An armed bystander, apparently with a concealed carry permit, interrupted a mass shooting at a mall in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. The mall prohibits firearms.
Should the heroic bystander face criminal charges for carrying the gun in the mall?
Should the state revoke his carry permit?
Or should the mall and the state honor his heroism?
This is where the DA used to shine and be the good cop.
No charges.
Wow.
Sounds like quite a few Heroes there…
But, most importantly, thank god we live in a country with more than one gun er every citizen. Otherwise, that 16 year old kid might not have been able to get his hands on a firearm and start the gun fight. In which case, we’d never know about these heroes.
Yes, criminals are going to ignore the laws and get guns, and the biggest mass shootings have occurred in Norway and France where gun laws are much tighter.
I am glad that the bystander was armed and ended the mass shooting.
Yes, I doubt that the DA in Lancaster will press charges.
If this had happened in Philly, the 16-year-old would probably be back on the streets and the bystander would be facing serious charges.
Was it against the law…or just mall policy?
And it seems those with permits ignore the law too.
A lot going on here. Where did the OP get the information that the mall prohibits firearms?
Not knowing the laws in PA it is difficult to comment.
Since this occurred on private property I think one question is wither or not the mall has the choice of pressing charges or not.
The next question is wither or not the city has a ordnance regarding discharging firearms inside city limits.
And then there is the fact that he did shoot a person. What law(s) are in effect there?
And finally, how much discretion does the DA have over wither or not to charge certain things.
There are jurisdictions where DA’s and judge’s hands are tied when it comes to the laws on the books.
If he was breaking the law…How would it be any different then say, somone breaking into someones house and then finding the owner having a heart attack and saving him. Does that cancel out the break in?
Another story where a gun saved lives and libs come out with their usual nonsense of what laws this hero might have broken to move the point away from how they saved lives.
Not to worry. The age limit for carrying a handgun in Alabama is 18, so at 16 he could not possibly have been carrying a handgun. There must be some mistake in the article.
So what…
Unless it is a Soros DA. Then the bystander goes to jail and the initial shooter goes free.
The announcer stated it was a “legally” possessed firearm so it appears he had a Pennsylvania state license and conceal carry permit.
And like I asked earlier …Was he breaking the law by carrying in the mall or just mall policy? Thats the issue.
The mall has this sign on the door as seen at :28 in the video:
Presumably the armed bystander could be charged with trespassing. Normally that charge would require the property owner to press charges.
A well thought out rebuttal …
From the article:
It also generally accepted that it is not legal to carry a firearm onto private property if the owner or a representative has requested or posted that no firearms are permitted.
So it might be that the owner does not have to press charges.
I would think that if the person who pulled his weapon is changed the defense could be that he was acting in self defense.
