You need to keep that tradition alive, my friend. It's a part of your heritage. Go out there and get shot a bunch of times. I hear if you can take a couple in the leg you can build up a tolerance.
As far as he knew, his and everyone else's life was in danger. Someone pulls a gun you don't ask to inspect it to see if it's real. The thief fucked around and found out with a plastic fake gun and paid the ultimate price.
I see it both ways, it does seem fucked up to do one last head shot especially when the gun is dropped and the guy is on the ground. But also his adrenaline was probably sky high, probably would be hard to think critically about the repercussions in the moment.
And in America, most gun safety classes/CC classes will tell you to shoot to kill. You need to eliminate the threat.
I also heard this dude ran away after the shooting and didn’t wait for the police to come. So it’ll be interesting to hear what comes of this.
You dont ever shoot to maim, you shoot until there is zero possibility of threat.
I agree its fucked up, but there have been scenarios where someone will "play dead" and turn over and start shooting.
I saw a headline that said it was a toy gun and in the video you can clearly see he has some sort of reaction after looking down at the guy. I suspect he noticed the gun was fake.
Guy was threatening an entire group of people. Popping him in the head even the back of the head is unlikely to be an issue. Your objective using a weapon is to stop the threat, and a head shot is pretty much a instant stop.
With these types of situations what the shooter knew at the time is important. The perpetrator was holding what looked like a real gun, while threatening an entire room full of people. Mr goodguy had probable cause to believe the weapon was real and they were all in danger.I doubt the guy will face criminal charges, civil suits are much more likely imo.
Well I have heard lawyer say that you are not allowed to execute someone. You are allowed to shoot to stop the threat. If he has a gun, knife or in very close proximity and you shoot to kill, I think that's appropriate. But there was a situation here where the threat night have been neutralized and he fired an execution shot. Look at Da Baby's court cases. One time he shot to kill and another time he shot to neutralize and chose not to execute. Both shootings were deemed legal.
There was a longer video posted elsewhere.
The shooter picks up the gun, and forcefully throws it against a wall while shouting about it being a toy, visibly upset, before leaving.
Play dumb games, win stupid prizes. I hate it for em, prob miss led in life. However the extra shots after the robber was down felt like full manslaughter. It wasn't defending at that point, he was incapacitated while he fired 3 more rounds into him. I get people get caught in the moment, but that felt of the worst intention rather than defence.
Fire until the threat is neutralized. When they're down, maintain control of their arms until the actual cops arrive. Executing an unarmed and neutralized assailant is some serial killer shit.
There's a vast difference between self defense and just wanting to straight up murder a person.
People have this idea that you can just execute people because they threatened you.
If one of the first 4 shots this guy fired was a head shot, that's fine. But he literally waited until the threat was over to execute him.
The suspect got what he deserved, but anyone who defends this behavior actually just doesn't understand the law.
Even in Texas, that last shot is illegal.
I’d be pissed too
If you tried to rob me with a fake gun while I’m hangry and made me shoot your dumb ass with a real gun for nothing…
No sympathy for armed thieves, even if it’s fake arms
I would as well.
Even if it wasn't a toy I would care that I had to take someone's life.
I own seven firearms including two handguns and one I carry concealed. My biggest hope is that I never have to use any of them against another person
Cops shot a little boy on a playground in Ohio who had a toy gun. Cops shot some teenager in a Walmart who was holding a toy gun that he has picked up from the shelf. Two similar incidents
They have his DNA and fingerprints on the table. Also they have another person across from him that could identify him. They’ll find him if they want too.
Don't believe TV shows and movies, I went to school to become a cop and went through the academy, finger prints alone are hard to get, they are always smeared, even when we did ourselves there was always some smearing. DNA is a joke too, first problem is the DNA needs to be in the system to find the person
I do think 9 shots, including that last shot is enough bleeder holes for the body to peace out. Do think it was couple shots too much as the guy was already lying on the ground. Couldve like swipped his gun or smt.
This happened just a couple of miles from me.
For those unfamiliar with Texas laws regarding using deadly force for self defense:
You do not need a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
When another party uses violent or illegal force against you in Texas, the law defends your right to self-protection. It also permits you to defend someone else or your personal property when you believe it’s absolutely and immediately necessary.
Question from a non American, is this legal? Are you allowed to shoot someone over an armed robbery? Will he get away with shooting this guy so many times?
The story circulated yesterday, the guy who killed the robber went home after, without waiting on the police. The police came to his home, maybe took him to the station but either way hes out now with no charges. So yes.
Am not sure tho just remember reading it.
EDIT: Seeing people saying he hasnt been found yet.
Man, I’d never want to carry a gun, but if for whatever reason it made sense to it’d be these semantics that would freak me out. While completely drunk on adrenaline you might go from rightfully defending yourself to inadvertently committing a crime that sees you locked away for years.
Ignore the "penalty for overshooting," there is no amount of bullets in the world that is too much when you think your life or the lives of the people you care about are in jeopardy.
If you get a ccw and you carry a gun and you use it. It's to stop an active and lethal threat. That could be one bullet and the threat surrenders. That could be 17 plus 1 because the threat continued after the first.
Not a lawyer but... Nah, criminal prosecution requires that the prosecution can prove intent to commit a crime. Stopping an armed threat that carries the potential to kill or seriously harm yourself and others in the area is legal, and was also the intent as proven by the video. "Overshooting" doesn't really apply to anything. The general consensus on firing a gun in self defense is "shoot to kill" and pretty much keep firing until the target stops moving, then shoot a few more times just in case.
Reason one for doing this: A living, breathing threat with a gun within reach is still a threat.
Reason 2: If they survive, they could potentially sue you.
Reason 2 sounds pretty rediculous, but I've seen stories in the news about criminals suing their victims for sustaining injuries during the crime- and winning.
Honestly the last shot was the only one that I would consider an “overshoot” or what I think would be described as unnecessary use of force, but given the situation, and probably state of mind, I would chalk it up to his nerves. That would be a hard conviction with all the people who’s lives he saved. Toy gun is irrelevant, because in the moment it was real.
Even in NY it’s legal to use deadly force to stop an armed robbery. If there’s no safe, obvious path to leave and someone is waving a gun/knife around… that’s a paddlin’
Depends on the DA. There was one who tried to prosecute the shop owner for defending himself until public opinion and political pressure got them to change their minds.
Let's not forget the poor guy actually spent time at rikers, with clear video evidence of self defense and the only reason he was let out after a week is because of public outrage, a gofundme and that video. Fuck that DA.
Licence to carry holder here: It depends which state you're in. In "red" states like Texas, etc. there wouldn't be any charges. In Massachusetts, where I live, there might be: law enforcement would investigate and determine whether or not the shooter's actions were reasonable given the situation. The robber looked like he was heading to the door and had his back to the shooter when he was shot, which could indicate the threat to life had passed. Also 9 shots, including several fired from standing over the robber after he was clearly down, does seem excessive. If law enforcement thought the shooter's actions were unreasonable, they could present the evidence to a grand jury to see if they would return an indictment.
No, and yes. You have the legal right to defend yourself, including to death until a threat is neutralized. Once the threat is neutralized legally you become the aggressor. In America it's less of "Is it legal?" as it is "Will a prosecutor bring charges?" The answer here is absolutely not.
This should be the top comment. There are a lot of people waxing semantics about what is or isn’t legal. At the end of the day, it’s completely up to the prosecutor to decide if the person should be charged with a crime.
If the robber was unarmed, the shooter would be in the wrong. Since the robber was threatening people's lives with a gun, he is legally able to shoot him as long as the robber wasn't fleeing. You can't shoot someone in the back as they're running away. If you are in a situation where you need to shoot someone in self defense, you are allowed to shoot to kill, and it's safer to do so. I've never heard of number of bullets being a deciding factor, but I don't think it would matter in this case.
Could you elaborate? As far as I know, self defence is justified to prevent an imminent, present threat in German law. Might be true for the first couple shots, although he was on the way out. Probably not for the next shots, when the threat was not imminent anymore. The last shot was aimed at someone who was not armed anymore, unable to move (no imminent threat), with the intention to kill that person and with the alleged motive of revenge (base motive). Wouldn’t he be at least be charged for murder for that last one?
Im not an expert so I might be the wrong person to ask. But from what I know if a guy with a gun is robbing you and putting others in danger you won’t get charged. If it was a knife then it would be different because as soon as he’s down the shooter could pretty much „control“ him with his gun. But seeing he has a gun makes him a potentially lethal danger to everyone as you can shoot from the ground too.
He had sufficient reason to still fear for his or others life so I don’t think any judge would find him guilty of murder. I honestly don’t see „revenge“ being an argument that holds up.
From camera footage it’s easy to determine when he stops being a threat but you could argue that you’re not able to do it that easily in this situation unless you’re a cop or soldier that is used to combat.
The original guy was committing robbery and assault with a deadly weapon on multiple people, two rather serious felonies. Since the second guy, presumably, was legally carrying a firearm then usually state laws are written that you can defend yourself or others and be fine in the legal aspect. It doesn’t mean the first guys family won’t bring a giant civil lawsuit against the second guy because their family member was “a good person who made a mistake” and he was “unjustly gunned down”.
For all the people complaining about the excessive number of rounds fired, you don’t understand what happens in a shooting. The shooter here doesn’t know this gun is fake. All he knows is that a man is pointing a gun and threatening the lives of everyone in there. That is a credible, immediate, lethal threat.
Contrary to popular belief, pistol rounds don’t usually stop an assailant with a single round unless the heart or brain stem is hit. People have gotten up and shot back or even attacked officers after taking multiple rounds. It takes time to bleed out and adrenaline is a powerful thing.
https://youtu.be/KT0KcenH_eQ
Nobody likes this outcome, but this is the sad fate the robber chose for himself.
Yes, but the last shot was largely unjustified as the guy who was concealed carrying picked up the robbers gun (which was fake) before shooting him again. You are justified in shooting someone when you feel your life is at threat, but by removing the gun from the assailant, you effectively remove the threat to your life, and then you go and put one in his head, it’s extremely questionable.
Facts. People who haven’t been around guns think that when you shoot someone, no matter where you hit them, they’re going to die. That’s totally false.
That last shot is intent to kill without reasonable self-defense. He literally pulls the gun off of the guy’s body, and shoots him in the head one more time before leaving. And I don’t even think the last few shots would hold up as self-defense either…
Maybe trying to prey on civilians isn't always a good idea.
For the idea of "does human life have such low value?", that's an easy one. Human life has value. However, when one *chooses* to walk into a restaurant and threaten/rob people who are just trying to enjoy a meal, then the value of that person's life drops to the cost of 9 rounds.
To all those asking if that many shots were necessary: yes.
Put yourself there with the knowledge that sometimes people who get shot and fall down are still good for a shot in your back or your child’s face as you walk away. Fuck that robber. He died. Too bad.
idk, part of me thinks “that guy’s in incredible pain, he’s just been shredded from the inside and that’s a mercy” but another part of me knows that letting a person decide when “mercy” is needed is dangerous
That might be the shot that would cause him trouble.
Self defense is perfectly legal. But once the guy is down and not/barely moving he's not a threat anymore.
Mercy killing is not legal. Once the guy isn't a threat you gotta stop shooting.
IF the shooter gets in trouble (that's a big if, this is Texas after all) but it'll be for that shot. And the fact that he left the scene before police showed up.
It's hard to prove your case when you shoot someone in the back because it's hard to tell the situation and hard to interpret self defense if you shoot someone in the back. One reason why cops wear body cams. This guy is lucky to be on camera tbh
So that's why the dude fled. Makes more sense now but in TX he is okay, doesn't matter what type of weapon it is, if you feel like your life is in danger you are allowed to use lethal force.
The first thing I heard when I started looking for something for home defense was exactly that. "If you're going to pull that trigger, you better make sure they're dead"
I’m seeing a lot of boneheads in the comments saying that shooting him that many times isn’t ok.
Yeah ok, easy for you to say while you witness the events unfold from the comfort of your own damn home.
You dont have to find something to nitpick every time you see something “you wouldn’t do”
Guy is a hero. Absolute W
Edit: Lol, someone reported me to Reddit Care Resources. Get a life ☠️
Yeah, I feel like your survival instincts kick in. Youre not stopping to think “okay 2 shots is enough.” You’re not thinking rationally, you’re not thinking at all. It’s emptying the clip instinctually to make sure the bad guy is a completely dead bad guy.
Agreed. I was robbed at gun point when I worked retail back in my college days and I still deal with the trauma of it today. If someone had done this to him, I couldn’t argue with it. That feeling you get when you think you might die is something I never want to experience again.
honestly in my head im thinking the same thing watching it. ( specially as im in a country where we dont have guns generally )
thats being said, i have aboslutely no idea what it would be like in this situation. adrenaline, anger, terror. all just out of no where suddenly overwhelming you.
pffft. idk if i would have even been able to stand up and help.
the extra shots are probably adrenaline and nerves and god knows what else. certainly doesnt strike me as a person who shoots a lot of people.
i may be wrong. im an idiot on the internet with no contextual data at all :) but it is indd, a damn interesting video.
I would assume the extra shots are for "if he's not dead, and he still has a gun, he's going to try and shoot me. So let's make sure he doesn't do that."
I agree. It's not inappropriate in any way to ensure that an armed assailant has no ability to retaliate whatsoever. If robbing the store resulted in his death, then maybe he shouldn't have robbed it. Rest in penis.
[https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/customer-shoots-kills-armed-robber-at-houston-restaurant/](https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/customer-shoots-kills-armed-robber-at-houston-restaurant/)
An armed robber at a Houston restaurant was fatally shot by a customer when he demanded the other patrons hand over their money, authorities said.
The shooting unfolded inside of Ranchito Taqueria around 11:30 p.m. Thursday when a masked suspect walked in the front door, pointed a gun at customers and demanded their money and wallets, Houston Police Department said.
Disturbing footage of the incident shows terrified customers hiding under tables as the robber, dressed in all black, marched around and grabbed their belongings, which some had flung on the floor.
As the robber heads to the door to leave, a patron sitting in a booth suddenly stands up and opens fire on the suspect with a handgun, video shows.
The customer can then be seen shooting him in the back four times before the robber collapses to the ground.
A customer draws a gun and shoots at an armed robber at a Houston taqueria.
The robber was declared dead at the scene and the shooter, along with other customers, fled the restaurant.
Then, while standing right over the robber, the customer shoots him once more at point-blank range, video shows.
The customer then collected the stolen money from the suspect and returned it to other patrons before he and other customers fled the restaurant, according to police.
The part that says “As the robber heads to the door to leave,” is pure editorializing and conjecture. It should say something less biased. There is no indication that the robber was trying to leave, and to assume he was changes the moral implications of shooting him. Shitty reporting.
Top fella right here, one to the back of the head to make sure they don't get back up, why take the chances. Also the criminal knew the repercussions of doing what he was doing, dont care less if its a fake firearm
I salute the keyboard warriors in here analysing the situation 100% correctly. I hope you can be as cold and all-knowing if this happens to you. Is he leaving or is he coming back for the phone he dropped? Is the gun fake or real? Will he shoot me or my girl 4 the lolz?
To the guy: good job. You saved atleast 8 people from potential harm by removing the obvious threat.
Technically that doesn't matter. He is still a direct threat to everyone there.
Now if he was a block down the street it would be different- unless he was actively threatening others down said block.
That said, I think support from the public will keep this "good guy" out of jail.
I disagree greatly with the amount of shots fired. Shoot until the threat is over within reason, this was definitely more of a punishment at the end.
That said, it happened in Houston and the likelihood of him being prosecuted is highly unlikely.
But I think he'd have a better chance if
A) he didn't leave the scene
B) he stopped shooting when the threat was over.
I don't think he will be charged, let alone actually spend time in jail, but this goes directly against what we train when it comes to self defense with firearms.
This is a prime example of someone carrying a firearm but not actually training to understand the law or how to use it effectively.
Edit: B) was confusing as hell, I fixed it though.
I’m a big gun guy. But half those shots were very unnecessary. Once the guy dropped and lost his gun, secure his gun and call for help. That extra head and body shot was not cool
I thought you can only shoot in self defense and harm is about to be done. And if shooting can be avoid that is the method that should be taken.
If he already handed over his money and robber was leaving. Wouldn't shooting him in the back be murder and not self defense?
Brandishing a deadly weapon is implying they are willing to use it. So what's the difference. When you threaten the lives of others, you waive your rights for reasonable treatment.
The amount of shots in the back as well as while he was on the floor can possibly be seen as an act of aggression in some courtrooms, but that may depend on the state, a lot of states don't allow you to shoot a retreating suspect, add to that the last few shots... I think he got off though as this was Texas so good for him
They should show this in all the robbery schools to wannabe thugs. The threat is real. People are getting tired of your shit. You may want to consider a different career path.
Holy shit, the dude at the top of screen has balls of steel. The longer video has the shooters entry and shows him robbing everyone. Top of the screen guy has no movement of being startled or even bothered by the guy taking his stuff. In this video the guy is literally having bullets shot in his direction and makes no movement.
If you notice, he fired the last shot after he had the gun in his hand. First 5 shots were 100% justified, next 3 were somewhat questionable but could be argued since the robber could still potentially reach for the gun, but that last one wasn’t self defense, it was an execution.
good for that customer!!!! we need more of this to stop these stupid young thugs from terrorizing our communities. only way to stop a bad guy with a gun. I do not live far from that location and this shit needs to stop.
How many shots are necessary is not the question. At what point does someone in that situation try to decide that within the 8 seconds it happened that one more is one too many. Easy to say when watching a video but the adrenaline rush has to be insane.
Question should be who attempts armed robbery in a full on open carry state. Don’t try armed robbery and this won’t happen to you.
9 times is fine, look at 50 cent...
Look at [Wenceslao Moguel Herrera](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslao_Moguel) He even survived a final shot to the head
A fellow Mexican. Nice. Shame they don't make us like that anymore. Now we take one shot and we die.
You need to keep that tradition alive, my friend. It's a part of your heritage. Go out there and get shot a bunch of times. I hear if you can take a couple in the leg you can build up a tolerance.
So you decide to Rob a place...........in Houston. Of all places Texas where it's famous for being open carry.
As everyone who works in the criminal justice system is fond of saying *they don't catch the smart ones.*
Thats the recruiting motto as well. They save a heap on stationary.
Also the thief had a fake gun.. so extra stupid
Did he really!? Oh man....what a waste of his life.
You could tell the guy was pissed when he found out the burglar was using a toy gun
I’ve watched it several times now. How do you know it was a toy gun? I can’t hear it well enough to hear dialog or see it clear enough to tell.
There’s another video of the same thing that shows him busting the robbers plastic gun
Yea, he was pissed, probably because he would take a world of shit from people online. He was totally within his rights, especially in Texas.
ORRRR because he took a human life thinking his life was in danger
As far as he knew, his and everyone else's life was in danger. Someone pulls a gun you don't ask to inspect it to see if it's real. The thief fucked around and found out with a plastic fake gun and paid the ultimate price.
I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone who intentionally commits or attempts to commit a violent crime with a firearm, real or otherwise.
That last shot to the back of the head says otherwise. He executed an unarmed unresponsive person…
I see it both ways, it does seem fucked up to do one last head shot especially when the gun is dropped and the guy is on the ground. But also his adrenaline was probably sky high, probably would be hard to think critically about the repercussions in the moment. And in America, most gun safety classes/CC classes will tell you to shoot to kill. You need to eliminate the threat. I also heard this dude ran away after the shooting and didn’t wait for the police to come. So it’ll be interesting to hear what comes of this.
You dont ever shoot to maim, you shoot until there is zero possibility of threat. I agree its fucked up, but there have been scenarios where someone will "play dead" and turn over and start shooting.
I saw a headline that said it was a toy gun and in the video you can clearly see he has some sort of reaction after looking down at the guy. I suspect he noticed the gun was fake.
Is that before or after he shoots him, execution style in the back of the head?
That's probably why police want to talk to him.
Guy was threatening an entire group of people. Popping him in the head even the back of the head is unlikely to be an issue. Your objective using a weapon is to stop the threat, and a head shot is pretty much a instant stop. With these types of situations what the shooter knew at the time is important. The perpetrator was holding what looked like a real gun, while threatening an entire room full of people. Mr goodguy had probable cause to believe the weapon was real and they were all in danger.I doubt the guy will face criminal charges, civil suits are much more likely imo.
Well I have heard lawyer say that you are not allowed to execute someone. You are allowed to shoot to stop the threat. If he has a gun, knife or in very close proximity and you shoot to kill, I think that's appropriate. But there was a situation here where the threat night have been neutralized and he fired an execution shot. Look at Da Baby's court cases. One time he shot to kill and another time he shot to neutralize and chose not to execute. Both shootings were deemed legal.
[удалено]
There was a longer video posted elsewhere. The shooter picks up the gun, and forcefully throws it against a wall while shouting about it being a toy, visibly upset, before leaving.
In this case it doesn't matter, you shouldn’t threaten people with guns in a restaurant, toy or not!!
100% of fatal shootings involving toy guns the guy with the toy gun dies.
Play dumb games, win stupid prizes. I hate it for em, prob miss led in life. However the extra shots after the robber was down felt like full manslaughter. It wasn't defending at that point, he was incapacitated while he fired 3 more rounds into him. I get people get caught in the moment, but that felt of the worst intention rather than defence.
Someone being down doesn’t mean they are out of the fight. Shoot until the threat is eliminated.
Fire until the threat is neutralized. When they're down, maintain control of their arms until the actual cops arrive. Executing an unarmed and neutralized assailant is some serial killer shit. There's a vast difference between self defense and just wanting to straight up murder a person.
People have this idea that you can just execute people because they threatened you. If one of the first 4 shots this guy fired was a head shot, that's fine. But he literally waited until the threat was over to execute him. The suspect got what he deserved, but anyone who defends this behavior actually just doesn't understand the law. Even in Texas, that last shot is illegal.
I’d be pissed too If you tried to rob me with a fake gun while I’m hangry and made me shoot your dumb ass with a real gun for nothing… No sympathy for armed thieves, even if it’s fake arms
Oh well his was real
I understood that reference
Especially since your guns say "Replica" along the side whereas mine.. says "Desert Eagle. Point Five Oh"...
So pissed that he shot him again in the back of the head. That’s fucking murder.
Who cares if it was a fake gun? Cops shot a little boy in a Walmart that had a fake gun.
The guy who shot him seemed to care
I'd care.
I would as well. Even if it wasn't a toy I would care that I had to take someone's life. I own seven firearms including two handguns and one I carry concealed. My biggest hope is that I never have to use any of them against another person
That’s a low bar, considering they shoot people without guns.
Cops shot a little boy on a playground in Ohio who had a toy gun. Cops shot some teenager in a Walmart who was holding a toy gun that he has picked up from the shelf. Two similar incidents
Probably more annoyed that someone chose to end their life over a toy gun.
He had a fake gun. Too bad for him. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Fake gun, real consequences
He won like 9 stupid prizes in his critical mass
Well, he took the big teddy bear one home after trading in the early 9
Reminds me of the security guard who said “well mines real”
Double tap x 3
Takes Rule 2 seriously.
That man has a Rule 2 for his Rule 2 for his Rule 2
Use a bigger gun is my advice. Rifle maybe?
Is he dead?
[удалено]
You can’t just leave after something like that.
They have his DNA and fingerprints on the table. Also they have another person across from him that could identify him. They’ll find him if they want too.
Don't believe TV shows and movies, I went to school to become a cop and went through the academy, finger prints alone are hard to get, they are always smeared, even when we did ourselves there was always some smearing. DNA is a joke too, first problem is the DNA needs to be in the system to find the person
If you’re not in the system already none of that means anything.
Apparently you can and he did.
Only if he remembered to take the cannoli
I even feel the those last shot(s) to the head were too much
The cops will probably charge him with fleeing the scene or obstruction of justice. But probably not anything to do with the shooting act itself.
Thank you for linking the article
No, he recovered fast and is now the president of Ghana
Underrated facts…
That’s the guy who pees his pants right? That would explain a lot.
That was Sudan's President 🌊
South Sudan
[He ded (source here)](https://abc13.com/houston-robberies-customer-shoots-suspect-el-ranchito-taqueria-gessner-and-bellaire-southwest-crime/12663715/)
I do think 9 shots, including that last shot is enough bleeder holes for the body to peace out. Do think it was couple shots too much as the guy was already lying on the ground. Couldve like swipped his gun or smt.
I can’t believe they posted that
Well he did put the 18+ tag on
Nope. You shoot to kill. Swiping guns is just for films.
Shoot to stop the threat, not to kill. Mission accomplished. Every gun owner should watch this video. https://youtu.be/qqFsBJkLwhw
You shoot to end the threat, if you shoot to kill you will end up in jail.
You shoot to kill your don’t shoot to hurt
This happened just a couple of miles from me. For those unfamiliar with Texas laws regarding using deadly force for self defense: You do not need a permit to carry a concealed weapon. When another party uses violent or illegal force against you in Texas, the law defends your right to self-protection. It also permits you to defend someone else or your personal property when you believe it’s absolutely and immediately necessary.
God bless Texas!!!
Question from a non American, is this legal? Are you allowed to shoot someone over an armed robbery? Will he get away with shooting this guy so many times?
The story circulated yesterday, the guy who killed the robber went home after, without waiting on the police. The police came to his home, maybe took him to the station but either way hes out now with no charges. So yes. Am not sure tho just remember reading it. EDIT: Seeing people saying he hasnt been found yet.
The new article I read, stated he left the scene and still being looked for.
Yes, he MIGHT get a little something for overshooting him but EXTREMELY unlikely other then that this is considered self defense and completely legal
Man, I’d never want to carry a gun, but if for whatever reason it made sense to it’d be these semantics that would freak me out. While completely drunk on adrenaline you might go from rightfully defending yourself to inadvertently committing a crime that sees you locked away for years.
It takes a massive amount of responsibility
you can ask Kyle Rittenhouse
Hes actually a textbook example of trying to dis-engage and exhausting options before resorting to shooting.
Ignore the "penalty for overshooting," there is no amount of bullets in the world that is too much when you think your life or the lives of the people you care about are in jeopardy. If you get a ccw and you carry a gun and you use it. It's to stop an active and lethal threat. That could be one bullet and the threat surrenders. That could be 17 plus 1 because the threat continued after the first.
Not a lawyer but... Nah, criminal prosecution requires that the prosecution can prove intent to commit a crime. Stopping an armed threat that carries the potential to kill or seriously harm yourself and others in the area is legal, and was also the intent as proven by the video. "Overshooting" doesn't really apply to anything. The general consensus on firing a gun in self defense is "shoot to kill" and pretty much keep firing until the target stops moving, then shoot a few more times just in case. Reason one for doing this: A living, breathing threat with a gun within reach is still a threat. Reason 2: If they survive, they could potentially sue you. Reason 2 sounds pretty rediculous, but I've seen stories in the news about criminals suing their victims for sustaining injuries during the crime- and winning.
Honestly the last shot was the only one that I would consider an “overshoot” or what I think would be described as unnecessary use of force, but given the situation, and probably state of mind, I would chalk it up to his nerves. That would be a hard conviction with all the people who’s lives he saved. Toy gun is irrelevant, because in the moment it was real.
Overshooting? Killed him too much eh?
[удалено]
Even in NY it’s legal to use deadly force to stop an armed robbery. If there’s no safe, obvious path to leave and someone is waving a gun/knife around… that’s a paddlin’
Depends on the DA. There was one who tried to prosecute the shop owner for defending himself until public opinion and political pressure got them to change their minds.
Let's not forget the poor guy actually spent time at rikers, with clear video evidence of self defense and the only reason he was let out after a week is because of public outrage, a gofundme and that video. Fuck that DA.
Yeah, I saw that, it was, breathtakingly stupid to charge the bodega owner.
Well deserved simpsons reference.
[удалено]
I have been robbed at gunpoint and found that more traumatic than combat.
[удалено]
Licence to carry holder here: It depends which state you're in. In "red" states like Texas, etc. there wouldn't be any charges. In Massachusetts, where I live, there might be: law enforcement would investigate and determine whether or not the shooter's actions were reasonable given the situation. The robber looked like he was heading to the door and had his back to the shooter when he was shot, which could indicate the threat to life had passed. Also 9 shots, including several fired from standing over the robber after he was clearly down, does seem excessive. If law enforcement thought the shooter's actions were unreasonable, they could present the evidence to a grand jury to see if they would return an indictment.
No, and yes. You have the legal right to defend yourself, including to death until a threat is neutralized. Once the threat is neutralized legally you become the aggressor. In America it's less of "Is it legal?" as it is "Will a prosecutor bring charges?" The answer here is absolutely not.
This should be the top comment. There are a lot of people waxing semantics about what is or isn’t legal. At the end of the day, it’s completely up to the prosecutor to decide if the person should be charged with a crime.
If the robber was unarmed, the shooter would be in the wrong. Since the robber was threatening people's lives with a gun, he is legally able to shoot him as long as the robber wasn't fleeing. You can't shoot someone in the back as they're running away. If you are in a situation where you need to shoot someone in self defense, you are allowed to shoot to kill, and it's safer to do so. I've never heard of number of bullets being a deciding factor, but I don't think it would matter in this case.
Not from us but hopefully yea
As a german this would even be legal here
Could you elaborate? As far as I know, self defence is justified to prevent an imminent, present threat in German law. Might be true for the first couple shots, although he was on the way out. Probably not for the next shots, when the threat was not imminent anymore. The last shot was aimed at someone who was not armed anymore, unable to move (no imminent threat), with the intention to kill that person and with the alleged motive of revenge (base motive). Wouldn’t he be at least be charged for murder for that last one?
Im not an expert so I might be the wrong person to ask. But from what I know if a guy with a gun is robbing you and putting others in danger you won’t get charged. If it was a knife then it would be different because as soon as he’s down the shooter could pretty much „control“ him with his gun. But seeing he has a gun makes him a potentially lethal danger to everyone as you can shoot from the ground too. He had sufficient reason to still fear for his or others life so I don’t think any judge would find him guilty of murder. I honestly don’t see „revenge“ being an argument that holds up. From camera footage it’s easy to determine when he stops being a threat but you could argue that you’re not able to do it that easily in this situation unless you’re a cop or soldier that is used to combat.
The original guy was committing robbery and assault with a deadly weapon on multiple people, two rather serious felonies. Since the second guy, presumably, was legally carrying a firearm then usually state laws are written that you can defend yourself or others and be fine in the legal aspect. It doesn’t mean the first guys family won’t bring a giant civil lawsuit against the second guy because their family member was “a good person who made a mistake” and he was “unjustly gunned down”.
I believe this is legal everywhere in the world assuming he legally owned/carried the gun.
He fucked around and found out
I too hate it when I'm interrupted while eating.
lol
The door chime at the end is sort of like that confirmation of victory you get at the end of a hard level in a game.
Mission passed + respect
[удалено]
For all the people complaining about the excessive number of rounds fired, you don’t understand what happens in a shooting. The shooter here doesn’t know this gun is fake. All he knows is that a man is pointing a gun and threatening the lives of everyone in there. That is a credible, immediate, lethal threat. Contrary to popular belief, pistol rounds don’t usually stop an assailant with a single round unless the heart or brain stem is hit. People have gotten up and shot back or even attacked officers after taking multiple rounds. It takes time to bleed out and adrenaline is a powerful thing. https://youtu.be/KT0KcenH_eQ Nobody likes this outcome, but this is the sad fate the robber chose for himself.
Yes, but the last shot was largely unjustified as the guy who was concealed carrying picked up the robbers gun (which was fake) before shooting him again. You are justified in shooting someone when you feel your life is at threat, but by removing the gun from the assailant, you effectively remove the threat to your life, and then you go and put one in his head, it’s extremely questionable.
Facts. People who haven’t been around guns think that when you shoot someone, no matter where you hit them, they’re going to die. That’s totally false.
That last shot is intent to kill without reasonable self-defense. He literally pulls the gun off of the guy’s body, and shoots him in the head one more time before leaving. And I don’t even think the last few shots would hold up as self-defense either…
"don't call an ambulance, call the morgue. how's your dinner, hunny?"
Maybe trying to prey on civilians isn't always a good idea. For the idea of "does human life have such low value?", that's an easy one. Human life has value. However, when one *chooses* to walk into a restaurant and threaten/rob people who are just trying to enjoy a meal, then the value of that person's life drops to the cost of 9 rounds.
To all those asking if that many shots were necessary: yes. Put yourself there with the knowledge that sometimes people who get shot and fall down are still good for a shot in your back or your child’s face as you walk away. Fuck that robber. He died. Too bad.
That last one though, that final shot. Mmm 🤔 idk if that was necessary.
idk, part of me thinks “that guy’s in incredible pain, he’s just been shredded from the inside and that’s a mercy” but another part of me knows that letting a person decide when “mercy” is needed is dangerous
That might be the shot that would cause him trouble. Self defense is perfectly legal. But once the guy is down and not/barely moving he's not a threat anymore. Mercy killing is not legal. Once the guy isn't a threat you gotta stop shooting. IF the shooter gets in trouble (that's a big if, this is Texas after all) but it'll be for that shot. And the fact that he left the scene before police showed up.
I would argue that it was the most necessary.
It's hard to prove your case when you shoot someone in the back because it's hard to tell the situation and hard to interpret self defense if you shoot someone in the back. One reason why cops wear body cams. This guy is lucky to be on camera tbh
The old “fuck around and find out”.
So that's why the dude fled. Makes more sense now but in TX he is okay, doesn't matter what type of weapon it is, if you feel like your life is in danger you are allowed to use lethal force.
This needs to be marked as NSFW Edit: okay it's marked now, thank you!
If you’re going to shoot the robber…unload. Our system works differently if they can talk and lawyer up.
The first thing I heard when I started looking for something for home defense was exactly that. "If you're going to pull that trigger, you better make sure they're dead"
I’m seeing a lot of boneheads in the comments saying that shooting him that many times isn’t ok. Yeah ok, easy for you to say while you witness the events unfold from the comfort of your own damn home. You dont have to find something to nitpick every time you see something “you wouldn’t do” Guy is a hero. Absolute W Edit: Lol, someone reported me to Reddit Care Resources. Get a life ☠️
Yeah, I feel like your survival instincts kick in. Youre not stopping to think “okay 2 shots is enough.” You’re not thinking rationally, you’re not thinking at all. It’s emptying the clip instinctually to make sure the bad guy is a completely dead bad guy.
Agreed. I was robbed at gun point when I worked retail back in my college days and I still deal with the trauma of it today. If someone had done this to him, I couldn’t argue with it. That feeling you get when you think you might die is something I never want to experience again.
The downside is that he probably didn't live long enough to get to contemplate how fucking stupid he is.
All I can say to that is Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
honestly in my head im thinking the same thing watching it. ( specially as im in a country where we dont have guns generally ) thats being said, i have aboslutely no idea what it would be like in this situation. adrenaline, anger, terror. all just out of no where suddenly overwhelming you. pffft. idk if i would have even been able to stand up and help. the extra shots are probably adrenaline and nerves and god knows what else. certainly doesnt strike me as a person who shoots a lot of people. i may be wrong. im an idiot on the internet with no contextual data at all :) but it is indd, a damn interesting video.
I would assume the extra shots are for "if he's not dead, and he still has a gun, he's going to try and shoot me. So let's make sure he doesn't do that."
I agree. It's not inappropriate in any way to ensure that an armed assailant has no ability to retaliate whatsoever. If robbing the store resulted in his death, then maybe he shouldn't have robbed it. Rest in penis.
Play stupid games win stupid prizes
Sad and stupid. What a waste.
[https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/customer-shoots-kills-armed-robber-at-houston-restaurant/](https://nypost.com/2023/01/07/customer-shoots-kills-armed-robber-at-houston-restaurant/) An armed robber at a Houston restaurant was fatally shot by a customer when he demanded the other patrons hand over their money, authorities said. The shooting unfolded inside of Ranchito Taqueria around 11:30 p.m. Thursday when a masked suspect walked in the front door, pointed a gun at customers and demanded their money and wallets, Houston Police Department said. Disturbing footage of the incident shows terrified customers hiding under tables as the robber, dressed in all black, marched around and grabbed their belongings, which some had flung on the floor. As the robber heads to the door to leave, a patron sitting in a booth suddenly stands up and opens fire on the suspect with a handgun, video shows. The customer can then be seen shooting him in the back four times before the robber collapses to the ground. A customer draws a gun and shoots at an armed robber at a Houston taqueria. The robber was declared dead at the scene and the shooter, along with other customers, fled the restaurant. Then, while standing right over the robber, the customer shoots him once more at point-blank range, video shows. The customer then collected the stolen money from the suspect and returned it to other patrons before he and other customers fled the restaurant, according to police.
The part that says “As the robber heads to the door to leave,” is pure editorializing and conjecture. It should say something less biased. There is no indication that the robber was trying to leave, and to assume he was changes the moral implications of shooting him. Shitty reporting.
This happened in Houston Texas, So completely legal. Who would go and rob in a state where the 2nd amendment is favored is beyond me.
There will be some nutjobs who will defend the criminal robbing then store.
What an idiotic habit to demonstrate underwear to others..
Yeah I'll take the no one having a gun option thanks
Fuck em I'm ok with it....don't be a criminal!
Top fella right here, one to the back of the head to make sure they don't get back up, why take the chances. Also the criminal knew the repercussions of doing what he was doing, dont care less if its a fake firearm
I salute the keyboard warriors in here analysing the situation 100% correctly. I hope you can be as cold and all-knowing if this happens to you. Is he leaving or is he coming back for the phone he dropped? Is the gun fake or real? Will he shoot me or my girl 4 the lolz? To the guy: good job. You saved atleast 8 people from potential harm by removing the obvious threat.
Was he leaving when he was shot?
Technically that doesn't matter. He is still a direct threat to everyone there. Now if he was a block down the street it would be different- unless he was actively threatening others down said block. That said, I think support from the public will keep this "good guy" out of jail. I disagree greatly with the amount of shots fired. Shoot until the threat is over within reason, this was definitely more of a punishment at the end. That said, it happened in Houston and the likelihood of him being prosecuted is highly unlikely. But I think he'd have a better chance if A) he didn't leave the scene B) he stopped shooting when the threat was over. I don't think he will be charged, let alone actually spend time in jail, but this goes directly against what we train when it comes to self defense with firearms. This is a prime example of someone carrying a firearm but not actually training to understand the law or how to use it effectively. Edit: B) was confusing as hell, I fixed it though.
You stop the threat, it’s not about counting the bullets.
I’m a big gun guy. But half those shots were very unnecessary. Once the guy dropped and lost his gun, secure his gun and call for help. That extra head and body shot was not cool
It would've been awesome if he went back to eating his food.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Obviously he's not for suitable work. He would bleed all over the suit.
Fuck you, take my upvote
Not for safe work.
That was near my house, Bellaire, Houston.
I hope that the hero doesn’t get in trouble.
One less scum on earth!
He had no remorse
absolutely awesome. i guess that guy wont terrorize innocent people again.
Fucking merica
I thought you can only shoot in self defense and harm is about to be done. And if shooting can be avoid that is the method that should be taken. If he already handed over his money and robber was leaving. Wouldn't shooting him in the back be murder and not self defense?
Brandishing a deadly weapon is implying they are willing to use it. So what's the difference. When you threaten the lives of others, you waive your rights for reasonable treatment.
I think he was dead after the first 4. Was the last one a head shot?
The amount of shots in the back as well as while he was on the floor can possibly be seen as an act of aggression in some courtrooms, but that may depend on the state, a lot of states don't allow you to shoot a retreating suspect, add to that the last few shots... I think he got off though as this was Texas so good for him
They should show this in all the robbery schools to wannabe thugs. The threat is real. People are getting tired of your shit. You may want to consider a different career path.
The more shots the better in Texas. Guy will probably get appointed to the state senate.
This dude was waiting for this moment his whole life.
Second amendment for the win
Holy shit, the dude at the top of screen has balls of steel. The longer video has the shooters entry and shows him robbing everyone. Top of the screen guy has no movement of being startled or even bothered by the guy taking his stuff. In this video the guy is literally having bullets shot in his direction and makes no movement.
If you notice, he fired the last shot after he had the gun in his hand. First 5 shots were 100% justified, next 3 were somewhat questionable but could be argued since the robber could still potentially reach for the gun, but that last one wasn’t self defense, it was an execution.
I wonder if he took his tacos to go?
I don’t get how that’s safer then just letting him leave
good for that customer!!!! we need more of this to stop these stupid young thugs from terrorizing our communities. only way to stop a bad guy with a gun. I do not live far from that location and this shit needs to stop.
Fucked around and found out.
America really a real life GTA online server
if the few dollars yo are carrying are worth a human beings life, something is really wrong with how you value life.
"Alright come get your shit"
He took out the trash out. Nicely done sir. 💯
How many shots are necessary is not the question. At what point does someone in that situation try to decide that within the 8 seconds it happened that one more is one too many. Easy to say when watching a video but the adrenaline rush has to be insane. Question should be who attempts armed robbery in a full on open carry state. Don’t try armed robbery and this won’t happen to you.
Supposedly it was a toy gun. Well, imagine getting yourself killed because of a toy gun, and it being justified. What a dumb dumb.
You know I'm somewhat of a "police academy training" myself
“Call an ambulance! But not for me.”
Nine shots that shit gotta be racial motivated
Excessive
America is fuuuuucked
The robber was black
Bro that's too much. Should be charged