CHL Holder Shoots Man On Bus
Witnesses in Houston report a shooting on a Metropolitan Transit Authority bus at the 11700 block of Westheimer around 11:45 AM on March 28, 2007. 
According to statements, Garrett Mallot was entering the bus when Otis James Francis bumped into him. The bump escalated quickly into argument. The argument escalated to deadly force.
"That guy said he was going to kick my ass," Mallot told police. He stated he then pulled a knife and Francis repeated the threat. Mallot then drew a a .357 magnum revolver and shot Francis COM in front of more than 20 passengers. Francis then ran to the front of the bus where he collapsed and died. Garrett Mallot holds a license for a concealed handgun.
Gwen Guidry, a nurse on her way to work at Methodist Hospital stated, “We saw this big light and this big pop. My ears are still ringing. I tried to revive him. I did what I could. But it wasn’t happening."
“The guy bumped him,” said Effrom Mooring who was on the bus. “They exchanged words. The guy pulled out a gun and shot him. Just for bumping him.”
“Everybody started ducking and hollering. He just put the gun back in his pants and politely walked to the back of the bus and sat down,” said Troy Andrews.
Troy Andrews’ wife was on the bus. “He was gasping for air and there’s no way she (Gwen Guidry) could help him.”
On arrival at the scene, Houston police found a compliant Mallot in the rear of the bus, his hands raised. He had surrendered his firearm to paramedics who were treating another passenger for chest pain, and attending to the deceased Francis. Garrett Mallot was taken into custody, and has now been charged with murder. If convicted, he faces 5 to 99 years, or life in prison. Mallot's attorney, Alvin Nunnery, was not immediately available for comment.
According to statements, Garrett Mallot was entering the bus when Otis James Francis bumped into him. The bump escalated quickly into argument. The argument escalated to deadly force."That guy said he was going to kick my ass," Mallot told police. He stated he then pulled a knife and Francis repeated the threat. Mallot then drew a a .357 magnum revolver and shot Francis COM in front of more than 20 passengers. Francis then ran to the front of the bus where he collapsed and died. Garrett Mallot holds a license for a concealed handgun.
Gwen Guidry, a nurse on her way to work at Methodist Hospital stated, “We saw this big light and this big pop. My ears are still ringing. I tried to revive him. I did what I could. But it wasn’t happening."
“The guy bumped him,” said Effrom Mooring who was on the bus. “They exchanged words. The guy pulled out a gun and shot him. Just for bumping him.”
“Everybody started ducking and hollering. He just put the gun back in his pants and politely walked to the back of the bus and sat down,” said Troy Andrews.
Troy Andrews’ wife was on the bus. “He was gasping for air and there’s no way she (Gwen Guidry) could help him.”
On arrival at the scene, Houston police found a compliant Mallot in the rear of the bus, his hands raised. He had surrendered his firearm to paramedics who were treating another passenger for chest pain, and attending to the deceased Francis. Garrett Mallot was taken into custody, and has now been charged with murder. If convicted, he faces 5 to 99 years, or life in prison. Mallot's attorney, Alvin Nunnery, was not immediately available for comment.
Labels: CCW, News, Self Defense
posted by Xavier at 6:16 AM
26 Comments:
any info about the knife?
herrmannek
One word, de-escalation.
Don't get into an argument over something so damned silly, if it comes to it, get off the bus and wait for the next one. Of course, this should take place before the knife comes out, its too late by then.
I agree, this was a bad shooting. I was always taught that as a gun owner, it's my responsibility to rise above the everyday crap people might throw at me because if not, dumb stuff like this happens.
If indeed there was a knife, that is a different story - although one has to wonder if the CHL holder in the article could have just gone a different way before it even got to that point.
..and who the heck surrenders their pistol to the paramedics, anyway?
thanks a lot knucklehead!
Jay asked "..and who the heck surrenders their pistol to the paramedics, anyway?"
During my career as a paramedic I had two cases where the offender presented me with a gun and one pistol I found on a lady after a cop had "searched" her.
I would not go so far as to condemn the shooting; Mallot was there and I was not.
But I'm with Jose. It sounds like there were lots of unused opportunities for Mallot to disengage and get away from the confrontation. This may or may not have been the case in this situation, but it sure as hell looks better to the cops and witnesses if the good guy tries to de-escalate before lighting the bad guy up.
the latest...
Prosecutors at a probable cause hearing said Garrett Mallot first pulled a knife, then a .357-caliber Magnum pistol during the dispute with Otis James Francis, 31, as the two rode a Metro bus in the 11700 block of Westheimer around 11:45 a.m. on Wednesday.
-----------
The CHL guy was apparently the prime instigator / escalator.
This guy should have been the better person and pardoned himself, even if it was the other guys fault.
We all know there is jack asses out there, but we have to be the better people then they are.
"Prosecutors at a probable cause hearing said Garrett Mallot first pulled a knife, then a .357-caliber Magnum pistol during the dispute with Otis James Francis"
What a f*cking moron. Expect to hear a lot more about this story in the mainstream media.
Some of you guys are thinking exactly like gun-control heads. "He makes us look bad", to paraphrase it. Ooooohhh! (wringing hands...) he had been anointed with the License issued by our Betters and he violated its term. May he burn in Hell!
But if we believe that the 2nd Amemdment applies to everyone--OK, let's exclude felons--then carrying a weapon should be like driving a car (OK, you still need a license to do that): almost everyone can do it who doesn't have a barring disability or a previous conviction for driving offenses.
This means that you'll find all strata of society and levels of intellingence represented behind the wheel. In the same way that some yahoos drive drunk or burn red lights, in a fully armed society (or at least one where the 2nd Amendment is applied as it should), you'll sometimes see minor arguments handled with the gun. It comes with the territory.
Let's not have an "elitist" gun attitude. It plays right into the hands of whose who want to disarm us.
This appears to be just the kind of shooting the anti's use against concealed carry. If the facts are correct all I can say is Gee, thanks.
Is there any info that the deceased was physically intimidating relative to the shooter? Did anyone corroborate the deceased's verbal threats reported by the shooter?
One hothead in several decades of shall issue CCW?
Looks like a good record to me. Punish this moron and move on.
Anonymous said, "Let's not have an "elitist" gun attitude. It plays right into the hands of whose who want to disarm us."
I disagree. I think the attitude of "Oh well, idiots own guns too" is much more dangerous to those of us who want to keep our rights. We need to call it as we see it.
Bearing in mind I wasn't there, and have limited information...yeah, there were possibly things that Mallot could have done to de-escalate...including walking away and taking the next bus. I don't carry, but obviously, one is going to be held to a higher standard if one does. If he had walked away from it, it is possible nothing more would have happened. It pays to keep in mind that the prosecutor has to agree that it was a lawful shooting. Otherwise, you go to jail. I would rather take a punch to the face than go to jail.
I agree with Kristopher. This appears to be an exception to the rule.
From Gun Facts: "Crime rates involving gun owners with carry permits have consistently been about 0.02% of carry permit holders since Florida’s right-to-carry law started in 1989."
I fully expect the anti's to make as much "hay" out of this as possible, regardless of the facts.
This incident is extremely troubling.
This incident could lead to deeper involvement of the so-called sciences of psychiatry and/or psychology in the evaluation of a person's fitness to be granted a CCW.
How many of you would like a psychiatrist or a psychologist determining whether you should have the constitutional right to defend your life with a concealed, loaded weapon?
If you all had to guess, how many psychiatrists or a psychologists are anti-gun?
Regardless of whether the shooter was justified--and first impressions suggest he wasn't--this whole thing is a black eye for CCW and for 2nd Amendment rights in general.
I wonder who vouched for the shooter's mental fitness.
This is not good.
This is bad.
We need to put on our thinking caps and figure out how to deal with this situation and others like it that will be equally harmful to the cause of 2nd Amendment rights.
In some states, the politicians are already "protecting us from ourselves."
This just makes it easier for them to justify doing so.
If this shooter is found guilty, I hope he is slammed at sentencing.
I am pissed off at him and the others who are pulling stunts like this.
He threw away a human life, his own life, and damaged the cause of the 2nd Amendment--especially in places where we need it the most.
This is not good.
ASMS
Universal City, CA
When I was working as a part-time paramedic I had one individual surrender his revolver to me while I treated him at an MVA scene. Dumb stuff...the really dumb stuf...really happens. As for Mr. Chucklehead the nut: Back in the attitude of "with friends like him gun owners don't need enemies."
And, you know what, Mr. Anonymous? Call me an elitist if you need to. get your cookies that way. Your remarks might have more weight if you actually signed them. There are many people who have a right to carry but who have no business with anything sharper than a pencil eraser. This moron was one. I will NOT suffer some idiotic and dangerous moron to have firearms in my presence without finding a way to disarm them. No matter what you feel common sense has to be in this argument. Heck, following that train of thought why not allow personal ownership and operation of jet planes by people who have no business with them?
I see "anonymous" has favored us with yet more of his wit. It is good to provoke honest thought. It is not good to recklessly inflame a discussion. This guy is unsuited to carry guns. He's a nut. Accused? Not really. "Hoist by his own petard" is more apt. I don't care very much what upsets you about having shrinks look you over. There are people who must never be allowed to own or use firearms. Your comment that people in an "armed society" sometimes settle arguments with guns misses the mark widely. You need to repeat over and again..."Deadly force to prevent deadly force." We are no longer in a society where yokels nattering about the fence line or who owns the apple tree should simply go home and get the musket and "let'er fly!" If you relish living in that sort of armed society go to Iran or Iraq. Perhaps Columbia or Peru? Not here champ. Not Here!!
This is bad press no matter how you try to spin it.
Remember that pure truth and logic are not what convince people.
All of the pro-2nd-Amendment folks who simple-mindedly say, "Justice is on our side, therefore our logically rigorous pronouncements cannot fail," are simply naive.
Every gain that has been made in the last 20 years can go up in smoke ON ONE NIGHT IN 2008 if crap like this keeps being pulled by morons like Mallot who kill people over getting bumped on a bus.
I'll gladly eat my words if I turn out to have been wrong and Mallot turns out to have been fully justified--but that is highly unlikely, I suspect.
You can compare the conscientiousness of lawfully armed gun owners/operators to the routine negligence of careless motor vehicle operators from now until the end of time--your logic will have no measurable influence on the vast majority of the uninformed, anti-gun voting public.
So while you sit here and preach to the choir about what a great record CCW holders have, the Democrats, Bloombergs, Daleys, Meninos, Brattons, Bacas, Villaraigosas, et alii will use actions such as Mallot's to overturn two decades of progress in right-to-carry reform--progress which has yet to reach MANY of the most powerful and populous states in the Union, including mine.
(FYI: My previous post is signed ASMS--the other "anonymous" is not mine.)
ASMS
Universal City, CA
We weren't on the bus. We don't really know what happened. Since Katrina, Houston has become an even more violently crime-ridden town.
The victim may have been a 8-foot tall Borg. And Mallot might have already been edgy. Or he may be a nut-job, we just don't know... CTK
Anonymous said, "Let's not have an "elitist" gun attitude. It plays right into the hands of whose who want to disarm us."
"I disagree. I think the attitude of "Oh well, idiots own guns too" is much more dangerous to those of us who want to keep our rights. We need to call it as we see it.""
Well, then this put us into the position of relying on the "authorities" to sort out the idiots and bar them from being issued a license to carry a weapon. So you need a license, first of all. And then who decides who/what is an "idiot" not worthy of the license? A guy named Schumer or a gal named Feinstein?
And I don't want to be too cynical but even if the guy who did the shooting in that Houston bus had been justified in doing so, do you really think it would change anything in the treatement he would receive in the media, or even in the courts?
I'm old enough to remember the Bernard Goetz affair in details. Setting aside the fact that Mr Goetz was a rather naive person, to put it charitably--as all his actions after the shooting demonstrated--you can find in all the details of that event a distillation of anything that is wrong with so-called "gun control"; the press; and the justice system. He ended up being the criminal and his aggressors being the victims.
Xavier, i apologize for interrupting the blog and I promise this will be the final off-tempo answer to Mr. Anonymous. Sir; You sound as a reasonable person in some way. Entering an ID isn't really hard. You may see the irony in your response about the "other anonymous" posting things you aren't. If you don't allow me to illuminate the question for you. When you cloak your acts under anonymity you become lumped in the batter with others of the same persuasion and desire for hiding behind your appellation. No matter who you are if you have something worth saying it is worth taking full credit for. In a sense, when you call yourself "anonymous" you are going to be called to task for anything said by others like you. Nice thing about using your own name or unique appellation is that you don't suffer ridicule for some of the other's perfidies. Regards. Alan
If Mallot was threatened by the guy with a knife, in a bus, he was in reasonable jeopardy of receiving great bodily harm, or death at the hands of the other, and the shooting was justified. It is always unfortunate that someone has to use deadly force, but lets celebrate the fact that Texas does have a CCW law, has a Castle Doctrine Law, that says you don't have to retreat from a place you are legally entitled to be, and that the CCW holder survived the assault. It makes no difference if he " escalated " the argument or not. No words justify pulling a knife and threatening someone with it.
Lets keep the facts in mind, and in order here. From what we have been told by this writer, the knife threat came BEFORE the shooting. Mallot is darn lucky he was not stabbed before he got his gun out, considering how close the other guy would have been to him on a bus.
The only reason this man is " giving " us a bad name, is the rather accusatorial attitude of some of the commentators here. Why do we always think that when someone shoots another, its murder?
A victim does not have to be even armed for there to be a justifiable shooting, if the defendant reasonably believed that the other man was going for a gun or other weapon, and the circumstances are such that he would not otherwise be able to protect himself if he doesn't shoot. I am reminded of People Vs. Ed. Cantrell, the sheriff in Wyoming charge with murdering another police officer inside his car, when words were exchanged, and Ed testified that the other officer threatened him, and then moved in a way that suggested to Ed that the man was going for his gun. Ed was faster and shot him dead. Gerry Spence defended the Sheriff, and he was acquitted. The press, and many people in the town who resented the Sheriff's crackdown on bars, and night spots, were all against him and wanted him convicted. A change of venue allowed a more reasoned view of all the evidence and the jury properly acquitted Mr. Cantrell.
So, Jay, I most respectfully disagree with you that this is a " Bad Shooting ". Shame on you for adding fuel to the anti-gunner's camp. Its guys like you that become the next Jim Zumbo!
Those of you capable of doing so, run the victims criminal history, there is more here than what meets the eye.
My question is how many people illegally carry knives or guns on the busses every day?
If it were the case that everyone went through a metal detector and if there was Metro Police on every bus then a person would not need to worry about the possibity of defending themselves.
The cost is too great and this will never happen, as it were it took 2 hours for the Houston Police to arrive after a fatal altercation. Law enforcement is spread way too thin, and they cannot prevent by thier presence this type of thing from happening.
When I have used the bus system over the past 35 years it has been for the most part uneventful, however a CCW still has to get from the bus to thier final destination.
When I last served on jury duty and the judge let us go at 8:00PM it was no party waiting downtown for 2 hours for a bus to take me back to my car at the park and ride.
If Metro had better bus schedules, and the HPD had a greater presence I feel a lot of people would not feel the need to arm themselves to defend themselves, or thier loved ones.
But with the addition of the CCW permits even though our police are overworked our crime rate is less, and they have less shootings to contend with justified or not than districts like D.C.
Just like there are illegal cars operated everyday, and there are collisions between them because of bad judgement from one driver or another legal or otherwise. There will be instances of legal handgun owners maybe making an error in judgement.
We will have to let a jury decide whether in this case an error in judgement was made, and if so what the consequences should be.
But although computers can be used for illegal or immoral purposes would the instance of an hacker justify removing everyones right to use a computer in a proper fashion?
We should not jump to conclusions, nor let political and media bias sway us into thinking like sheep. We should wait for the outcome and make rational decisions from the facts.
Dan
http://www.click2houston.com/news/13444644/detail.html
"Mr. Mallot, being significantly physically smaller than the victim, pulled out a knife"
"When he recognized that the deceased was still continuing toward him in an aggressive manner, already announcing his intention to hurt him physically, he (Mallot) pulled out his gun and he shot him one time."
Several witnesses testified that Mallot was defending himself. Mallot did not testify.
Francis(deceased) had a lengthy criminal past and had been arrested on charges of felony assault of a peace officer and fighting on two METRO buses.
Post a Comment
<< Home