Business Owner Kills Armed Robbers

[KeypoX]

Originally posted by: adairusmc

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
The robbers (or their families) should be forced to pay for the bullets and whatever other damages they caused. Shooting robbers in the back should be legal. Everyone knows this.

I was robbed at gun point, when the robber was heading out the door I should have been able to shoot him in the back? I don't think so, you only shoot when a person's a threat. When they're hi tailing it away they're no longer a threat so shooting them should be illegal. This coming from somebody who was robbed with a Glock to the side of his head.

Speaking for myself, I personally view my property and money (even it is just pocket change) more valuable than the life of anyone that would try to take it from me by force.

So yes, you should be allowed to shoot them in the back fleeing, then charge their family with murder for raising such a fuck up.

Thats because your immature and stupid.

 

[thepd7]

Originally posted by: thescreensavers
at 20-30 feet with a 12 gauge shotgun at that distance is it hard to be accurate with it? I though after 10-15 feet it becomes highly inaccurate.

The Human laws that are written somewhere say you cant shoot people in the back even during war and crap, idk. I read it a while ago for some school paper

this is grave misinformation, shotguns don't spread nearly that fast. Have you heard of skeet shooting or sporting clays?

 

[mugs]

:thumbsup:

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: thescreensavers
at 20-30 feet with a 12 gauge shotgun at that distance is it hard to be accurate with it? I though after 10-15 feet it becomes highly inaccurate.

The Human laws that are written somewhere say you cant shoot people in the back even during war and crap, idk. I read it a while ago for some school paper

this is grave misinformation, shotguns don't spread nearly that fast. Have you heard of skeet shooting or sporting clays?

At 30 feet my 12 gauge still stays tightly grouped center mass with all buckshot probably within 12" circle. You're right, it is grave misinformation.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Team America, Fuck YEAH!

 

[Freshgeardude]

no jury is going to charge him with a crime. he rightfully defended his property. who is to say he didnt try to injure the guy he shot fleeing so the cops could catch him. thats all he needs to say.

good for him seriously

 

[Red Squirrel]

Awesome. I hope he gets zero legal charges.

 

[Eli]

:thumbsup:

 

[Schadenfroh]

While I hate to see bloodshed, it is difficult to have sympathy for armed robbers. There was a home invasion repelled not long ago around here.

http://www.thedailytimes.com/a...0090806/NEWS/908059925

A South Knoxville resident killed a 17-year-old boy and possibly wounded another suspect when he shot them during an early morning home invasion Wednesday, according to Knoxville Police.

 

[Eli]

Some of you are silly. This guy isn't going to be charged because it isn't illegal to shoot someone in the back once they have displayed deadly force. That's like saying all a robber has to do is turn his back to you and yell "TIME OUT!" and you will be charged with murder if you shoot. :laugh:

Once you pull out your weapon, you better be ready to fire. If they turn and run at that point and you hit them in the back, that's great.

 

[OCGuy]

Good for him. :thumbsup:

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
The robbers (or their families) should be forced to pay for the bullets and whatever other damages they caused. Shooting robbers in the back should be legal. Everyone knows this.

I was robbed at gun point, when the robber was heading out the door I should have been able to shoot him in the back? I don't think so, you only shoot when a person's a threat. When they're hi tailing it away they're no longer a threat so shooting them should be illegal. This coming from somebody who was robbed with a Glock to the side of his head.

"he was pointing his gun at me behind him as he was running away"

/case

 

[venkman]

Originally posted by: Exterous

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

he furious employee who had been pistol-whipped ran out of the store and leaned over the mortally wounded Footmon, cursing at him, witnesses said.

The worker went back into the store and dragged Morgan's body onto the sidewalk, yelling at him and kicking him, witnesses said.

"He stood over the body cursing him and shaking him, even though he was dead," said Matthew Viane, 38, who lives in the neighborhood. "He was screaming at him and stomping him. "He [the employee] said, 'You were going to kill me? Now you're dead!'"

This man is amazing.

Heh

What the story didn't tell you is that the owner than pulled his pants down and took a deuce on the corpse of the robber. yeah, he's just that hardcore.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Despite all the congratulations, Mr. Augusto said he wished that the men had left when he urged them to and that he would not have had to use the shotgun.

?I know the pain these people must feel,? he said, referring to the families of the two who were killed. ?I don?t know what feels worse, now or when my only son died.?

what a classy guy.
but i don't feel any pain for the perpetrators nor their families. F them all.

 

[xanis]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: Skoorb
They got owned. He broke the law probably with a back shot but hey slap on the wrist, maybe community service or something or volunteer work to teach a class on targeting.

My bet is it will even help his business.

Seriously. Who would you rather buy from? Some average Joe, or a kick-ass old dude that's willing to protect his (and possibly) your shit with a big fat 12-gauge?

 

[KeithP]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
In California he would get 15 to life for 2nd degree murder. Is it right? I don't know. Once the perp runs away I'm not sure if you have the right to shoot him in the back.

Yeah, but was he running away or just running for cover so he could try and return fire? In the end, I guess what is right and wrong doesn't matter in court, only what is legal and illegal.

-KeithP

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
The robbers (or their families) should be forced to pay for the bullets and whatever other damages they caused. Shooting robbers in the back should be legal. Everyone knows this.

I was robbed at gun point, when the robber was heading out the door I should have been able to shoot him in the back? I don't think so, you only shoot when a person's a threat. When they're hi tailing it away they're no longer a threat so shooting them should be illegal. This coming from somebody who was robbed with a Glock to the side of his head.

everyone's different. some people would piss their pants, some people would just feel shock, some people will want to fight back. no law can break being human and having an extreme fight or flight response and going with fight.

 

[OCGuy]

I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: KeithP

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
In California he would get 15 to life for 2nd degree murder. Is it right? I don't know. Once the perp runs away I'm not sure if you have the right to shoot him in the back.

Yeah, but was he running away or just running for cover so he could try and return fire? In the end, I guess what is right and wrong doesn't matter in court, only what is legal and illegal.

-KeithP

This guy is lucky, because what he did should technically be considered man slaughter. But, since he shot people who were robbing him. He more than likely will get off with a slap on the wrist. They will go lienant on him due to the circumstances. The fact he drug a dude he shot dead out of the store and proceeded to stomp his ass should result in at least probation. When the robber was DEAD he posed no threat, but the dude still continued on. In Cali he wouldn't get off easy, here man slaughter is man slaughter.

 

[Sea Moose]

Gotta admire American home made justice. I suppose that this is why you guys are allowed to bear arms.

The store owner pwned

 

[amicold]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: KeithP

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
In California he would get 15 to life for 2nd degree murder. Is it right? I don't know. Once the perp runs away I'm not sure if you have the right to shoot him in the back.

Yeah, but was he running away or just running for cover so he could try and return fire? In the end, I guess what is right and wrong doesn't matter in court, only what is legal and illegal.

-KeithP

This guy is lucky, because what he did should technically be considered man slaughter. But, since he shot people who were robbing him. He more than likely will get off with a slap on the wrist. They will go lienant on him due to the circumstances. The fact he drug a dude he shot dead out of the store and proceeded to stomp his ass should result in at least probation. When the robber was DEAD he posed no threat, but the dude still continued on. In Cali he wouldn't get off easy, here man slaughter is man slaughter.

Read the article again the owner did not drag one of the perps out, the man who the criminals pistol-whipped did.

 

[Venix]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: KeithP

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
In California he would get 15 to life for 2nd degree murder. Is it right? I don't know. Once the perp runs away I'm not sure if you have the right to shoot him in the back.

Yeah, but was he running away or just running for cover so he could try and return fire? In the end, I guess what is right and wrong doesn't matter in court, only what is legal and illegal.

-KeithP

This guy is lucky, because what he did should technically be considered man slaughter. But, since he shot people who were robbing him. He more than likely will get off with a slap on the wrist. They will go lienant on him due to the circumstances. The fact he drug a dude he shot dead out of the store and proceeded to stomp his ass should result in at least probation. When the robber was DEAD he posed no threat, but the dude still continued on. In Cali he wouldn't get off easy, here man slaughter is man slaughter.

The owner was not the person who dragged the corpse out of the store. He fired three times and then immediately disengaged when the threats were neutralized.

The owner's actions were not even remotely close to manslaughter or any other crime, as the police have already confirmed. Only a complete dipshit could possibly fault this man for his actions.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Venix

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: KeithP

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
In California he would get 15 to life for 2nd degree murder. Is it right? I don't know. Once the perp runs away I'm not sure if you have the right to shoot him in the back.

Yeah, but was he running away or just running for cover so he could try and return fire? In the end, I guess what is right and wrong doesn't matter in court, only what is legal and illegal.

-KeithP

This guy is lucky, because what he did should technically be considered man slaughter. But, since he shot people who were robbing him. He more than likely will get off with a slap on the wrist. They will go lienant on him due to the circumstances. The fact he drug a dude he shot dead out of the store and proceeded to stomp his ass should result in at least probation. When the robber was DEAD he posed no threat, but the dude still continued on. In Cali he wouldn't get off easy, here man slaughter is man slaughter.

The owner was not the person who dragged the corpse out of the store. He fired three times and then immediately disengaged when the threats were neutralized.

The owner's actions were not even remotely close to manslaughter or any other crime, as the police have already confirmed. Only a complete dipshit could possibly fault this man for his actions.

 

[irishScott]

Uh, for those of you saying you'd shoot them in the back, there's a good compromise solution here.

1. Get mugged
2. Muggers leave but don't realize you're carrying
3. Draw weapon, tell muggers to get on the ground, fire warning shot.
4. Muggers turn around to see WTF is going on. If they refuse to get on the ground, shoot them in the chest.
5. No back shot, say they were charging you, problem solved.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: theflyingpig
The robbers (or their families) should be forced to pay for the bullets and whatever other damages they caused. Shooting robbers in the back should be legal. Everyone knows this.

I was robbed at gun point, when the robber was heading out the door I should have been able to shoot him in the back? I don't think so, you only shoot when a person's a threat. When they're hi tailing it away they're no longer a threat so shooting them should be illegal. This coming from somebody who was robbed with a Glock to the side of his head.

Yeah, but being in the situation is entirely different, especially from person to person - your adrenaline is pumping, you're in the heat of the moment - I mean, imagine if it was your wife or girlfriend or S.O. they were pistol-whipping - wouldn't you do everything you could to protect them? You don't know if the bad guys are going out for more guns or if they're leaving for good. You're frightened and your blood is pumping and it's hard to think straight and then you realize you have something you can fight them with.

While I don't think killing someone is a good answer, I can't fault the owner for doing what he did - he was in a scary situation! I just think if you're stupid enough to rob someone, you should be fully prepared to deal with the consequences - including getting shot. i.e. don't rob anyone! 😀