Friday FGS

| January 15, 2021


FN 509 LS Edge

Cleveland Lyft driver fired for admitting to firing legally-owned gun during attempted carjacking

By Jim Nelson
CLEVELAND, Ohio (WOIO) – A Lyft driver has been fired by the ridesharing service after she admitted to firing her legally-owned and licensed gun during an attempted carjacking.

Cynthia Norman said she picked up a pair of young men — likely in their 20s — at an apartment complex in Cleveland’s Nottingham neighborhood around 1:00 a.m. Sunday.

As she arrived at the destination, the NEO Sports Plant, formerly known as the Euclid Sports Plant, she became concerned as it appeared the facility was closed.

That’s when the ride turned violent.

“I had to fight with these two men. I had one choking me from the back,” Norman told 19 News.

Norman said the other passenger, breaking Lyft’s COVID-19 protocol, insisted on sitting in the front seat.

She said he started punching her in the face as the man in the backseat choked her.

She was driving a rental car and refused to back down.

0 / 0 / 2
Read the rest of the article here: 13 ABC

Man Fatally Shot After Road Rage Incident in Scottsdale
Police in Scottsdale say a man has been fatally shot after a road rage incident.

SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. (AP) — A man has been fatally shot after a road rage incident in Scottsdale, according to police.

They said 42-year-old Nathan Lindman died after the shooting Sunday.

Police said Lindman and 27-year-old Andre Hall became involved in a road rage incident.

Hall left the scene and returned to his Scottsdale residence, but he was followed by Lindman and a verbal altercation between the two ensued in the parking lot.

During the altercation, Lindman allegedly reached into a bag.

The other man told police that he feared Lindman was reaching for a firearm, so he drew his own weapon and shot him.

1 / 0 / 0
Read the rest of the article here: US News

A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution… The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down… a person cannot be compelled ‘to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the constitution.’ —MURDOCK V. PENNSYLVANIA 319 US 105 (1942)

Category: Feel Good Stories

Comments (10)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. 11B-Mailclerk says:

    The Lyft driver should have refused the ride when the one would not comply with instructions. And bravo for putting that lead dot under the exclamation mark of “get out!”

    Lyft should be ashamed, for apparently deciding it is better a woman be robbed/raped/murdered than defend herself.

    Isn’t that “un-woke” to demand a woman just accept abuse, or worse?

    • MI Ranger says:

      Especially a woman of Kolor!

      Lyft needs to be cancelled. Apparently Lyft would rather have cash in their pocket than employees who can survive. I’ll bet Lyft will probably go after her now for not getting paid.

  2. My, My, My says:

    F’k Lyft for that rule. I am no lawyer, but curious if that policy violates Ohio’s “Parking Lot” Gun Law that was passed in 2017. Company does not own the vehicle she was driving, and I certainly do not think the company posted a prohibited sign in her rental vehicle.

  3. lyft, most likely another ANTI 2A company.

    • MI Ranger says:

      most likely?! Mot definitely…what part of Shall not be infringed do they not understand?

      • Hondo says:

        The Second Amendment restricts government actions. However, the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to private entities.

        Private employers are free to declare their businesses/workplaces “Please Rob Us – We’re Unarmed” zones “gun free zones” if they so desire, or to forbid their employees from being armed while working for the company. However, with rare exceptions people are not forced to accept a job with/continue working for such an employer if they personally find that type of “no firearms” policy unacceptable. (Military personnel with an active duty service obligation are the only such example I can think of, but I guess it’s possible there could be others. And last time I checked, no one is involuntarily inducted into the military these days.)

  4. KoB says:

    BZ to the young Lady for defending herself. I know times are tuff, but I do believe that I would take a pass on doing work for a company that advertised the fact that I was a rolling rape/rob/murder oppotunity. Anybody else remember when cab drivers were a favorite target until they started shooting the mofos? I’ll bet Pepperidge Farms Remembers.

    AZ Story is a repeat from Wednesday, but that is OK. Never get tired of stories with a happy ending…Or Happy Endings in general!

    The PIO for FN made hisself proud in the propaganda piece he wrote. Must be like Larsie Boi, paid by the word. The do need to hand one more piece of bling on the thing. /s/ Can the light be swapped out for a chainsaw bayonet?

  5. UpNorth says:

    If Murdock v. Pennsylvania has been decided, then why do states get away with demanding FOID cards, various fees for purchasing a firearm and such? Don’t those fly in the face of Murdoch?

    • gitarcarver says:

      For those who are unaware, Murdock v. Pennsylvania was a case where the Supreme Court ruled that a tax on Jehovah’s Witnesses selling / asking for donations for pamphlets was unConstitutional because it was a restraint of the First Amendment religious protections. The Court viewed the actions of the JW’s as part of their religion, and not commerce which could be taxed and regulated.

      No “right” is an absolute.

      While Murdock addresses the exercise of religion and speech, the Supreme Court did not say that the exercise of the First Amendment was absolute. For example, you cannot “preach” in the middle of a street, blocking traffic. These restrictions are called “time, place, and manner restrictions” (TPM) and the government must show that the restriction serves a legitimate governmental interest.

      FOID cards are issued to ensure that people are legally allowed to possess a firearm. (ie no felons, no mental illness, etc.) It is a legitimate governmental interest to try to ensure that only legally eligible citizens own a weapon.

      The case of United States v. Cruikshank was cited in Heller v. District of Columbia saying “States, we said, were free to restrict or protect the right under their police powers.”

      Presumably, an FOID card is that “police power” as it does not eliminate “the right to bear arms,” but only serves as a means to regulate a legitimate government interest in protecting other citizens and their rights.

  6. What’s with all those bells and whistles on that FN, and instead of the swap out with the light like KoB mentioned, how about an M-203 launcher where the light would be and then the chainsaw bayonet below it for a back up in case of a miss with the 203. What about a mini crossbow. Any other suggestions??????????