Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store


Recommended Posts

+ 1

you don't need to say anything to anyone that is stabbing people.

what could his reasoning be? "i wasn't trying to kill them. just stab them in the arm?"

+1

Anyone that is engaging in an act of grave bodily harm on you or any other innocent person, there is no need for a warning. By most states law, you're justified in "eliminating the threat." You're going to have more trouble in court, but even if you have a halfway competent lawyer, you'll be deemed justifiable in your actions.

Depending on the circumstances, if this guy was say 15 feet from me, and not actively stabbing someone at that moment, I would offer him a warning. But if he was 15 feet away and engaging/stabbing someone at that moment, I would fire without warning.

Two reasons, I know my ability to shoot at certain distances and hit my intended target as I spend a lot of time at the range. Also, how am I to know if his next thrust of the knife would be the deciding factor between this innocent persons life being taken.

Edit: Also I use jacketed hollow point rounds that won't exit your intended target.

+1

Anyone that is engaging in an act of grave bodily harm on you or any other innocent person there is no need for a warning. By most states law, you're justified in "eliminating the threat." You're going to have more trouble in court, but even if you have a halfway competent lawyer, you'll be deemed justifiable in your actions.

Depending on the circumstances, if this guy was say 15 feet from me, and not actively stabbing someone at that moment, I would offer him a warning. But if he was 15 feet away and engaging/stabbing someone at that moment, I would fire without warning.

Two reasons, I know my ability to shoot at certain distances and hit my intended target as I spend a lot of time at the range. Also, how am I to know if his next thrust of the knife would be the deciding factor between this innocent persons life being taken.

Edit: Also I use jacketed hollow point rounds that won't exit your intended target.

agreed, that's why even if someone was in my house stealing my VCR i wouldn't want to shoot them hands down. i would give them a chance to be cool(unless they were coming at me.) a human life is worth way more than any piece of electronics. just like this story.

Here's one for you; how many homicides with firearms were committed during the day this guy used his gun for something useful, in the USA? The answer is approximately 80.

And here's another comment; once you've been aimed in the head with a gun while trying to help someone, your perspective on how wonderful they are might change. But I don't really expect most of you to understand, you're just children that haven't seen real life outside TV anyway.

I am a soldier and have faced death at the hands of others on several occasions, and firmly believe that every citizen who wants to and isn't insane or a convicted felon, should be allowed to carry. An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.

I am a soldier and have faced death at the hands of others on several occasions, and firmly believe that every citizen who wants to and isn't insane or a convicted felon, should be allowed to carry. An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.

-=\

as long as we're both on the same page about not killing the innocent. all people are the same. both are citizens.

because they don't want to carry guns (while maybe silly and maybe not) we're both just as equal.

i get it if you don't wan to have a gun. fine by me. but when you start telling me that i shouldn't or don't have the right, you become almost a joke.

-=\

as long as we're both on the same page about not killing the innocent. all people are the same. both are citizens.

because they don't want to carry guns (while maybe silly and maybe not) we're both just as equal.

i get it if you don't wan to have a gun. fine by me. but when you start telling me that i shouldn't or don't have the right, you become almost a joke.

Agreed.

You sure do like to bash people don't you. "Insecure gun nuts" calling NRA members ignorant.

Btw what makes you think that because someone owns a gun it makes them "little insecure men"? Its called protecting yourself,

Truth.

Anyone who argues that they NEED to own a gun to "protect themselves" is paranoid and insecure. Thanks in large part to a media and gun lobby that makes money off selling fear, the truth of the situation has been lost.

And what is the truth? Simply that there is little or no chance you will EVER be in danger enough to ever need a gun to defend yourself or others within the borders of the United States.

These situations are so exceedingly rare that we only hear about a story like this one once every few YEARS. In a country of 311+ million people. Even in former gangland shooting zones, the real (rather than the perceived) danger has all but disappeared. And not because suddenly all the people "in the hood" are now armed and dangerous.

So the need for the security blanket of a personal firearm is based on an irrational fear...which is paranoia born of that fear and personal insecurity.

99.999999999% of American gun owners will NEVER have the occasion to use their weapon for other than target practice. And the majority that do accidentally shoot themselves, a family member, or commit suicide instead of actually protecting themselves or someone they love. Period.

But people who are afraid will latch on to anything (including manufactured "facts" paid for by the salesmen) to justify their irrational paranoia.

This is partially @ excalpius - However based on your views, I know this will be I'll agree we disagree.

People are very opinionated on this topic, so going to say my piece and let it be that.

Criminals can get access to guns illegally, no laws going to change that.

It's legal to own a gun (with some limits, convicted felony, etc).

Another factor, The denser the population tends to equal more gun control people.

However, the sparser the population tends to equal more gun rights people, think about it, how many minutes will it be for police to respond in your city... vs the small sheriff office serving a entire county?

(This is just looking at the police protection angle).

And using the news for any gauge of society for anything is flawed (for and against) stories.

The news focus on that 1% non-normal events (no matter what it is) the problem is when they put the extremes in your face day after day, you get view gets jaded.

Also liberal biased new sources will push the anti-gun agenda when they can. (Flipside Conservative will push there's as well) - and people typically watch what the want to hear.

However, again, most people have a strong opinion and this won't sway someone who's already for or against.

+1

Anyone that is engaging in an act of grave bodily harm on you or any other innocent person, there is no need for a warning. By most states law, you're justified in "eliminating the threat." You're going to have more trouble in court, but even if you have a halfway competent lawyer, you'll be deemed justifiable in your actions.

Depending on the circumstances, if this guy was say 15 feet from me, and not actively stabbing someone at that moment, I would offer him a warning. But if he was 15 feet away and engaging/stabbing someone at that moment, I would fire without warning.

Ever hear of the Tueller Drill? In 1983 Sgt. Dennis Tueller of the Salt Lake City PD ran a series of reaction time experiments to establish a "Danger Zone" distance; he came up with an average of 21 feet. If the attacker is within that distance the average person won't have time to accurately fire before an attacker can approach and make contact, be it with a knife or whatever, Depending on their individual reaction time some people may have to shoot sooner. The Tueller Drill now an accepted training exercise.

Edit: Also I use jacketed hollow point rounds that won't exit your intended target.

My carry pieces are the SIG Sauer P250sc or P239, both .40 short-barreled subcompacts. I use the special Federal XM40HA 135 grain Tactical HST developed for DHS and ICE to use in their HK P2000sk undercover subcompacts. These are very unlikely to over-penetrate and injure an innocent, but have a near explosive hydrostatic shock effect. Not in the catalog, but some discounters like Walmart, chain sporting goods stores or mail order ammo suppliers carry production overruns but labeled JHP instead of HST .

Truth.

Anyone who argues that they NEED to own a gun to "protect themselves" is paranoid and insecure. Thanks in large part to a media and gun lobby that makes money off selling fear, the truth of the situation has been lost.

And what is the truth? Simply that there is little or no chance you will EVER be in danger enough to ever need a gun to defend yourself or others within the borders of the United States.

These situations are so exceedingly rare that we only hear about a story like this one once every few YEARS. In a country of 311+ million people. Even in former gangland shooting zones, the real (rather than the perceived) danger has all but disappeared. And not because suddenly all the people "in the hood" are now armed and dangerous.

So the need for the security blanket of a personal firearm is based on an irrational fear...which is paranoia born of that fear and personal insecurity.

99.999999999% of American gun owners will NEVER have the occasion to use their weapon for other than target practice. And the majority that do accidentally shoot themselves, a family member, or commit suicide instead of actually protecting themselves or someone they love. Period.

But people who are afraid will latch on to anything (including manufactured "facts" paid for by the salesmen) to justify their irrational paranoia.

Sorry but I don't live in a fantasy world. Crime happens, its better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have one. Where are you getting your numbers at? The majority of gun owners will shoot themselves,a family member or commit suicide? Really so How many is that out of 84 million legal gun owners 83 million will accidently shoot themselves,a family member or commit suicide? Yeah you're pulling things out of thin air.. 1,300 people commit suicide with guns every year vs 84 million gun owners. Very small number and considering they would use something else to kill them selves if they didn't have a gun anyway. In 2006 339 children died of accidental shooting vs 84 million legal gun owners, that's far far FAR less than the majority.

The only one manufacturing facts is you.

Here's one for you; how many homicides with firearms were committed during the day this guy used his gun for something useful, in the USA? The answer is approximately 80.

And here's another comment; once you've been aimed in the head with a gun while trying to help someone, your perspective on how wonderful they are might change. But I don't really expect most of you to understand, you're just children that haven't seen real life outside TV anyway.

I was more nervous when I had somebody from the Bahrain military looking at me with their hand on their pistol at the chow hall than when I had some Afghan military actually point theirs at me. I think it was more scary knowing what not to expect than when the other guy was aiming at me from a guard tower. Anyway the guy in the chow hall ended up not doing anything.

Aren't firearms illegal in Finland anyway?

That's typical for the anti-gun crowd - they get some BS talking point from Brady or whatever (or make it up) figuring if they repeat it often enough it'll be believed.

The only people repeating one-off, non-representative events and propaganda sponsored by those that sell guns and make money from sale and their ownership are the people who constantly try to justify their complete surrender to fear.

No one here lives in a war zone.

And as I said earlier, I have no problem with well-trained and responsible people owning a pistol or rifle for home defense. Keeping it securely locked up keeps it out of the hands of children, casual visitors, and criminals and saves innocent lives.

That's pretty crazy. We recently had something similar here Down Under with a shooting in a mall, crazy times.

As long as the mentally ill don't get proper help and can get their hands on weapons, free societies will have to deal with events like this.

+

The only people repeating one-off, non-representative events and propaganda sponsored by those that sell guns and make money from sale and their ownership are the people who constantly try to justify their complete surrender to fear.

No one here lives in a war zone.

And as I said earlier, I have no problem with well-trained and responsible people owning a pistol or rifle for home defense. Keeping it securely locked up keeps it out of the hands of children, casual visitors, and criminals and saves innocent lives.

And you have no problem calling well-trained and responsible people "gun nuts" "ignorant NRA members" and "insecure little men"

As long as the mentally ill don't get proper help and can get their hands on weapons, free societies will have to deal with events like this.

So what do you suppose we do? Not sell knives in stores anymore??

My carry pieces are the SIG Sauer P250sc or P239, both .40 short-barreled subcompacts. I use the special Federal XM40HA 135 grain Tactical HST developed for DHS and ICE to use in their HK P2000sk undercover subcompacts. These are very unlikely to over-penetrate and injure an innocent, but have a near explosive hydrostatic shock effect.

Listen to yourself. You are making all the points I made (in general, and not referring to anyone here in particular) for me...

For example, you've stated in previous posts that you carry a gun because you are afraid you will be faced with another circumstance where you were on the scary end of a gun.

You've taken this fear to a level where it has become normal to you to publicly rationalize nonsense like "unlikely to over-penetrate and injure an innocent" as if people have different skin thickness based on situation or intent. Did you come up with those words, or are you parroting the marketing literature from people who have a consumer sales agenda you fell for?

In truth, because the odds are so infinitesimal that you would have been put in that situation in the first place (and I'm sincerely sorry that you were), the odds are now even more astronomical that you will ever find yourself in that situation again.

Of course, that is unless you actively seek out such situations, now that you feel the need to not be afraid at any cost...

But barring that irrational hypothetical reaction, you're already wasting a lot of time, money, and pretty juicy rationalizations just to make up for the fact that you had a very human reaction to a fear-inducing situation. This is and was NORMAL.

On a personal note, a little therapy would be a lot cheaper for you, more effective long term, and would reduce the potential risk you now pose to the rest of us.

Because for every 99 people like you who won't seek out a chance to assuage their fear through misguided action, there is one George Zimmerman. And no matter who was at fault in that situation, the truth is that if George hadn't been armed both of them would be alive to tell their story in court and we would have had a vastly improved chance to learn the truth of what really happened that rainy day.

Now, back to the general debate.

And you have no problem calling well-trained and responsible people "gun nuts" "ignorant NRA members" and "insecure little men"

So what do you suppose we do? Not sell knives in stores anymore??

Yes, it is my position that there isn't a member of the NRA who isn't compensating for insecurity and fear, unless they are just cynically profiting from the insecurity and fear of others, of course.

Since no one is advocating the removal of all guns from the hands of citizens...not even me, please read my other comments...it is clear the positions the NRA takes are because they prey on the fear and cowardice of insecure men.

The NRA "leadership" are con-men and cowards.

Guns and knives are not equivalent. There are MANY different ways of dealing with a knife-wielding assailant, even in the grocery store. And all of them give us all the benefit of TIME.

Guns can make one bad decision FINAL in an instant. From suicide to jealous rage, the difference between having a loaded gun on hand vs. having a kitchen knife on hand is night and day.

Regardless, the core issue in that case is the mental illness of the person in question and how the US abandons the mentally ill to be homeless or worse.

These people, if they've fallen through the cracks, will get their hands on something to cause harm to themselves or others. If they get their hands on gun(s) we get Virginia Tech. If they can't, we get a lone nut in a grocery store with a knife.

Given the choice as a hypothetical unarmed civilian, I'd prefer my odds of crowning the grocery store nut with a glass baking tray than trying to use that tray to stop a bullet...

Yes, it is my position that there isn't a member of the NRA who isn't compensating for insecurity and fear, unless they are just cynically profiting from the insecurity and fear of others, of course.

Since no one is advocating the removal of all guns from the hands of citizens...not even me, please read my other comments...it is clear the positions the NRA takes are because they prey on the fear and cowardice of insecure men.

The NRA "leadership" are con-men and cowards.

Guns and knives are not equivalent. There are MANY different ways of dealing with a knife-wielding assailant, even in the grocery store. And all of them give us all the benefit of TIME.

Guns can make one bad decision FINAL in an instant. From suicide to jealous rage, the difference between having a loaded gun on hand vs. having a kitchen knife on hand is night and day.

Regardless, the core issue in that case is the mental illness of the person in question and how the US abandons the mentally ill to be homeless or worse.

These people, if they've fallen through the cracks, will get their hands on something to cause harm to themselves or others. If they get their hands on gun(s) we get Virginia Tech. If they can't, we get a lone nut in a grocery store with a knife.

Given the choice as a hypothetical unarmed civilian, I'd prefer my odds of crowning the grocery store nut with a glass baking tray than trying to use that tray to stop a bullet...

I've came to the conclusion that you're just a troll, you claim you dont mind if people own guns then you bash the same people that you said you dont mind them owning guns by calling them insecure among other things. You sit here act as if the gun was in the hands of the bad guy and go on to say you'd rather be unarmed and beat the guy to death with a piece of glass, internet tough guy at his finest.

I've came to the conclusion that you're just a troll, you claim you dont mind if people own guns then you bash the same people that you said you dont mind them owning guns by calling them insecure among other things. You sit here act as if the gun was in the hands of the bad guy and go on to say you'd rather be unarmed and beat the guy to death with a piece of glass, internet tough guy at his finest.

Since you apparently can't win this debate through the logic and reason of your arguments, you've resorted to insults.

Your forfeit and surrender is hereby noted.

Since you apparently can't win this debate through the logic and reason of your arguments, you've resorted to insults.

Your forfeit and surrender is hereby noted.

By that logic, you forfeit and surrendered 3 pages ago when you stopped using logic and starting making up bs facts. Your forfeit and surrender is hereby noted.

By that logic, you forfeit and surrendered 3 pages ago when you stopped using logic and starting making up bs facts. Your forfeit and surrender is hereby noted.

Then challenge my facts with facts, and my opinions with your own!

Otherwise, you're currently using an "I'm rubber and you're glue" defense strategy...and no one is going to fall for that. 8P

Listen to yourself. You are making all the points I made (in general, and not referring to anyone here in particular) for me...

For example, you've stated in previous posts that you carry a gun because you are afraid you will be faced with another circumstance where you were on the scary end of a gun.

>

Now, back to the general debate.

The part you quoted was my reply to Marshall saying he used JHP's, not to you, and was to explain my choice of HST's - a next-gen technology.

Also, it's not fear but pragmatism There is a large number of violent sociopaths out there and some of us live in cluster zones; parts of the metro areas of Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, LA etc. By the time the cops arrive to a call (assuming you have time to make one) it's all over and someone's going to be on the ground, and I'm going to do my utmost to assure it's the other guy. Don't like it? Too bad.

There is a large number of violent sociopaths out there and some of us live in cluster zones; parts of the metro areas of Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, LA etc. By the time the cops arrive to a call ...

Fear. Irrational. Unreasonable. Unrealistic. Fear.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!