View Full Version : Self Defense In a Grocery Store
Crazed Rabbit
07-09-2007, 02:40
Or, 'Man Shot in Back While Fleeing Grocery Store, and CR Couldn't Be Happier!'
Fort Worth Robbery Suspect Shot, But Not By Police
...
The incident took place at about 11:30 p.m. at the store located on Sycamore School Road.
According to the Fort Worth Police Department, three armed men walked into the store and began robbing customers and employees. One of the victims called her husband who was waiting just outside of the store. The husband then walked into the store with a concealed handgun and confronted one of the suspects.
...
The suspect, identified as Raysun Johnson, was shot in the backside as he was leaving the scene. He underwent surgery at JPS Hospital in Fort Worth, and is expected to be arrested when he is released.
The other two suspects fled the scene and have not yet been found.
Police are calling the shooting an act of self-defense, and are not charging the husband.
http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_185074228.html
I love it when citizens take active measures to assure their safety.
CR
seireikhaan
07-09-2007, 02:57
Whoo! Go dude w/ handgun!:cheerleader: :dancinglock: And the wife, too. Kudos to her for being able to keep her cool and call him. And good job to the police, for doing their job right and not charging the husband.
Strike For The South
07-09-2007, 03:08
its always Texas
Spetulhu
07-09-2007, 05:13
Self defense? While I don't think it unreasonable to apprehend an armed robber by shooting it's hardly self-defense to shoot him in the back. Citizen's arrest using the means necessary to stop an armed suspect, perhaps?
Warluster
07-09-2007, 05:21
Why do people shoot each other all the time now, shooting is weird, when you can subject the person to... 72 HOURS OF TELETUBBIES!
*Ahem*
I think theres more to the case then we know...
Evil_Maniac From Mars
07-09-2007, 05:25
Why do people shoot each other all the time now, shooting is weird, when you can subject the person to... 72 HOURS OF TELETUBBIES!
*Ahem*
I think theres more to the case then we know...
To tell the truth, I think most sane people would rather be shot.
I wouldn't call that self-defence.
Samurai Waki
07-09-2007, 06:32
There is never honor in violence. To fight any fight that ultimately comes to blows, means the honor has been thrown out the window, and one must do what he believes will be in his best interest to survive (or in this case let his wife survive).
Ja'chyra
07-09-2007, 08:15
There is never honor in violence. To fight any fight that ultimately comes to blows, means the honor has been thrown out the window, and one must do what he believes will be in his best interest to survive (or in this case let his wife survive).
Lol, forgetting the fact that it's "Honour" that was all a bit condescending wasn't it. One mans idea of honour isn't going to be the same as anothers.
Duke John
07-09-2007, 08:27
I love it when citizens take active measures to assure their safety.
Assuring safety by confronting armed robbers? It turned out well, but I would guess the risk of the robbers pulling the trigger was only increased by that action.
forgetting the fact that it's "Honour"
Welcome to honorable America!
shooting someone in the back who is already leaving the scene is not what I´d call "self-defence"....
but hey...whatever you guys wanna do over there....go for it :dizzy2: :book:
Banquo's Ghost
07-09-2007, 15:02
shooting someone in the back who is already leaving the scene is not what I´d call "self-defence"....
I am not a fan of personal firearms, but CR and others have made pretty solid cases for it being an American prerogative, and fair enough.
In this case (seen through those eyes) whilst there is very little information to go on, the suspect was shot in the backside. (Or as Forrest Gump would have it, the butt-ock :beam: ). That strikes me as a valid attempt to disable a fleeing criminal, not a summary execution. The seat is a big muscle and easily mended from such a wound - better than a possible broken femur or cut femoral artery from a leg shot, for example. It indicates that the shooter knew what he was doing, for which the criminal should be grateful, if sore.
Given that the citizen doing the shooting was not originally at the scene, and appears to have forced a confrontation with the suspects, I fear he may have been putting himself and others in danger - but having said that, I think most of us would go round and defend our wives as best we could , and as I noted, there is little detail about what actually transpired. Self-defence does not have to be immediate danger, but can include the legitimate belief that danger may reappear any moment. These fellows may have returned without "encouragement to vacate the premises".
It strikes me as commendable that he shot the fellow to disable, rather than gun him down like a "dawg".
Louis VI the Fat
07-09-2007, 15:34
I'm torn. One the one hand, quite frankly, the idea that some thug was served right pleases me. Yes, I'm that primitive.
The other thought, is that this case may have turned out fine, but that I don't think people should die for robbery, or be severely maimed for life. I don't know the story of the robbers. It's easy to identify with the victims. But perpetrators have a story too. What if this armed robber was your own easily impressionable little brother with an alcohol problem? Would you want him executed on some parking lot?
Self-defense is one thing, but for the execution of a punishment I'd not put my trust on grocery store Clint Eastwood-wannabees. There are laws, judges, psychological reports for that.
I'm torn. One the one hand, quite frankly, the idea that some thug was served right pleases me. Yes, I'm that primitive.
The other thought, is that this case may have turned out fine, but that I don't think people should die for robbery, or be severely maimed for life. I don't know the story of the robbers. It's easy to identify with the victims. But perpetrators have a story too. What if this armed robber was your own easily impressionable little brother with an alcohol problem? Would you want him executed on some parking lot?
Self-defense is one thing, but for the execution of a punishment I'd not put my trust on grocery store Clint Eastwood-wannabees. There are laws, judges, psychological reports for that.
Impossible to fully imagine, since I don't even have a younger brother, but I think I would be saddened yet not altogether surprised if my brother, while robbing people and threatening them with a deadly weapon ended up shot. :shrug:
It's a tragedy, but by the time it gets to the point where he is endangering other people's lives, I think it'd be hard to blame people who responded aggressively to his threats.
Besides, he wasn't "executed". And seeing as how the other assailants escaped, it would seem this crime could have likely gone unsolved were it not for the actions of a law-abiding citizen in disabling one of them. Now, I would suspect the police will be able to glean the identities of the other suspects from the one that was captured.
Tribesman
07-09-2007, 15:49
Don't ya just love Fort Worth http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/162877.html
I love it when citizens take active measures to assure their sanity.
Don't ya just love Fort Worth http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/162877.html
I love it when citizens take active measures to assure their sanity.
:inquisitive:
My attempted dissection:
(...)
The husband then walked into the store with a concealed handgun and confronted one of the suspects.
This act is strategically offensive, not defensive, in nature (and it may very well lead to aggression/violence).
"We certainly don't encourage that," said Lt. J.D. McCarthy with the Fort Worth Police Department. "We ask that, most of the time, contact the police department and let patrol officers handle those situations."
This should say enough. The man should not have entered the establishment but should've let the police handle it.
The suspect, identified as Raysun Johnson, was shot in the backside as he was leaving the scene. Leaving a scene, shot in the backside. Hmmm...
Police are calling the shooting an act of self-defense, and are not charging the husband. The suspect's act of leaving suggests self-defense, and if that is true he was defending from a threat. The only other -- probable -- recognizable threat is the husband shooting at him, which can only be offensive in this particular scenario.
However, he was shot in the backside suggesting different possibilities. Maybe he was slightly turned in his run as he shot (first) at the husband; maybe he was indeed fleeing and only fleeing, while the husband stood in a position enabling his shot into the suspect's backside.
Of course, as already said, there's not enough vital info. Any little detail matters.
Regarding what self-defence is, does it really include a "legitimate belief in danger?" The physical act of self-defence is when you defend against the only thing that logically threatens you -- offence. The limited article mainly suggests deliberate aggression by the citizen who entered the place.
Regarding self-defence: belief should not be considered because it is an extremely faulty gauger.
That husband is cool.
Too bad he didn't shoot all 3 of them and recover all the stolen cash and items they had whilst the robbery victims were still right there in the store so he could give them back to their rightful owners.
Alexander the Pretty Good
07-09-2007, 20:51
This act is strategically offensive, not defensive, in nature (and it may very well lead to aggression/violence).
More like a counter-offensive. The robber wasn't there to leave stuff.
More like a counter-offensive. The robber wasn't there to leave stuff.
Hmmm. Was his act based on the conscious decision to prevent the thief from robbing?
---
In any case:
he should not have entered in the first place
the limited article minimally suggests he was the eventual attacker in the fight itself
Gregoshi
07-10-2007, 00:36
More like a counter-offensive. The robber wasn't there to leave stuff.
Well, the husband's bullet was left behind...or was it the right behind? Gotta give him credit though - he's a crack shot.
Crazed Rabbit
07-10-2007, 01:49
Given that the citizen doing the shooting was not originally at the scene, and appears to have forced a confrontation with the suspects, I fear he may have been putting himself and others in danger
More danger than already having three people pointing guns at them and being completely unopposed?
Assuring safety by confronting armed robbers? It turned out well, but I would guess the risk of the robbers pulling the trigger was only increased by that action.
Yes, so they aren't in complete control of your loved ones.
Self-defence does not have to be immediate danger, but can include the legitimate belief that danger may reappear any moment. These fellows may have returned without "encouragement to vacate the premises".
Very true.
What if this armed robber was your own easily impressionable little brother with an alcohol problem? Would you want him executed on some parking lot?
1) This guy wasn't executed. 2) No, I wouldn't want my brother executed. I'd be sad if something like that happened, but I wouldn't be angry at the guy who shot him if he was pointing guns at innocent people.
CR
seireikhaan
07-10-2007, 02:45
Ok, I've gotta throw in my lot on this one. As for this whole 'what if your brother was killed while robbing someone' thing, I've got a tad bit of experience on this issue. My older brother's had some 'issues' in the past, but I'm not gonna go into detail here. Let me just say that I learned pretty much everything not to do from him. When you've got a brother with issues like this, then its rather hard to develop a good, solid relationship with him. And if your brother is robbing stores at gunpoint, then he's got even bigger issues than mine. In my case, my brother is basically a brother in blood only. I rarely talk to him, and our contact over the past five years or so has been very limited. Although he's gotten a lot better over the years, I still don't have much of a relationship with him. So, if my brother died or was seriously maimed because he robbed a store at gunpoint? I would be upset, but I wouldn't be crushed. And I sure wouldn't be mad at the guy who shot him.
Tribesman
07-10-2007, 07:49
I wonder why rabbit didn't go with the 2 other man shoots criminal stories in the news down Texas way , do they lack the woohoo having guns is good factor due to their circumstances ? ~;)
No wonder he didn't go with the multitude of other shooting stories in the Texas news at the same time , they really lack the woohoo having guns is good thing .
So on balance with one good story , one slightly dodgy story, one really dodgy story and a whole big pile of crap ones , is there really a woohoo factor to shout about ?
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.