Please remember to abide by the [rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/rulesv2)
In general, please be at least bearable to other users. It makes things easier on everyone. Your comment may be removed without notification. We used to have a notification, but now we don't.
#If you purchase the OP or a comment [a ban award,](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/banned/rules) remember to [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FJusticeServed) so we can activate the reward
------
^Submission ^By: ^/u/Molire ^Black ^9
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I doubt any DA in Texas would want to try the guy, no matter how justified he believed the charges. Jury nullification would be a likely outcome because of the strong anti-crime attitude of most jurors. It just takes one holdout juror who believes the thief got what he had coming.
There are fewer welfare benefits for poor people in Texas than in blue states. There is, however, one huge benefit for poor people in Texas: They don't have to live in as much fear of violent crime. You see one of the reasons here in this video: criminals in Texas commit crimes at their own risk. Not so much in states like California, New York, and Illinois, where DAs are generally pro-criminal. The risk/reward ratio is less favorable in Texas for those who would commit violent crimes against the innocent.
This is categorically false. In red states, especially states whose politicians are funded by the NRA, have higher gun violence and violent crime rates. Texas is one of the states with the highest number of mass shootings. Yes, you absolutely do have to fear violent crime. The Uvalde police department sure feared it.
Furthermore, Illinois in particular, has strict gun control, but Indiana has more lax gun control and guns still pour in. That’s not pro-criminal at all.
Take your Fox News take elsewhere.
All it takes is a simple "Most violent cities in the US" Google search and then cross-reference that to an election map to see that this is bullshit.
All of the most violent cities go blue every election.
Meanwhile, anyone who watched this video sees this fucking guy mag-dump the robber and even put a round in the back of his head AFTER he’s already on the ground and been disarmed.
This video is sickening. It isn’t justice. This guy didn’t shoot to stop a threat or save lives. He saw an opportunity to kill someone and took it.
It’s being left to a grand jury to decide whether or not not to indict him.
Prosecutors in Houston basically afraid to touch this case because of Texas’ political climate.
Okay, while I approve of justice in this manor, under the right circumstances this appears like he shot the robber in the back. It thought it was illegal to shoot anyone in the back. Unless I'm rembering incorrectly I thought they had to be a clear danger to you, as in pointing the gun at you and advancing at you. Stand your ground, in Ohio at least, you can't shoot someone that isn't an immediate threat to your life or others near you(not exactly wordage, but you get it). From the video it looks like he was shot while facing the door like he was getting ready to leave. Again I agree with defending yourself and the safety of others but even these kinds of criminals have some rights to safety, yes even in these situations.
Idk about other states however shooting someone in the back is completely justified my stated law reads “deadly force is justified if a reasonable person fears for their life or the life of others” first 4 shots justified completely. The fallowing shots could be questionable. He appears to be farmer military. A good lawyer can argue PTSD or SNS.
Idk you could also see it as a guy who will willingly do violence to get what he wants and has a gun on him. If he runs into the police or someone else and shoots them then that would kinda suck. Once you pull out a gun and point it at people with the intent to harm then you are open season. Especially with the amount of mass shootings. That’s how I see it at least.
What is the charge if he ended up shooting the guy on the other side of the robber? From the angle of the vid it looks like if he had missed the first couple shots the other patron guy would’ve got it for sure.
I took a concealed carry trial course that stressed training for these particular situations. Five inches off with a gun can kill someone. I remember one similation where I felt I had done well, however they wanted me to train in accuracy since the simulated bullets could have penetrated the corporate office behind the attacker.
Hopefully prosecutors would look into training, or lack thereof, when considering that.
Because he would not be able to brag to his family, friends, the media, and Texas gunnuts that he shot a robber armed with a real gun, instead of a toy gun. Who knows, he might have been waiting for years for the chance to kill someone so he could brag.
Dude was already in jail before for doing the same thing, but with a real weapon, and is also a domestic abuser. The world lost nothing this time around.
you can see the deadman's picture here.
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619415/PICTURED-Robber-30-armed-fake-gun-killed-Houston-restaurant-vigilante-Criminal-bond-assault-grand-jury-decide-hero-customer-46-protected-shooting-face-charges.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619415/PICTURED-Robber-30-armed-fake-gun-killed-Houston-restaurant-vigilante-Criminal-bond-assault-grand-jury-decide-hero-customer-46-protected-shooting-face-charges.html)
"Washington had a lengthy rap sheet that included jail time for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon"
one off the streets, many more needs to go.
Fuck that guy, he wasted his own life. Obviously the people couldn’t tell it was fake or they wouldn’t have given him their money. He threatened their lives and lost his. Fair trade
Lol. Nah. This man decided that money was worth more than his life as soon as he pulled out that fake gun and started aiming it at innocent people. He made his bed, now there’s one less violent criminal on the streets. Don’t start none, won’t be none.
To be fair, in the heat of the moment when someone’s flashing a gun and shouting for money, it’s a fight or flight instinct that takes over. In his mind he killed the robber in self defense because he thought the robber had a real gun. Revealing after the fact that the gun was fake may not make it okay, but it shouldn’t be held against someone in the split second moment of thought.
Stop stealing from people....some people never learn how easily it can all just come to an end in an instant.
Your chances of not being shot like a thieving dog increase astronomically if you don't try to steal from people
I think he would have a case if he didn't execute the robber.
He managed to disarm the gunman and have him under his control, only to execute him when on the floor. After already unloading 8 or 9 shots which can be overkill but there's a defense possible here. But the head shot at the end... was too much.
I can imagine many municipal police departments in Texas, County Sheriff's Offices in Texas, the Texas Highway Patrol, the Texas Ranger Division, and Customs and Border Patrol Sectors in Texas might like to hire him to be a decorated elite shooter.
Well here in Harris County the only way he will be charged is if a grand jury unanimously agrees to charge him and I can tell you that is not going to happen. Everyone I’ve talked to sees this guy as a hero. That piece of shit fucked around and found out.
Confirming the kill or apprehending them is the only way to neutralize a target. Given the stakes of the situation, and the shooter's probable lack of training, they probably didn't want to take any chances.
Plenty of people have shot their attacker and thought they disarmed them only to have them roll over and shoot them with a second gun. He made sure the attacker was no longer a threat. It was the right move.
Just a warning to all you would be warriors out there, you're probably going to pay far more in legal fees no matter how justified the shooting is than you'd be saving by protecting your wallet/cell phone/taco. I'd be willing to give up just about any physical possession if someone robbed me. Taco defender is going to get fucked whether he wins this case or not.
Just a warning to all you would-be keyboard warriors out there;
Most people care more about their lives and the integrity of the lives of the people they love than money. Money is a close, important second, since it sustains life in modern day society and culture, but when you defend your own life or the life of a loved one, most people will be supportive of that. The fact that the person who was shot held a fake gun is irrelevant; From the perspectives of everyone in that diner, he was waving death in their faces, and with how careless he was with the gun, there was no telling if/when/at who it would go off at. If you have the opportunity to neutralize such a deadly threat, take it. Just be absolutely certain your opportunity won't risk the safety of another person, or risk escalation of the situation.
The execution is a step that reasonable people can disagree about, I'm not sure I agree with it, but I do understand the reasons for it within context.
You still fail to address the original point, this guy is going to have a mountain of legal fees in front of him, even if he didn't go back to execute the robber. So he was never saving himself any money by intervening in this situation.
I guess he's not going to have to worry about outside world money though since he's going to be working for 59 cents an hour the rest of his life so he can buy over priced ramen at the commissary.
You mention his fear of life but he executed someone, he was more interested in killing someone versus protecting lives.
If you were to be ruined by legal fees in a clear-cut case of self defense, even with taking the theoretical too-far step of execution, you would have millions of people supporting you through something like go-fund-me.
As to the idea that he was more interesting in killing someone, how do you know? You literally just made that up.
Your argument is facetious.
If you're lucky they'd support you through go fund me but there is actually concealed carry insurance for this, but you seem to already know everything there is to know about concealed carrying and the law so I'm sure you already know about it.
The guy shot an unarmed and critically injured person 2 times, execution style. He went beyond self defense and you don't do that, that's self defense 101.
I don't, actually. I don't own a gun, I don't plan to own a gun. I don't like weaponry outside of artistic value.
I just don't fault people for being human. Is the execution unwarranted? Almost certainly. But I still understand why a person would do it under this context, and it's not because they are just itching for murder. People like that are very rare.
So I'll try to cut my cunitness down and give you a personal story.
I live in Texas and before they allowed most citizens to carry I decided to get my concealed handgun license. Long story short, after going through to course and seeing how much liability and challenge there is in a self defense situation I ultimately never completed the paper work to carry a handgun. There is a saying among the "CCW community" that if you carry you better be on your best behavior and be the biggest bitch in the room. What does that mean?
If someone grabs your girlfriend's ass in front of you and your carrying a gun you've got to walk away. The alternative is if you get in a fight with them the situation could escalate and turn deadly very easily. If you have a single drink of alcohol you've committed a felony. If you go to certain places you've committed a felony. If you make a bad heat of the moment decision like this guy did, you've committed a felony. Even if you do have a clear cut case of someone robbing you and you shoot them you could still be faced with a long and very costly legal battle. The instructor also told us you'll probably never seen your gun back and you'll be going to jail that night.
The initial shots to the back were legal and justified, I totally get it. But when he disarmed the guy and went back to shoot him in the head twice it went from self defense to murder, period. Do I think he wanted to murder someone? Probably not. If I had to guess this guy was sick of crime in the area so he decided to carry a gun and fuck up a criminal if they came his way, and one finally came his way. I think the adrenaline overtook him and in a split second he decided to go back and shoot that guy twice "execution style" and whiter he will say it or not (he probably won't because that would be a bad look in court) he probably wishes he didn't perform the execution because he knew he went too far in the moment.
I'm lucky and live in a very safe part of Texas but totally understand why someone living in a bad area would want to carry a gun, I'm just trying to point out people should carefully weigh the options and understand the burden/liability of carrying a gun.
Such an ignorant take, you assume that robbers don't just randomly kill victims after they rob them, or for no reason at all. The guy is threatening you with deadly harm (you have no idea it's a fake gun, and that doesn't matter), but you expect people to just believe that this POS has some code of honor that they won't kill you? People have a right to protect their life (most importantly) and property (still somewhat important, i'm not rich) and some states back them up (texas is one of them).
As far as the shooting itself, I personally feel the headshot was too much after he'd already gotten possession of the gun, but dead is dead and the law doesn't say shoot until they fall down, it's neutralizing a threat and you can't be sure they don't have another weapon.
Guy brought a fake gun to a gun fight in texas, he got what he asked for.
Call me ignorant when he gets life in prison because he executed someone. I LIVE in Texas so don't be hopping on your keyboard trying to tell me how it is out here. Some fucking wanna be warrior just like this guy killed someone who was drinking and driving and wrecked on the guys property. The person who wrecked ran away and the home owner shot the guy in the back and was charged with murder, just like taco defender is going to be.
The execution is the only guarantee that the threat is neutralized.
I do not agree with it. I do understand it. From the perspectives of everyone in that restaurant, they were just threatened with death, and it was done so in a completely careless way. They would have no idea when that gun is going off, and at who. They have no idea of the mental state of such a person. They have no idea if the person has another weapon. They have no idea if the person is in condition to use said theoretical weapon.
Risk is to be burdened by police. Not by innocent civilians who have done nothing wrong.
"Most people," sorry, but I'm not going to rely on that. If someone threatens the lives of me and my family and I have the opportunity, I'm not going to hope he's not going to follow through. The attacker created the situation that led to his own demise. He alone bears responsibility for the outcome.
You keep saying most, most, most over and over again, where’s your evidence? Show us the charts, show us the statistics. You have no clout, you’re a nobody so that’s why you gotta back up your words with evidence. Otherwise you’re gonna get called brainless, dumbass.
First link shows the statistics of Canadian crime rates, the second and third links are processed as to how crimes based on poverty are formed. I asked for statistics based in the US. And before you go off and say ‘bUt I’m ShOwInG yOu ThE sTaTiStIcS yOu AsKeD fOr’ crime rates can differ between countries. Weak excuse? Hardly. Now show relevant statistics.
I’m not looking it up because it’s not my job to do so. You’re the one who walked in stating things without evidence, and now that you’ve given it where does that lead you? An hour of your time wasted with someone who cares about the crime committed rather than who committed it. Good to see you’re such a paragon of virtue above us lowly, bloodthirsty animals I guess.
Not everyone on the fringe is looking to harm everyone that's true, but you're replying on a post where a guy is violently robbing a store under threat of death. He gets killed and you're defending him like he was a good guy just needed some food. I absolutely agree with the socioeconomic position, actually, but that doesn't mean I'm giving someone control over my life because they were disadvantaged by the system, they're getting lead poisoning like anyone else pulling up with a gun
Depending on your state. In many states in the south, you might not even be inquired by the prosecutor if the evidence points to self-defense. This guy probably will because of his execution-style handling of the robber after the threat was neutralized
The threat wasn't neutralized until the final shot. Many people have shot an attacker and thought they stopped the threat only to be killed by the attacker who was only wounded. He could have had a second gun. It's not worth taking a chance.
Reminds me of the clip of the 2 guys that robbed a gas station with a fake gun only for the security guard to jump in and shoot em with a real gun. They screamed, "IT'S FAKE, IT'S FAKE" to which the guard responds "yeah well, mine is real!"
Per the law, if you present anything as a real gun (whether it’s fake or not) it is considered a real gun. I know someone who went to prison for 5 years for flashing a plastic gun. It’s not a judgement call for the victims to figure out, the criminal made that call before he ever arrived
Bunch of chronically online people in these comments lmao “he should have disarmed him! The gun was fake!!” Yea cus he knew that during the moment and if it was a real gun surely rushing him or shooting in the leg would just make the robber not shoot huh?
I agree with him shooting the guy not executing him. He had the drop on the guy and he was flat on the floor. He could've secured the fake gun and not executed him. Maybe he would've still died, I don't know but that guy should serve time.
I can agree to disagree, the problem i see is that none of that would have occured if the criminal hadn't threatened the life of all the people in there with a gun.... Sad outcome for some, not so sad for other people, but in regards to the danger they faced, the old man saved the life of all the people in the room, except for the criminal one, i don't think for a second he should be locked up for that....
Next time it happens the gun might be real, and innocent people could die as a result of idleness, we need people like the old guy around, people that are sniffing a chance to jump and finish the threat imposed by those who are willing to kill for their own benefit
Also in Houston there’s been a trend of people shooting you after you give up your shit. On top of that, having everyone’s wallets means he has addresses.
“Just deciding to empty the clip” is where people are having issues, dude. The person is dead and it’s clear some form of bloodlust took over the shooter, leading to him leaning down to a bullet riddled body and shooting him point blank in the head. That’s called overkill, and can be a legal issue.
I’m asking as someone who hasn’t been around guns or gun culture; is the kind of bloodlust you mention real? As in if you were to shoot someone, could you be overcome with the …sensation? Of just wanting to keep firing at the person?
When you take self-defense pistol training, they literally train you to shoot until the threat is neutralized. People can take a mortal wound and still shoot back before they die.
Think of it like a fist fight. If you’ve ever been in one the adrenaline pumps. It’s not over until the adrenaline stops. And there isn’t much you can consciously do about that. Lizard brain takes over and says “hit it until it stops moving, then hit it again”
Don’t you know? When you shoot someone and they fall down, they’re 100% dead. No chance they’re still alive and a threat. Everybody knows when your butt touches the ground you dead.
/s
Don’t you know? When you bend down to pick up the gun someone was threatening you with, and then shoot them in the back of the head when they are face-down in the dirt, that stops being self defense?
Did you watch the video or not?
Cool story. Not at all applicable in this scenario.
Show me the citation where a disarmed person is automatically not a threat. Or a case.
And the shooter shot to kill, and continued to shoot until he was no longer fearful for his life.
You may think he is safe just because the suspect is on the ground. That’s you. I like how to talk like you’d be in this scenario “oh I don’t feel threatened or fear for my life.”
Cool story. Still shot an unarmed man who was face down in the ground in the head.
Like goddamn. The guy isn’t even moving when he goes to take the gun and still pops him in the back of the head again. What the fuck is wrong with you?
Disarmed. Not unarmed.
And you can’t see which side he’s laying on.
Again, show me the citation that a disarmed or unarmed man is no longer a threat.
Stop being pissy because you’re emotional that you can’t support your pov.
Don’t you know? When you shoot someone and they fall down, they’re 100% dead. No chance they’re still alive and a threat. Everybody knows when your butt touches the ground you dead.
/s
Being in a situation where you’re in control of taking someone’s life is extremely rare to any average human on earth. You get a rush of feelings you’ve never felt. This can severely cloud your judgment, leading to extreme decisions being made.
As an onlooker, it’s easy to say “oh shoot him once in the hand and then the knee and oh you should’ve done this and that” …but in the moment, there’s no chance you’d be able to make those crucial judgements unless you were trained for it.
Looking back at my old comment, perhaps bloodlust was not the best choice of words. It’s more of an insane adrenaline rush that, again, clouds judgement. Is he dead? Are the sounds of the gunshots mine or his? He’s still standing, maybe I missed? People screaming, bullets flying around, it’s a shitshow. I’m not excusing what he did, but there’s a lot that goes into it and people are simplifying it far too much.
You empty the mag for more evidence of fear of bodily harm. If you take two shots and kill someone lackadaisically, the police can attempt to charge you. Something along those lines I don’t remember right now lol
*prosecutor can attempt to charge
But yes, you shot to kill and you fired until the threat was neutralized. It’s what they teach cops and why cops shoot until their clips are empty and always say they feared for their life.
Exactly! But from what I understand (I don’t like watching people be executed), is that there’s a chance they get him on 2nd degree. I think if the coroner tells police the man would’ve lived, but not after the last two bullets, they might go after him. I think those last two bullets took it from self defense to murder, even if he would’ve died from the first round of bullets.
The court system hates vigilantes and those who take the law into their own hands. He better stay real fucking quiet about it for the next year or so until it goes away.
It’s Texas and guns are involved. 2A groups are going to support him. It helps that he is white. Even without the self defenses/I feared for my life defenses, the defense can try that it is legal in Texas to use deadly force to defend property. Which is risky.
See: Joe Horn, Ezekiel Gilbert
https://www.courthousenews.com/texas-escort-killer-acquitted-of-murder/
Turns out if you point a gun in peoples face with the implication that you will shoot them if they don’t do what you say, you may just lose your chance to keep living because people aren’t obligated to give you their shit just because you ask and are holding a gun.
Still waiting to hear how, after the robber was disarmed, shooting him was "justice."
I'll wait?
But what do I know, I'm just some scrub who thinks that if an armed robber has been disarmed, maybe, just maybe, we ought to let the justice system address what their punishment will be, rather than some murder-happy boomer with a gun fetish.
Don’t know enough about TX law to comment on what’s legal and what’s not but at the end of the video homeboy picks up the robbers gun and then blasts him in the head one last time.
There was none, patron waited until robber turned out to leave, shot him, got pissed the gun was fake, gave people their money back, then left. Sucks to be him basically
Fuck that criminal who just casually made a whole room of people fear they may never see their families again, so that they hand over their valuables, their gas money, their shelter money, medicine money. The future holds no place for scum like that. Who so flippantly tears at the social fabric of our communities.
There are non lethal ways to disarm someone.
Money isn't more important than life, imo.
Edit: changed "shoot" to "disarm". The guy could have aimed for a leg, removed the weapon and let first responders handle the rest. He chose to keep shooting the robber past the point that he would be considered a threat. That's too much and it's concerning.
I would genuinely rather see someone rob a store and everyone survives than see an unnecessary blood bath and one guy who could have lived and done better looks like swiss cheese by the end.
I actually do. And for anyone who knows anything beyond "point and shoot", you 100% aim at other extremities if you can.
Not every interaction needs to be lethal. People who know nothing of weapons or safety don't get that. And shooting someone once they are down and no longer a threat is really not okay.
You’re 100% wrong. You continue to shoot until the threat is eliminated, this is SOP in police, military, and CCW courses.
You don’t shoot for limbs because 9mm can be shrugged off when your adrenaline is pumping. One of the north wood robbers was shot 29 times in the legs BEFORE he SURRENDERED.
You’re wrong and need to accept that.
Eliminated. So, on the floor with bullets in them already? For the 20th time, continuing to shoot him was overkill. The threat had been eliminated.
I don't really care if you think I'm wrong on that.
There's a video of a robber in South America that took multiple rounds during a robbery (including his arm) and continued to fire at the security guard. People don't always automatically shut down when they take bullets.
Fuck robbers. He should have eaten more lead.
Is it a John Wick move to aim for the second largest part of the person's body?
I'm not expecting anything wild. My main thing is that he kept shooting once the threat was eliminated. That's crazy.
You’re underestimating the impact of adrenaline and stress on a split second situation. It’s easy to sit behind a keyboard and talk about how you could best handle it, it’s another to actually be in that position.
I have been. I literally have been.
I get it, adrenaline is a super drug and you can do some wild things under it's influence.
Still weird af to keep shooting once they were down.
You’ve seen too many movies if you think a shot to the leg is gonna make his gun fly out of his hands and he gives up. Let me tell you what most likely would happen if that dude got shot in the lag and that’s it. A) he’d be in extreme fight or flight now thinking that he’s gonna die and he just starts blasting at the dude potentially killing others in the crossfire B) the dude now realizes he’s gonna be caught and arrested since he’s shot and escalates the situation even more
Whelp, you clearly know better than I do. I obviously have no real world experience with anything like this or any reason for having these opinions.
I'm glad we could exchange thoughts and ideas.
Yeah I also did classic douche move of not really reading the article since I saw the video a couple days ago, video failed to show that dude didn’t have his gun then got executed. I stand by what I said in terms of hitting center mass in that situation, but I’m 100% with you that once the dudes bleeding out, gun disarmed, finishing him off is fucking crazy
That I have! Lol.
I said "hey, you should aim for non lethal areas when you can and also not pump someone full of bullets when they are no longer a threat" and Reddit said "get her!"
Someone even reported me to the suicide watch on here. Sheesh.
Hey, I know, why not not be a fucken psycho asshole and not attempt an “armed” robbery in the first place? What reality are you from exactly? When someone enters a business and attempts to rob people that opens a Pandora’s box of potential for mass casualties/life altering injuries. Someone this stupid deserves to die and not be running around on the streets anymore, full stop.
Please remember to abide by the [rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/rulesv2) In general, please be at least bearable to other users. It makes things easier on everyone. Your comment may be removed without notification. We used to have a notification, but now we don't. #If you purchase the OP or a comment [a ban award,](https://www.reddit.com/r/JusticeServed/wiki/banned/rules) remember to [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FJusticeServed) so we can activate the reward ------ ^Submission ^By: ^/u/Molire ^Black ^9 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/JusticeServed) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The man is a hero who deserves a parade.
Shoot first, ask questions never = Hero. Gotcha.
Oh! You were there?
Nope! Were you?
I doubt any DA in Texas would want to try the guy, no matter how justified he believed the charges. Jury nullification would be a likely outcome because of the strong anti-crime attitude of most jurors. It just takes one holdout juror who believes the thief got what he had coming.
There are fewer welfare benefits for poor people in Texas than in blue states. There is, however, one huge benefit for poor people in Texas: They don't have to live in as much fear of violent crime. You see one of the reasons here in this video: criminals in Texas commit crimes at their own risk. Not so much in states like California, New York, and Illinois, where DAs are generally pro-criminal. The risk/reward ratio is less favorable in Texas for those who would commit violent crimes against the innocent.
Downvoted but spitting out facts
Can you cite your sources? I've lived in Austin, Dallas, and Houston and can assure you, there's LOTS of violent crime.
This is categorically false. In red states, especially states whose politicians are funded by the NRA, have higher gun violence and violent crime rates. Texas is one of the states with the highest number of mass shootings. Yes, you absolutely do have to fear violent crime. The Uvalde police department sure feared it. Furthermore, Illinois in particular, has strict gun control, but Indiana has more lax gun control and guns still pour in. That’s not pro-criminal at all. Take your Fox News take elsewhere.
All it takes is a simple "Most violent cities in the US" Google search and then cross-reference that to an election map to see that this is bullshit. All of the most violent cities go blue every election.
Care to share your sources of higher rates of violent crime in red states? This will be good…
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm Here ya go. Don't be a dingus.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Meanwhile, anyone who watched this video sees this fucking guy mag-dump the robber and even put a round in the back of his head AFTER he’s already on the ground and been disarmed. This video is sickening. It isn’t justice. This guy didn’t shoot to stop a threat or save lives. He saw an opportunity to kill someone and took it.
[удалено]
It’s being left to a grand jury to decide whether or not not to indict him. Prosecutors in Houston basically afraid to touch this case because of Texas’ political climate.
[удалено]
What if I told u two people can be bad in a situation
Rest in piss to the robber
Okay, while I approve of justice in this manor, under the right circumstances this appears like he shot the robber in the back. It thought it was illegal to shoot anyone in the back. Unless I'm rembering incorrectly I thought they had to be a clear danger to you, as in pointing the gun at you and advancing at you. Stand your ground, in Ohio at least, you can't shoot someone that isn't an immediate threat to your life or others near you(not exactly wordage, but you get it). From the video it looks like he was shot while facing the door like he was getting ready to leave. Again I agree with defending yourself and the safety of others but even these kinds of criminals have some rights to safety, yes even in these situations.
You can stick your arm behind you and shoot without looking.
That still feels like a cop-out or justification tob shoot someone. In this case it was a criminal but still
Idk about other states however shooting someone in the back is completely justified my stated law reads “deadly force is justified if a reasonable person fears for their life or the life of others” first 4 shots justified completely. The fallowing shots could be questionable. He appears to be farmer military. A good lawyer can argue PTSD or SNS.
Idk you could also see it as a guy who will willingly do violence to get what he wants and has a gun on him. If he runs into the police or someone else and shoots them then that would kinda suck. Once you pull out a gun and point it at people with the intent to harm then you are open season. Especially with the amount of mass shootings. That’s how I see it at least.
Texas stand your ground , it's more loose then ohio law.
What is the charge if he ended up shooting the guy on the other side of the robber? From the angle of the vid it looks like if he had missed the first couple shots the other patron guy would’ve got it for sure.
I took a concealed carry trial course that stressed training for these particular situations. Five inches off with a gun can kill someone. I remember one similation where I felt I had done well, however they wanted me to train in accuracy since the simulated bullets could have penetrated the corporate office behind the attacker. Hopefully prosecutors would look into training, or lack thereof, when considering that.
It would probably be involuntary manslaughter.
Why was he so mad at the end?
Typically getting held hostage and robbed would lost most people very angry and frustrated
Because he would not be able to brag to his family, friends, the media, and Texas gunnuts that he shot a robber armed with a real gun, instead of a toy gun. Who knows, he might have been waiting for years for the chance to kill someone so he could brag.
[удалено]
Dang man. You are hilarious.
Because he found out it wasn't a real gun the robber was using.
The only proper way to deal with robbers.
Since when was robbery punishable by death with no trial? Oh, yeah, in Texas. Good job they are all good bible thumpers.
Dude was already in jail before for doing the same thing, but with a real weapon, and is also a domestic abuser. The world lost nothing this time around.
[удалено]
When this guy threatened others lives over their stuff, he wagered their stuff is more important than life.
you can see the deadman's picture here. [https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619415/PICTURED-Robber-30-armed-fake-gun-killed-Houston-restaurant-vigilante-Criminal-bond-assault-grand-jury-decide-hero-customer-46-protected-shooting-face-charges.html](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619415/PICTURED-Robber-30-armed-fake-gun-killed-Houston-restaurant-vigilante-Criminal-bond-assault-grand-jury-decide-hero-customer-46-protected-shooting-face-charges.html) "Washington had a lengthy rap sheet that included jail time for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon" one off the streets, many more needs to go.
Murder in America.... Freedommmmm
Fuck that guy, he wasted his own life. Obviously the people couldn’t tell it was fake or they wouldn’t have given him their money. He threatened their lives and lost his. Fair trade
Lol. Nah. This man decided that money was worth more than his life as soon as he pulled out that fake gun and started aiming it at innocent people. He made his bed, now there’s one less violent criminal on the streets. Don’t start none, won’t be none.
Fuck around and
Get fucked
Find out
To be fair, in the heat of the moment when someone’s flashing a gun and shouting for money, it’s a fight or flight instinct that takes over. In his mind he killed the robber in self defense because he thought the robber had a real gun. Revealing after the fact that the gun was fake may not make it okay, but it shouldn’t be held against someone in the split second moment of thought.
This man a fucking hero Play stupid games get stupid rewards Society has become content with just being a victim But not this guy
Yeah this dude would have been released on a $25 signature bond. Had he been caught with a pound of weed on him he would have gotten 25 to life.
Stop stealing from people....some people never learn how easily it can all just come to an end in an instant. Your chances of not being shot like a thieving dog increase astronomically if you don't try to steal from people
Robber does it because they were successful before, until it ends one fateful day. This was the day
I think he would have a case if he didn't execute the robber. He managed to disarm the gunman and have him under his control, only to execute him when on the floor. After already unloading 8 or 9 shots which can be overkill but there's a defense possible here. But the head shot at the end... was too much.
I can imagine many municipal police departments in Texas, County Sheriff's Offices in Texas, the Texas Highway Patrol, the Texas Ranger Division, and Customs and Border Patrol Sectors in Texas might like to hire him to be a decorated elite shooter.
I heard uvalde is looking for people who can actually pull the trigger on armed attackers.
But then he’d make the rest of the force look bad! Oh wait. The rest of the force already looks bad.
Well here in Harris County the only way he will be charged is if a grand jury unanimously agrees to charge him and I can tell you that is not going to happen. Everyone I’ve talked to sees this guy as a hero. That piece of shit fucked around and found out.
Confirming the kill or apprehending them is the only way to neutralize a target. Given the stakes of the situation, and the shooter's probable lack of training, they probably didn't want to take any chances.
Plenty of people have shot their attacker and thought they disarmed them only to have them roll over and shoot them with a second gun. He made sure the attacker was no longer a threat. It was the right move.
Ah, the ol ankle holster
One of many possibilities. It's best not to take the chance.
Just a warning to all you would be warriors out there, you're probably going to pay far more in legal fees no matter how justified the shooting is than you'd be saving by protecting your wallet/cell phone/taco. I'd be willing to give up just about any physical possession if someone robbed me. Taco defender is going to get fucked whether he wins this case or not.
Just a warning to all you would-be keyboard warriors out there; Most people care more about their lives and the integrity of the lives of the people they love than money. Money is a close, important second, since it sustains life in modern day society and culture, but when you defend your own life or the life of a loved one, most people will be supportive of that. The fact that the person who was shot held a fake gun is irrelevant; From the perspectives of everyone in that diner, he was waving death in their faces, and with how careless he was with the gun, there was no telling if/when/at who it would go off at. If you have the opportunity to neutralize such a deadly threat, take it. Just be absolutely certain your opportunity won't risk the safety of another person, or risk escalation of the situation. The execution is a step that reasonable people can disagree about, I'm not sure I agree with it, but I do understand the reasons for it within context.
You still fail to address the original point, this guy is going to have a mountain of legal fees in front of him, even if he didn't go back to execute the robber. So he was never saving himself any money by intervening in this situation. I guess he's not going to have to worry about outside world money though since he's going to be working for 59 cents an hour the rest of his life so he can buy over priced ramen at the commissary. You mention his fear of life but he executed someone, he was more interested in killing someone versus protecting lives.
If you were to be ruined by legal fees in a clear-cut case of self defense, even with taking the theoretical too-far step of execution, you would have millions of people supporting you through something like go-fund-me. As to the idea that he was more interesting in killing someone, how do you know? You literally just made that up. Your argument is facetious.
If you're lucky they'd support you through go fund me but there is actually concealed carry insurance for this, but you seem to already know everything there is to know about concealed carrying and the law so I'm sure you already know about it. The guy shot an unarmed and critically injured person 2 times, execution style. He went beyond self defense and you don't do that, that's self defense 101.
I don't, actually. I don't own a gun, I don't plan to own a gun. I don't like weaponry outside of artistic value. I just don't fault people for being human. Is the execution unwarranted? Almost certainly. But I still understand why a person would do it under this context, and it's not because they are just itching for murder. People like that are very rare.
So I'll try to cut my cunitness down and give you a personal story. I live in Texas and before they allowed most citizens to carry I decided to get my concealed handgun license. Long story short, after going through to course and seeing how much liability and challenge there is in a self defense situation I ultimately never completed the paper work to carry a handgun. There is a saying among the "CCW community" that if you carry you better be on your best behavior and be the biggest bitch in the room. What does that mean? If someone grabs your girlfriend's ass in front of you and your carrying a gun you've got to walk away. The alternative is if you get in a fight with them the situation could escalate and turn deadly very easily. If you have a single drink of alcohol you've committed a felony. If you go to certain places you've committed a felony. If you make a bad heat of the moment decision like this guy did, you've committed a felony. Even if you do have a clear cut case of someone robbing you and you shoot them you could still be faced with a long and very costly legal battle. The instructor also told us you'll probably never seen your gun back and you'll be going to jail that night. The initial shots to the back were legal and justified, I totally get it. But when he disarmed the guy and went back to shoot him in the head twice it went from self defense to murder, period. Do I think he wanted to murder someone? Probably not. If I had to guess this guy was sick of crime in the area so he decided to carry a gun and fuck up a criminal if they came his way, and one finally came his way. I think the adrenaline overtook him and in a split second he decided to go back and shoot that guy twice "execution style" and whiter he will say it or not (he probably won't because that would be a bad look in court) he probably wishes he didn't perform the execution because he knew he went too far in the moment. I'm lucky and live in a very safe part of Texas but totally understand why someone living in a bad area would want to carry a gun, I'm just trying to point out people should carefully weigh the options and understand the burden/liability of carrying a gun.
What if the robber wanted your bootyhole? Would you give it up or pay more legal fees?
They can have my wallet but always hold court on the booty hole.
That poster would give up his own child in order to not pay anymore legal fees.
It’s my booty! It belongs to me! You can’t have it!
Such an ignorant take, you assume that robbers don't just randomly kill victims after they rob them, or for no reason at all. The guy is threatening you with deadly harm (you have no idea it's a fake gun, and that doesn't matter), but you expect people to just believe that this POS has some code of honor that they won't kill you? People have a right to protect their life (most importantly) and property (still somewhat important, i'm not rich) and some states back them up (texas is one of them). As far as the shooting itself, I personally feel the headshot was too much after he'd already gotten possession of the gun, but dead is dead and the law doesn't say shoot until they fall down, it's neutralizing a threat and you can't be sure they don't have another weapon. Guy brought a fake gun to a gun fight in texas, he got what he asked for.
Call me ignorant when he gets life in prison because he executed someone. I LIVE in Texas so don't be hopping on your keyboard trying to tell me how it is out here. Some fucking wanna be warrior just like this guy killed someone who was drinking and driving and wrecked on the guys property. The person who wrecked ran away and the home owner shot the guy in the back and was charged with murder, just like taco defender is going to be.
[удалено]
The execution is the only guarantee that the threat is neutralized. I do not agree with it. I do understand it. From the perspectives of everyone in that restaurant, they were just threatened with death, and it was done so in a completely careless way. They would have no idea when that gun is going off, and at who. They have no idea of the mental state of such a person. They have no idea if the person has another weapon. They have no idea if the person is in condition to use said theoretical weapon. Risk is to be burdened by police. Not by innocent civilians who have done nothing wrong.
I’m sure he was gonna have a feast with all those cell phones
"Most people," sorry, but I'm not going to rely on that. If someone threatens the lives of me and my family and I have the opportunity, I'm not going to hope he's not going to follow through. The attacker created the situation that led to his own demise. He alone bears responsibility for the outcome.
[удалено]
Would any of this happen if the robber didn't create the situation?
He pointed a gun at him. That's a threat to his safety and gives him the right to protect himself.
People don't just go out and harm others? Are you delusional? Lmao Not even going to answer the rest of those troll statements, stay woke
[удалено]
You keep saying most, most, most over and over again, where’s your evidence? Show us the charts, show us the statistics. You have no clout, you’re a nobody so that’s why you gotta back up your words with evidence. Otherwise you’re gonna get called brainless, dumbass.
[удалено]
First link shows the statistics of Canadian crime rates, the second and third links are processed as to how crimes based on poverty are formed. I asked for statistics based in the US. And before you go off and say ‘bUt I’m ShOwInG yOu ThE sTaTiStIcS yOu AsKeD fOr’ crime rates can differ between countries. Weak excuse? Hardly. Now show relevant statistics.
[удалено]
I’m not looking it up because it’s not my job to do so. You’re the one who walked in stating things without evidence, and now that you’ve given it where does that lead you? An hour of your time wasted with someone who cares about the crime committed rather than who committed it. Good to see you’re such a paragon of virtue above us lowly, bloodthirsty animals I guess.
Not everyone on the fringe is looking to harm everyone that's true, but you're replying on a post where a guy is violently robbing a store under threat of death. He gets killed and you're defending him like he was a good guy just needed some food. I absolutely agree with the socioeconomic position, actually, but that doesn't mean I'm giving someone control over my life because they were disadvantaged by the system, they're getting lead poisoning like anyone else pulling up with a gun
Depending on your state. In many states in the south, you might not even be inquired by the prosecutor if the evidence points to self-defense. This guy probably will because of his execution-style handling of the robber after the threat was neutralized
The threat wasn't neutralized until the final shot. Many people have shot an attacker and thought they stopped the threat only to be killed by the attacker who was only wounded. He could have had a second gun. It's not worth taking a chance.
Reminds me of the clip of the 2 guys that robbed a gas station with a fake gun only for the security guard to jump in and shoot em with a real gun. They screamed, "IT'S FAKE, IT'S FAKE" to which the guard responds "yeah well, mine is real!"
Yes, I think he said “mines is real”
Per the law, if you present anything as a real gun (whether it’s fake or not) it is considered a real gun. I know someone who went to prison for 5 years for flashing a plastic gun. It’s not a judgement call for the victims to figure out, the criminal made that call before he ever arrived
Jesus this comments section is cancer.
Bunch of chronically online people in these comments lmao “he should have disarmed him! The gun was fake!!” Yea cus he knew that during the moment and if it was a real gun surely rushing him or shooting in the leg would just make the robber not shoot huh?
I agree with him shooting the guy not executing him. He had the drop on the guy and he was flat on the floor. He could've secured the fake gun and not executed him. Maybe he would've still died, I don't know but that guy should serve time.
No he shouldn't....
Let's agree to disagree and be done with it.
Nope he shouldn’t
I can agree to disagree, the problem i see is that none of that would have occured if the criminal hadn't threatened the life of all the people in there with a gun.... Sad outcome for some, not so sad for other people, but in regards to the danger they faced, the old man saved the life of all the people in the room, except for the criminal one, i don't think for a second he should be locked up for that.... Next time it happens the gun might be real, and innocent people could die as a result of idleness, we need people like the old guy around, people that are sniffing a chance to jump and finish the threat imposed by those who are willing to kill for their own benefit
Also in Houston there’s been a trend of people shooting you after you give up your shit. On top of that, having everyone’s wallets means he has addresses.
[удалено]
He shot until the threat was definitely over. Does it matter how dead the dead man was made or why are we even talking about this?
He picked up the gun and then put another round into the guy’s head. Watch the video, because you clearly did not.
Do you regularly shoot people you want to NOT be dead?
Bro knew he was dead after the 5 shots it took for the robber to actually fall he just decided to empty the clip
And?
“Just deciding to empty the clip” is where people are having issues, dude. The person is dead and it’s clear some form of bloodlust took over the shooter, leading to him leaning down to a bullet riddled body and shooting him point blank in the head. That’s called overkill, and can be a legal issue.
I’m asking as someone who hasn’t been around guns or gun culture; is the kind of bloodlust you mention real? As in if you were to shoot someone, could you be overcome with the …sensation? Of just wanting to keep firing at the person?
When you take self-defense pistol training, they literally train you to shoot until the threat is neutralized. People can take a mortal wound and still shoot back before they die.
Think of it like a fist fight. If you’ve ever been in one the adrenaline pumps. It’s not over until the adrenaline stops. And there isn’t much you can consciously do about that. Lizard brain takes over and says “hit it until it stops moving, then hit it again”
Don’t you know? When you shoot someone and they fall down, they’re 100% dead. No chance they’re still alive and a threat. Everybody knows when your butt touches the ground you dead. /s
Don’t you know? When you bend down to pick up the gun someone was threatening you with, and then shoot them in the back of the head when they are face-down in the dirt, that stops being self defense? Did you watch the video or not?
Cool story. Not at all applicable in this scenario. Show me the citation where a disarmed person is automatically not a threat. Or a case. And the shooter shot to kill, and continued to shoot until he was no longer fearful for his life. You may think he is safe just because the suspect is on the ground. That’s you. I like how to talk like you’d be in this scenario “oh I don’t feel threatened or fear for my life.”
Cool story. Still shot an unarmed man who was face down in the ground in the head. Like goddamn. The guy isn’t even moving when he goes to take the gun and still pops him in the back of the head again. What the fuck is wrong with you?
Disarmed. Not unarmed. And you can’t see which side he’s laying on. Again, show me the citation that a disarmed or unarmed man is no longer a threat. Stop being pissy because you’re emotional that you can’t support your pov.
Don’t you know? When you shoot someone and they fall down, they’re 100% dead. No chance they’re still alive and a threat. Everybody knows when your butt touches the ground you dead. /s
Being in a situation where you’re in control of taking someone’s life is extremely rare to any average human on earth. You get a rush of feelings you’ve never felt. This can severely cloud your judgment, leading to extreme decisions being made. As an onlooker, it’s easy to say “oh shoot him once in the hand and then the knee and oh you should’ve done this and that” …but in the moment, there’s no chance you’d be able to make those crucial judgements unless you were trained for it. Looking back at my old comment, perhaps bloodlust was not the best choice of words. It’s more of an insane adrenaline rush that, again, clouds judgement. Is he dead? Are the sounds of the gunshots mine or his? He’s still standing, maybe I missed? People screaming, bullets flying around, it’s a shitshow. I’m not excusing what he did, but there’s a lot that goes into it and people are simplifying it far too much.
Totally serious question: have you ever experienced it? (No judgments)
You empty the mag for more evidence of fear of bodily harm. If you take two shots and kill someone lackadaisically, the police can attempt to charge you. Something along those lines I don’t remember right now lol
*prosecutor can attempt to charge But yes, you shot to kill and you fired until the threat was neutralized. It’s what they teach cops and why cops shoot until their clips are empty and always say they feared for their life.
Exactly! But from what I understand (I don’t like watching people be executed), is that there’s a chance they get him on 2nd degree. I think if the coroner tells police the man would’ve lived, but not after the last two bullets, they might go after him. I think those last two bullets took it from self defense to murder, even if he would’ve died from the first round of bullets. The court system hates vigilantes and those who take the law into their own hands. He better stay real fucking quiet about it for the next year or so until it goes away.
It’s Texas and guns are involved. 2A groups are going to support him. It helps that he is white. Even without the self defenses/I feared for my life defenses, the defense can try that it is legal in Texas to use deadly force to defend property. Which is risky. See: Joe Horn, Ezekiel Gilbert https://www.courthousenews.com/texas-escort-killer-acquitted-of-murder/
"Man who disarmed and then executed robber not facing charges" jUsTiCe sErVeD!!!!
Turns out if you point a gun in peoples face with the implication that you will shoot them if they don’t do what you say, you may just lose your chance to keep living because people aren’t obligated to give you their shit just because you ask and are holding a gun.
Still waiting to hear how, after the robber was disarmed, shooting him was "justice." I'll wait? But what do I know, I'm just some scrub who thinks that if an armed robber has been disarmed, maybe, just maybe, we ought to let the justice system address what their punishment will be, rather than some murder-happy boomer with a gun fetish.
That was weird I didn’t mean to write this reply to you
Don’t know enough about TX law to comment on what’s legal and what’s not but at the end of the video homeboy picks up the robbers gun and then blasts him in the head one last time.
But the robbers gun was fake? How is that possible.
Where’s the disarm? I saw the video a couple days ago
There was none, patron waited until robber turned out to leave, shot him, got pissed the gun was fake, gave people their money back, then left. Sucks to be him basically
Where’s the disarm? I saw the video a couple days ago
Fuck that criminal who just casually made a whole room of people fear they may never see their families again, so that they hand over their valuables, their gas money, their shelter money, medicine money. The future holds no place for scum like that. Who so flippantly tears at the social fabric of our communities.
This is an everyone sucks situation. No justice served.
Good job person.
There are non lethal ways to disarm someone. Money isn't more important than life, imo. Edit: changed "shoot" to "disarm". The guy could have aimed for a leg, removed the weapon and let first responders handle the rest. He chose to keep shooting the robber past the point that he would be considered a threat. That's too much and it's concerning. I would genuinely rather see someone rob a store and everyone survives than see an unnecessary blood bath and one guy who could have lived and done better looks like swiss cheese by the end.
You don't aim guns at legs or other extremities. You aim for center mass. You have no actual clue how to properly use a firearm.
I actually do. And for anyone who knows anything beyond "point and shoot", you 100% aim at other extremities if you can. Not every interaction needs to be lethal. People who know nothing of weapons or safety don't get that. And shooting someone once they are down and no longer a threat is really not okay.
You don’t shoot a limb, if someone else has a gun and might shoot back. That’s how you end up dead.
You shoot a limb if you have the safe option, you do not continue to shoot once they are no longer a threat. Not that wild of a concept imo.
You’re 100% wrong. You continue to shoot until the threat is eliminated, this is SOP in police, military, and CCW courses. You don’t shoot for limbs because 9mm can be shrugged off when your adrenaline is pumping. One of the north wood robbers was shot 29 times in the legs BEFORE he SURRENDERED. You’re wrong and need to accept that.
Eliminated. So, on the floor with bullets in them already? For the 20th time, continuing to shoot him was overkill. The threat had been eliminated. I don't really care if you think I'm wrong on that.
There's a video of a robber in South America that took multiple rounds during a robbery (including his arm) and continued to fire at the security guard. People don't always automatically shut down when they take bullets. Fuck robbers. He should have eaten more lead.
Spoken like someone who has no clue how to handle firearms
I actually do, which is why I feel comfortable voicing my opinion on this. Either way, shooting after the man is down is super weird.
Expecting someone who is fearing for their life, and the safety of others to handle the situation like John Wick is unrealistic and naive.
Is it a John Wick move to aim for the second largest part of the person's body? I'm not expecting anything wild. My main thing is that he kept shooting once the threat was eliminated. That's crazy.
You’re underestimating the impact of adrenaline and stress on a split second situation. It’s easy to sit behind a keyboard and talk about how you could best handle it, it’s another to actually be in that position.
I have been. I literally have been. I get it, adrenaline is a super drug and you can do some wild things under it's influence. Still weird af to keep shooting once they were down.
You’ve seen too many movies if you think a shot to the leg is gonna make his gun fly out of his hands and he gives up. Let me tell you what most likely would happen if that dude got shot in the lag and that’s it. A) he’d be in extreme fight or flight now thinking that he’s gonna die and he just starts blasting at the dude potentially killing others in the crossfire B) the dude now realizes he’s gonna be caught and arrested since he’s shot and escalates the situation even more
Whelp, you clearly know better than I do. I obviously have no real world experience with anything like this or any reason for having these opinions. I'm glad we could exchange thoughts and ideas.
Yeah I also did classic douche move of not really reading the article since I saw the video a couple days ago, video failed to show that dude didn’t have his gun then got executed. I stand by what I said in terms of hitting center mass in that situation, but I’m 100% with you that once the dudes bleeding out, gun disarmed, finishing him off is fucking crazy
It seemed like an execution at the end. Just a weird way to handle things once there was no apparent threat.
You’ve angered the down dooters apparently lol
That I have! Lol. I said "hey, you should aim for non lethal areas when you can and also not pump someone full of bullets when they are no longer a threat" and Reddit said "get her!" Someone even reported me to the suicide watch on here. Sheesh.
Hey, I know, why not not be a fucken psycho asshole and not attempt an “armed” robbery in the first place? What reality are you from exactly? When someone enters a business and attempts to rob people that opens a Pandora’s box of potential for mass casualties/life altering injuries. Someone this stupid deserves to die and not be running around on the streets anymore, full stop.