Skip to comments.Father Ends Crime Spree by Shooting Armed Robber Outside Burger King
Posted on 04/08/2013 6:10:52 AM PDT by expat1000
click here to read article
This is a marvelous lesson in some of the advantages of concealed carry.
CC sends the “degree of difficulty” of armed robbery through the roof, and gives huge advantages to the cc-carrying victim, even if the robber is brandishing a gun, pointing it at the victim, and the hammer is back.
First of all, the robber wants to rob, not kill, then get away. He does not want to be witnessed, or have somebody sneak up behind him. And he has to be aware of an escape route or two, and that they remain open.
So his attention is all over the place, looking in all directions, not just the victim, ready to bolt at moment’s notice for several reasons, and, often as not, he is high on some drug or alcohol, further diminishing his capacity.
But the cc victim is focused. Find an opportunity, draw my gun while taking it off safe, and light the robber up. Your intent is not to rob the robber, but to shoot him. Hopefully a bunch, not once at a time with a pause to see if your bullets have “worked”.
The cc victim can shoot any time he wants. If the robber says he has a gun, or holds the gun in his pocket, or is distracted, or when he reaches down to get valuables you have tossed on the ground, or even when he is leaving.
(Oh, and the big secret, that a lot of guns used by robbers don’t even work.)
It’s comparable to waiting for an opening when you want to make a left turn across traffic. If you see an opportunity, you can take it or not, or wait until a better opportunity. Or even wait for a red light in the opposing lane, and for a nice person to stop and leave you a gap to cross.
The tactical advantages of cc are huge. The dad in this instance did not want any risk to his kids at all, so at first cooperated, and only shot when the robber was trying to get away. He did right. Judgment call as to whether he did right enough times.
As a civil or criminal juror, I would accept the father's statement at face value. The predator would get nothing in civil court, and the decent citizen would not even be convicted of "disturbing the peace" or of "discharging a firearm within city limits" if I was on the jury. Decent people need to make time for jury duty and put an end to abusive prosecution (like Martin Zimmerman but less publicized) and to frivolous or abusive lawsuits (such as a criminal who whines because he got shot by his victim).
Hubby was in the army and then was a firefighter for 33 years. He is OCD about gas in the car. I will run it to the red line but anything close to 1/4 of a tank deserves a fill-up in his view.
Admittedly, I did not click out to the article and read the whole thing, but was there a “Crime Spree” or was this a simple robbery? I don’t see any mention of the series of robberies or other crimes that one would normally think of when hearing the words “Crime Spree” as mentioned in the title.
Wife is emphatic about it after being caught low during an impending Florida hurricane, when all the gas stations shut down and bailed.
Years later a mechanic said that with these new cars, driving too often with a low tank left the internal gas pump exposed and not insulated by the gas, and tended to fail more often.
Between the two, I now top off when I get near a half tank.
IF they had the $80 for a fill up, they wouldn’t be robbin’ nobody!
oh... and why can’t dad hit center mass, inside 15 yds.?
ONE MILLION carry permits in Florida. Crime is not a good idea.
CT is an free range crime zone, criminals are welcome in connecticut. Where the homes are rich, the citizens unarmed, and the TV shows use bows and arrows.
My wife and I argue about this. We drive cars with very good mileage. She fills up almost every time she passes a Sams Club or Costco (ok, a little exaggeration there), while I wait until 1/4 tank or so is left. That’s still over 100 miles until empty. I don’t think it is efficient to fill up at 1/2 tank, unless you plan on driving on roads where there is no gas for hundreds of miles.
A happy news story for today!!
the “alleged” criminal had already demonstrated he was a danger to the father and others. It was an ongoing threat. He robbed a store in broad daylight, not a rational act. He could easily have decided to eliminate witnesses.
FL’s stand your ground law has complete civil immunity. There will be no civil action. If there is a suit, the lawyer and the plaintiff will BOTH become pesonally liable for a bad faith filing.
Also you have an intervening supervening criminal act.
bottom line, no civil suit.
So, if he committed an irrational act I suppose the defense will be able to plea deal him out on a temporary insanity deal. But then, since he will have the “insanity” thing in his “permanent record”, he’ll be “prevented” from ever obtaining another firearm. Isn’t that what we’re being promised by the king and his court? LOL!
the law has changed SIGNIFICANTLY.
Plaintiff’s lawyers have been tort reformed out of business.
FL has stand your ground laws.
Even under the old law it would still be justified.
Many instructors have no clue about the law, nra certification or not. Some still think a bowie knife exposed on the boot is ok because it is exposed.
We should start pointing out that most of the criminals who use guns are liberals, and vote democrat.
The guy needs more range time.
unless “cured” and rights restored.
bottom line, the father is safe from civil liability. Also keep in mind a jury has to unanimously agree. I believe this would be a jurry of twelve.
The real issue in FL is the out of control lying prosecutors.
In Texas, if someone is leaving the scene with your property, it’s ok to shoot. I probably wouldn’t shoot over a tire or a battery, but it is within my rights as I understand it. That’s what my CHL instructor said.
I know you aren't talking about a shortage of money but that was the case of my teenagers running out of gasoline. I tried to drill it into them when they called me to come get them from wherever because the tank was empty. It costs exactly the same to drive with a full tank as it does with an eighth of a tank (or a sixteenth).
99% of the folks say: YES!
The manwas seen by the perp and he could have returned to kill the witness(s)
Thus: the man FEARED for his LIFE.
Now the Feds are trying to lighten cars as much as possible to make them more fuel efficient, and you are carrying around a halftank of dead weight all the time.
Shame on you and your carbonfootprint!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.