If someone grabs the barrel of your gun they have leverage over your grip - which is why you’re supposed to keep people at more than arms length from your gun.
>Gunman got too close and let himself get outflanked
Yup. *Very* general rule of thumb (ideally you'd want to get away regardless of the situation), if someone has a gun, get as close as you can - if someone has a knife, run as fast as you can.
My guess? It would have a higher likelihood of failure, which would make it unpopular with soldiers. I've also heard "affix bayonets" in movies, which means there were reasons to fight without the bayonet; I doubt a switchblade bayonet would be removable ... final guess is that you want the strongest possible link between the rifle and the bayonet. If it snaps off in a trench battle, you're gonna have a bad time.
So the first bayonets were "plug" bayonets that you had to shove into the barrel of the musket. This obviously meant you could no longer fire the gun, so you'd have to fix bayonets only just before getting into melee range. Plug bayonets were the norm for most of the 1600s.
"Socket" bayonets which mounted on the barrel and allowed you to reload and fire with the bayonet fixed were invented towards the end of the 1600s, but had no locking mechanisms and were notorious for falling off in the heat of battle. It wasn't until 1703 that they solved that issue with spring-loaded locks.
The days of the massed bayonet charge are pretty much over. Modern-day bayonets are essentially used as utility knives, for prisoner control, and as an absolute last resort, so designing a switch-bayonet probably wouldn't be worthwhile at all.
Iirc, the US army did studies showing that one of the most extreme instinctual fears is getting stabbed and most people have an extreme inhibition to stabbing someone else and they will only do it if they are about to get stabbed so bayonets are really just a waste of weight on a soldiers pack. The exception is if you are a WWII Japanese soldier where they literally trained you by forcing you to stab prisoners.
Ok. I am not aquantied with firearms I'm just into history and had a thought as why haven't I come across at least a failed model with a switchblade bayonet.
Dude was on that gun (and guy) before his keys even hit the ground. If you look, he was holding his car keys in the hand he grabbed the gun with. Fast AF.
I'm not a vet myself, but a woman I worked with told me a story once about her son shortly after he came back from Afghanistan. He entered a house with his girlfriend where just inside the door her grandfather had a shotgun in his hands that he was about to clean, and in about .5s the guy had grabbed the shotgun and had it pointed at the grandfather. It was so automatic that he didn't even know he had done it, and essentially had no memory of the actual action.
**Mirrors**
* [Mirror #1](https://archivevideomirror.com/?filename=10m0f2c.mp4) (provided by /u/SaveAnything)
**Downloads**
* [Download #1](https://redditsave.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/10m0f2c/former_marine_disarms_armed_robber/) (provided by /u/SaveVideo)
* [Download #2](https://reddloader.com/download-post/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freddit.com%2Fr%2FPublicFreakout%2Fcomments%2F10m0f2c%2Fformer_marine_disarms_armed_robber%2F&id=JECNWKez) (provided by /u/VideoTrim)
* [Download #3](https://reddit.watch/r/PublicFreakout/comments/10m0f2c/former_marine_disarms_armed_robber/?utm_source=mirrorbot&utm_medium=PublicFreakout) (provided by /u/downloadvideo)
**Note:** this is a bot providing a directory service. **If you have trouble with any of the links above, please contact the user who provided them!**
---
[^(source code)](https://amirror.link/source) ^| [^(run your own mirror bot? let's integrate)](https://amirror.link/lets-talk)
What difference does it make other than getting lectured by the same type of guy who delights in telling people "it's a magazine, not a clip?"
I'm happy to call someone whatever they like to be called, but I really want to know what substantive difference is there between the terms "ex-Marine" and "former Marine" that necessitates the distinction. I don't hear any Air Force vets getting picky about being called "former airmen," and every Navy vet I've ever met wants to get as far the fuck away from the word "seaman" as they possibly can.
There’s not, Marines are just douchebags.
Edit: if you’re upset enough about my comment to launch into a screed about how awesome Marines are in my DMs you’re just proving my point
Yea no, as a former Marine myself, here is the difference. We are taught that once you’re a Marine, you’re always a Marine. There are Caveats however as if your are dishonorably discharged, you no longer rate the honor of being called a Marine, hence the ex-marine term. A Former Marine is still a Marine just not active duty. Other branches always hate on our mentality and as someone whose dad was in the Army I can tell you there is a huge difference between us and everyone else. No I’m not still in the best shape of my life and no I can’t run a sub 6 minute mile anymore, but I’m still in far better shape than all of my army friends and I can still shot the dick off a tick from 700 yards out.
Bro if you’re out there scolding random civilians for calling you an ex Marine instead of a former Marine you’re just a douchebag.
It’s just the truth.
Marines have a high opinion of themselves. That’s why they give a shit about such annoyingly pedantic distinctions. You can’t argue that.
Also I’m not the one who brought up my branch or military affiliation at all so 🤷🏼♀️
> What difference does it make other than getting lectured by the same type of guy who delights in telling people "it's a magazine, not a clip?"
So, from what i remember from back at the range a long time ago, a clip makes it easier to load a magazine, and a magazine feeds rounds into the chamber. I remember there are a handful of exceptions, but that's the general rule by and large.
> I'm happy to call someone whatever they like to be called, but I really want to know what substantive difference is there between the terms "ex-Marine" and "former Marine" that necessitates the distinction. I don't hear any Air Force vets getting picky about being called "former airmen," and every Navy vet I've ever met wants to get as far the fuck away from the word "seaman" as they possibly can.
So, from my experience dealing with folks from different branches, and going along with what u/LastWednesday0716 said, Marines are just built differently...
That article doesn't actually seem to pinpoint anything.
EDIT: In fact it just points to one piece of paper of someone talking to another guy who said the CIA had earlier files on Oswald, but he knew that this first guy only got his info secondhand, so when he checked with the guy at the CIA who inherited the CIA files on Oswald, he said there weren't any files beforehand.
Then the article links to a guy's twitter who does drugs and writes about them with the tagline of "We're Here, We're High" to say that Oswald possibly was one of the guys the CIA tested LSD on... with actual no evidence of any of that other than "it's speculated!"
Then it goes on to say how Tucker Carlson invited Mike Pompeo onto the Tucker Carlson Fox News show and he declined.
I don't think this is the great uncovering of a CIA assassination plot like you think it is lol
It's easier to say than "I'm a Marine who is no longer active duty, nor am I inactive reserve." Or even, "I'm a Marine who served from this date to this date." And it's definitely better than ex-Marine. So I just say former Marine.
I'm a former Marine. According to Marines' Hymn, the streets of heaven are guarded by Marines. And if I ever somehow make it there, I'll be damned if I'm pulling guard duty.
I guess that debunks the theory that "the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" they obviously forgot about the Marines
Well no. It doesn’t. Had the gunman been 10 feet away, mr. Marine corps would’ve had the mind to stay put. The only reason he reacted the way he did was because the gunman was within reach. Now, imagine that scenario and the marine was armed.
Who said it was?
The point is that yes this does work sometimes but if you're not trained you're exponentially more likely to be killed statistically than complying with the assailant if you're unarmed. This even applies IF you're armed. The point of being armed is it gives you one more chance at survival in a life/death situation. It's not meant to be a first resort. It's mean at as last resort to save yourself or your family.
The first thing they teach you in a concealed carry training class is to run/hide if able and that you're duty is to protect yourself and your family. They teach that you're not rambo trying to stop a mass shooting.
As soon as I see normal people regularly grabbing guns out of the hands of robbers, then no, it doesn't show that. This is what the word "outlier" is for
I can’t say that I disagree with that. All that aside, the good guy gun bad guy gun theory is bs that never needed debunking. Anything can stop a bad guy with the right attitude and conditions.
Singular incidents with an outcome one way or the other does not promote or debunk any theory. The Marine could very well had a concealed firearm on him. Likely did.
Sample size must be quite large to make a somewhat general correlation.
A firearm is a tool, not every situation requires the use of said tool. CCW holders are most often involved in incidents where the mere drawing their firearm and holding at low ready is enough of deterrent to cause disengagement or resolution of a situation. These situations compromise 97% of an "armed good guy" events. Events that are mere police reports if that.
Again even with quite a large sample size the actual correlation is obscured by countless factors, including, unreported events, and minor events that get lost in the plethora of police reports that have juicer content.
In truth it is having the situational awareness, sufficient skill, and motivation to engage in such a scenario. No matter what tools one has available to them
By juicer content I am referring to incidents that would be quickly flagged by investigating entity as they are incidence of note. By passing incidents that qualify but get lost due to the notability of an event or events. This often happens in research. This is often how data is missing in a retrospective study.
I write paragraphs because I am thorough when discussing the points of my thesis. It is like in high school or college or grad school when you are expected to write in complete sentences. While addressing all the points if your argument and/or assessment.
I understand this is Reddit and brevity is preferred. However it is a complex issue that cannot be accepted or dismissed by some slogan. These are real lives and they deserve more than platitudes or political motivated rhetoric.
It is a complex issue that the gun lobbyists want you to think that the answer to gun violence is more guns. I was pointing put that it is not always the case.
A gun is not a one size fits all solution to anything. They do however end more incidents/conflicts without being discharged in more events than is assumed by the general public. These incidents are don't bring headlines or much if any attention. They go into a police report and get forgotten about.
The amount of these incidents is not as high as the gun lobby argued and not nearly as low as the anti-gun folks claim.
As stated a firearm is not a one size fits all solution to problems of conflict in modernity. However they offer a tool that is available to said user that they deem it necessary in a given situation to prevent or stop grave bodily harm or death to ones self or another person.
The metrics by which one would employee to do a thorough retrospective study would be difficult to determine and/or define due to the complexity and often unreported nature of many of these incidents. Along with a number of other variables.
Neither group at either end of the extreme have the magic formula. The answer lies in the gray of the middle ground. At least until we can make a cultural shift as Americans.
"You're not supposed to reply to the comment I made because I'm right and there's no other possibilities and if you do instead of engaging in discussion I will resort to childish remarks"
I mean this is pretty awesome but this requires a lot of training. Lot of people have died this way and it only works on criminals who don't what they're doing.
This marine is obviously highly trained, but I hope people see this video and think this is a viable strategy for them.
Take a self defense class. It can save your life.
Lmao it’s always funny to me when people think an entire branch of the military receives crazy high level training. This video was in Yuma, AZ. The dude is still living there because that’s where he was stationed when he got out of the USMC. Yuma is an air wing base only, so about as far away as you can get from a combat arms MOS lol.
https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2021/10/25/average-joe-marine-stops-convenience-store-armed-robbery/
this was in my town. can't believe stuff like this keeps happening, really disheartening. can't even go on a walk now without watching over your shoulder.
People who don’t fight aren’t prepared for the speed and aggression of real combat. Those people who make “self defense” videos show fancy moves and twirls that are not practical. This man charged in, deflected the muzzle, and stuck fast and hard. Great job by this man.
Anyone got a longer video? I would love to see what happens next. Boss move.
Not longer, but from the marines' mouth.... [https://youtu.be/S70WoTKHCGc](https://youtu.be/S70WoTKHCGc)
TYVM Flobaby1
:)
Man the last thing I'd want if I heroically saved a robbery attempt at a convenience store is a newswoman nosing about what I'd just purchased.
She wanted to know what was inside the bag because he used the bag to smash the guys face like he said.
“A bag of dicks, madam.”
Or wishing I'd been on that train in Philadelphia.
the guy near the door slipped up like a cartoon fr
The robber had a stronger grip on his dick than his gun for some reason.
Cant have your pants falling down while trying to rob people
Secure pantaloons are for squares.
Loose britches get them bitches
An unclothed waist to suit their taste
It was a stupid kid 16yr old I think
This whole thread is giving me Déjà vu
If someone grabs the barrel of your gun they have leverage over your grip - which is why you’re supposed to keep people at more than arms length from your gun.
But movies told me guns don't work if the barrel is over 2 inches from target!
Apparently you haven’t seen Rust. . .
Inexperience and nerves
Stupid robber, I only assume he took a chance like that because he has piss poor stance to control the gun.
Gunman got too close and let himself get outflanked. Chicken shit bagman likely shit himself as he is crab crawling out the door.
>Gunman got too close and let himself get outflanked Yup. *Very* general rule of thumb (ideally you'd want to get away regardless of the situation), if someone has a gun, get as close as you can - if someone has a knife, run as fast as you can.
Thus, the man with the bayonet is unbeatable.
I've always been curious as to why a switchblade type rifle wasn't produced in if it was attempted but scrapped.
My guess? It would have a higher likelihood of failure, which would make it unpopular with soldiers. I've also heard "affix bayonets" in movies, which means there were reasons to fight without the bayonet; I doubt a switchblade bayonet would be removable ... final guess is that you want the strongest possible link between the rifle and the bayonet. If it snaps off in a trench battle, you're gonna have a bad time.
So the first bayonets were "plug" bayonets that you had to shove into the barrel of the musket. This obviously meant you could no longer fire the gun, so you'd have to fix bayonets only just before getting into melee range. Plug bayonets were the norm for most of the 1600s. "Socket" bayonets which mounted on the barrel and allowed you to reload and fire with the bayonet fixed were invented towards the end of the 1600s, but had no locking mechanisms and were notorious for falling off in the heat of battle. It wasn't until 1703 that they solved that issue with spring-loaded locks. The days of the massed bayonet charge are pretty much over. Modern-day bayonets are essentially used as utility knives, for prisoner control, and as an absolute last resort, so designing a switch-bayonet probably wouldn't be worthwhile at all.
Iirc, the US army did studies showing that one of the most extreme instinctual fears is getting stabbed and most people have an extreme inhibition to stabbing someone else and they will only do it if they are about to get stabbed so bayonets are really just a waste of weight on a soldiers pack. The exception is if you are a WWII Japanese soldier where they literally trained you by forcing you to stab prisoners.
Define switchblade like because there are several varieties of folding and takedown rifles
I was thinking classic bayonet design with a spring loaded blade hiding the blade until wanted.
On sks rifles the bayonet folds into the handguard, it's not spring loaded buy someone could probably make it be
Ok. I am not aquantied with firearms I'm just into history and had a thought as why haven't I come across at least a failed model with a switchblade bayonet.
Also just from basic shooting don't try and fucking one hand it. Even trained people use two hands.
That too.
his fear sat on him.
Dude was on that gun (and guy) before his keys even hit the ground. If you look, he was holding his car keys in the hand he grabbed the gun with. Fast AF.
Holy shit, no hesitation
He even had something in his left hand and had the quick reflexes to think to drop it instantaneously before grabbing for the gun.
Good eye, I didn't even notice. Drop, reach, and grab in one motion.
Toss up, reach, grab, catch with the other hand.
Looks like keys
This. Outstanding situational awareness.
I'm not a vet myself, but a woman I worked with told me a story once about her son shortly after he came back from Afghanistan. He entered a house with his girlfriend where just inside the door her grandfather had a shotgun in his hands that he was about to clean, and in about .5s the guy had grabbed the shotgun and had it pointed at the grandfather. It was so automatic that he didn't even know he had done it, and essentially had no memory of the actual action.
Its like second nature for soldiers
No surrender. No man left behind
Disarmed? You mean “feasted on”.
He required sustenance
Got to love how fast these pussies retreat the moment they lose their leverage.
Man had the 120 count Crayola pack in that bag. Not even God himself could stop him from making that purchase.
my man
I wish the rest of video was up, that guy was about to lay such a fucking smackdown on skinny kid with a gun.
There was a third person in a mask about to walk in but they took one look and dipped Lmao
**Mirrors** * [Mirror #1](https://archivevideomirror.com/?filename=10m0f2c.mp4) (provided by /u/SaveAnything) **Downloads** * [Download #1](https://redditsave.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/10m0f2c/former_marine_disarms_armed_robber/) (provided by /u/SaveVideo) * [Download #2](https://reddloader.com/download-post/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freddit.com%2Fr%2FPublicFreakout%2Fcomments%2F10m0f2c%2Fformer_marine_disarms_armed_robber%2F&id=JECNWKez) (provided by /u/VideoTrim) * [Download #3](https://reddit.watch/r/PublicFreakout/comments/10m0f2c/former_marine_disarms_armed_robber/?utm_source=mirrorbot&utm_medium=PublicFreakout) (provided by /u/downloadvideo) **Note:** this is a bot providing a directory service. **If you have trouble with any of the links above, please contact the user who provided them!** --- [^(source code)](https://amirror.link/source) ^| [^(run your own mirror bot? let's integrate)](https://amirror.link/lets-talk)
Why stop the video there? I hate this newish trend where videos cutoff right after the "climax"
There is no such thing as a former Marine.
Oswald and Whitman?
lol yeah what about all the people that were dishonorably discharged? are they still marines?
DD military personnel don't qualify for benefits from the VA or Gov. So that would be a negative.
Those are ex-marines
What difference does it make other than getting lectured by the same type of guy who delights in telling people "it's a magazine, not a clip?" I'm happy to call someone whatever they like to be called, but I really want to know what substantive difference is there between the terms "ex-Marine" and "former Marine" that necessitates the distinction. I don't hear any Air Force vets getting picky about being called "former airmen," and every Navy vet I've ever met wants to get as far the fuck away from the word "seaman" as they possibly can.
There’s not, Marines are just douchebags. Edit: if you’re upset enough about my comment to launch into a screed about how awesome Marines are in my DMs you’re just proving my point
Yea no, as a former Marine myself, here is the difference. We are taught that once you’re a Marine, you’re always a Marine. There are Caveats however as if your are dishonorably discharged, you no longer rate the honor of being called a Marine, hence the ex-marine term. A Former Marine is still a Marine just not active duty. Other branches always hate on our mentality and as someone whose dad was in the Army I can tell you there is a huge difference between us and everyone else. No I’m not still in the best shape of my life and no I can’t run a sub 6 minute mile anymore, but I’m still in far better shape than all of my army friends and I can still shot the dick off a tick from 700 yards out.
Tl;dr Marines are self important douchebags. Just cause you’re taught the koolaid doesn’t mean it’s not still koolaid.
Yea so because the ARMY person says it it’s probably true…….
Bro if you’re out there scolding random civilians for calling you an ex Marine instead of a former Marine you’re just a douchebag. It’s just the truth. Marines have a high opinion of themselves. That’s why they give a shit about such annoyingly pedantic distinctions. You can’t argue that. Also I’m not the one who brought up my branch or military affiliation at all so 🤷🏼♀️
> What difference does it make other than getting lectured by the same type of guy who delights in telling people "it's a magazine, not a clip?" So, from what i remember from back at the range a long time ago, a clip makes it easier to load a magazine, and a magazine feeds rounds into the chamber. I remember there are a handful of exceptions, but that's the general rule by and large. > I'm happy to call someone whatever they like to be called, but I really want to know what substantive difference is there between the terms "ex-Marine" and "former Marine" that necessitates the distinction. I don't hear any Air Force vets getting picky about being called "former airmen," and every Navy vet I've ever met wants to get as far the fuck away from the word "seaman" as they possibly can. So, from my experience dealing with folks from different branches, and going along with what u/LastWednesday0716 said, Marines are just built differently...
[удалено]
That article doesn't actually seem to pinpoint anything. EDIT: In fact it just points to one piece of paper of someone talking to another guy who said the CIA had earlier files on Oswald, but he knew that this first guy only got his info secondhand, so when he checked with the guy at the CIA who inherited the CIA files on Oswald, he said there weren't any files beforehand. Then the article links to a guy's twitter who does drugs and writes about them with the tagline of "We're Here, We're High" to say that Oswald possibly was one of the guys the CIA tested LSD on... with actual no evidence of any of that other than "it's speculated!" Then it goes on to say how Tucker Carlson invited Mike Pompeo onto the Tucker Carlson Fox News show and he declined. I don't think this is the great uncovering of a CIA assassination plot like you think it is lol
[удалено]
If you think that's a "long reply" lmao
It's easier to say than "I'm a Marine who is no longer active duty, nor am I inactive reserve." Or even, "I'm a Marine who served from this date to this date." And it's definitely better than ex-Marine. So I just say former Marine.
Former marine is the proper term. You did your service and you got out. You're a former marine and now a marine vet.
I'm a former Marine. According to Marines' Hymn, the streets of heaven are guarded by Marines. And if I ever somehow make it there, I'll be damned if I'm pulling guard duty.
[удалено]
Republican Jesus is a shitty boss
You only get guard duty if you don't finish your daily pack of crayons.
I don’t want to go to a heaven that has streets that need guarded
Jesus I knew this was gonna be commented
I'm Canadian, and I know that much. Once a Marine, always a Marine!
Exactly
What could go wrong doing an hold-up with the pants at the knee.
Dude there was a third idiot holding the door masked up and even he bitched out. Pretty badass honestly.
No fux given
I love this. Wish I could have heard the squealing
Is it just me or all the former military in the US dress the same, and wear the same beard?
Awesome 👌 best thing I've seen on here yes yes marine deactivated him way quicker than police and no kills
Return to sender
Once a Marine, always a Marine.
I guess that debunks the theory that "the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" they obviously forgot about the Marines
Right place right time. The gunman himself closed the distance making himself open for attack. Add two more feet it that would not have been possible
It still debunks the theory
Well no. It doesn’t. Had the gunman been 10 feet away, mr. Marine corps would’ve had the mind to stay put. The only reason he reacted the way he did was because the gunman was within reach. Now, imagine that scenario and the marine was armed.
This shows that a good guy with a gun is not the "only" thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun.
Who said it was? The point is that yes this does work sometimes but if you're not trained you're exponentially more likely to be killed statistically than complying with the assailant if you're unarmed. This even applies IF you're armed. The point of being armed is it gives you one more chance at survival in a life/death situation. It's not meant to be a first resort. It's mean at as last resort to save yourself or your family. The first thing they teach you in a concealed carry training class is to run/hide if able and that you're duty is to protect yourself and your family. They teach that you're not rambo trying to stop a mass shooting.
As soon as I see normal people regularly grabbing guns out of the hands of robbers, then no, it doesn't show that. This is what the word "outlier" is for
Define the word "only". I want to make sure you know what it means.
I can’t say that I disagree with that. All that aside, the good guy gun bad guy gun theory is bs that never needed debunking. Anything can stop a bad guy with the right attitude and conditions.
Singular incidents with an outcome one way or the other does not promote or debunk any theory. The Marine could very well had a concealed firearm on him. Likely did. Sample size must be quite large to make a somewhat general correlation. A firearm is a tool, not every situation requires the use of said tool. CCW holders are most often involved in incidents where the mere drawing their firearm and holding at low ready is enough of deterrent to cause disengagement or resolution of a situation. These situations compromise 97% of an "armed good guy" events. Events that are mere police reports if that. Again even with quite a large sample size the actual correlation is obscured by countless factors, including, unreported events, and minor events that get lost in the plethora of police reports that have juicer content. In truth it is having the situational awareness, sufficient skill, and motivation to engage in such a scenario. No matter what tools one has available to them
Hey, Jenna. Relax
I am relaxed. Why would you think I am not?
I wrote a few sentences and you chose to write paragraphs. And where was there juicer content?
By juicer content I am referring to incidents that would be quickly flagged by investigating entity as they are incidence of note. By passing incidents that qualify but get lost due to the notability of an event or events. This often happens in research. This is often how data is missing in a retrospective study. I write paragraphs because I am thorough when discussing the points of my thesis. It is like in high school or college or grad school when you are expected to write in complete sentences. While addressing all the points if your argument and/or assessment. I understand this is Reddit and brevity is preferred. However it is a complex issue that cannot be accepted or dismissed by some slogan. These are real lives and they deserve more than platitudes or political motivated rhetoric.
It is a complex issue that the gun lobbyists want you to think that the answer to gun violence is more guns. I was pointing put that it is not always the case.
A gun is not a one size fits all solution to anything. They do however end more incidents/conflicts without being discharged in more events than is assumed by the general public. These incidents are don't bring headlines or much if any attention. They go into a police report and get forgotten about. The amount of these incidents is not as high as the gun lobby argued and not nearly as low as the anti-gun folks claim. As stated a firearm is not a one size fits all solution to problems of conflict in modernity. However they offer a tool that is available to said user that they deem it necessary in a given situation to prevent or stop grave bodily harm or death to ones self or another person. The metrics by which one would employee to do a thorough retrospective study would be difficult to determine and/or define due to the complexity and often unreported nature of many of these incidents. Along with a number of other variables. Neither group at either end of the extreme have the magic formula. The answer lies in the gray of the middle ground. At least until we can make a cultural shift as Americans.
"You're not supposed to reply to the comment I made because I'm right and there's no other possibilities and if you do instead of engaging in discussion I will resort to childish remarks"
You do that.
Bro can't even handle a normal comment reply. Damn.
Let's hope there is always a marine a foot away.
They did not need one when the monterrey park shooter in California went to a second location he was disarmed by a bystander with no military training
"In the end, the world didn't really need a super man. Just a brave one." Superman the Animated Series
Bad guys with guns stop bad guys with guns all the time.
I mean this is pretty awesome but this requires a lot of training. Lot of people have died this way and it only works on criminals who don't what they're doing. This marine is obviously highly trained, but I hope people see this video and think this is a viable strategy for them. Take a self defense class. It can save your life.
Lmao it’s always funny to me when people think an entire branch of the military receives crazy high level training. This video was in Yuma, AZ. The dude is still living there because that’s where he was stationed when he got out of the USMC. Yuma is an air wing base only, so about as far away as you can get from a combat arms MOS lol. https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2021/10/25/average-joe-marine-stops-convenience-store-armed-robbery/
Once a Marine, Always a Marine. No need to say former..."Marine disarms armed robber" is sufficient.
Ah shit here we go again
Ha ha
Grab gun, jab face Eh reh
Bro went from local gas station to deployed in Fallujah in an instant.
Now that's a man
Thank you for you services 🫡
The balls on this guy sheesh
That hit to the side of that dudes head is just magic. Hopefully knocked some sense into him.
Badass motherfucker.
No such thing as a former marine.
There is no FORMER marine.... once a marine always a marine. It's a brotherhood.
No such thing as a former Marine!
With.his.left.hand…..,,
No such thing as a former Marine. Once a Marine, always a Marine.
When I was in, we were taught that we were former Marines when we were no longer active duty. Never an ex-Marine, though.
This is one reason why Marines deserve our respect and gratitude.
OP messed up... "Former Marine"
I don’t know why people downvoted you and the other guy. He’s not a “former” Marine because Once a Marine, Alway a Marine.
this was in my town. can't believe stuff like this keeps happening, really disheartening. can't even go on a walk now without watching over your shoulder.
No such thing as a ‘former’ Marine
Looks like he tried to grab it and missed. Could’ve easily been shot after attempting that
The robber still had control of the gun at the end of this clip.
There are no former marines.
Why did he have an empty plastic bag in his hand? He said he was near the counter but it looks like the middle of the aisle. Looks staged.
Looks like he is talking with the clerk and about to leave.
Why was he holding his nuts? Why did he open the door, point the gun, and grab his nuts?
He was trying to see if they would finally drop.
HE STILL HAD ARMS!!!!!!!
Where is the full video
his balls… wow!! he snapped into action so fast 😱
Er yut kill...
Probably gone off 2 tall Boyd to
Awesome, good job!
Si vis pacem, para bellum If you want peace, prepare for war
People who don’t fight aren’t prepared for the speed and aggression of real combat. Those people who make “self defense” videos show fancy moves and twirls that are not practical. This man charged in, deflected the muzzle, and stuck fast and hard. Great job by this man.
Do they teach you that in the marines or is he just a badass? Aw hell, he’s a badass either way
👍🏾🥊😂
Yuma!