Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man at ATM fires back at would-be armed robber
http://charlotte.news14.com/content/local_news/charlotte/628167/man-at-atm-fires-back-at-would-be-armed-robber ^

Posted on 07/16/2010 5:00:47 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA

CHARLOTTE -- Police say a man shot a would-be robber Thursday night at an east Charlotte ATM.

According to police, the man was attempting to use a Cash Points ATM on Eastway Drive at North Tryon Street around 11 p.m. A suspect seemingly saw that as an opportunity and tried to rob the victim at gunpoint.

However, that victim was also armed. He shot the suspect twice in the leg. Police officials report that suspect suffered non-life-threatening injuries.

CMPD officials are no longer interviewing the shooter in the case, who they say did cooperate with detectives in their investigation. No charges are pending against him.

The suspected robber will face charges once that person is released from the hospital.

(Excerpt) Read more at charlotte.news14.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 07/16/2010 5:00:52 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

http://ccwsaveslives.blogspot.com/


2 posted on 07/16/2010 5:01:10 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

This guy’s aim was WAAAAAAAAAAAY OFF!


3 posted on 07/16/2010 5:02:35 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop...........Eagle Scout since Sept 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Slam dunk with the ATM camera’s as evidence.


4 posted on 07/16/2010 5:02:46 AM PDT by Marty62 (marty60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P8riot

Not if he was aiming for the old scrotillia.


5 posted on 07/16/2010 5:03:29 AM PDT by domenad (In all things, in all ways, at all times, let honor guide me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Time to visit the range


6 posted on 07/16/2010 5:04:13 AM PDT by Mobties
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P8riot

Great tag line!


7 posted on 07/16/2010 5:05:30 AM PDT by Howie66 (I can see November from my house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

I suspect the ATM holder will be sued later by the robber. If you point your weapon at a life threatening situation, finish the job! More range time indeed!


8 posted on 07/16/2010 5:09:52 AM PDT by texson66 (Congress does not draw to its halls those who love liberty. It draws those who love power .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howie66

Thanks, I like yours too.


9 posted on 07/16/2010 5:10:02 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop...........Eagle Scout since Sept 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: domenad

At that range he should’ve hit those too.


10 posted on 07/16/2010 5:11:07 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop...........Eagle Scout since Sept 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

When a punk has a gun aimed at you, you may not wait until your weapon is aimed at center mass before pulling the trigger.
Having stopped the threat, not everybody has the makeup to then take the kill shot.


11 posted on 07/16/2010 5:14:54 AM PDT by G Larry (Democrats: expediting the Destruction of America, before they lose power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P8riot

In cases like this, I believe the would be victim should be forced to spend some time on the range. I’m serious.


12 posted on 07/16/2010 5:15:10 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (How do I change my screen name now that we have the most conservative government in the world?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian

Agreed.

As it stands, now the Perp is alive to sue his intended target.

Dead Perps don’t sue anybody.


13 posted on 07/16/2010 5:19:47 AM PDT by Howie66 (I can see November from my house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

Could not agree more. Am amazed at the Monday Morning quarterbacks on here.


14 posted on 07/16/2010 5:22:10 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian

Exactly, but I’ll go further than that. They ought to get a ticket and a heavy fine with mandatory range time if they fail to kill the perp. The way I look at it we would be doing society and the law enforcement and court system a favor by minimizing their case load.


15 posted on 07/16/2010 5:24:19 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop...........Eagle Scout since Sept 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: P8riot

Hope you are kidding, because no offense, but that is the dumbest idea I have ever heard.

The victim stopped the threat.....all he wants to do in a life threatening situation. He did that, and you want to punish him. That would do wonders for the 2A/sarc


16 posted on 07/16/2010 5:26:36 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Trasnsaction Cancelled.


17 posted on 07/16/2010 5:27:44 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
This guy’s aim was WAAAAAAAAAAAY OFF!

I would agree, but at least he hit him. You gotta hate it when you rob an innocent man at gunpoint and he turns out to be (oh my gosh) ARMED! Take that you gun control marxists!

18 posted on 07/16/2010 5:37:50 AM PDT by politicalmerc (It's not their house; it's your home: GaHouseTrust.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

More range time and more caliber needed. Glaser blue ammo.


19 posted on 07/16/2010 5:40:39 AM PDT by CholeraJoe ("What did the English ever give you? Muffins and a burnt White House. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howie66

Dead perps tell no lies, either, but IIRC their family members can sue for “wrongful death” while wailing,

“He was just turning his life around!”

Anyway, better to aim below center of mass and score extremity hits, than to aim above and miss.

“Confucius say: woman who think way to mans’ heart through his stomach have sights set too high.”


20 posted on 07/16/2010 5:41:52 AM PDT by elcid1970 ("O Muslim! My bullets are dipped in pig grease!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

LMAO


21 posted on 07/16/2010 5:51:13 AM PDT by Howie66 (I can see November from my house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Using an ATM in that area at night is like hanging out a sign saying, “ROB ME!”

I never use a walk up in Charlotte anymore (unless someone in the car has a piece in their hand) and never use a drive up ATM at night (or a convenience store for that matter).


22 posted on 07/16/2010 5:54:53 AM PDT by Big_Harry ( Starve the Beast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P8riot

Low hits could be the result of stress causing him just to point the gun and yank the trigger.

Or he was aiming at the scrot. :)


23 posted on 07/16/2010 5:58:04 AM PDT by IGOTMINE (1911s FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

Two leg shots! He’s lucky the criminal didn’t return fire. Aim higher next time.


24 posted on 07/16/2010 5:59:46 AM PDT by crosshairs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
Having stopped the threat, not everybody has the makeup to then take the kill shot.

Ummm...if you've stopped the threat, there is no legal reason to take the kill shot.

25 posted on 07/16/2010 6:12:58 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: P8riot

A heavy fine for missing the perp? You are kidding. I was thinking more like a couple of hours on the police range and some beer afterwards.


26 posted on 07/16/2010 6:24:30 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (How do I change my screen name now that we have the most conservative government in the world?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
Ummm...if you've stopped the threat, there is no legal reason to take the kill shot.

If the perp is still armed there is still a threat. If I sat on the jury and the perp was still breathing I'd consider there to still be a threat.

27 posted on 07/16/2010 6:25:55 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970
Dead perps tell no lies, either, but IIRC their family members can sue for “wrongful death” while wailing,

“He was just turning his life around!”

You forgot grandma "Johnny's a good boy, he'd never do that"

(even though Johnny has a rap sheet as long as his arm.)

28 posted on 07/16/2010 6:28:32 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All

The good citizen should sue the robber for causing emotional distress...


29 posted on 07/16/2010 6:40:34 AM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
Ummm...if you've stopped the threat, there is no legal reason to take the kill shot.

You're right. Shoot to stop, not shoot to kill.

If I ever had to shoot someone, I'd hope they lived. I don't want the death of another human being on my mind for the rest of my life, even if they 100% deserved it.

By forcing me to kill them, they'll have taken something from me. I'd do it if necessary, but wouldn't like having to live with it.
30 posted on 07/16/2010 6:55:05 AM PDT by ConservativeWarrior (In last year's nests, there are no birds this year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Former Proud Canadian

I was thinking of it as an incentive to improve accuracy


31 posted on 07/16/2010 7:06:42 AM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop...........Eagle Scout since Sept 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: John O
If the perp is still armed there is still a threat. If I sat on the jury and the perp was still breathing I'd consider there to still be a threat.

Reread the original comment....

Having stopped the threat, not everybody has the makeup to then take the kill shot.

32 posted on 07/16/2010 8:00:15 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeWarrior
You're right. Shoot to stop, not shoot to kill. If I ever had to shoot someone, I'd hope they lived. I don't want the death of another human being on my mind for the rest of my life, even if they 100% deserved it. By forcing me to kill them, they'll have taken something from me. I'd do it if necessary, but wouldn't like having to live with it.

Some people just don't realize that when you are physically attacked, you are dealing with two battles, the perp and the legal system. I want to survive both.

33 posted on 07/16/2010 8:03:07 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA

It’s much easier to be heroic typing on a computer in the office than it is to intentionally take the life of a human being, even a rotten human being.


34 posted on 07/16/2010 8:07:41 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Indeed. One of the most difficult things in this life is to keep your composure while a gun is pointed at you. But sounds like some here have mastered that/sarc


35 posted on 07/16/2010 8:52:53 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68

Yes, but only a mind reader would be aware of your perceptions regarding the threat at that point.


36 posted on 07/16/2010 9:41:51 AM PDT by G Larry (Democrats: expediting the Destruction of America, before they lose power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
Yes, but only a mind reader would be aware of your perceptions regarding the threat at that point.

Your perceptions still have to be reasonable and based on facts. I could perceive that the guy walking down the sidewalk in my direction is going to kill me. That perception doesn't give me the right kill him.

37 posted on 07/16/2010 10:13:27 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Howie66

Sorry to disagree with you, but sometimes their surviving family members can sue you.

A double tap aimed at the center of mass would reduce the likelihood that of any lawsuit, but the possibility is still there.

That’s always the biggest target, but you intent is never to have the perp go tango uniform – that’s the story you stick to.

On the other hand maybe he just wanted to kneecap the wandering shred of human debris.


38 posted on 07/16/2010 12:00:16 PM PDT by BerserkPatriot (There are no 1st Amendment rights without 2nd Amendment Rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
me->If the perp is still armed there is still a threat. If I sat on the jury and the perp was still breathing I'd consider there to still be a threat.

you->Reread the original comment....

Having stopped the threat, not everybody has the makeup to then take the kill shot.

Let me be blatantly clear. If the perp is still breathing, you have not stopped the threat. If he is still armed (you know he had one gun, You don't know if he was carrying another) you have not stopped the threat. If there is any chance of future retaliation, you have not stopped the threat.

If I were sitting on the jury in any case where a person shot and killed a 'person' who had assaulted (attacked, tried to rob, etc) them, I would find the person not guilty due to self defense.

See what I am saying?

39 posted on 07/16/2010 12:04:39 PM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: politicalmerc

Yes, I’m sure they would say that maybe the victim should have given over the money and they could have both sung Kumbaya or something.

Violence only breeds violence... blah.. blah.. blah...

On a serious note – I think that this incident should highlight to all of us the importance of being vigilant, especially in a situation like this.

If your doing something like getting money out of an ATM you need to continuously look around the area for any threats.

And you need to be listening for anyone that may be approaching.

At least if you see someone approaching you can at least put you hand on your weapon just in case.


40 posted on 07/16/2010 12:11:04 PM PDT by BerserkPatriot (There are no 1st Amendment rights without 2nd Amendment Rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68

The bandit had a gun pointed at the citizen. The armed citizen could have emptied his weapon on the bandit and nobody else is in a position to suggest that he should have known he was no longer a threat after being shot twice in the leg.


41 posted on 07/16/2010 12:19:34 PM PDT by G Larry (Democrats: expediting the Destruction of America, before they lose power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: John O
Let me be blatantly clear. If the perp is still breathing, you have not stopped the threat. If he is still armed (you know he had one gun, You don't know if he was carrying another) you have not stopped the threat. If there is any chance of future retaliation, you have not stopped the threat. If I were sitting on the jury in any case where a person shot and killed a 'person' who had assaulted (attacked, tried to rob, etc) them, I would find the person not guilty due to self defense. See what I am saying?

I completely understand what you are saying, it's just doesn't jibe with the laws in my state. We are debating the way thing are vs the way they should be. If you shoot an armed attacker, he falls down seriously wounded, his arms spread out on the ground, and his weapon falls beyond his reach, you do not have legal grounds to finish him off. There is a fine line between personal defense and retribution. Now, if we were all guaranteed 12 John O's on the jury, we might act differently. But when I think of a 12 person jury, I think of those morons on the OJ jury. I don't want to trust my freedom to 12 random citizens.

42 posted on 07/16/2010 12:26:27 PM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
The bandit had a gun pointed at the citizen. The armed citizen could have emptied his weapon on the bandit and nobody else is in a position to suggest that he should have known he was no longer a threat after being shot twice in the leg.

The local DA and a jury will certainly be in a position to decide whether you acted legally or not.

43 posted on 07/16/2010 12:32:48 PM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68
If you shoot an armed attacker, he falls down seriously wounded, his arms spread out on the ground, and his weapon falls beyond his reach, you do not have legal grounds to finish him off. There is a fine line between personal defense and retribution.

Sad but probably true. However, if you think he can reach his gun before you do. Bang!

Now, if we were all guaranteed 12 John O's on the jury, we might act differently.

Don't need 12. Just one. And you have to plan to be one if you ever get called for jury duty. The juror makes the law. There is no authority higher than he.

44 posted on 07/16/2010 12:54:40 PM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68

Oh....”certainly”?

The conditions I described and you repeated, don’t put the DA or the jury in a position to decide anything with any more certainty than the information provided by the victim.
The victim is under no obligation to assert the armed threat ended with 2 shots to the leg.

“Your Honor, the gun was in his hand, not between his legs.”


45 posted on 07/16/2010 2:06:24 PM PDT by G Larry (Democrats: expediting the Destruction of America, before they lose power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: John O
Don't need 12. Just one. And you have to plan to be one if you ever get called for jury duty. The juror makes the law. There is no authority higher than he.

I'm aware of jury nullification and believe in its purpose, but if only one juror is "on your side" that's a hung jury which is a mistrial and you can absolutely be retried. That one juror doesn't necessarily end it for you. I just believe there is a successful way to defend yourself and avoid legal trouble and the same time. In the process of protecting my life, I don't want to lose my wealth and/or freedom.

46 posted on 07/16/2010 2:07:41 PM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
Oh....”certainly”? The conditions I described and you repeated, don’t put the DA or the jury in a position to decide anything with any more certainty than the information provided by the victim. The victim is under no obligation to assert the armed threat ended with 2 shots to the leg. “Your Honor, the gun was in his hand, not between his legs.”

Your theory works great...in the absence of forensic evidence, other witnesses, or surveillance cameras.

47 posted on 07/16/2010 2:12:44 PM PDT by Niteranger68 (I believe in man-made political climate change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
According to the local TV news this morning the perpetrator shot at the victim and missed before the victim drew his gun and shot the perpetrator.

I"m going to guess here that NONE of us would be a dead aim when we were being shot at.

48 posted on 07/16/2010 2:12:47 PM PDT by KenD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KenD

That’s where training and muscle memory come in. Granted, not everyone trains to that extent, but I’d hazard a guess that many of us are very good instinctive shooters. Specially those of us with combat military and/or law enforcement backgrounds.


49 posted on 07/16/2010 2:32:28 PM PDT by P8riot (I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop...........Eagle Scout since Sept 9, 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Niteranger68

You can “if” this to death.

As long as there is no clear evidence that the threat was stopped, and I then went over a planted a kill shot, I can shoot until my gun is empty.


50 posted on 07/16/2010 3:48:17 PM PDT by G Larry (Democrats: expediting the Destruction of America, before they lose power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson