• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Robber with AK-47 shot by Waffle House customer

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Real Abed

Perma-Junior
This is a bit of a fuzzy area.

On the one hand, he stopped the robber from getting away with his crime and everyone's belongings.

On the other hand, he entrapped him.

Then again, I'm sure if he hadn't fired, the robber would have. And possibly killed a lot of people. Possibly everyone in the restaurant out of anger.

So I don't know.

As for gun ownership, I don't think any civilian should have access to an AK-47. But that's just me. (We know the customer's gun was licensed. I assume it was just a handgun? Do we know if the robber had a license?)
 
He had already left the scene, if you follow them out to his/her vehicle and attempt to reengage him it is no longer self defense.

Say something along the lines of "hey" isn't provocation. The robber has no special protections. Once he turned around and aimed the rifle he was the aggressor.

According to the shooter.

Of those two I don't see the robber being the more trustworthy one.
 

War Eagle

Member
positive?

c'mon, we all know exactly how this went down.

he followed the robber out, called out and shot as soon as dude turned.

pure revenge but the dude was a robber so holdat L.



Really, the key is this:

One customer, who was legally carrying a concealed handgun, followed the robber into the parking lot because he was afraid for the safety of his wife, who was on her way to the Waffle House.

If security footage corroborates with this, then the shooter has a reasonable cause to fear for the safety of his wife, and he was nothing short of brave to call to the robber and neutralize him. If footage shows this to be false, then the shooter should be arrested. I think it's pretty clear-cut.

This is a bit of a fuzzy area.

On the one hand, he stopped the robber from getting away with his crime and everyone's belongings.

On the other hand, he entrapped him.

Then again, I'm sure if he hadn't fired, the robber would have. And possibly killed a lot of people. Possibly everyone in the restaurant out of anger.

So I don't know.

As for gun ownership, I don't think any civilian should have access to an AK-47. But that's just me. (We know the customer's gun was licensed. I assume it was just a handgun? Do we know if the robber had a license?)


The shooter most definitely had a handgun if it was concealed. I highly doubt the robber obtained the AK 47 legally.
 
Say something along the lines of "hey" isn't provocation. The robber has no special protections. Once he turned around and aimed the rifle he was the aggressor.



Of those two I don't see the robber being the more trustworthy one.

Once you start to pursue the suspect, you're crossing the line into playing law enforcement.
 

BinaryPork2737

Unconfirmed Member
Say something along the lines of "hey" isn't provocation. The robber has no special protections. Once he turned around and aimed the rifle he was the aggressor.

The concealed carrier escalated the situation simply by following the robber out into the parking lot with the intention to engage him. Whether or not the robber's AK was raised at the point when he turned around is irrelevant since the situation already moved past the self-defense stage. This is a case of retaliation, not self-defense.
 

mackattk

Member
Ok, so he murdered the robber when he posed no threat to anybody. I guess vigilante justice is A-OK in the USA

If security footage corroborates with this, then the shooter has a reasonable cause to fear for the safety of his wife, and he was nothing short of brave to call to the robber and neutralize him. If footage shows this to be false, then the shooter should be arrested. I think it's pretty clear-cut.


I got two options: 1, go and shoot the motherfucker. 2, I can call my wife and tell her to hold off on coming to Waffle House. Who in their right mind would choose option 1, unless they dream of being one of those good guy with a gun and a hero? He put everybody in that Waffle House in danger when he did that. Any stray bullets from the AK-47 could have easily went into the Waffle House or elsewhere, and injure/kill innocent bystanders.

But let's think about this. What are the chances that his wife would get hurt by the shooter anyway? Even if she was 20 seconds out, the shooter would have been long gone by then. I doubt he would stand around and watch for anybody to pull into the Waffle House parking lot so he can shoot them.

This is just a guy who has always dreamt of using a gun and probably had fantasies of what he would do in a situation like this. The situation presented itself, so he went after it. He should be charged with murder.
 

Christhor

Member
I'd have just called my wife and told her to not come because of a person with a gun, instead of putting my life at risk like this. What he did was not really smart and easily could have gotten him killed.

What did the robber take from the customers? It would make sense to me to take the phones if you're going to rob people.
 

War Eagle

Member
The concealed carrier escalated the situation simply by following the robber out into the parking lot with the intention to engage him. Whether or not the robber's AK was raised at the point when he turned around is irrelevant since the situation already moved past the self-defense stage. This is a case of retaliation, not self-defense.

Not if the pursuer had reasonable cause for the safety of his wife who was on her way to the location of the robber though. Why does this part keep getting left out?
 
If I wanted to find someone with a gun, I'd go to a Walmart or a Waffle House... and maybe not in that order. You have to be a fool to try and commit a robbery there.

Nah, our local gun shop was robbed once. Which is pretty high on the 'I have no brains' scale of ideas, if not top 5.
 

HeySeuss

Member
Just because the robbery in the moment was over doesn't mean the threat had subsided. He still posed a risk to the public having just robbed the place. Responding law enforcement, any civilians that came into contact with him, hell even if he didn't get enough money and decided to rob another place were still in danger. So I wouldn't call this vigilantism just because dude followed him out to the parking lot.

Even if he doesn't get into a shootout with arriving police, he's likely to flee and there would be an ensuing car chase putting innocent bystanders at risk. He doesn't magically stop being a threat just because he got some money.
 

BinaryPork2737

Unconfirmed Member
Not if the pursuer had reasonable cause for the safety of his wife who was on her way to the location of the robber though. Why does this part keep getting left out?

Because the wife wasn't actually in clear and present danger at the time. The claim is a shaky defense at best. Self-defense still wouldn't apply.
 
The concealed carrier escalated the situation simply by following the robber out into the parking lot with the intention to engage him. Whether or not the robber's AK was raised at the point when he turned around is irrelevant since the situation already moved past the self-defense stage. This is a case of retaliation, not self-defense.

Yep, this is my feeling as well. He knew exactly what the robber would do if he went out and confronted him, it really isn't self-defense if you goad someone to do something.

Not if the pursuer had reasonable cause for the safety of his wife who was on her way to the location of the robber though. Why does this part keep getting left out?

Why not just call your wife? Did the wife arrive on the scene? When was she supposed to get there, there is so much left which is why I'm ignoring it.

It's only fair that positive use of CCWs get posted as much as negatives.

I don't consider this a positive.
 

nynt9

Member
It's only fair that positive use of CCWs get posted as much as negatives.

Murdering someone in a parking lot when they've already left the scene and stopped threatening anyone doesn't really count as self defense. It's vigilantism and murder. That's what we have the justice system for, not cowboys like this guy. He should be tried.

The robber was black, so this also might be some guy using a convenient opportunity to "clean the streets" or whatever, Zimmerman style.
 

TaterTots

Banned
From the member that brought you:

Concealed Carrier Stops Shooting in Progress Outside SC Nightclub

and

Homeowners shoot & kill murder suspect that escaped from jail & broke in their house

again, if nobody had guns, nobody would have to get shot.


We're way past that though. Guns are never going to disappear in America. Too many.
 

MogCakes

Member
The way I see it is in the current state of things, if you decide to rob a place with an AK-47, you accept the risk that someone else is also packing and you will be shot, be it police or citizen.
 

War Eagle

Member
We're way past that though. Guns are never going to disappear in America. Too many.

People can't get this through their heads though. It just will never happen. The best we can do is sensible gun control, which I am 100% for! I am not a member of, nor will I join the NRA because I am very opposed to how lax they are about guns and gun control.
 

BinaryPork2737

Unconfirmed Member
Uh, that wasn't what I was saying. I was saying maybe he couldn't call his wife, who he was worried would pull up.

Wouldn't a waffle house have at least one phone inside the establishment? The article mentions nothing about the robber stealing phones, or cutting the power or phone cords, so we're just left to speculate the alternatives here.

People can't get this through their heads though. It just will never happen. The best we can do is sensible gun control, which I am 100% for! I am not a member of, nor will I join the NRA because I am very opposed to how lax they are about guns and gun control.

Yeah, the carrier was clearly in his legal right to carry his gun, this is more about how he acted in the situation.
 
From a legal standpoint, if a gun was pulled on you during a robbery, and they walk away afterwards, can you still claim self-defense if you shoot them as they try to get away?
 

MogCakes

Member
From a legal standpoint, if a gun was pulled on you during a robbery, and they walk away afterwards, can you still claim self-defense if you shoot them as they try to get away?
I suppose the customer might be prepared to face time if not. If he was acting in defense of his wife whom presumably he couldn't contact for whatever reason then he may consider it worth the penalty.
 
The way I see it is in the current state of things, if you decide to rob a place with an AK-47, you accept the risk that someone else is also packing and you will be shot, be it police or citizen.

Nobody's really putting up a vigorous defense of the robber, but I'd also argue pursuing the robber after leaving the premises, provoking them as an excuse to play executioner isn't really a stellar "good guy with gun" scenario.

Just because somebody was robbed doesn't automatically give them license to exercise the death penalty against the robber.

This country has a problem with "bad guys with guns" and a pretty mixed record with "good guys with guns" alongside of it.
 

Christhor

Member
Wouldn't a waffle house have at least one phone inside the establishment? The article mentions nothing about the robber stealing phones, or cutting the power or phone cords, so we're just left to speculate the alternatives here.

Who remembers numbers these days? I only know my own, lol. But yeah, that was really my main point, we don't know the details either way. So his reason for going outside is all speculation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom