pharmacy_shooting

[hotshot 4]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_pharmacy_shooting

 

 

how fair was that sentence???? was race a factor here???? i would say so...

[usnmars 136]

I saw that too. PISSES ME OFF. If the guy had the nerve to rob the place, he faced the consequences. Justice was done to the bad guy, but the good guy got burned for it. WTF is wrong with the country!!!!!!!!

[JackDaWack 2,895]

I dont have much sympathy here, he shot an unarmed robber... ok, came back a minute later and shot him 5 more times while he was bleeding on the ground to finish him off....not ok. Did u guys read the whole article?

[PeteF 1,044]

I don't know the details of the case but that story pisses me off.

 

The thug who came in to rob the store somehow becomes the "Victim" WTF?

[SSlav 14]

I saw that too. PISSES ME OFF. If the guy had the nerve to rob the place, he faced the consequences. Justice was done to the bad guy, but the good guy got burned for it. WTF is wrong with the country!!!!!!!!

 

I am going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there. The good guy stopped being a good guy when he pumped five more rounds into the bad guy 46 seconds after he brought him down with a shot to the head. At that point it is no longer self defense - its murder.

[kenw 293]

Shot him in the head, got another gun and shot him some more?

 

Good verdict.

[alowerlevel 77]

I am going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there. The good guy stopped being a good guy when he pumped five more rounds into the bad guy 46 seconds after he brought him down with a shot to the head. At that point it is no longer self defense - its murder.

Agreed 100%. There absolutely was no need to go get a 2nd gun and shoot the unarmed bad guy 5 MORE times after you already shot him in the head and he is lying on the floor. First shot = self-defense. . . First shot + 5 more = Murder

[Dan 177]

Agree with most here. Initial shots were self defense and justifiable. He retreated back to saftey 46 seconds later with the guy incapacitated on the ground. If he could grab another gun from behind the counter, he could have easily covered the guy with the other gun while dialing the police. Going back and shooting him 5 more times is just plain murder, as how could he say he felt his life was in danger threatend by the bleeding guy on the ground with a gunshot wound to his head?

[vjf915 456]

I dont have much sympathy here, he shot an unarmed robber... ok, came back a minute later and shot him 5 more times while he was bleeding on the ground to finish him off....not ok. Did u guys read the whole article?

I couldn't agree more. I know that your adrenaline is pumping.....but going to get another gun is where this guy crosses the line. Nothing wrong with the ruling at all.

 

On a side note, I love seeing this happen to accomplices:

The second teen who entered the pharmacy with Parker, Jevontai Ingram, was sentenced to a state juvenile facility after pleading guilty to first-degree murder under Oklahoma's felony murder law. That law allows a murder charge against someone when an accomplice is killed during the commission of a crime.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

What a crock, you meet force with appropriate level force and you shoot to stop the threat when your life is in danger, what he did was execute the other person. He deserves everything he gets.

 

Harry

 

 

[vjf915 456]

What a crock, you meet force with appropriate level force and you shoot to stop the threat when your life is in danger, what he did was execute the other person. He deserves everything he gets.

 

Harry

Agreed. Said it before but I'll say it again. I work in a bank. If someone comes in demanding the money, I'm handing over every penny they ask for. That's MY policy. I'm not risking my life for money.

[hardline_42 7]

One of the comments on the article mentions that part of the story was left out. Apparently, the shooter claims that the robber was trying to get up and "make a move" and that's why he shot him again. Of course, that part is obscured from the surveillance video so we'll probably never know. Still, five additional shots is overkill.

[jermz1987 243]

Yeah, Getting another gun to shoot the guy on the floor 5 more times was where it stopped being self defense. Also what do you mean was race a factor?

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Yeah, Getting another gun to shoot the guy on the floor 5 more times was where it stopped being self defense. Also what do you mean was race a factor?

yeah i was wondering the same thing about where the race issue came into play, i missed that.

[Maksim 1,504]

Maybe it would of been better if he claimed innocent by reason of mental instability....

 

"I thought he was a zombie and came back to life"

 

But +1 to all other posts. going to get another gun? too excessive.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Maybe it would of been better if he claimed innocent by reason of mental instability....

 

"I thought he was a zombie and came back to life"

 

But +1 to all other posts. going to get another gun? too excessive.

 

 

I agree.. the original gun should have had at least 7 or 8 more rounds...

 

while I agree with all of you that it is excessive... do you find it any more excessive than what the "other side" does?

 

while I am not advocating vigilante justice, I will say I find it difficult to shed a tear over this.. when you establish a rule where "only force that is reasonably necessary to neutralize the threat" you shift the entire burden of the altercation over to the law abiding citizen, and away from the instigator....

 

some scumbag with a criminal record a mile long..

in and out of jail his whole life...

breaks into my house in the middle of the night.. with the intent of stealing my stuff? or worse attacking, and or killing me or worse my fiance? and I have to be concerned that I hurt this individual TOO much? that is nuts..

 

now you pit me a law abiding clean record citizen against the scum of the earth.. WHY should I be obligated to be concerned with this individuals well being in ANY capacity? is he concerned with mine? is he concerned with the good of the community? the only concern I should be charged with is protecting myself, and or any innocent individuals... as far as the bad guy? he IMO took his fate in his own hands when he broke the law..

 

sorry but my "care meter" falls off the edge of the earth when you set out to harm me or other innocent people....

[vjf915 456]

sorry but my "care meter" falls off the edge of the earth when you set out to harm me or other innocent people....

I couldn't agree with this more. The only problem is.....guy breaks into your house. You shoot him once in the head and your Glock malfunctions (hypothetical situation). The guy is lying on the ground in a pool of his own blood, not moving, yet you still go get your S12 to "finish him off" just in case. You are no longer defending yourself. I understand your argument as far as force v. force goes, and that is a VERY valid point. Someone breaks into my house, theres no way for me to be 100% sure they don't have a weapon, and there's no way in hell I'm going to frisk them to find out.....so I'm going to assume that they have a weapon hidden somewhere and be ready for anything. But when you shoot someone who is lying on the ground, motionless, that's not self defense anymore. I completely agree with you, I feel no sympathy whatsoever for the criminal.......however I also feel no sympathy whatsoever for the defendant. They both brought the situation upon themselves.

[usnmars 136]

People act differently in stressful situations. I dont blame the guy at all. The fact of the matter is our justice system is completely fugged.

[vladtepes 1,060]

You shoot him once in the head

 

fair enough...

 

Glock malfunctions

 

Glock malfunction? are you are drugs?

 

(hypothetical situation).

 

oh gotcha.. yeah that makes sense..

 

The guy is lying on the ground in a pool of his own blood, not moving, yet you still go get your S12 to "finish him off" just in case. You are no longer defending yourself. I understand your argument as far as force v. force goes, and that is a VERY valid point. Someone breaks into my house, theres no way for me to be 100% sure they don't have a weapon, and there's no way in hell I'm going to frisk them to find out.....so I'm going to assume that they have a weapon hidden somewhere and be ready for anything. But when you shoot someone who is lying on the ground, motionless, that's not self defense anymore. I completely agree with you, I feel no sympathy whatsoever for the criminal.......however I also feel no sympathy whatsoever for the defendant. They both brought the situation upon themselves.

 

as for the rest I think that the reason people think the way most in this thread do.. is because we are good people in general.. so what is reasonable to you is that you would shoot someone to stop them from hurting you and that IS totally reasonable to me as well (as I sit here calmly chit chatting over the computer).. change that to 3 am awaken out of a dead sleep to the sound of broken glass someone you have never seen before in your life standing in your living room (with who knows what intention).. and his friend entering in through the window they just smashed.. now what is reasonable? you are half asleep.. likely terrified.. are you going to make the right call? shoot the right person JUST enough to stop him? but not too much that you "over injure" or kill them? that whole situation places an unreasonable burden on the law abiding citizen.. when you commit a crime against another individual.. especially one that is intentional.. and one filled with malice.. you deserve what you get IMO..

 

now obviously shooting someone in the head and then shooting him several more times IS unreasonable... but my response? WHO CARES... did the pharmacist rob the community of a great leader? or did he rid the world of one more scumbag before he could do something far more serious?

 

again I will respectfully agree to disagree.. but when it comes to criminals that set forth to violate you, you should be allowed to freely fight back... I have never shot someone.. I have no idea what went on in the pharmacists head... very easy to sit here and make the judgment call after the fact but put yourself in the situation and who knows WHAT you would ACTUALLY do..

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I hear exactly what you are saying and each situation is going to different, as far as someone breaking into out homes I am going to go with what is practiced, double center mass and one to the head, plain and simple. I think all of us can do that in a situation like that without second thought and well under 2 seconds. If that stops them and they are no longer a threat, that's that, if they try and advance again, repeat. That I feel is not overkill (sorry for the pun) and if no longer a threat it's over. Now a downed lowlife that had bad intension's no longer has them, where the line would be crossed would be to keep pumping lead into them after they were no longer a threat.

 

As they say a dead person tells no tales, and like Ray Ray signature says, I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6 is very valid, but there still is a point that you can cross the line from being labeled a good guy to to a bad guy.

 

Again keep in mind I do hear what you are saying, violate you or you family and it all bets are off, but are these last few shots worth not being with your family, something ALL of use who keep arms to defend ourselves need to think about and hope it never goes any further than conversations on the forum.

 

Harry

[vladtepes 1,060]

I hear exactly what you are saying and each situation is going to different, as far as someone breaking into out homes I am going to go with what is practiced, double center mass and one to the head, plain and simple.

 

 

to error on the side of caution I'll elect to do exactly the same.. only difference is mine is coming from a 12 gauge shotgun.

[Maksim 1,504]

To me as a business owner, I would rather someone try to rob the business then the home. If it is a business, nothing is worth dying over. If someone robs a convenience store, or bank, whatever, they just want the quick cash, let them go.

 

If someone comes into your home... where they know your family is there, and lets say in the middle of the night, they are looking for trouble.

 

My biggiest issue with the guy is actually the lapse in time.

 

He brought the guy down. No issue so far.

 

He chases after the other guys with a gun. (what was he goign to do, shoot them in the back?) it is LEO job. (slight issue)

 

Then... He goes back, gets another gun, and empties 5 or 6 more rounds into someone he already shot in the head. (big issue)

 

 

He had plenty of time to stop and act in shock... rather than to logically know he has another gun, go get it from what I assume is a safe, and empty another mag.

 

Had the situation been.

 

Bad guy comes in, guy empties 10 rounds into BG, I would have no issues at all. Emotions could of taken over and he emptied the mag into him out of fear for his life.

 

Really wish I could see the video though.

[vjf915 456]

now obviously shooting someone in the head and then shooting him several more times IS unreasonable... but my response? WHO CARES... did the pharmacist rob the community of a great leader? or did he rid the world of one more scumbag before he could do something far more serious?

I'm not even really disagreeing with you that much. I completely understand where you're coming from. If he had fired 6 shots in rapid succession from the same gun, the first shot striking the suspect in the head....that would be completely understandable. My only issue is that he went to get another gun. I don't expect somebody in a high stress situation to fire exactly the right amount of shots to stop the threat....no more, no less. That is extremely unreasonable. However leaving to get another gun, and coming back almost a minute later is enough time for a reasonable person to realize their life is no longer in danger....especially when the person you feel threatened by is lying on the ground in a pool of their own blood from a headshot wound.

[vladtepes 1,060]

To me as a business owner, I would rather someone try to rob the business then the home. If it is a business, nothing is worth dying over. If someone robs a convenience store, or bank, whatever, they just want the quick cash, let them go.

 

If someone comes into your home... where they know your family is there, and lets say in the middle of the night, they are looking for trouble.

 

My biggiest issue with the guy is actually the lapse in time.

 

He brought the guy down. No issue so far.

 

He chases after the other guys with a gun. (what was he goign to do, shoot them in the back?) it is LEO job. (slight issue)

 

Then... He goes back, gets another gun, and empties 5 or 6 more rounds into someone he already shot in the head. (big issue)

 

 

He had plenty of time to stop and act in shock... rather than to logically know he has another gun, go get it from what I assume is a safe, and empty another mag.

 

Had the situation been.

 

Bad guy comes in, guy empties 10 rounds into BG, I would have no issues at all. Emotions could of taken over and he emptied the mag into him out of fear for his life.

 

Really wish I could see the video though.

 

just to be clear.. I am by no means giving the pharmacist a free pass.. I think he totally dropped the ball and as I stated.. totally crossed the line.. my issue is not about not punishing him at all.. but I just wish this thing was more in perspective.... to hear that your "boy" got his face blown off while trying to rob a local business is going to put a serious reality check into those considering similar crimes... I would even be interested to see if things like this have any short term impact on crime within an area.. not that ANY of that makes his actions correct..

 

as far as robbing a business.. just quick cash and all that.. yeah I agree with that MOST of the time.. but the problem is not all robberies are the same.. is that guy behind the mask.. pointing a gun at your face... some scared 20 year old kid who is shaking so hard he is likely going to end up shooting you by accident? or is he some calm middle aged guy down on his luck just trying to make bills meet? or worse yet.. is he some gang member earning his way in? planning to shoot you to death no matter what you do?

 

a long time ago.. likely before I was alive.. I would agree with your words.. without any hesitation just hand over the cash.. but times have changed.. look at some thug the wrong way on the street and you may find yourself staring up at the inside of an ambulance... so I do not think it incredibly unreasonable to assume that anyone threatening you MAY stand to pose a substantial threat.. it is not the good old days of "hand over your money and no body gets hurt" NOW it is "so and so gang making a name for themselves" or "john smith going on some random killing spree"... in a time period where such incredible acts of random violence occur I would never simply assume someones intentions end with scoring the money...

 

Hope for the best.. but be prepared for the worst..

[vladtepes 1,060]

I'm not even really disagreeing with you that much. I completely understand where you're coming from. If he had fired 6 shots in rapid succession from the same gun, the first shot striking the suspect in the head....that would be completely understandable. My only issue is that he went to get another gun. I don't expect somebody in a high stress situation to fire exactly the right amount of shots to stop the threat....no more, no less. That is extremely unreasonable. However leaving to get another gun, and coming back almost a minute later is enough time for a reasonable person to realize their life is no longer in danger....especially when the person you feel threatened by is lying on the ground in a pool of their own blood from a headshot wound.

 

 

just to reaffirm what I was saying in the other posts..

 

I get that as a simple statement..

"shooting someone.. then going and getting another gun to finish them off.. is NOT self defense" LOL

I totally get that.. but more what I was saying is that we as a society are a little to concerned about criminal rights for my liking.. and was also all the "Monday night quarterbacking".. It is just really easy to sit here and assume how you would act.. but we really don't know.. if someone violates me I honestly have no idea how I would act... hopefully I never need to find out.. but if I do.. hopefully the first shot scares the **** out of me so bad I stop there.. lol

[bbk 188]

It takes an effort to actively end someone's life. Of course I don't know the facts, and I can't say whether or not after the initial shooting (which *seems* justified) the threat was no longer a threat. I don't know if the guy on the ground was still actively trying to assail the victims. From what is out there though, to grab a secondary firearm, and fire five more shots into a wounded (though maybe still a threat, I don't have those facts) individual who probably wasn't a threat at that point? That's just cold blooded and straight up murder.

 

Again, I don't have the facts, and my comments are based on my opinions and assumptions of what had occurred (and are more so hypothetical). If it was indeed murder, I have no issues of applying a proper and equal punishment.

[usnmars 136]

Like I said people do strange things while under extreme stress. I have seen in combat a Marine that froze. All around him was live rounds on the ground. He would take aim, and clear the weapon like he had a jam, never pulling the trigger, take aim again and clear the weapon again. The guy was shaken to heck but just shows on how someone was trained to a high degree, but froze under a stressful situation. Until you are placed in a situation like that, you don't know how you are going to react. The guy felt himself and his employees were threatened, shot the guy once, guy started moving again and the pharmacists mind recognized the moving bad guy as a threat again, with adrenaline pumping and not thinking clearly he permanently eliminated the threat. Game over for the bad guy.

[Maksim 1,504]

Vlad,

 

I agree with you whole heartedly. Anyone can be looking for danger. However why should we treat a vigilante any different then the guy who was out to rob him.

 

The guy trying to rob him most likely not going to rob him, shoot him. Go get his boy's Hi point carbine and empty 5 more rounds for shits and giggles.

 

The guy being robbed did worse in my book by trying to make his point. He shot the guy in the head, obviously stopped the threat as he was able to go chase down his buddies, then came back, probably pissed that he did not get his buddies so he empties another 5 rounds out of frustration to get the point across.

 

This has nothing to do with criminal justice. This has to do with the guy murdering someone in cold blood. They are both criminals. I dont think the guy is even sorry for what he did.

 

Reminds me of how Nazi's would kill Jews in concentration camps because they stole food to feed their families. I dread the day I would have to use lethal force. Same thing with Martial Arts, yes, even though I know of numerous points on the body that would instantly pacify the threat, doesnt mean I was out to kill everyone at any martial arts competitions, or did I try to kill my foe in the two times I had to fight in my life.

 

Day one they teach you to be responsible and to try to diffuse the situation. The moment the guy ran out of his store to chase the other suspects, he became a criminal himself. Even if the bad guy who was shot in the head, lying on the floor, bleeding was moving a bit, putting 5 rounds with another gun, he became the executioner, no better than al queda doing beheadings. You want to change the world, plenty of ways to do it.

[Maksim 1,504]

Like I said people do strange things while under extreme stress. I have seen in combat a Marine that froze. All around him was live rounds on the ground. He would take aim, and clear the weapon like he had a jam, never pulling the trigger, take aim again and clear the weapon again. The guy was shaken to heck but just shows on how someone was trained to a high degree, but froze under a stressful situation. Until you are placed in a situation like that, you don't know how you are going to react. The guy felt himself and his employees were threatened, shot the guy once, guy started moving again and the pharmacists mind recognized the moving bad guy as a threat again, with adrenaline pumping and not thinking clearly he permanently eliminated the threat. Game over for the bad guy.

 

 

Eric, but that is not what happened.

 

He shot the guy in the head. He chased the other suspects outside.... came back almost a min later, took out another gun from the safe and put 5 more rounds into him.

 

Had it been as you mentioned. He shot the guy, he fell/started moving, he shot him again. No issues.

[Maksim 1,504]

A quote from someone who saw the case/video tape.

 

Before making any off-the-cuff judgment, I needed to read the facts of the case, and watch the pharmacy's in-store surveillance video. Without a doubt, this is first degree murder. Ersland put down one of the robbers with a shot to the head, and then chased the other out the door; firing two errant shots at him. Ersland then came back into the pharmacy, stepped over the wounded perpetrator, and went and retrieved a second handgun. He then stepped over the injured felon and pumped five additional bullets into his abdominal region; ending his life. It was clearly an execution.

 

In this great nation, we have a set of laws, and judicial civility to adhere to. While as law abiding citizens we need to have the right to defend ourselves, our loved ones and property, we cannot go around executing criminals.

 

Ersland crossed the line. The felon was stopped by the first bullet. He was unconscious and obviously no longer a threat. He should have handcuffed the criminal with something and called 9-1-1.