Store owner shoots robber, with a twist

[ubet]

I'm not sure where he's going to end legally, but this will be one to watch

http://concealednation.org/2018/08/store-owner-sees-robbery-on-camera-at-home-goes-to-store-shoots-and-kills-robbery-suspect/

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[SteyrAUG]

I'm not sure where he's going to end legally, but this will be one to watch

http://concealednation.org/2018/08/store-owner-sees-robbery-on-camera-at-home-goes-to-store-shoots-and-kills-robbery-suspect/

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Happened in FL a few times with no issues.

[titsonritz]

Happened in FL a few times with no issues.

Geography is the determining factor in these cases.

[AKDoug]

I commented on this one on Facebook. Regardless of the outcome, this is going to cost him some serious coin in lawyer fees. I am all for "stand your ground" laws in any location, and castle doctrine at your home. I've posted around here several times that I am not shooting someone stealing my stuff outside of my home, including stuff from my business. Just not worth the trouble or the money. I have pretty strong beliefs in the constitution and I value the 5th amendment as much as I do the 2nd. We are not cleared, both in statute and by the U.S. Constitution, to simply start whacking people who are committing theft outside an occupied home.

I'm actually in a similar situation as the guy in this story. My business (that I've owned for 18 yrs) has an alarm system. It notifies me first and not LEO due to the high volumes of false alarms. I then go to the business 3 miles away and determine if I need police. I drive around the building and observe if there are any unauthorized vehicles in the lot. I then check and see for any signs of forced entry on the three points of entry. If I don't see anything I have the alarm company re-set the alarm and I sit out in the parking lot for a while. If someone were to be inside they would set off the motion detectors rather quickly and then I'd call the cops. I've never had anyone actually in the building after an alarm.

If I were to see signs of B&E.. I would just back off and call the cops. No way am I clearing a 12,000 sqft building solo. Just not worth the trouble. My cameras will catch the action if there is any.

Call me a chicken shit, I could care less. I'm going to LIVE to retire AND I'm going to have my money to do it, not give it to some lawyer.

[HMM]

I commented on this one on Facebook. Regardless of the outcome, this is going to cost him some serious coin in lawyer fees. I am all for "stand your ground" laws in any location, and castle doctrine at your home. I've posted around here several times that I am not shooting someone stealing my stuff outside of my home, including stuff from my business. Just not worth the trouble or the money. I have pretty strong beliefs in the constitution and I value the 5th amendment as much as I do the 2nd. We are not cleared, both in statute and by the U.S. Constitution, to simply start whacking people who are committing theft outside an occupied home.

I'm actually in a similar situation as the guy in this story. My business (that I've owned for 18 yrs) has an alarm system. It notifies me first and not LEO due to the high volumes of false alarms. I then go to the business 3 miles away and determine if I need police. I drive around the building and observe if there are any unauthorized vehicles in the lot. I then check and see for any signs of forced entry on the three points of entry. If I don't see anything I have the alarm company re-set the alarm and I sit out in the parking lot for a while. If someone were to be inside they would set off the motion detectors rather quickly and then I'd call the cops. I've never had anyone actually in the building after an alarm.

If I were to see signs of B&E.. I would just back off and call the cops. No way am I clearing a 12,000 sqft building solo. Just not worth the trouble. My cameras will catch the action if there is any.

Call me a chicken shit, I could care less. I'm going to LIVE to retire AND I'm going to have my money to do it, not give it to some lawyer.

Great advice there!

[LMT Shooter]

Article says the store owner has been charged w/ voluntary manslaughter.

https://wlos.com/news/local/north-carolina-business-owner-accused-in-fatal-shooting

[ubet]

So you show up, someone is robbing you, and attempts to harm you, you aren't going to defend yourself? Legally is it right what this guy did? That's not for me to decide, morally, I think so. NO ONE has a right to take stuff that I own and have worked for because they're too effing lazy to do legal work. We start loosening laws on shooting burglars, we will start ridding this country of criminals.
I commented on this one on Facebook. Regardless of the outcome, this is going to cost him some serious coin in lawyer fees. I am all for "stand your ground" laws in any location, and castle doctrine at your home. I've posted around here several times that I am not shooting someone stealing my stuff outside of my home, including stuff from my business. Just not worth the trouble or the money. I have pretty strong beliefs in the constitution and I value the 5th amendment as much as I do the 2nd. We are not cleared, both in statute and by the U.S. Constitution, to simply start whacking people who are committing theft outside an occupied home.

I'm actually in a similar situation as the guy in this story. My business (that I've owned for 18 yrs) has an alarm system. It notifies me first and not LEO due to the high volumes of false alarms. I then go to the business 3 miles away and determine if I need police. I drive around the building and observe if there are any unauthorized vehicles in the lot. I then check and see for any signs of forced entry on the three points of entry. If I don't see anything I have the alarm company re-set the alarm and I sit out in the parking lot for a while. If someone were to be inside they would set off the motion detectors rather quickly and then I'd call the cops. I've never had anyone actually in the building after an alarm.

If I were to see signs of B&E.. I would just back off and call the cops. No way am I clearing a 12,000 sqft building solo. Just not worth the trouble. My cameras will catch the action if there is any.

Call me a chicken shit, I could care less. I'm going to LIVE to retire AND I'm going to have my money to do it, not give it to some lawyer.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Mr. Goodtimes]

It’s absolutely ridiculous that the legality of this is even a concern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LMT Shooter]

So you show up, someone is robbing you, and attempts to harm you, you aren't going to defend yourself? Legally is it right what this guy did? That's not for me to decide, morally, I think so. NO ONE has a right to take stuff that I own and have worked for because they're too effing lazy to do legal work. We start loosening laws on shooting burglars, we will start ridding this country of criminals.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

+1

Morally, the idea that a property owner is required to have a reason to believe that an intruder is a threat to ones life & safety before deadly force against said intruder can be legally justified, is horseshit. We ought to be allowed, legally, to assume that anyone entering either our property with obvious criminal intent, is a deadly threat, and treat them accordingly. Once they've broken the law by unlawfully entering, why is there ever a requirement to determine how many other laws they're willing to break, endangering lives & safety, before taking action?

We ought to have the right, under any & all circumstances, to confront anyone who violates the sanctity of our property, anytime & anywhere.

[LMT Shooter]

It’s absolutely ridiculous that the legality of this is even a concern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The word "ridiculous" is wholly inadequate for this.

[JulyAZ]

Well i guess I’m on a different side than some folks here. But taking someone’s life seems wrong when the items are covered by insurance, nobody’s life is in danger and you have a video tape recording the whole thing.

Nobody shouldve lost their life in this situation. Nobody’s life was in danger.

Showing up to serve out your own justice Judge Dredd style seems a little excessive over a broken window and a few items. Record the whole thing, make a good witness and see him get locked up.

I don’t see how you can justify this and get off as the store owner. You don’t shoot someone in the back running away, because the threat is gone. I feel the same concept applies here, there was no life or death threat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Hmac]

Well i guess I’m on a different side than some folks here. But taking someone’s life seems wrong when the items are covered by insurance, nobody’s life is in danger and you have a video tape recording the whole thing.

Nobody’s shouldve lost their life in this situation. Nobody’s life was in danger.

Showing up to serve out your own justice Judge Dredd style seems a little excessive over a broken window and a few items. Record the whole thing, make a good witness and see him get locked up.

I don’t see how you can justify this and get off as the store owner. You don’t shoot someone in the back running away, because the threat is gone. I feel the same concept applies here, there was no life or death threat.

Yeah, that's about where I am. This store owner could have avoided the lethal threat to himself if he'd just let the cops, whom he'd already called, show up and do their job. I have no problem with lethal force in self-defense. Property defense...I'm not on board. Having said that, I won't lose any sleep over a felon-in-progress reaping the whirlwind. It seems like, in a stand-your-ground state, that's something a burglar ought to consider as part of his pre-mission planning.

In a stand-your-ground state, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[AKDoug]

So you show up, someone is robbing you, and attempts to harm you, you aren't going to defend yourself? Legally is it right what this guy did? That's not for me to decide, morally, I think so. NO ONE has a right to take stuff that I own and have worked for because they're too effing lazy to do legal work. We start loosening laws on shooting burglars, we will start ridding this country of criminals.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I didn't say that. I made it clear in my post that I believe in stand your ground laws. Driving to a scene of a property crime and popping an unarmed perp is not stand your ground or even castle doctrine.

We all want the 2nd amendment to be understood literally. I believe the same thing in the 5th "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" is pretty damn clear in the 5th. Shooting unarmed people for property crimes, no matter how hard you work for it, is not where I'd like to see this country go.

Even though I hate playing Devil's advocate, here I go. What if it was one of his neighbor shop owners that came barreling out of that broken window, huffing and puffing after wrestling with the real perp, and takes a .45ACP to the melon from a well intended property owner? We have rules for the appropriate use of force and against vigilantism for a reason.

By all means, defend your house, defend your family if they're being assaulted, defend your car when you're in it, defend yourself in public. I'm 100% behind that. Using the excuse that someone is taking my stuff that I worked for is lame. Shit, the U.S. Government took over $100K of my hard earned money last year.. basically at gunpoint.

[titsonritz]

One died and one killed over pot growing gear. Wow.

[223to45]

I have no problem with what he did.

Might not get away with it legally. But I have no issues with it , a thug is a thug.

Time to start thinning the herd.

Police are generally useless when it comes to property crime, no money to be made.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[26 Inf]

I didn't say that. I made it clear in my post that I believe in stand your ground laws. Driving to a scene of a property crime and popping an unarmed perp is not stand your ground or even castle doctrine.

We all want the 2nd amendment to be understood literally. I believe the same thing in the 5th "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" is pretty damn clear in the 5th. Shooting unarmed people for property crimes, no matter how hard you work for it, is not where I'd like to see this country go.

Even though I hate playing Devil's advocate, here I go. What if it was one of his neighbor shop owners that came barreling out of that broken window, huffing and puffing after wrestling with the real perp, and takes a .45ACP to the melon from a well intended property owner? We have rules for the appropriate use of force and against vigilantism for a reason.

By all means, defend your house, defend your family if they're being assaulted, defend your car when you're in it, defend yourself in public. I'm 100% behind that. Using the excuse that someone is taking my stuff that I worked for is lame. Shit, the U.S. Government took over $100K of my hard earned money last year.. basically at gunpoint.

Well, yeah, but he punched his CONUS kill card.

BTW both of your posts are spot on.

[LMT Shooter]

I didn't say that. I made it clear in my post that I believe in stand your ground laws. Driving to a scene of a property crime and popping an unarmed perp is not stand your ground or even castle doctrine.

I get your point, but I feel that even when you aren't at your property, it's still your property. Any action that would be justified if I were already there ought to be equally justified if I show up after the fact if the perp is still there, including if I know the perp is there prior to my arrival/entry. If I pull into my drive & see a window broken out, and someone inside, can I then enter my own home?

We all want the 2nd amendment to be understood literally. I believe the same thing in the 5th "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" is pretty damn clear in the 5th. Shooting unarmed people for property crimes, no matter how hard you work for it, is not where I'd like to see this country go.

These are restrictions on what the government can do. I know it's popular for courts & other gov't officials to say it applies to every citizen, but I do not believe that's what our Founding Fathers meant. Where's the due process when shooting in justified self defense?

Even though I hate playing Devil's advocate, here I go. What if it was one of his neighbor shop owners that came barreling out of that broken window, huffing and puffing after wrestling with the real perp, and takes a .45ACP to the melon from a well intended property owner? We have rules for the appropriate use of force and against vigilantism for a reason.

Misuse of guns by others should not lead to a further infringement of my rights.


By all means, defend your house, defend your family if they're being assaulted, defend your car when you're in it, defend yourself in public. I'm 100% behind that. Using the excuse that someone is taking my stuff that I worked for is lame. Shit, the U.S. Government took over $100K of my hard earned money last year.. basically at gunpoint.


I don't think that a property owner should be a criminal for defending their property, nor ever afraid to enter it for any reason. If some folks don't want to do this for themselves, I have no argument against that.

[MegademiC]

Iirc its legal inTX.
I wont comment further on legality as its out of my lane, but morally I dont see an issue.


At the end if the day, legal or not, if you dont want to die- dont mess with other peoples stuff.
Its not difficult.

[SteyrAUG]

I didn't say that. I made it clear in my post that I believe in stand your ground laws. Driving to a scene of a property crime and popping an unarmed perp is not stand your ground or even castle doctrine.



Well here's the thing. Not all property is replaceable and some people will even be willing to sacrifice their own lives to protect certain things.

Will I run into a house on fire to rescue my grandfathers flag? Probably.

So if I'm willing to risk my life to protect certain items that are irreplaceable, the lives of anyone trying to steal those items are already forfeit. There is of course an easy way to prevent all of this, don't try and steal my shit because most of it is more valuable to me than the life of a thief and some of it is more valuable than even my own life.

Additionally, a shop owners entire future could be tied up in inventory, do you imagine insurance will provide full replacement value? In many cases, our business IS our 401k. And in my case specifically, we are talking firearms so it's in the community interests that a firearms inventory is not distributed to the local criminal community.

So I have a baseline position, that if you are breaking in you are here for the guns and if you are here for the guns then you are probably ready to kill people to get them. As a result I am going to act accordingly.

The only thing that will change any of the above is if it is OBVIOUS the individual is unarmed and alone.

[Watrdawg]

Well i guess I’m on a different side than some folks here. But taking someone’s life seems wrong when the items are covered by insurance, nobody’s life is in danger and you have a video tape recording the whole thing.

Nobody shouldve lost their life in this situation. Nobody’s life was in danger.

Showing up to serve out your own justice Judge Dredd style seems a little excessive over a broken window and a few items. Record the whole thing, make a good witness and see him get locked up.

I don’t see how you can justify this and get off as the store owner. You don’t shoot someone in the back running away, because the threat is gone. I feel the same concept applies here, there was no life or death threat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is where I'm at with this also. I understand defending your property and if you were already on scene when this started I have no issues what so ever with what went down. However, to interject yourself into this situation when you didn't have or need to is something completely different. The Police had already been notified and were on their way. No need to become part of the situation.

[B Cart]

Well i guess I’m on a different side than some folks here. But taking someone’s life seems wrong when the items are covered by insurance, nobody’s life is in danger and you have a video tape recording the whole thing.

Nobody shouldve lost their life in this situation. Nobody’s life was in danger.

Showing up to serve out your own justice Judge Dredd style seems a little excessive over a broken window and a few items. Record the whole thing, make a good witness and see him get locked up.

I don’t see how you can justify this and get off as the store owner. You don’t shoot someone in the back running away, because the threat is gone. I feel the same concept applies here, there was no life or death threat.



Yeah, that's about where I am. This store owner could have avoided the lethal threat to himself if he'd just let the cops, whom he'd already called, show up and do their job. I have no problem with lethal force in self-defense. Property defense...I'm not on board. Having said that, I won't lose any sleep over a felon-in-progress reaping the whirlwind. It seems like, in a stand-your-ground state, that's something a burglar ought to consider as part of his pre-mission planning.

In a stand-your-ground state, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

THIS^^. The police had already been called and were on their way. Why not be a good witness at this point and let the police grab the guy? Especially if the perp wasn't armed, why the need to kill him as he walks out? Don't get me wrong, i'm not losing any sleep over this criminal either, just seems like a lot of extra headache and legal fees for the business owner when he could have let the police handle it.

[docsherm]

Well i guess I’m on a different side than some folks here. But taking someone’s life seems wrong when the items are covered by insurance, nobody’s life is in danger and you have a video tape recording the whole thing.

Nobody shouldve lost their life in this situation. Nobody’s life was in danger.

Showing up to serve out your own justice Judge Dredd style seems a little excessive over a broken window and a few items. Record the whole thing, make a good witness and see him get locked up.

I don’t see how you can justify this and get off as the store owner. You don’t shoot someone in the back running away, because the threat is gone. I feel the same concept applies here, there was no life or death threat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is a real question, not trolling. The cops do so why can't we?

There are many states that have a fleeing felon law. It needs to apply to all.

We can did it here: http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas/

[jpmuscle]

See

Tennessee v Gardner


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JulyAZ]

This is a real question, not trolling. The cops do so why can't we?

There are many states that have a fleeing felon law. It needs to apply to all.

We can did it here: http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas/

I don’t believe cops are above the law, and even their shootings have to be justified (ideally), I just don’t see in this case how it was justified when there was no imitate threat of danger.

I believe there a line between killing someone and murdering someone. Killing can be justified, and murder can’t. I’m not sure where this case is though.

Plus how many people are ready to pay for defense attorneys when PDs have a team of lawyers ready to go on the drop of a dime.

I believe in defending yourself with all means necessary, but the guys with the lawyers to back their actions were already on the way. I think the store owner may have made a mess for himself.

Even if they don’t charge this guy, what if the family comes after him with a wrongful death suit.

All I’m saying is there was plenty of reasons in this situation just to sit back and wait.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[docsherm]

See

Tennessee v Gardner


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He was not LEO.


Here in Texas citizens are authorized to use deadly force in Defence of life or property. So it would be a good shoot.

https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-9-32.html

[Averageman]

So both the Police and the Store Owner got the alarm at the same time. The Store Owner calls 911 and then heads toward his store, more than likely alerting the 911 Dispatcher that he was on the way.
With all of that, the Store Owner gets there first. I would imagine he was afraid when he understood the criminal was still inside the store.
So with all of that, I wouldn't agree that shooting the guy was a good thing to do, but it was pretty much a series of events that went sideways on the guy.

[SHIVAN]

I don't even care, and barring some slam dunk claim by the shooter seems like an easy deadlocked jury.

[26 Inf]

This is a real question, not trolling. The cops do so why can't we?

There are many states that have a fleeing felon law. It needs to apply to all.

We can did it here: http://nation.time.com/2013/06/13/when-you-can-kill-in-texas/

Up until 1985 a few states had fleeing felon laws that allowed officers to use deadly force to apprehended any fleeing felon - even non-violent ones. By the time the SCOTUS decided the case of Tennessee v. Garner in 1985 most larger agencies and most states had adopted more stringent standards.

Today before an officer can use lethal force to apprehend someone trying to defeat an arrest by resistance or escape, the officer has to reasonably believe that they are faced with a force likely to cause death or great bodily harm, or have probable cause to believe the person has committed a crime involving the infliction, or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, or is using a weapon to facilitate escape and will be a continued threat unless arrested without delay.

So the police, in many cases must be more cerebral and restrained than citizens when using force. Probably as it should be in a Nation of Law.

Regarding your link - well, Texas. Need I say more. :sarcastic:

[Moose-Knuckle]

CRUCIFY HIM! CRUCIFY HIM! CRUCIFY HIM! :mad::mad::mad::mad:

I haven't been able to sleep since this senseless crime, I keep waking in cold sweats and experiencing urinary incontinence! If we would just beat our handguns into plowshares, and our fully semi-automatic assault rifles into pruninghooks for Christ's sake this poor, young, aspiring horticulturist would still be here curing cancer and shit. :cray::cray::cray::cray:

Damn this bourgeoisie business owner and his privileged CONUS kill card to the deepest blackest pit of H E L L ! :mad::mad::mad::mad:

#OneLess