The Aftermath: Friendly Fire Isn’t

Legal & Second Amendment
21

Defense of 3rd parties is legal in Utah. Also, aggravated armed robbery is a felony.
Utah Code 77-30-14. Arrest without warrant.
The arrest of a person may be lawfully made also by any peace officer or a private person without a warrant upon reasonable information that the accused stands charged in the courts of a state with a crime punishable by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, but when so arrested the accused must be taken before a judge or magistrate with all practicable speed and complaint must be made against him under oath setting forth the ground for the arrest as in Section [77-30-13], and thereafter his answer shall be heard as if he had been arrested on a warrant.

Might want to have the perp bagged and tagged before police show up.

1 Like
22

First I would have called 911 then I might have followed the robber but stayed out of sight, even if it meant watching another store get robbed. When the police arrived I would have told them what and if the robber was still in the second store I would have pointed him out, if he was gone from the store I would have told them which way he went if he was in a car and what type and color, also we all carry cell phones I would tried to get his picture when he left the second store.

23

i would not have pursued the robber

24

This is not a tough one and the DA (Allentown Pennsylvania) got it right this time (this is also according to my jurisdiction (STATE)). This is where we need to know the laws concerning the use of deadly force in your Juridiction (STATE) as well as other Jurisdictions (STATES) in which you intend to travel. The store clerk acted in defense of others which is one covered by the use of deadly force (In American States). Also I noticed a key word “Owner” . If the Beer Store Owner is the owner then he acted in defense of property which also authorizes the use of deadly force (In the United States). Also keep in mind that Alcohol is a controlled substance that can alter one’s judgment or state of mind and the scenario here stated that the beer store was robbed but didn’t state whether Mussa robbed the beer store for beer, money or both. Either way the key take aways here is to know what constitutes the use of deadly force in your jurisdiction (STATE) as well as other Jurisdictions (STATES) in which you intend to travel. Also you need to know what constitutes the use of deadly force under FEDERAL LAW (America). If you reside in one of those Communist STATES (Jurisdictions normally associated with excruciating taxes, bad roads and an altered State of mind) i.e. CA, NY, IL etc… then I would say yes the Beer Store Owner could possibly be facing the death penalty for his heinous behavior in such a ubiquitous crime (Sarcasm there lol) and, he would then need to take this case to the America (United States Supreme Court) to seek asylum. Hence knowing the use of Deadly Force under FEDERAL LAW would aid the Beer Store Owner in seeking asylum.

  • Per the friendly fire there could be a little blow by (Charges) depending on Jurisdiction (STATE). Why wouldn’t there be charges? Because some Jurisdictions (Called UNITED STATES) actually possess the common decency to pass judgement on the Beer Store Owner based on his “Intent” which is also part of the “Threat Triangle”. I order for a crime to be committed the Threat Triangle must be completed. The Triangle consist of Opportunity, Capability, & Intent. With intent being the hardest to prove. Here the Beer Store Owner unanimously displayed the intent to neutralized the threat (Mussa) and not the Clerk. I am most certain the the Beer Store Owner had the capability, as well as the opportunity to dispatch the Clerk also but stood down. Therefore all charges should be dropped and for future reference the Clerk knows to GET DOWN!!!
2 Likes
25

Tough one. In general, as a civilian you are not to pursue. These situations are never clear cut and maybe the beer guy had a legit reason to go to pizza shop. Thanks to USCCA for providing us the support to defend ourselves in these situations.

1 Like
26

I would have done exactly what the owner of the property did. Even if I had not been a property owner I would have run to help my neighbor, regardless of whether I knew him or liked him. Scripture says there is no greater love than to lay one’s life down for another. I am not one to stand by while someone else is in the middle of danger. If I’m prosecuted, so be it. I would want somebody to help me, I would hope a brave soul would come to my rescue. By the time the police arrived the guy would have had plenty of time to get away and do this to someone else, maybe worse. As another posted, the criminal knowingly put himself in danger by committing his crimes. I understand what others are saying when they advise to check the laws in their jurisdiction, but just as only some states allow for a citizen to break another’s car window in order to rescue an animal about to expire from heat stroke, I wouldn’t care if my state didn’t allow it, I’m not going to stand around waiting for the police to show up while an animal suffers and dies. You bet I’m going to break that window, just as I would run to help another person in danger.

3 Likes
27

I live in California. Been a CCW carrier for 30 years.
If this incident occurred in California, after the money exchanged hands, the weapon was no longer pointed at me, imminent danger no longer prevailed, I would of had to say “thank you”, please come again.

Welcome to California.

2 Likes
28

I think that most again I say MOST Americans are sick of this legal system that belittles the owners of small business and people who take pride in WORKING and providing for their families. Yet because it does not affect the so called law makers. They tend to defend the person doing wrong to innocent people. People are sick of it and how they are released from jail within hrs or days of their crime. And the store owners insurance goes up. Business loss goes up. And the trash who did the crime just moves on to next store. I think the gentleman who shot him has my 100% support. That is until this legal system realizes it’s just wrong what’s happening. Now switch places of this crime to a judge’s home or defenders home. I’m pretty sure the criminal would be hung. If not SHOT and it would ALL be justified. It’s time for everyone to help in taking back the country we love. And it’s values. Remember the values we all used to actually value. Yup those.

4 Likes
29

“When the robber left the beer store, the threat to the store owner terminated. There was no need for self-defense. The owner’s pursuit could be attributed to a desire for revenge”

But if the same thing happened when dealing with a cop, the cop can shoot the fleeing suspect in the back, even kill them, and that shooting is “justified.” And that’s wrong.

So the cops do have privilege that citizens don’t. They can evidently exact revenge but citizens can’t. Got it.

30

WOW! Welcome to the Community @TJ15, @Ernest25, @Tylor, @Dennis112, @James588, @Gary200, @David618, @Alfred18, @John581, @Michael742, @Christopher182, @leon12, @Lawrence44, @Suzannah, @Kevin199 and @John582! Thank you for joining the conversation.

I am a Kentucky attorney and am part of the USCCA Attorney Network. You will probably see me around fairly often. If you have specific questions and you want my input just tag me in the post @MikeBKY. My one caveats are that while I can give my opinion (sometimes personal, sometimes professional and I try to differentiate the two) I like all attorneys, am unable to provide legal advice absent an attorney/client relationship and that I am unable to give professional opinions on the laws of other jurisdictions.

As I said in my earlier response to this post, what the beer store owner did could have devastating consequences. As everyone pointed out, there was no longer a specific threat that required the beer store owner to respond. At the same time, I cannot say that it is wrong, after such an incident, to check on your neighbor. In Kentucky, use of force in the defense of others is authorized if you would be justified in using the same force in defense of self. If charged, the big question for the jury would be the mens rea (mental state) of the beer store owner when he had the second encounter with the burglar. If the jury believes it is revenge, he goes to prison. If they believe it was revenge, he is going to prison.

I am happy to say this is NOT true! There are different standards for arrests between civilians and peace officers in every jurisdiction I am aware of. The use of force, however, is the same. a person can use reasonable force to effectuate an arrest. Deadly force cannot be used unless reasonable.
Deadly force is rarely legitimate against a fleeing felon. Most states had “fleeing felon” statutes that allowed the police to use deadly force to stop a fleeing felon. The practice dates back to when the only crimes that were felonies were punishable by life or death, i.e. murder, rape, arson, burglary amongst others. But, in Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court opined

The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/471/1.html

3 Likes
31

Fits with what has been attributed to Benjamin Franklin ;
That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved.
though it may be connected to Voltaire that ’tis much more Prudence to acquit two Persons, tho’ actually guilty, than to pass Sentence of Condemnation on one that is virtuous and innocent but more so with Blackstone and Blackstone’s Ratio (and Blackstone’s Commentaries) It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer

It is better that one escape than to shoot and kill them, especially as they are only suspects and not convicted. (Unless they are armed and use lethal force to attempt escape)

Thank you for the information and link.

2 Likes
32

I don’t see it as a tough call. When you think your neighbor might be in danger, to pursue the gun toting threat. I respect the heroic actions in this situation, but am disturbed that an innocent man was shot. That was reckless. Disturbing also that I see little mention of careless shooting in these comments. Aren’t we all here at this great USSCA site to train ourselves to be better protectors? Ironic.

1 Like
33

The two situations you mention are different. The bad guy (bg) that robbed the two stores only took cash and was departing the stores…not threatening anyone further. The bg over the man’s bed presented a greater opportunity to do bodily harm…even though he didn’t but due to his very “stealthy” presence in the home…in the bedroom I would have probably shot him.

34

I should clarify @Stephen131. It is a tough call from the legal perspective and I should acknowledge that I did not have the complete story when I made my original post as the article had not arrived in my inbox at that time. I did not know that there was an innocent struck as well. And yes, I agree with the fact that you need to account for every round that leaves your barrel.
Either way, it leads to tough choices. Who knows what the bad guy would have done if the other man did not enter. He probably would have turned and walked away. Or he might have chased the other victim down and killed him.
It is always easier to QB these after the fact when you have the luxury of time and safety to make decisions.

3 Likes
35

Thanks for clarify. Sorry that I am doing the armchair QB’ing thing, but without benefit of legal training the best way to learn is hearing from knowledgable sources such as MikeBKY. Glad he is a fellow Kentuckian as well!

1 Like
36

Don’t apologize! We all learn by asking the questions. Sports teams watch hours of video of how they and their competitors play so they can find a competitive advantage. There is no reason we shouldn’t do the same to give us a life or death advantage! Some day it may save someone’s life or liberty!

1 Like
37

Kevin, you are right on the money. We agonize over the treatment of these criminal pukes like they are some special class of citizen because they’ve had a bad upbringing or some other psycho-babble excuse. Hunting them down like the mangy curs they are would possibly make some of them consider another line of business. Sooner or later these scum will kill someone during the act of robbery. Mr. beer store owner solved the problem in this case ( Good job, sir! ) and saved the taxpayers a lot of money in chasing down, incarcerating, trying, and , ultimately providing for the well being of this crook for decades in jail. Of course attorneys don’t approve of this solution, it cuts down on business.
PS; Kevin, you don’t happen to be a Redcatcher do you?

38

I don’t think he should have followed him. When Mussa left the threat was gone. You don’t chase after them.

39

Not sure what a redcatcher is. I’m gonna say no. lol. However yes that’s another HUGE problem, why do we spend so much to house these losers in jail. For years sometimes. For what TIME SERVED. F that crap. I say let the families have them, even for just 12 hrs. And guarantee they would be returned alive. No guarantee on physical state. But alive. At least the victims family would have closure. Because the legal system more often than not provides NONE. I’m not sick or demented. I just have learned in 53 yrs I say whatever I feel and unlike most don’t give a crap about political correctness. Where was theirs when crime was being done. Especially rapes and child crimes. Oh shit I’ll take all of them and the families would be at peace. That I would guarantee. Those are really the scum trash I dislike. Anyway sorry. Get carried away sometimes.lol.

40

Last thought about the store owner. I agree about the innocent man getting hit. That is unfortunate. I can only say if I was there the thief would have never passed the front door to terrorize another. He entered with full intention of committing a crime. Well come in expecting the consequences of that crime. Like I stated before. It’s way late to hope he will get his. The time is now.