|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
TX: Armed robber possibly struck by fleeing getaway driver after business owner pulls gun
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
An attempted robbery at a San Antonio automotive shop Tuesday afternoon was thwarted when the owner of the business opened fire on the suspects, killing one and possibly wounding the second.
The two suspects drove to Vail’s Industrial Park around 2 p.m. One of the men stayed in the truck, while the other walked into the business, brandished a gun and demanded the owner hand over money, as well as the owner’s wallet.
However, instead of grabbing for his wallet or any cash, the owner of the shop reached for a handgun. An exchange of gunfire ensued, and the suspect sitting in the truck was struck in the stomach. |
| Comment by:
jac
(7/10/2015)
|
| A betting man would give odds that this is another crime by illegal immigrants. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
