Man kills robber. Community divided.
- Thread starter ace_of_something
- Start date
How can someone say he isn't a hero? Because he fired four shots? Because he didn't stop to see if people were okay? That's the most asinine thing I've ever heard. Would they have rather had him do nothing? This guy was wearing a ski mask and carrying a shotgun in a store. I don't think he was there to pick up milk. I applaud the man for his actions. He may have very well saved lives.
What would you have done? Stood there like a lemon and watched, I suppose? at least he did something.
Sometimes that's better.Instant K4rma said:
If you, or anyone else in the thread, bothered to read the posts or check the articles- you'd know that the shotguns were empty.
You'd then realize this is why no one else got hurt. Not because of the guard, but because the shotguns were EMPTY.
He put 2 shots into the left arm of the 1st assailant before finding the torso. They found one of his bullets in the shotguns barrel. Sounds like the assailant had the gun pointed at the guard right? What do you think would have happened when you shoot a guy with a loaded shotgun, pointed at you, in the left arm?
The guard would likely be injured, if not killed.
And lord knows what the 2nd gunmen would have done with ammo. He certainly would have had time to cut the guard down while he was putting 4 shots into his friend, maybe take out some bystanders in the process in what otherwise would have been a grab and go. The third robber was a getaway driver who stayed with the running vehicle.
Long story short.
Right idea. Poor execution. Thank god the shotguns were empty.
How exactly could he have known the shotguns were empty? There is no way to tell whether or not a firearm is loaded, so he had to respond as if it were.xDarc said:
If you point a gun at a someone who knows how to respond to a potentially armed threat, he will shoot you down. He does not first ask you to demonstrate if it is loaded or not, if he did that, he'd be likely to get shot himself. It's better to shoot down a robber with a weapon that later turns out to be not armed, than to risk death by not doing a thing at all.
Yes, I agree 100%. If you see someone pointing a shotgun at someone, especially if that someone is you, your first gut instinct reaction is probably not "Oh, it's empty. No harm done." The guard reacted how anyone would in this situation. They see someone brandishing a firearm, so he draws his and fires. Seems perfectly logical.erbkaiser said:
I would give this man money to buy himself a beer, since I'm not old enough to buy it for him.
I'm not sure how security is taught, but in the military soldiers are taught two methods of engagement: controlled pair, and shoot-til-they're-down. With a controlled pair, you put two aimed shots into their torso and move to the next target. The other one is much more useful when someone is aiming at you, in which case you keep putting bullets in them until they run (which is what happened) or they go down because they really want to shoot at you.
If I had a sidearm, though, I'd be using .45 hollow points, because it's reportedly fairly difficult to get up after one of those hits you, nevermind two (which is the minimum a threat would get from me).
I'm not sure how security is taught, but in the military soldiers are taught two methods of engagement: controlled pair, and shoot-til-they're-down. With a controlled pair, you put two aimed shots into their torso and move to the next target. The other one is much more useful when someone is aiming at you, in which case you keep putting bullets in them until they run (which is what happened) or they go down because they really want to shoot at you.
If I had a sidearm, though, I'd be using .45 hollow points, because it's reportedly fairly difficult to get up after one of those hits you, nevermind two (which is the minimum a threat would get from me).
Exactly!erbkaiser said:
But it isn't a lone gunman. It's two guys, with scatter guns, with a crowd present, and he's one guy, a rent-a-cop at that; not John McClane.
From the details of the story, this guy is lucky they were empty or he or someone else, maybe both, would be dead. He obviously didn't consider any of this and just tugged the gun out of his shorts and hoped for the best. Luckily for him and possibly the bystanders, the shotguns were empty.
I carry too. I was a rent-a-cop too. I wouldn't be that irresponsible. If I was, I probably would have shot the two plain clothes cops that came into my work one night with guns out because someone had falsely called in a robbery.
What stood out to me the most in the article was the fact that it claims the man who was shot fled after being shot and was found dead later. If he fled after being shot, how do people expect the guard to be able to perform CPR? That fact, to me, makes it sound like people are looking for an issue with this.
Concealing and carrying is against the law. Case closed.
His actions in the store make him a "hero", but this trial is separate from that one. He shouldn't have been doing it in the first place.
His actions in the store make him a "hero", but this trial is separate from that one. He shouldn't have been doing it in the first place.
Agreed. I don't care if your black, white or green with purple poker dots, if your robbing a place with a firearm or doing any crime with a firearm, then you deserve what you get, weather the weapon was loaded or not.Eukaryote said:
I think the bloke should be thanked for (potentially) saving alot of lives.
Dude did nothing wrong. However, if a criminal dies doing violent crimes, if I were a lawmaker, I'd have his whole family charged with the crime and make them serve the time. Death isn't punishment enough for making a society crumble.
Make them think twice before listening to their violent music and media and committing a serious crime.
Make them think twice before listening to their violent music and media and committing a serious crime.
Lol, he was wearing a ski mask, how could he tell the colour of his skin, i doubt he was looking at any body part considering the shotgun.
Its basic self defense. While he shouldn't be carrying the weapon concealed like that he was in his right to shoot the robbers.
What's funny about that statement is that the shotguns were empty and no one's life was in jeopardy.RicoADF said:
What's kind of frightening is that had the shotguns been loaded, evidence suggests the assailant was aiming directly at the guard when he put those 4 rounds into him, the first two shots hitting the assailants left arm.
It's pretty easy to imagine the guard getting cut down in those first two shots, squeezing off reflexively only takes a hair, and certainly easier to imagine the 2nd assailant getting him thereafter. And then who knows what...
Think about it. This could have went very, very wrong.
Justified? Sure. Stupid and lucky? Definitely.
Uh oh, the guy doing something illegal was black and the person who stopped him was white? Racism!
Because, if the band Testament is to be believe, we live in a fucked up world. For some reason, only the police are allowed to stop crime. Everyone else has to just sit and watch.Mechsoap said:
Gun laws are supposed to be absolute. So fine the shooter, but make sure he isn't charged with any nonsensical humbug for reacting like a trained and armed (even former) security person should. Armed and masked robbers barge in. You react, take them out, whatever, number one priority is to avoid civilian casualties.