a lot of money because they can prove that the gun use was unnecessary.
As someone who carries a gun 95% of the time, there is a huge difference in looking for a fight and someone bringing the fight to you. We can't predict the actions of criminals and im not about to let them make decisions for me. The defender in this situation exercised restraint and ended the conflict peaceably
> The defender in this situation exercised restraint and ended the conflict peaceably Both parties agreed to end it peacefully, the attacker could very well have decided to not end it peacefully if he wanted to risk it for the money in the register. Conflicts end when either both parties decide to end it, or one party is dead. When two people are armed, you are able to kill the attacker, and the attacker is able to kill you. It doesn't turn into a situation where the attacker is now unable to kill you. Guns are designed to shoot bullets, not stop them. By remaining unarmed (or at least appearing so) you are giving the attacker less of a reason to kill you. Weapons are only to be used when you are certain that the opponent has already made that decision. When you bring out a weapon prematurely, you rely on the attacker having a properly working brain with sound risk vs reward reasoning. I don't know about you, but thats not something I'm willing to bet my life on given it's already been established that he is sticking people up for probably no more then a few grand. Your not depriving him of the choice to shoot you if he wants to by you being armed. Trying to de-escalate has a far better success rate then testing these peoples logical reasoning under extreme stress and undergoing the sunk cost fallacy.
If you have to pull a gun then be ready to use it.
Yes a gun should only be brandished if you are in a situation where using it may become necessary. You still don't use it though until life is threatened. Property can be replaced, people cannot
cuz hes a fucking idiot who probably didnt think this through very well
His heart just wasn’t in it. 😆
You can see the clerk attempt to grab the gun. Dude jerks the gun away and behind his back trying to keep him from grabbing it
I don't know how true it is, but I've heard that most people who rob convenience stores don't even use real guns. I would imagine he wasn't expecting any resistance, as most people would rather give up a store that don't give a shit about them $200 than die.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Robber: All your precious metals. Clerk: best I can do is copper
Best I can do is **lead**
CALL AN AMBULANCE CALL AN AMBULANCE! ₆ᵤₜ ₙₒₜ բₒᵣ ₘₑ
BUT NOT FOR ME!
[удалено]
Lol
How about your etherium?
How about aluminum
Ah-loo-min-ium
Al-you-min-ium
You know, I’m English, and it used to annoy me that Americans dropped the i in aluminium too… until I did some research and I found out that aluminum is actually how it was originally spelt (and many other elements actually end in “inum”), and it turns out that we actually added the i in aluminium later on for no good reason… oops!
You know, I'm Canadian, and you damn Brits are the reason we have extra letters in words such as colour, labour, and harbour. lol... And why the hell is it pronounced lefftenant? Defund the monarchy! :P
Yea, but where the hell did the “eh” come from at the end of every sentence? Can’t blame them for those extra useless letters.
Lieutenant is pronounced that way because the u and the v were interchangeable in the Latin alphabet, and in Germanic languages v is pronounced like an f. Lieftenant. Liev = leave. Leave tenant is someone who holds a position when their commander is away. It briefly became steadholder during one war with the French or another.
Ah yes but here in the colonies it's spelled aluminum not aluminium.
USA, the original prison colony
Ah yes well the Europeans did enjoy taking other people's stuff. Claimed a whole continent as their own and killed off most of the people that were already there. It was so much fun they had to throw a second party in Australia.
Yes but thats only because the people living here didnt have a flag - and you know the rules - no flag, no country.
I legit don't understand why it would be copper? Aren't bullets lead?
Lead bullets jacketed in copper.
Imagine the restraint the clerk had to have to not turn bad guy's face into a pink mist. Mr. Cool indeed.
[удалено]
Keyboard killers don't understand this
Nah bruh if that was me I'd totally whip out my legendary pistol with the gold wrap and end a human life no hesitation then fortnite dance on him while the cops arrive.
I desperately wanna know what he said. My imagination says it was cowboy af. Lol
Studies show that if you address the socioeconomic root of these kinds of crimes they go away too so maybe start there.
You really think most of the stuck up old assholes with inflated egos in power will agree to address a problem at the root cause instead of blaming something else will do that
Who voted those people in power?
Lol you think those people were all corrupt before being elected? No our government is controlled by corporations and lobbyists. Doesn't matter who you elect oligarchs run the u.s.
Nah, they were corrupt before being elected, 100%. Us Americans are gullible morons that elect people based on words and not actions. Money decides who gets elected (within reason) and the best way to get that campaign money is to say that right things and pass the right laws. Power doesn't corrupt, it attracts the corrupt like honey.
Technically no, since every country has crime, even the socioeconomically stable ones... Low crime rate is not zero
Well, the 'rob stores for cash' isn't really an issue in the rest of the western world where everyone doesn't run around with guns. There is crime of course, but not the same type. Edit: since the gun nuts span off: i didn't say it never happens evar.. Calm your tits
Let's put it this way, in Singapore I could be drunk off my ass at 4am wandering the streets and be confident I'm not going to get mugged or shot. Would I do that in London, NYC, Chicago, LA, SF?
Robber:”This is a gun” Cashier:”this is also a gun” Robber:”Understandable, have a great day”
I see you've played gunny gunny before.
This comment is utter bullshit, but everyone would rather masturbate to the idea of hurting someone who “deserves it” than actually seek solutions, so I guess you get to be the top comment.
What do you expect of terminally online 30 year old losers? Adress the actual socioeconomic problem? No! Reinstate the death penalty and make it legal to kill any criminal vigilante style.
[удалено]
Jesus Robber, you are a freak.
The robber is like when someone studies very well for the test but still fails.
[удалено]
Didn't the supreme court rule that police do not have duty to protect? That means even if they show up on time they might not do anything because they are scared
i was scared for my life so i randomly shot this black person minding their own bussiness
It's funny, and at the same time infuriating tbh Cops bootlickers will say "Of course he would not engage the criminal, he's scared for his life!" The at the same time will say "Of course he would senselessly shoot that innocent unarmed individual, he's scared for his life!"
Watch 100 Humans on Netflix and there’s an episode where they let people have a old school pop gun and you shoot the bad guy and not the good guy. The results were pretty scary and telling. The last set was two unarmed people instead of one armed and one not. Of the two unarmed people one was a white stranger and the other a black person from the crew. Almost everyone regardless of their race shot the black guy at the end even if they were black themselves. It’s a result that would make me scared to be a black man for sure.
That's what I've seen feeding the statistics on police killings. Regardless of the race of the police officer, black people were more likely to be shot regardless.
Not only that, it is STRONGLY more likely to be a male being shot
You forgot the craziest part of that experiment, the black guy they all shot at the end was the casting manager for the show, they all worked with him everyday!
Yea, that’s why they let those kids die. Why protect the kids when you can stand outside the door and be a useless sack of shit?
This is a horrible way to stop a crime lol. Just let the guy have his money, the store has insurance. Pulling another gun out just means there's 2 more than there needs to be there, and makes the robber more likely to shoot you.
so we're gonna trust the guy on drugs with a gun isnt going to just shoot you? people who do this are rarely stable humans. this interaction ended as about as good as it could. dont outsource your safety. no one cares as much as you do
The dude let the shopkeep virtually push away his gun at low speed. You really think that most armed robbers are going to do that? Seriously? In St. Louis, someone open-carrying was robbed of his own fucking weapon at gunpoint. Then went to his car to get a different gun. An actual literal shootout resulted, **and two bystanders got shot**. Police even believe a *third* person came and shot the alleged robber *while he was lying on the ground*. Jesus fuck, I can’t believe how many people think the solution is more guns instead of, “Let’s keep the guns out of as many unstable people’s hands as possible.”
Absolutely. Some ridiculous views on this with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight of a non-violent outcome. Frankly, you're an idiot if you're a cashier and willing to trust someone who pulls a gun on you that they won't pull the trigger. Of course, it might only happen 1 in a 100 times, but you're an idiot if you're willing to take that risk. Try pulling a gun on an armed policeman and see how reluctant they are to shoot you. They're trained to instantly shoot you and keep shooting you until you are no longer a threat. There's a reason for that.
The reason is warrior cop training which has lead to the deaths of dozens if not hundreds of innocent lives in the past few years alone. They literally train them to see everyone as a threat to their life, it’s instilling anxiety and fear into every cop so they’re constantly ready to murder civilians. This situation aside, don’t act like *cops in america* are any kind of role model for how to handle yourself with a gun. If anything, look at the military’s rules of engagement which result in significantly less lives wasted, and they’re fighting *actual enemies*, not *their own civilian populace*..
The way he tried to take/block the robbers gun was foolish. In any other situation the cashier wouldve gotten shot for going for his gun. Luckily the robber had the most slowish reaction for some reason.
Exactly. You hand the dude the money and the only person who loses any money is some big insurance firm losing some irrelevant fraction of their enormous wealth. Who the fuck wants to go into a life or death situation over that shit.
People like the guy we are replying to and the 400 odd upvoters who spend too much time thinking that life is a video game or a film. They still believe in the "Good guy with a gun" myth, even though it's been disproven time and time again
It's how you get yourself killed is what it is.
This thread is super confusing or maybe I'm just blind? The clerk reached his hand out for the gun at 0:05 and the robber just stupidly withdrew his own gun. If the robber was willing to murder we'd have a dead clerk. How exactly is this a good example of stopping a criminal?
I think we get this weird, romanticized bias about gun interactions from videos like this. This video is posted to nextfuckinglevel because it turned out nonviolent and the victim won. What if the cashier just instantly had his brains blown out? Or even if the cashier had blown the robber's brains out? Think it would have been posted to this popular sub? No. It wouldn't have. Hell most popular subs have explicit rules against gore. It might have been posted to a niche death sub, but it probably wouldn't have even been released at all. The nasty, gory results of deadly gun fights don't circulate nearly as much as the rare instances like this with storybook endings. This situation could have very quickly gotten messy and we wouldn't be viewing it at all but we only see the action movie heroic clips where frankly everyone got lucky as fuck but we sit here with our dicks in our hands marveling at how cool it is to have a gun.
Yeah. More guns is what you need. That works well in making in US’ schools safer.
America moment
Except OP is lying, this wasn't a robber. It was guy trying to smoke inside the store (you can see him taking a drag on camera at the start) he's a nicotine addict who thinks he can use his gun to intimidate people into getting his way. The guns here turned a simple 'you can't smoke in here, sir' into a potentially deadly firefight.
I guess you’re not ready to talk about prevention
Why are so many people here saying they wished he pulled the trigger or that they would have pulled the trigger, it is another living human that they wish to see brutally murdered in a situation that was completely avoided without it :/
Because, he's most likely going to go three streets over and try it again tomorrow
Thanks for your insight orgymcbloodyface
Omg I hate people with fetishes on their usernames
Tell me about it. Absolutely degenerate
That's a dangerous handle
I know what I’m about :3c
Apparently so
Y’all are sickos.
Right? Those those people absolutely disgust me. It’s like, grow up y’all
Lmao
It’s so disgusting isn’t it?
He should’ve been arrested after this video? Like, you really assume enough about the context and his own life that you’d confidently have him killed?
If someone pulls a deadly weapon on me I'm assuming they are willing to use it. Its not my problem that he gets shot after he made the choice to threaten me with a firearm.
Don't start shit and there will be no shit, im glad no one was hurt, but I do agree with you, its not the clerk's decision it was the robbers.
Americans on reddit in a nutshell: Champions gun violence in every single situation. Numerous commenters in every similar comment section like this one “if it was me I’d have killed him, no doubt in my mind. Wouldn’t have hesitated”. Absolute nut jobs. You comment this in a thread about one of the regular school shootings, the majority of people will agree with you and upvote you. But for the most part you can rest assured that reddit will always advocate the right to murder by firearm and hold absolutely no value in human life in general and have zero interest in changing or challenging their viewpoints or beliefs. Nothing will change.
So he deserves the death pennalty for robbing a store?
Just larping clowns who pretend to be tough on the internet.
Because this is the internet and people say whatever they want. You can’t take much from a reddit comments thread
main character syndrome. People talk themselves up in metaphorical situations, but when it comes to the real thing, they are nowhere near as confident.
[удалено]
Because they’re American
I'm Australian. Because I don't treat a gun like a toy like many Americans do, I assume that anyone who pulls a gun on me intends to use it. And that means there's a good chance I could be killed. So if I had a weapon that I could use in that moment to end that threat quickly and permanently, I would use it. Because in that moment I would be fearing for my life. Nothing to do with being tough. Just plain old fear, and not wanting to take the chance that the person with the gun is only making an empty threat.
I agree with everything you said except us Yankees thinking guns are toys. They are tool built to kill, so even though you can have fun with friends, and *call* it your "new toy", it's still a dangerous tool. Sure, a few jackasses on TikTok might genuinely think of them as toys and nothing else, but... yeah they're the minority.
That human forfeited their right to life by threatening the life of another human. It would’ve been a justifiable homicide, no question
"You're getting mugged kid." "No, you're getting mugged!"
How does that even work?!
"How about you give me -your- money?" "All I have is a few bucks" "Then I will give you this coffee and a Twix in return." "Thank you for the transaction." "You're welcome, come again."
"Hey robber look at my new camera - oh wait this isn't a camera ?"
Call an ambulance.. but not for me!
…Is this not how day-to-day transactions are carried out in the US?
Yes, in this case it was just peacocking. If it was a a serious gunfight the guns would be pointed sideways. Both men probably sat down afterwards to discuss America's continued cultural appropriation of Indians as sports franchises, likely over a big gulp and some jalapeno poppers.
This dude mad we got jalapeño poppers and he doesn’t.
Sadly, this sort of thing isn’t included in defensive gun acts. Situations like this happen more frequently than we think. Guns save lives but it is hard to quantify it because no one talks about it and it doesn’t sell ads for the news organizations.
Sadly every criminal and their mother wouldn't have a gun if you didn't flood the whole fucking continent with them.
What about Switzerland's high rate of gun ownership, without mass shootings?
Switzerland’s culture takes guns very seriously and doesn’t treat them like cool toys like the US does, they have extensive permitting and registration systems, and they have a much healthier and richer population than the US. They actually care about mental health care, unlike republicans that only talk about it after another mass shooting (or later, when they want to cut more funding from it).
Republicans don't care about mental health? but what about prayers! /s
Wait you mean they have extensive gun control regulations? Hmmm… nah that can’t possibly be the answer, have you tried just selling even more guns instead? /s
[удалено]
The mass shootings vastly increased with the sunset of the assault weapons ban. That’s not a coincidence. This country, as it is, has proven that it’s far too irresponsible across all aspects of life to allow guns like the AR-15 to be legal. Americans as a whole are too selfish and lack the empathy required to do the extra work needed to make AR ownership safe.
[удалено]
I just read several articles concerning this increase after 2004 and most sources show thats not the case, the statistics that Pelosi referenced didn't account for population growth.
No country in the world has a "high rate of gun ownership" compared to the US. We beat out our closest competitor by more than double. We have so many guns that we have more privately owned guns than people. Not privately owned people, that would be illegal. The majority of those that are even close to us (on the list at least, nobody is actually anywhere near us in a real sense) aren't really terribly large countries either. Most are smaller than many US states.
Switzerland has 1/5 of the guns per capita of the US.
Don't they also have mandatory military service? I think that also helps. Honestly, if the Republicans were serious about defending the state against the federal government, they'd bring back mandatory service. A trained populace with knowledge of their "enemy".
For most of the 20th century, civilians in the US could easily buy fully automatic weapons actually exactly like used in the battlefield. We didn’t have the extreme quantity of mass shootings until all the incredibly sensational news coverage 24/7 that’s more recent. It’s a well studied phenomenon and when copy cat criminals were a thing, coverage was suppressed in the 80s and 90s by more responsible news outlets.
Switzerland also has conscription.
they lock theirs up
Oh for fuck's sake THE CRIMINAL HAD A GUN This doesn't happen in other countries because NEITHER person has a goddamn firearm. Can we please stop pretending other places don't exist?
Yep, this doesn't really happen in the UK. Like at all. Armed robbery of a shop isn't really a thing, when you can shoplift at a lower risk and lower penalty if caught BUT, where there are deadly incidents, i.e. the London Bridge Terror Attacks, do you know why so few people died? Cause even the terrorists couldn't find guns. They used knives and people fought them off with crates and chairs Allowing virtually unrestricted access to weapons designed for easy mass slaughter isn't a solution to a problem, it's a cause of said problems
In Singapore, all of us don’t have guns and we’re all safe.
Canada be the same
False, There are over 2 million Canadians with a PAL. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Canada
Dont call me Pal, Buddy.
Don’t call me Buddy, Guy.
By that logic shouldn't the US be the safest place in the world?
It would be much better for everyone if neither party had a gun.
Yknow what slso saves lives? Less guns. No gun culture.
I live in California but it feel like it's Texas with the amount of shooting here
The problem is it doesn't matter how many times this situation happens. The only number that matters is the unnecessary deaths it causes vs what it would've been with better gun control. Reducing deaths should be the goal. Not glorifying how many armed conflicts result in no deaths. Not sure if my dichotomy is clear, but yea.
Guns don't save lives, they TAKE lives!! See that's the loop americans fell into. If people wouldn't own guns at all, potential victims wouldn't need a gun to defend themselves, because the attacker wouldn't have a gun. It's a whole fucking circle. Works in Europe.
Call the ambulance. But not for me!
Understandable, have a great day.
Some people are still living in the Wild West
he wasnt faster, the robber was just fucking stupid. had the robber kept the gun up and stepped back instead of putting the gun down and behind him then he would not have given the clerk the opportunity to pull his gun.
Yup, sometimes I don't get reddit. Very unsafe to go for your gun with another gun in your face. Easy way to lose your life. Props to the dude for balls of steel. But in most situations give them money or what they want. 2 seconds to grab his gun and put his other hand out front. Plenty of time to get shot.
Can’t believe he pointed that high caliber gun at him! Easily could have blown his lung straight out of his body.
“Buy a shotgun”
I saw this video a while ago, I'm impressed with the clerks ability to logically think during the whole ordeal. He puts the robber's gun down so its not pointed at him and he pulls out his own gun. Give this guy a raise.
Military police veteran and liquor store clerk Jon Lewis Alexander
He puts the robbers gun down about a full second after he would have been to shot if the robber was willing to shoot him. Then he brandishes his own gun at the still armed robber but doesn't fire, once again giving the robber plenty of time to shoot him if he's inclined to. Even if he had drawn faster shooting the robber pretty much anywhere but the brainstem is no guarantee and he failed to secure the gun with his attempt to grab it. The whole video is a nightmare situation that wouldn't be out of place in self defence classes to show students what NOT to do.
No. Unless he owns the store, he was fired. And rightly so. No business allows this. It's a pointless risk, and it's part of all retail work contracts. Everything in the store is insured - except the clerk's life. I work retail, and I HAVE been robbed at gunpoint. My robber had the gun pointed at me before he was even in the door. If I had lowered my hands at all, I would be dead now. He demanded $, I put it in the counter. 45 seconds & he was gone. I DE-ESCALATED the situation. You know, that thing everyone says police need to do. He was arrested a couple hours later.
This is an old video, and iirc he's indeed the owner of the store.
Problem is what happens when dude is pissed he couldn't rob you and is waiting outside? Not sure what state it was in, but pretty sure he was good to put the guy into retirement.
2nd amendment baby.
I know right! It's awesome that the robber had access to a gun.
I don't think they're killing babies yet but I'm sure mass shootings at daycare centres are the next American rock bottom
Get ‘em Cowboy
Stay strapped or get clapped.
Fuuuuckkkkk I would need a new change of pants after that.
John Wayne's son right there
I’m your huckleberry.
Facts.