Shooting at Brooklyn Mall

I qualified my post with "If that is accurate", I'm sure there is a lot more to the story as you suggest.

However I still question why the civilian was carrying a firearm in a shopping mall: do people take firearms into public places thinking they can go full Rambo at a moment's notice without any regard for the safety of bystanders that will undoubtedly be caught in the crossfire?

Using that firearm in the way that the article suggested would be reckless.

However if I were in a shopping center and I heard gunshots, I would be pretty happy to have my firearm wielding brother next to me as we run for cover.
 
I qualified my post with "If that is accurate"
Yes I know.

, I'm sure there is a lot more to the story as you suggest.

However I still question why the civilian was carrying a firearm in a shopping mall: do people take firearms into public places thinking they can go full Rambo at a moment's notice without any regard for the safety of bystanders that will undoubtedly be caught in the crossfire?

As for the only "one shot", there was mention of three shots having been heard.

The end result is that there is now one more firearm in the hands of criminals, and if the civilian had not been carrying a firearm, the robbers probably would have left without firing any shots.

If the civilian has since died as you suggest, my sympathy is with his family and friends.

Yeah, I only heard one shot, but I was not in the mall.

That's allot like the thing about blaming rape victims for the way they dress...
I dont like guns, dont have one, and never will, but only because I would use it if I had it.
Our country we need people carrying guns... but they should have the right to use it.

I'm quite sure, if he did take out his firearm, he probably had to say stop, put down your weapons or something to the like.
If he could just have shot them and ask questions later, he would be ok, and they would not be walking around with an extra gun.
 
1. Why nobody gives us the public, a full description of the robbers?
2. FFS This is South Africa 2016. NEVER ever get involved if you stumble upon a violent crime! On occasion even the police stand down until the culprits finish.
 
Getaway vehicles described along with one of the suspects: https://twitter.com/MaxiConsultant/status/751032616137138176

Another news article: http://ewn.co.za/2016/07/07/Pretoria-police-probe-BrooklynMall-robbery

Police spokesperson Kay Makhubela said:
“They robbed the shop of coins and cash. On their way out they met a man who tried to apprehend them, they shot him and made off with his firearm.”

Again I qualify my post with if that news article and quote are accurate, the man put himself and others in danger especially since no shots had been fired prior to his attempt to apprehend the robbers, his own actions resulted in him being shot and his firearm being stolen.

And an older news article: http://ewn.co.za/2016/07/07/Reports-emerge-of-attempted-robbery-at-Brooklyn-Mall

That's allot like the thing about blaming rape victims for the way they dress...

I don't see how you could possibly make that association, you will have to spell it out for me step by step.

BTW, why did you post earlier that the civilian, who was shot, died? What is your source for that?
 
Last edited:
“When he walked past the shop, the first robber came out. I think my brother’s big size or the gun he carried gave him a fright,” Sarel said on Friday.

“The robber grabbed him by his arm. Bennie’s first reaction was to get away and he slapped the robber, who fell to the ground.”

Sarel said Bennie, who works for a security company, was about to draw his firearm to arrest the man.

“The second robber came out and shot my brother. The bullet went through his shoulder, down his back and was lodged behind the liver,” Venter said.
\\Record East
 
I qualified my post with "If that is accurate", I'm sure there is a lot more to the story as you suggest.

However I still question why the civilian was carrying a firearm in a shopping mall: do people take firearms into public places thinking they can go full Rambo at a moment's notice without any regard for the safety of bystanders that will undoubtedly be caught in the crossfire?

As for the only "one shot", there was mention of three shots having been heard.

The end result is that there is now one more firearm in the hands of criminals, and if the civilian had not been carrying a firearm, the robbers probably would have left without firing any shots.

If the civilian has since died as you suggest, my sympathy is with his family and friends.

So where must he put his gun when he gets to the mall?...

At least he tried to do something about the crime (citizens arrest). Most of you probably do 0...
 
He's a hero.
The sheeple don't even know they need protecting. Happy to be picked off one by one as long as they don't have to do anything and can let it be someone else's problem.
Sometimes you take a chance, sometimes you succeed, and sometimes you don't. I take my chances. So far it has worked for me 3-0 against them. Train regularly, and watch for the stopper groups they always have. There are always guys in the crowd who are lookouts. Be aware, and remove them from the gene pool when you can.
 
So where must he put his gun when he gets to the mall?...

How about leaving the firearm at home locked up in an approved firearms safe?

I have carried firearms on duty in an official capacity. I also had permission to be in possession of a 9mm off duty, luckily I was never in a situation where I needed to use that 9mm off duty, it was however locked away when I was off duty and I never took it with me when I needed to go somewhere public like a shopping centre.

Far too many firearms are in the hands of criminals after having been stolen from legitimate firearm owners, both in home invasion robberies and when carried in public: protecting one's family at home with a firearm is perfectly legitimate, however when you enter the public space you make yourself a potential target for criminals that realise you might be carrying a (hopefully) concealed firearm.

If people are carrying firearms to protect themselves in a potential hijacking, I seriously doubt that they would have the time and opportunity to successfully defend themselves in a stationary vehicle with armed hijackers pointing AK-47s at the vehicle, and when there are other occupants it is even more unlikely that the driver is going to risk the lives of a the other occupants by firing shots at hijackers.

It is not the responsibility of shoppers to provide armed shopping centre security services, it is the responsibility of shopping centre management companies to do everything possible to provide a safe and secure shopping environment, including working closely with SAPS.

Shopping centre robberies are already a huge problem and shopping centre management companies should be actively preventing all firearms from being brought into shopping centres. If that means security guards using metal detectors at all entrances (including delivery bays etc), so be it. There should also be security guards in the parking lots with 2-way radios on the lookout (before anyone suspicious gets to the metal detectors), looking for shady characters. Shopping centre management companies have for far too long created an environment where criminals can thrive, and most of this started when "car guards" started infesting shopping centre parking lots.

The problem of shopping centre robberies is endemic and necessitates a permanent SAPS presence, even if it is only a satellite horse trailer type of thing (at some big shopping centres this is sometimes the case).

Regular screening of security guards, especially credit checks for runaway debt, is also essential to try and minimise the possibility that criminals could bribe security guards to turn a blind eye.

Targeted social media campaigns, threatening stay-aways, would be very effective at forcing specific shopping centre management companies to get their act together.

At least he tried to do something about the crime (citizens arrest). Most of you probably do 0...

Yes, he tried to do something and it resulted in bullets flying in a crowded shopping centre with shoppers reportedly ducking for cover.

If the guy that was shot is actually a security guard, he should have realised that there would be more than one robber with spotters in the crowded shopping centre.

If you want to go full Rambo, at least wait until the robbers are far enough away that the risk of collateral damage is minimised.
 
You are so out of touch with reality it is hilarious. I'm not even going to start picking all the inaccuracies apart. No-one has that much time to waste.
Suffice to say you live in a dream world, and should rather not talk for the rest of us who are alive because of our licensed firearms.
 
You are so out of touch with reality it is hilarious. I'm not even going to start picking all the inaccuracies apart. No-one has that much time to waste.
Suffice to say you live in a dream world, and should rather not talk for the rest of us who are alive because of our licensed firearms.
This.
If you want to go full Rambo, at least wait until the robbers are far enough away that the risk of collateral damage is minimised.
Huh are you carrying a rifle with a scope? Do you know how hard it is to hit someone at 30meters in a hot situation with a hand gun, I do and you obviously don't.

Secondly then you'd be in big shyte anyhow.
 
So the consensus is that anyone who has access to an illegal or licensed (even in someone else's name) firearm has to take the firearm to the shopping mall and it's perfectly OK to use a crowded shopping mall as a shooting range without any regard for the safety of anyone that will be caught in the crossfire.

You are so out of touch with reality it is hilarious. I'm not even going to start picking all the inaccuracies apart. No-one has that much time to waste.
Suffice to say you live in a dream world, and should rather not talk for the rest of us who are alive because of our licensed firearms.

Did you come up with that empty reply after watching Trump videos on YouTube?

This.

Huh are you carrying a rifle with a scope? Do you know how hard it is to hit someone at 30meters in a hot situation with a hand gun, I do and you obviously don't.

Secondly then you'd be in big shyte anyhow.

Go read my previous post properly and in context instead of cherry-picking a quote.
 
You are so out of touch with reality it is hilarious. I'm not even going to start picking all the inaccuracies apart. No-one has that much time to waste.
Suffice to say you live in a dream world, and should rather not talk for the rest of us who are alive because of our licensed firearms.

Bona fide ninja discovered on Mybb, the special one :D

I'm alive and I have no firearm licensed or unlicensed, explain how that was possible???

OMG, this is going to be good.
 
So the consensus is that anyone who has access to an illegal or licensed (even in someone else's name) firearm has to take the firearm to the shopping mall and it's perfectly OK to use a crowded shopping mall as a shooting range without any regard for the safety of anyone that will be caught in the crossfire.

Please quote where anyone said anything of the sort.

Your solution would be best, but if they really wanted to work smarter about this they would have already. And the likelyhood of the populace in SA boycotting malls? :crylaugh:
 
Bona fide ninja discovered on Mybb, the special one :D

I'm alive and I have no firearm licensed or unlicensed, explain how that was possible???

OMG, this is going to be good.

I don't have either and I'm alive too.

But now I have to ask how many times have been the victim of armed robberies or similar?
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X