-
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
- Thread starter War Eagle
- Start date
- Status
The point is that the robber was leaving. He committed his crime. He didn't shoot anyone. He walked out of the store and was leaving. He wasn't shot until the good guy with a gun called out to him and he turned around.
Would he have gone on somewhere else and shot someone? Maybe. Maybe not. You can't just say you're going to shot him and potentially kill him because of something he might do. Sure, he is much more liable to shot someone given that he just robbed a place with a gun and shit happens, but he still shouldn't have been shot as he was leaving.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
I don't know why any of you would follow a guy, a guy who has just pointed an AK-47 in your face, out in the parking lot and try to get into a gunfight with him like it is the wild west.
Call your wife, call the police, stop being Joe Horn.
Robber could have very easily have missed and shot people still inside the restaurant.
Considering AK-47 guy is still alive, I doubt this is the end of this.
Yeah, I really am too tired to discuss gun control. It really is a lost cause. No matter what evidence or mass shootings happen, die hard gun supporters keep shouting the same drivel. Hell, guns are the hottest topic of the year, and Congress literally just walked out for their summer vacation saying now is not the time to talk about guns. This country is bought and paid for by the NRA
Anyway, back on topic. There is a reason why thee murderer shouter hey to get the robber to turn around. Shooting them in the back would send a bad message. So you have to ask yourself, how much of an impulse was this move to go after the robber? To be able to think clearly enough "I got to get this guy turned around so I can shoot him in the front." Its premeditated, it has to be.
He is going to be heralded as a hero and the cycle continues.
Well, it's technically not an AK-47. AK-47s are selective fire. These are civilian semi-auto versions with (typically) stamped receivers. The internals of them are very different.
It's easier to just call it an AK, or AK Variant. Some people put forward the term "PAK", which means "Semi Automatic Kalashnikov".
The same way we stop criminals from doing any other criminal thing. Or would you suggest that we make stealing and murder legal, since we can't stop every criminal from stealing and murdering?
How the fuck does this absolute laziest of arguments continue to sound even remotely valid to anyone?
Was more of a tongue in cheek comment because it is one of the things that set gun supporters off the rails.
This isn't something new, it's been happening before you were born, before I was born, there was just no internet or media that wanted to blow everything up to push agendas and issues on either side back then.
As far as the fear of vigilantes? Again, internet and media would be to blame if that were to happen because it hasn't happened on a wide spread level yet.
It definitely was, likely while the robbery was taking place he was thinking through his course of action.
As with almost every issue, the people who oppose it get caught up in semantics.
"It's a magazine not a clip! Your opinion is invalid!"
Krappadizzle
Member
Fuck that robber. I have 0 sympathy for him. Shouldn't started no shit if he didn't want no shit.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Yep, we should just make all crimes punishable by death.
The U.S. is not a small country. There are way more guns than people in circulation. Why would a criminal turn over his firearm if he doesn't care for the law in the first place?
minor effort
Banned
Arguing against vigilante justice isn't necessarily a defense of the robber. It's an argument about the wisdom, safety, and ethics of the situation.
It's because they're important distinctions for making sensible gun laws.
To put it into game terms, if someone was to nerf a specific hero in Dota or League of Legends, you would want to have them understand the game in order to make a meaningful and accurate change to that character. If they have no understanding of the game mechanics, and just decide to decrease the AP of all characters, it wouldn't really do much for that hero. It'd also end up fucking everyone over who enjoys playing the other heroes for no real reason.
I'm sure he is really proud that whatever has happened in his life has led to robbing a waffle house.
Fuck him for not getting proper support from society for whatever obstacles he has faced.
I bought my AK-47 on the Internet for about $570. It was then transferred to a local FFL who administered the background check. Granted, only the semi-auto version is legal unless you go through the NFA process to buy a pre-ban full auto AK (which are about $20,000).
Not sure how I feel about the guy challenging the robber. You're really not supposed to engage someone like that unless it's your last resort and you have no other option to shoot the guy. Worrying about his wife getting shot after the guy was leaving is really pushing it IMO.
Give me a break. Nobody forced the guy to start robbing people. I get what you're saying, but societal problems don't give you an excuse to rob people at gunpoint.
Well when you walk in with an assault rifle and start robbing places you're just asking for jail or death, and chances are if the cops show up and this guy realizes he is fucked he is going to death by cop suicide anyway.
As you know, gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. The people that want to do bad shit with guns, will get them by any means necessary.
You have no evidence of this and are purely speculating. For all you know, he was a law abiding citizen and decided to try to detain the robber, but the robber met him at gun point. There is no proof of anything here. We need parking lot video imo.
Mackenzie 92
Member
Doesn't sound legal to me. Wonder if the DA will consider charges, especially if the man dies.
Link
The Autumn Wind
I'm so glad we got that Minority Report PreCrime tech up and running.
He is a product of his environment, but at the end of the day he is a self-aware human with the capability to think for himself. He knew the risks and took the gamble. His actions are his own.
Yep. Sounds like the guy was living out a hero fantasy. Or he had already made up his mind during the robbery and decided to carry it out while high on adrenaline.
Not sure why he wasn't arrested.
It's not an assault rifle.
Seductivpancakes
Member
A law abiding citizen should have called the cops and let them handle it.
Can you elaborate on this more? Are you now saying he was only shot because he was of color, or am I reading this wrong?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Crazy.
http://wncn.com/2016/04/03/nc-waffl...robber-carrying-ak-47-style-rifle-police-say/
Same guy, right?
http://www.fox4news.com/news/173255270-story
Yah, by accounts it looks like the same exact person.
http://wncn.com/2016/04/03/nc-waffl...robber-carrying-ak-47-style-rifle-police-say/
Same guy, right?
http://www.fox4news.com/news/173255270-story
Yah, by accounts it looks like the same exact person.
Well yeah, I would think that's obvious. It's within reason he was thinking through a course of action, I'm not implying he had evil murderous plots running through his head as the innocent robber took everyone's stuff at gunpoint.
No one called the police? There is such a thing as citizen arrest. It's really odd that people are sympathizing with a criminal who placed people at gun point and demanded shit. This is confusing.
A Link to the Past
Banned
So just to be clear, the man pursued the robber after the robber left, right?
Yeah, that's a man that needs to be put away. That shit isn't tolerable - it could have easily resulted in the robber doing something to cause the death of the vigilante or innocent bystanders.
Yeah, that's a man that needs to be put away. That shit isn't tolerable - it could have easily resulted in the robber doing something to cause the death of the vigilante or innocent bystanders.
Link
The Autumn Wind
The movie. He's just speculating that the guy would have gotten into a shootout with cops as justification for this guy chasing him down and shooting him.
Look at history of how these things turn out. Question, if he killed someone in there would you still want the shooter saved and rehabilitated?
Where did I say he would have shoot outs with the cops??, all he has to do is raise his arms the wrong way and the cops would take it as a threat and take him down, as they have in past situations over the last few decades.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Citizens arrest, lol.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Sorry, I don't speculate on complete hypotheticals.
minor effort
Banned
It feels like every discussion on gun proliferation and gun violence gets bogged down in a semantic argument over the definition of assault rifles.
Agreed. Situations like this are why we need better training requirements for people getting a CCW. I did the "training" and test for one just for fun and it's an utter joke. The only thing I have left to do after watching a 30 minute video and submittiting a 25-question multiple choice test full of obvious common sense answers is to submit the paperwork and pay a small fee. The training tends to only cover gun safety and operation but fails to cover descalation or when it's actually appropriate to use a gun in self defense.
Gun laws rely on semantics, otherwise people will always find ways around them. It's hard to take anti-gun people seriously when they don't actually know anything about guns or current gun laws.
uncelestial
Member
Cool thanks for another shitty thread, I'll pass it on to the families of the tens of thousands of people killed by guns in America last year.
I know GAF is pretty damn leftist, but how can anyone defend the assailant's actions/condemn the customer?
Guy goes into a populated restaurant, brandishing a firearm, demanding money. So it's an armed robbery. Then the perpetrator leaves, and a customer follows him out and calls out to the perp. Said perp then turns around, and brandishes the weapon again in a threatening manner and is shot down.
What isn't clear about this?
Guy goes into a populated restaurant, brandishing a firearm, demanding money. So it's an armed robbery. Then the perpetrator leaves, and a customer follows him out and calls out to the perp. Said perp then turns around, and brandishes the weapon again in a threatening manner and is shot down.
What isn't clear about this?
Seductivpancakes
Member
No one is sympathizing with the criminal. That's just your narrative.
A citizen arrest isn't always the best option for every crime in progress. Since we know the robber was leaving the scene of the crime while armed with a rifle, there is no good reason a civilian should attempt to arrest the robber. As people on this thread have pointed out, it could have escalated to bystanders being hit by stray rounds from either shooters.
Got ya.
Do you think robbers deserve immediate death sentences without due process? Keep in mind, none of us here are siding with the robber. He's obviously a criminal. We just don't think he should have been followed and shot.
The one that escalated the non-violent situation is the shooter. The potential for collateral damage is incredibly high in public shootouts like this. The shooter's life wasn't being threatened until he purposeful put himself in harm's way so that he could live out his hero fantasy at the risk of the public.
I haven't gone through the process in OR yet (I moved to Bend), but in WA all I had to do was go to the Sheriff, have them scan my thumbprints, and fill out some paperwork. Seriously dumb.
$10 says the guy follows Nutnfancy
It's not really semantics though. These are actual concrete terms that people view as unimportant semantics, which leads to dumb gun laws that have no appreciable affect on gun violence.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
What isn't clear is why would you follow the perp out of the place when he has already left the scene. Call the cops and let them deal with it.
Agreed, but that still doesn't mean he should get shot by a citizen, after the crime was done and he was leaving. I suppose my comment is more directed at having no sympathy for the guy. I don't have sympathy for him getting arrested, but I do have some sympathy and understanding that he probably has not had the same opportunities as other people.
You're confused because that's not sympathy you're reading.
I think everyone agrees guns are out of control. However if you only post threads about civilians misfiring or otherwise mishandling guns (not that this particular thread isn't or is such a case), then the discussions/arguments become an echo chamber.
Seductivpancakes
Member
Not every crime needs direct intervention from civilians. Context is key, and in this particular story, the professionals should have handled it.
minor effort
Banned
Where are people defending the assailant's actions in this thread? I haven't seen it.
As for condemning the customer's actions, you pinpointed it yourself.
By that point he was deliberately trying to further extend a deescalating situation and provoke the assailant. You don't need to defend the assailant's actions to determine that the customer's actions were dangerous, unethical, potentially illegal, and likely wrong.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked