Customer shoots 2 armed robbers

[Drm50]

A few years ago local boy got a position teaching in a University down South. He was a very meek type. He leased a apartment in a upscale apartment complex. His mother was going down with him to get the new apartment in shape and help him pick out fiurniture. They were taking stuff from the car to apartment when held up by a guy with a gun. They complied and handed over wallet & purse. Then for no reason the hood shot and killed him. Left the mother alone. This hood made Most Wanted program and did seven killings the same way before he was caught. He would have girlfriend drive him to a nice area where he would rob and kill his victims. The point is you never know what scum is going to do anymore. To much killing is unnessary and I think is brought of by politics and dope. I can see someone robbing. Right or wrong they have gained from the crime. Killing complete strangers for no reason is vandalism. I don't care what their excuse is. Nothing is gained by killing people. I'm not against killing as long as the right people get killed.

The return of Death sentence might have effect on murder rates. The return of prison sentences with hard labor attacked would save a lot of lives. A Perps first day cutting weeds and digging road ditches will make him reconsider his trade.

 

[stansdds]

Announced today will not be charged.

Excellent news!

 

[292]

Announced today will not be charged.

My interweb searching skills failed me. Where can I find that info?

 

[292]

I was spelling 7 Eleven wrong.

Police: Customer who shot, killed Virginia Beach robbery suspect will not face charges | WTKR.com

 

[Cortelli]

A case near me some time ago... a guy got into it with a neighbor, neighbor assulted him at his front door... both men tumbling down a half flight split level stairs. Guy draws a ppk/s and fires at neighbor as neighbor turns and runs out of guys's house. Guy follows him into the street and fires again, striking neighbor who dies. The guy claims self defense, is convicted anyway and sent to state prison.

I see so many cases... where defender carries it into the street while perp is fleeing. I feel that taking up a cover position to make sure perp is gone, renderng first aid to any injured, calling 9-1-1 is the correct action.

Even without the pursuit into the street, the guy might have been on thin ice legally in drawing and firing. Could be seen as an escalation from non-deadly force (the fist fight) to deadly force; doesn't help that in your telling the (ultimately) dead guy was first fired upon as he turned and ran away.

 

[Donn]

It's always interesting to read the range of opinions in threads like this. The original story did lack details, evidently it seems the grand jury learned enough to decide on no charges. Personally, I try to avoid convenience stores and gas stations after dark, never mind during the wee hours, regardless what I'm packing. Best to know the laws in your home state regarding concealed carry, not to mention having your lawyer's phone number in your wallet, tucked right behind your CPL.

 

[Muss Muggins]

If I'm standing by my car and they're still coming, I'm not defending the car . . .

In my state you can't use deadly force to defend property. And I wouldn't want to anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[flagman1776]

Even without the pursuit into the street, the guy might have been on thin ice legally in drawing and firing. Could be seen as an escalation from non-deadly force (the fist fight) to deadly force; doesn't help that in your telling the (ultimately) dead guy was first fired upon as he turned and ran away.

My best recollection is that the assailant was believed to not have been hit by the initial shot. I don't know if the fired slug was recovered. The testimony was that the action was very fast... the assailant may have been facing him when the first shot was fired but struck him in the back as he was turning (to run). If the first shot struck him, it might have been arguable had he not followed him into the street.

 

[Old cop]

The last time I went to a 7-11 @ 2 AM it was for coffee during a midnight shift when I was a young cop. Now I'm too old to stay up that late.

 

[Cortelli]

My best recollection is that the assailant was believed to not have been hit by the initial shot. I don't know if the fired slug was recovered. The testimony was that the action was very fast... the assailant may have been facing him when the first shot was fired but struck him in the back as he was turning (to run). If the first shot struck him, it might have been arguable had he not followed him into the street.

All true and I didn't intend to challenge your recollection or otherwise bag on your post in any way.

I'm just pointing out for the discussion that in some jurisdictions and under some prosecutors, applying deadly force to a non-deadly force assault can be enough to prosecute.

It's sort of annoyingly subjective - as self-defense, even involving deadly force, might be appropriate in where in fear of death or great bodily harm. On the other hand, bringing deadly force to a non-deadly force engagement might be seen as an escalation taking it outside of relevant self-defense law.

I liken it to the use of a stun gun, taser, or similar "non deadly" weapons. Use a stun gun in self-defense, and you will likely not be treated as if you had escalated a non-deadly force situation to deadly force. Use a stun gun to attack someone, and you have a very good chance of being charged with assault / battery with a deadly weapon. "Great bodily harm" has been defined in very elastic terms -- typically very elastic where the defendant is convicted of a crime and the task is to judge whether a "great bodily harm" enhancement is appropriate in sentencing or in the initial charging decision (in CA, serious bruising; a few stitches; etc. has been upheld as GBH); but where a prosecutor wants to prosecute someone using a gun in a fist-fight, even legitimate, professed fear of that nature of GBH is unlikely to carry the day.

 

[wetdog1911]

Update: One of the other customers in the store has established a Go Fund Me page for the shooter to help pay for his legal expenses. Just goes to show you just how grateful they are to him.

He's going to need it when one or both mama's sue him as soon as the right shyster comes along.

Wet

 

[Triggernosis]

I always told my guys that anyone out in the middle of the night is either delivering newspapers, a taxi carrying a drunk home, the cops or someone that is up to no good...

Apparently you have never had a wife or child with a fever or menstrual cramps in the middle of the night and your medicine cabinet is empty when they went to reach for something to make them feel better.

 

[Triggernosis]

I agree it's unclear if the armed citizen perceived there was an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury and that's a critical item as VA is an affirmative defense state. "No one points a gun at me and gets away with it" isn't a statement I'd choose to make before shooting someone in that legal environment, it implies that the motive may have been something other than an imminent threat.

IMHO, the armed citizen in question is very lucky that there were other bystanders who witnessed the robbery and shooting and are hailing him as a hero.

It could have been spun much differently. One of the suspects had a CO2 pistol that looked like a firearm. The suspects are also believed to have committed other robberies that night and on recent nights - robberies where no one was hurt, suggesting there was no risk of the victims getting shot, and thus no imminent threat. VA does not allow deadly force in defense of property, and certainly not defense of someone else's property.

To be fair, none of those facts were clearly known to the armed citizen at the time. None the less, a police chief with an aggressive anti-gun agenda, or a state's attorney with a similar anti-gun agenda could have resulted in the armed citizen being arrested and charged. Parts of VA are pro-gun, other parts are clearly anti-gun.

------

In any self defense shooting, if you add in some Monday morning quarterbacking, throw in a healthy pinch of anti-gun public outcry, and stir it with an anti-gun political agenda, you have a recipe where a well meaning armed citizen can easily end up in criminal or civil court.

With that in mind my first line of self defense is avoiding situations that require me to employ any other methods of self defense.

The only reason for a civilian to shoot and kill someone is if he/she believes their life is in danger or their family's life is in danger. If I were in a convenience store and it was being robbed, it's very well likely I may fear for my life. I will NOT give them the chance to kill me first- I'll take care of things the best I can and worry about the consequences later.

 

[V0OBWxZS16]

In looking at this event, I think that we all tend to ask ourselves, what would I have done if that was me. Prior to becoming disabled, my part-time job was as a Sunday newspaper truck driver, and I had to enter stores like this.

Now that I can carry outside of my home state (if I found myself in that situation today) is that whether I got involved was dependent upon how smart the robber was. My feeling would be:
a) robber wearing mask - smart person not intending to kill witnesses
b) robber not wearing mask - intends to leave no living witnesses
c) robber is jittery (whether wearing a mask or not) - someone is going to get hurt
My take on this could be wrong, but that would influence my actions. However, my plan of action would change the moment he/she starts shooting.

IMHO your feelings don't take into account that everyone knows that every stop-n-rob has video surveillance. My feelings therefore are:
- A robber without a mask is probably planning on "only" robbing the place (because the cost of being identified is low.)
- A robber with a mask is definitely planning something more than "just" a robbery (because the cost of being identified is not as low.)
- I agree with you on a jittery robber being bad news.