Man kills robber. Community divided.

[almostgold]

he's no hero. he just did what he did. I don't think he should be accused of murder, but come on. taking a life to save one is just putting the guilt on yourself.

He was in a Walgreens. I'm sure there was more than just one person there. Especially since there were what, three or four robbers?

Besides, he stopped people who had the intent to commit some pretty bad shit.

So he was in the right, even if the robber died.

no, there is no right in these situations. there is wrong, and slightly less wrong.
the 'hero' was slightly less wrong.

You're telling me that a man who drove off a group of armed robbers who--had very malicious intents--thereby potential saving the lives of the employees and customers, was only "slightly less wrong."

Look, these people were endangering the lives of innocents, and one of them suffered the consequences of his actions. It's just, and it's right.

No Latinidiot, in a situation like that the criminal's life is worth inherently less than the innocent's. Someone's gotta go. I'll be damned if its the innocent customers. He's a hero because he ended the life of the robber.

 

[Chris^^]

hats off to the guy, defending himself and others from any potential danger..
guy comes at me with a shotgun i'll blast him whether he's black or white..

 

[liquidmetal]

Four rounds? Sounds like there were two too many surviving robbers to me. Guy should have practiced more.

 

[Latinidiot]

he's no hero. he just did what he did. I don't think he should be accused of murder, but come on. taking a life to save one is just putting the guilt on yourself.

He was in a Walgreens. I'm sure there was more than just one person there. Especially since there were what, three or four robbers?

Besides, he stopped people who had the intent to commit some pretty bad shit.

So he was in the right, even if the robber died.

no, there is no right in these situations. there is wrong, and slightly less wrong.
the 'hero' was slightly less wrong.

You're telling me that a man who drove off a group of armed robbers who--had very malicious intents--thereby potential saving the lives of the employees and customers, was only "slightly less wrong."

Look, these people were endangering the lives of innocents, and one of them suffered the consequences of his actions. It's just, and it's right.

No Latinidiot, in a situation like that the criminal's life is worth inherently less than the innocent's. Someone's gotta go. I'll be damned if its the innocent customers. He's a hero because he ended the life of the robber.

in a society where killing is illegal, nobody should kill. what the guy did is forgivable, but he is not right. he, too did something questionable. but calling the man a hero is, in my mind, simply wrong.

 

[xDarc]

Wait, how does it being unloaded matter?

Because if it the shotguns were loaded, his first two shots into the first assailants left arm, when the shotgun was pointed directly at the guard, would likely have caused the first assailant to fire and cut down the guard.

Even if the first assailant didn't get the guard, the second one would have.

This guy is not a hero, he's a lucky fool who didn't stop to think for one second about how to engage 2 men with scatter guns near a crowd of bystanders.

I am telling you guys- if those shotguns would have been loaded, people would be dead BECAUSE of what this guy did.

The shooting is justified, but this guy is a moron.

 

[Loonerinoes]

He did what he thought was best, which is more than you can say for the idiots who rail on against his actions not because of the law, but out of a hidden envy, that they know they could never muster half the courage that guy had to have.

Also, on the racism part, this springs to mind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h_u3-mTZug

 

[DefunctTheory]

This was covered in an excellent episode of Boston Legal.

Watch it. It will explain everything.

 

[jpoon]

At least one robber is dead, some of the problem was solved, shame he didn't kill them all. I'd high 5 the guy who killed the moron robber. It's not like the dead kid would have changed his ways after this, he would have robbed more people.

 

[Kajt]

Three men armed with shotguns entered his store, he shot one of them. He did nothing wrong in my eyes, and should not be charged.

[sub]EDIT: He shouldn't have concealed the gun, though.[/sub]

 

[Gudrests]

...but...he needed to buy new shotgun barrels and just got back from skiing....he wasnt trying to kill anyone.... -_- for some reason i think the liberal side of your community was bitching ...QUICK...TRY AND REVIVE THE GUY YOU JUST SHOT!!!

 

[AceyBear]

Had the robbers been white i garuntee he woulda done the same thing
"Your white so go ahead and rob the story bro."
Umm... no?

 

[SlowShootinPete]

"excessive times" would require reloading and/or firing at a downed combatant.. the kid was able to flee the store, so it wasn't excessive.

I'd just like to add that, even if the guy you're shooting at is on the ground, if the weapon is still in his hands or close enough for him to reach, making sure he's absolutely dead is totally justified.

Spoiler

Would they have rather had him do nothing?

Sometimes that's better.

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.

This. If you shoot someone with a weapon pointed at people, they might get a shot off even if you mortally wound them. You have to destroy the frontal lobe to get an instant kill.

I think it's likely that the robbers wouldn't have shot anyone anyway.

Being a hunter it always mystifies him when they empty a magazine trying to hit a target when one careful shot would do the same.

To be fair, in a close-up gun fight, a careful shot is rarely an option. Hunters shoot at unaware targets using high-powered rifles. A single bullet from a handgun is not a reliable way to kill a person.

He was wearing a ski mask and had a shotgun, which was justification enough for preventative actions in my books.

This; why should we care about the rights of criminals? To me they give up their rights when they choose to murder, rape and steal.

Because if you don't, the definition of criminal might start getting vague, and then your government starts turning into INGSOC.

 

[SlowShootinPete]

Being a hunter it always mystifies him when they empty a magazine trying to hit a target when one careful shot would do the same.

To be fair, in a close-up gun fight, a careful shot is rarely an option. Hunters shoot at unaware targets using high-powered rifles. A single bullet from a handgun is not a reliable way to kill a person.

My apologies, I obviously forgot to edit that. I meant that they empty the magazine on a range, obviously I appreciate (as does my uncle, ex RAF) the need to make sure your assailant is dead before turning your back on them.

Oh.

You have nothing to apologize for, though. Simple misunderstanding.

 

[TheTim]

I wouldve shot the guy dead too.
He should be given the misdemeanor for the concealed weapon, but other then that he should be innocent.

 

[Queen Michael]

In my opinion, this man is a hero. He stopped an armed robber? I'll gladly chip in for a medal or buy him a beer.

 

[Atmos Duality]

As soon as the race card gets played, the nature of the incident seems to magically change.
So much for society being "progressive".

 

[Darkenwrath]

Why do you need a license to carry the weapon concealed or unconcealed> Is there a specific reason? Personally the guy was fully justified, they had shotguns and were threatening people, end of discussion.

 

[firedfns13]

Wait, how does it being unloaded matter?

Because if it the shotguns were loaded, his first two shots into the first assailants left arm, when the shotgun was pointed directly at the guard, would likely have caused the first assailant to fire and cut down the guard.

Even if the first assailant didn't get the guard, the second one would have.

This guy is not a hero, he's a lucky fool who didn't stop to think for one second about how to engage 2 men with scatter guns near a crowd of bystanders.

I am telling you guys- if those shotguns would have been loaded, people would be dead BECAUSE of what this guy did.

The shooting is justified, but this guy is a moron.

Fair enough, I didn't think it through like that (or read the article).

 

[Slayer_2]

This reminds me of that story about a robber who fell through a skylight when he was trying to rob a house. He then proceeded to sue the woman who owned the house. The fact that people get so hung up on this shit due to political correctness and America's obsession with lawsuits makes my blood boil.