man shoots robber in the back inside of a cafe
Yes he committed murder. The robber was facing the door, appearing to leave. The man shot him in the back. May be legal? When he walked over to the robber and shot him two more times, that made it murder. You can only shoot until the perpetrator is disabled.
It’s not so simple.
Check out the other threads.
In Texas a gunman doesn’t have to be facing you to be a threat. We don’t volunteer for standoffs, and if he’s presenting a gun, he’s already beaten you to a draw. We don’t know for sure if he was leaving. Also, what if the person dies from the second shot you fire? Technically you shot him till he died… I’ve agreed that the last shot to the head doesn’t appear to be defensive, but I wasn’t there.
But we do have video.
Touche! However, It is not my job to say he did or didn’t do something, with certainty. I will only to form an opinion from what I can see. To me it looks like it started as a righteous shoot, and ended with a “wanna rob me?? FU!” shot, but the final say isn’t up to me. Rittenhouse should be in prison depending on who you ask, and to me, at one point it seemed like he could have ended up there. We aren’t going to get back into that, but all ended as it should according to the law. Evidence just like the evidence in this incident came forth, and a jury decided what happened was righteous. Will the same decision be made if this goes to the court? Idk, but we may see.
One thing is sure, though; we will all find out in just a little while. This is a developing story.
I have not seen any print to the effect that a man is a threat if he is not facing you. He may be facings away from you and if that is the case and other people’s lives are threatened then the person could shoot. Can you share with me the place you received you information so I can check. Hope you have a wonderful new year
The fact here is that if you have to shoot you must stop shooting when the threat is over. I watched the video several times and the perp was not making any hostel moves toward his weapon. Therefore when the man approached the perp and shot him again it is not in self defense and could be interpreted as murder.
Say you live in a two story house with stairs to the second floor opposite the handrail of the second floor. You see an invader walking up them with a firearm. Are you going to let him get to the top of the stairs and facing you before eliminating the obvious threat? Actual scenario in which the woman engaged the threat from behind and was not arrested/detained/etc. I looked for the story last night but can’t find it. If I am able to find it, I will share. I learned about that example in my cc class years ago.
The difference is where the shoot took place, what’s legal in TX does not equate to legal in many states. Mine, he’d be going to jail. Once he shot him in the back it was voluntary manslaughter, finishing him off was murder. Without sound it’s hard to tell, let’s say for discussion purposes he yells I’m gonna kill all you mofo’s, I’m emptying my clip into him regardless of what way he’s facing and taking my chance at trial, if he’s on his way out the door, he’s no longer a threat, so “I was in fear for my life” has passed and it’s not legal to shoot him in the back in my state. YMNV
I believe (and am sure that a Texan or two will correct me if I’m wrong) that in TX you can protect personal property and/or possessions with deadly force whereas most other states only allow the protection of your life with deadly force.
That’s why I said this. As for protecting personal property, under Penal Code 9.42, deadly force may be used to protect land or property when a person reasonably believes that deadly force is immediately necessary to prevent arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft at night, or criminal mischief during nighttime; prevent someone fleeing with property after committing burglary, robbery, or aggravated robbery. I will say it’s important to pick your battles when it comes to that here. Long live the Lonestar State!
I first heard about this from tom Grieve, who is a frequent guest in USCCA videos.
I think we all agree that the first 4 shots were justified. He was walking around waving what appeared to be a firearm (we don’t find this out until the end mind you so the threat is still legitimate), We cannot hear what is being said, and even though he appears to be headed for the door, he does still wave his gun at the patron sitting next to the door.
The second set of four shots are a “wash”, you can argue both for, or against them. At first I thought they were questionable to be honest. Some days later I came across a Colion Noir video:
At 1:30 Colion talks about a (USCCA) training scenario the went through. The main point is that he shot far more shots than he thought he did. In the post interview he thought he fired 3 shots, but in reality fired 8.
I have changed my opinion on the second set of 4 shots with this information.
I also managed to run down a longer version of the video:
It is the longest one I could find.
I am having a hard time with the final shot, and then leaving the scene. Maybe I just don’t understand if this was part of the adrenaline dump that happens in a situation like this for the final shot, of panic/despair over discovering the assailant had a fake weapon. Until I hear from the shooter, I cannot say anything further.
The DA, being the political animal that he is has turned this over to a Grand Jury. Until this is fully settled, we will play this out in the court of opinion.
I wonder how much training the shooter has?
Texas is constitutional carry, so does that mean none?
If he does have training, is it more than say LTC training? (target shooting at the range doesn’t count)
How much would realistic training (like what Colion Noir went through) would have lessened the effects of the adrenaline dump, panic/despair?
I don’t mean to change the topic but kinda fits this thread I think.
When I was living in WA state and before I started to be active in the self defense aspect of life; I was driving out of an entrance of a 9 hole golf course. Some teens, 15-17yo high schoolers, were drinking beer and one pointed what looked like a 22 rifle at my wife and me as I drove out yells bang. I stopped the car and confronted him. Turns out it was a BB gun then he says “it’s not loaded “. An argument soon followed and my wife had to stop me from climbing the porch railing and kicking ass. I called the cops, waited for them to arrive and the kids took off in a car but I got the tag numbers.
I sometimes think about that situation and what I would do now that I carry every day. Would I be able to brandish my gun in return to teach them what he did wasn’t smart? Could I have shot him since I didn’t know the true nature of the threat? How would I feel about it later knowing I shot a high school kid just being stupid?
I bring this up to help others who are wrestling with these same questions. I still don’t know what I would do today in this situation and that was some 15 years ago.
Edit: another question would be: should I have kept on driving to get out of the possible danger zone quicker? But then would he have learned it’s easy tochase ppl off with a gun?
Compelling scenarios. How intense. And it seemed it happened so fast. Saddened for all involved.
What one thinks is important, but also important is was judge and jury think, believe. Safety, doing the right thing, preparing for “The Ethical Test”.
From a purely legal defensive view, I can understand where when the robber pointed the gun at you, if you shot then, that was more easily defendable as you’re at higher risk. As with all scenarios, it gets complicated.
9 shots heard?
4, then another 4, then 1.
We heard an attorney express more legal concern of shot # 9.
From a legal defense, I’d also be concerned about shots 4-8 (both, timing and placement)
However, for shots 1-4, was that onto the “back” on the perpetrator on his way out, as one article titled it?
How much life of the defendant was in danger “at the moment he pulled the trigger”? Or were the customers by the exit in more danger?
To Colion’s point about how the mind reacts when under such intense pressure, is that going to be enough for the jury to forgive? Criminal court? How about when it goes to civil court? Or how about in your state, if it’s on the opposite spectrum of “friendly” to you state. Are we willing to take that risk?
In one of the videos, the customer seemed to have picked up the perpetrator’s weapon and thrown it against a wall in anger; We are later told - it wasn’t even a a real gun. Although we believed it had been real, it might show that the defender had his wits and faculties about him. IDK.
Then the man who shot, reportedly left the scene. At a later time or date may have informed the authorities of his ID. We should all know leaving the scene is a concern, unless we have to in flight of our life.
There are “correct times” to defend oneself. And a million (per se) different scenarios. This was just one of a million different scenarios.
A part of me worries about if I were a bystander, would I have been at risk to be shot by one of the nine bullets which the man fired?
Kinda hit home, as I’m often in those same type of cafes at the same hour with a relative or friend.
Two families were shattered here. Hope we all reach out to each other to teach best practices, but also to persons like 30 year old Eric who died, such as if they could work that one day, they could have made more money in one day’s work than committing the crime he committed that day, and take pride in instead, being a good citizen.
As for some idiot that comes into a restaurant pointing what appears to be a real gun and threatening innocent ppl…the smoking lamp is lit in my mind.
I would go with this choice pretty much every time I am in a vehicle and someone is pointing a firearm at me. Assuming I have a clear path of escape. I’d then call the police when safely away from the area and let them give the lessons.
Brandishing a firearm at a bunch of kids is likely to put you in jail.
Very limited and specific circumstances for that