Sunday, August 25, 2013

Florida Concealed Carry Permit Holder Shoots Up the Starbuck's Bathroom then Flees

Guns dot com

Last week a man in Fort Walton, FL, walked into a Starbucks for a late afternoon caffeinated beverage, but before he ordered, what Guns.com assumes would’ve been, black coffee and apple pie with a slice of melted yellow cheese he stopped off into the bathroom, closed the door and accidentally discharged his firearm.


According to the the NWF Daily News, shortly after the barista heard the loud “bang”, he said the man walked out with a “shocked look” on his face. The barista then asked the man what the loud noise was and the man said he was playing with his concealed weapon and it went off.
The man then decided he didn’t want Starbucks, so he went down the street to Five Guys Burgers and Fries, whose menu is vastly different from Starbucks’, while the barista called the police.
After an investigation, police reasoned that the man was quick drawing his handgun when it fired, shattering the sink and lodging a round into the tiled floor. It’s unknown what brand of gun the man had orif someone was talking to him, but police did say the discharged round was a .40-caliber made by Hornady. No one was hurt.
The police, however, were unable to find the man to question him, but they are leaving the case open for investigation.

30 comments:

  1. You can't say that he was a permit holder, since his identity isn't known.

    ReplyDelete
  2. People like this are why flogging should still be an option.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gee, I was so wrong when I commented about this Starbucks issue on a prior post (HA HA). No need for anyone to fear being around guns, especially in a coffee shop!

    I rest my case, but then I'm just a lying sock puppet, right?

    "You can't say that he was a permit holder, since his identity isn't known."
    What a pathetic answer to a dangerous situation. It's only luck, that no one was killed.

    Sorry I don't fit your mold of what a gun carrier should be, but you are exactly the type that gives gun carriers a bad name. A lack of real awareness of the responsibility of carrying a deadly weapon; or the common sense to know that anytime, or place a gun is present people can get hurt, or killed. Or the lack of concern, that others are afraid to even be around those who carry guns.

    As I said before, it's a numbers game. More guns, more possibility people get hurt. Definite possibility guns get into the wrong (irresponsible) hands. And yes, some legal gun owners and permit holders are to irresponsible, and should not have one.

    When I go hunting, NO ONE is allowed to drink, or use other mind altering products. Is that your position Greg and TN? Because I can guarantee you most hunt while drinking.
    If some one even accidentally points a gun at someone, I read them the riot act. Do you?
    I take special care around children. Do you? If I visit a friend (who has children) after hunting (a normal thing I do) I lock my gun(s) in the trunk, I do not bring them into his house with children present.
    And no, I would never think of bringing my gun into a school, a church, or public places of business where children are present.
    I totally understand the fear people have of guns and I respect that by not bringing my gun with me in certain places.
    I have never accidentally shot a hunting partner (Cheney) because I was not paying attention, or did not know the exact location of my hunting partners. Oh yes, one must use special care when carrying, or using a gun.
    I could go on but obviously my idea of gun safety is different (tighter) than yours.
    Given the number of gun shot deaths due to "accidents" I'm surprised that your famous (TN) logic doesn't tell you that legal gun owners are obviously not being responsible enough!
    By the way Mike, would you tell these two, that I don't know you and have never talked to you before I started commenting here. I am no one's sock puppet. I am not a liar, and since that is your (Greg & TN) conclusion; I now judge that you two have no ability to reasonably, or fairly judge any issue concerning safe, rational gun use; nor do you have any logic discerning motives, or character of people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's quite the rant, there, Jim. Since you obviously don't know me, you should be careful about making such definitive statements about what I do. I've speculated about you actually being Mikeb, but that's because you express opinions in lock step with him. But you have never seen me advocating waving guns at people who aren't a mortal threat or drinking while in the act of hunting or other such irresponsible behaviors.

      As for carrying guns around children, do you imagine that the dangers that lead you to carry a gun in the first place somehow magically disappear when children are present?

      But here you take one incident--one--out of the thousands of Starbucks and decide that it's just too dangerous to carry a gun into the coffee shop. Really? This is what you call logic?

      You claim that your standards of safety are "tighter"--whatever that means--than ours. No, yours are just more compliant with gun control freaks.

      Delete
    2. There was no danger that led me to carry a gun, that seems to be your reason to carry a gun.
      Gee 7 billion people in the world, it's impossible two might have similar positions on anything.
      I never said you did anything. I asked.
      One incident? That's why Mike and thousands of bloggers like him post multiple stories a day about the dangerous irresponsibility of gun owners.
      I expect gun owners to be more responsible than they are. You seem to be just fine with 30,000 gun shot deaths a year. Sorry, I don't accept that. And anyone who does, is nuts.

      Delete
    3. Soooo Jim, please enlighten me and the rest of us of the reason that led YOU to carry a gun.

      Delete
    4. Exactly what Texas said. Jim, you seem to have bought into the idea that you have to provide a need for carrying a gun. Give us yours. And while you're at it, how about some links to those thousands of bloggers like Mikeb? There are lots of blogs in favor of gun rights. Not nearly so many supporting gun control--and fewer still if you take out the ones run by the Brady Bunch, et al., or their paid hacks and not by individuals.

      But on the question of gun rights, there is broad agreement among those of us who support such rights. You come here, striking the pose of someone who is one of us, but you talk the gun control line. That's fine by me, except where you help evil people work to infringe on our rights.

      Let's look at your number: 30,000. That number gets discussed here a lot. More than half of those deaths are suicides. The evidence is clear that people would continue to kill themselves at about the same rate without guns as with. And since there's no reliable way to determine who is going to commit suicide and who isn't, I see no means of keeping guns out of the hands of those who will without simultaneously removing guns from everyone.

      Delete
  4. http://www.tmz.com/2013/08/22/george-zimmerman-shotgun-kel-tec-trayvon-martin-shop-gun/

    It was not a shotgun!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Cry me a river Mikey, GZ gonna get himself a new gun!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. "When I go hunting, NO ONE is allowed to drink, or use other mind altering products. Is that your position Greg and TN? Because I can guarantee you most hunt while drinking."

    You can guarantee I drink when hunting? Wow, that's some powerful psychic mojo. Of course, it's powerfully wrong since I would have the same rule. I say would because I haven't had to make such a rule official--nobody has been stupid enough to try that.


    "If some one even accidentally points a gun at someone, I read them the riot act. Do you?"

    Yes, I do, and if they do it or another violation a second time, or if they don't take the correction well, they're done for the day, and maybe forever depending on attitude.


    "I take special care around children. Do you? If I visit a friend (who has children) after hunting (a normal thing I do) I lock my gun(s) in the trunk, I do not bring them into his house with children present."

    Yes. If children are coming over, Everything gets checked to make sure it's locked away, ammo separated from it, etc. Same with adult company. Only thing not secured in this way is my carry piece which stays on my side and under my control.


    "And no, I would never think of bringing my gun into a school, a church, or public places of business where children are present.
    I totally understand the fear people have of guns and I respect that by not bringing my gun with me in certain places."

    If it's legal and I'm carrying, it stays on me. It's always concealed, so nobody gets upset or offended.


    "I have never accidentally shot a hunting partner (Cheney) because I was not paying attention, or did not know the exact location of my hunting partners. Oh yes, one must use special care when carrying, or using a gun."

    Gee, same here.


    "I could go on but obviously my idea of gun safety is different (tighter) than yours."

    Oh yes, there's a huge difference! I conceal my carry gun to keep from giving offense and you leave yours behind. Given that your list is, otherwise, a bunch of common sense items I follow as a matter of course, I don't see why you're being such a sanctimonious ass about having better safety procedures.


    "Given the number of gun shot deaths due to "accidents" I'm surprised that your famous (TN) logic doesn't tell you that legal gun owners are obviously not being responsible enough!"

    Umm, activists have been pushing safety for a long time and as a result we've seen accidents fall to an extremely low rate. Yes, there's room for improvement until there are none, but education is doing a lot more good than gun control ever did.

    And as for what the numbers tell me, they tell me that there are still too many irresponsible idiots, but that we've made headway against stupidity. They also tell me that the Vast majority of gun owners are responsible and people like this idiot are the rare exception in the current population of owners.



    "By the way Mike, would you tell these two, that I don't know you and have never talked to you before I started commenting here. I am no one's sock puppet. I am not a liar, and since that is your (Greg & TN) conclusion; I now judge that you two have no ability to reasonably, or fairly judge any issue concerning safe, rational gun use; nor do you have any logic discerning motives, or character of people."

    Guess you haven't been reading all the comment threads or you'd know that it's my opinion that you ARE a real boy. Misguided, but someone I've been able to carry on a reasonable back and forth with over the past weeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. T., this is exactly why you're known as a liar around here.

      ""When I go hunting, NO ONE is allowed to drink, or use other mind altering products. Is that your position Greg and TN? Because I can guarantee you most hunt while drinking."

      You can guarantee I drink when hunting? Wow, that's some powerful psychic mojo. Of course, it's powerfully wrong since I would have the same rule. I say would because I haven't had to make such a rule official--nobody has been stupid enough to try that."

      Jim said "most hunt while drinking" and you got out your soap box and pretended to be outraged that he accused YOU of hunting while drinking. That's lying, twisting crap, nothing less. Or, did you read it too quickly again and misunderstand?

      I've known hunters all my life and I can honestly say I've never known one who doesn't drink while hunting. Usually it's under the guise of keeping warm, but like Jim said, MOST HUNTERS DRINK.

      Delete
    2. Well, Mike, maybe that's a thing up North, because I've Never yet been on a hunting trip where alcohol was brought along, much less consumed.

      As for your accusation of my lying, Jim addressed Greg and me in the sentence before that, asked that question, asked a series of other questions and made a series of statements about his safety positions and procedures. He then summed it up by implying that we differed greatly with him on most or all of the items.

      Moreover, look at that sentence: "Because I can guarantee you most hunt while drinking." I believe he's missing a comma after the word "you" if he intended the sentence to be read as you read it. As is, one could guess that he made one of two typos--omitting the comma or typing an "o" in "most" when he meant a "u", which would render the sentence an accusation. Poor punctuation has lead to potential ambiguity.


      Finally, you say that I have a reputation as a liar here? And then you back it up by bringing up an occasion when I made a mistake and frankly admitted it as soon as it was pointed out. Sorry Mike, but my history here has been to own up to mistakes and errors when they're pointed out--something you'll respond to with a statement about my integrity...and then a day or two later you call me a liar over something stupid like this.

      Fuck off, Sparky.

      Delete
    3. Tennessean, Mikeb's philosophy is that nothing is sacred except the goal to have everyone under state supervision. The truth is meaningless to such people.

      Delete
    4. You have called me a liar (twice) a sock puppet, now an ass. Aren't you just the poster boy of civil debate.
      I never said YOU drink while hunting. The fact that you twist it that way just makes you a dishonest person.
      It ridiculous to say no one can tell if you are carrying. It's just not true.
      So you do carry your gun into churches, schools, and places where children are present. Irresponsible.
      Call me an ass again, nice. Because most do not follow safety procedures, or we would not have thousands of "accidental" gun shot deaths per year. Most are not accidents, but negligence by irresponsible gun owners. Enlightening you think 30,000 gun shot deaths per year is low, or that 30,000 gun shot deaths is a definition of rare.
      I thought you had accepted that I was real, but then these liar and sock puppet comments keep coming up.
      So you contend that hunters down South never drink while hunting. I won't even look up the stats, to know you don't know what you are talking about, or for some reason you are lying.
      We do differ greatly on gun carrying safety, and I have stated my procedures, which you stated you disagree with.
      At the end you say, "fuck off Sparky." Leaving no doubt that you are not into civil debate, as if calling someone a liar wasn't proof enough.

      Delete
    5. Tennessean and Greg are getting more and more frustrated the more I catch them out. They hate that.

      Delete
    6. Mike,

      Keep patting yourself on the back. You didn't catch me on anything here.

      Jim,

      You didn't explicitly say that I drink and hunt, but you strongly implied it.

      Do you beat your wife, Jim? Because I can tell you that most gun controllers are depraved perverted wife beaters. My standards of spousal treatment would never allow wife beating, but I guess that's just a difference between us.

      Offended?



      Why, when talking about accidental shootings, do you keep bringing up 30,000 gun deaths? That's not the number of accidental shootings or accidental deaths which is actually only 600 nationwide. Quite small for the number of gun owners, and illustrative of the fact that most people DO practice gun safety, contrary to your statement.


      "So you contend that hunters down South never drink while hunting."

      No, I did not contend that. By your and Mike's standards you're twisting my words and lying.

      You're reading too much into my statement. Mike is from Jersey and stated that every one of them he's known drank while hunting. Maybe it's true, or maybe it's an exaggeration. Meanwhile, NOBODY I know drinks while hunting.

      Maybe there's a geographic divide such that it's more common to drink while hunting up north and that explains the differences in the groups of friends we have, or may be I just hang out with more responsible people than Mike does.


      Ah, yes, a great difference--one facet out of all of the rest, and only a difference in how we choose to deal with the desire to not offend people.


      With regards to all of your "civil debate" commentary, you call me uncivil for accusing people of lies--something you and Mike do regularly and that you did to me repeatedly in this reply. Pot, Kettle; Kettle, Pot.

      Your concept of "civil debate" seems to be that you guys can call me a liar constantly, insult me, defame me, and it's perfectly civil, but if I respond by calling you sanctimonious, saying you're acting like an ass, etc. I've stopped being civil.

      Was I rude to Mike with the final comment in the last post? Yes. And I intended to be after his defamatory statements. When y'all make such defamatory commentary about people and then whine about rude and uncivil responses, you just look pathetic.

      Delete
    7. Jim, there aren't thousands of accidental firearms deaths per annum. The number is actually about 600. When you make serious errors like that, how do you expect us to take the conclusions that you draw from numbers seriously?

      Besides, you have yet to explain how carrying a gun where a child might be present is in itself an irresponsible act. You have also yet to explain what you're going to do when a criminal or a wacko brings a gun to where children are.

      And by the way, unless I've misread Tennessean's comment, that Sparky line was to Mikeb, not to you.

      Delete
    8. "You didn't explicitly say that I drink and hunt, but you strongly implied it."

      Is this an example of how you admit when you're wrong?

      Delete
    9. Mikeb, why do you stubbornly refuse to recognize that things can be implied without being explicitly stated? Or that a person can lay out an argument, but leave the implied conclusion unstated?

      Of course, you do know about this. You do it all the time.

      Delete
    10. Sod off, Mikey. You and your allies love to hurl broad insults and make implications, but then pull back on them and say "I wasn't talking about YOU specifically" and accuse us of lying when we answer your charges as if they were aimed at us.

      It's a dishonest mode of argument and I, for one, am sick of it.

      Delete
    11. Mike you said,

      "I've known hunters all my life and I can honestly say I've never known one who doesn't drink while hunting. Usually it's under the guise of keeping warm, but like Jim said, MOST HUNTERS DRINK."

      I need proof that most hunters drink. I don't believe so it cant be true (sound familiar?) and need definitive proof before I will consider believing it. Either the hunters that you know are drunks and maybe you right along with them or your hanging around the wrong crowd.

      Put up the proof, show me the money!

      Delete
    12. Who started calling who a liar? You called me a liar twice first, so take your false equivalencies and, like your false comparisons and get a character. Now go teach your 3 year old how to kill.

      Delete
    13. Jim, you sound like another fellow who uses his dog's name to comment here. He had a carry license, too. He's on your level of rationality, by the way.

      Delete
    14. Yes, Jim, I did suggest that you were a concern troll when you first showed up. But then you engaged in some slightly rational discussion and played your role quite well--you actually came off as a believable gun owner, even carry permittee, for a short time since you reined in your desire to stir up trouble and merely played the part of a misguided individual like some I've met.


      But now you've taken to making accusing implications, accusing us of lying about you when we repudiated your prior accusations, taking increasingly irrational positions against guns, and topping it off with a wildly over the top comment there at the end.


      Sorry, Jim, but it was too much too quick, and I'm now firmly going back to my prior guess. Your imitation of us is the typical behavior of a concern troll. Sidle in as a gun owner, talk about your concerns about other gun owners, and eventually start stirring up trouble, making accusations, admitting nothing, denying everything.

      Sorry, Jimmy, but you've revealed yourself, and don't deserve to be taken seriously.

      Delete
    15. Like people who (you) pretend to be serious about discussing a serious issue but call people liars and other names should be taken seriously-NOT
      So again, just because I don't agree with your dangerous positions on gun use (like teaching a 3 year old how to shoot) I must be a liar.
      Is it always people who disagree with you, you call liars, or is it just people who disagree with you about guns?
      Sorry guys, I stopped taking you seriously when you proved even one life means nothing to you.

      Delete
    16. Soooo Jim, please enlighten me and the rest of us of the reason that led YOU to carry a gun.

      Delete
    17. I wanted to teach my 3 year old how to kill, so I needed a gun first.

      Delete
    18. I guess that explanation works as well as any. But it proves to me that you are not a gun owner or have, or ever had a permit to carry.

      Its further proof of what a troll means and what they do.

      Thank you for your answer Jim.

      Delete
    19. Gee, Jim . . . you had SOME finesse unlike our past trolls. You might have gone further and kept a few people on the real boy wagon, but you've gone full troll mode!

      Delete
  7. In the face of unbending idiocy and vulgar debate tactics, there really is no other way to respond.
    I agree with Steve, you guys are obviously NRA trolls. Every post, attack, attack, no matter how ridiculous you sound.
    Call me a liar and sock puppet and then wonder why you get no respect. DUH!

    ReplyDelete