pharmacy_shooting

[Maksim 1,504]

Here is the video.

 

[vladtepes 1,060]

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.

 

no no.. I hear you.. especially after seeing the video.. and in MY opinion the pharmacist was wrong.. but at the end of the day for me it is akin to "torturing prisoners of war"...

 

we as a policy.. say we do not torture prisoners...

we do not do that because it is morally "wrong" and those tactics are cold and "evil"

but at the end of the day... torturing bad people (which we don't do.. lol) to get information to stop other bad people from doing equally bad things?

is it "wrong"?

 

I honestly don't know.. the world is a cold hard place.. filled with evil evil people.. who will put a bullet in your head because the lyrics of a song told them to.. while this fact does not make me live in fear for my life on a daily basis.. it DOES sometimes cause me to give someone a second look...

 

at the end of the day I can not help to agree with you based on MY moral code.. I find the actions of him coming back and coldly killing the robber to be "wrong".. but I do not live his life.. walk in his shoes... experience the area he lives in.. we will really always only know part of the story.. so I guess we can only judge on the part we know.. and that is what we saw..

 

I appreciate you posting the video.. I will agree being a third party who was not there.. it does appear excessive..

 

but I do think SOME consideration needs to be given when sentencing in regards to him being attacked.. at the end of the day.. that guy would still be alive had he not chosen to mess with that store..

[M4BGRINGO 139]

I'm with Ant, you come in my house you better like the look of one of my 12 gauges as you watch the muzzle blast! I will not use any of my handguns or rifles for home defense. While the wife is dialing 911 and getting HER shotgun ready to back me up, I have 7 rounds of buckshot to use. I certainly do not want to ever have to use it for that purpose, will be a hell of a mess to clean-up later too. I will be prepared though.

[KpdPipes 388]

Pharmacist was 100% in the wrong for shooting the guy after he was down. Coup des Gras is not acceptable in todays world.

[Dan 177]

 

 

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?

 

 

This is called illegal vigilantism. Punishment for crimes can only legally be doled out by the justice system. No matter how much I agree with you regarding "who cares", as I for one do not... but it is still illegal and is why the guy got nabbed on murder charges.

 

A person is permitted to use force in self defense up to the point that the attacker is no longer a threat. In this case, there was a clear time period (46 seconds) in which the defender had observed the attacker was incapacitated on the ground, long enough for him to go back to safety to retrieve another gun, come back, and finish him off. Sure I don't care about the scumbag, and the pharmacist did the world a service... but it would have been better to leave justice to the justice system.

 

Imagine if the pharmacist was a cop, shot a bad guy in self defense and he is on the ground incapacitated and bleeding out. Cop goes back to the car to get his patrol rifle, comes back, and rips a string of 6 shots through the guy on the ground. Would that cop be in jail today? My guess is yes.

[Parker 213]

Obviously not the right method. You might get away with these tactics on the battlefield, but not in the civilized homeland: 3 different camera angles

[Ray Ray 3,566]

100 years ago or even 50 the store owner would've gotten a handshake but with today's whiny attitude and media biased against self defense he's going to jail. Sad

[kenw 293]

100 years ago or even 50 the store owner would've gotten a handshake but with today's whiny attitude and media biased against self defense he's going to jail. Sad

No. Murder was illegal then, too.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

No. Murder was illegal then, too.

 

Yeah, but he was being robbed. He was the victim. That's what they would've said.

I'm not saying he shouldn't be charged with a crime, but when your life is on the line and the adreneline is pumping you might do crazy things.

[vjf915 456]

I'm only 35 seconds into the live leak video, and I have another huge problem with this. Two people ran into the store. One had a gun, the other did not have a weapon visible. He shot the person who DIDN'T have a gun. The deeper I go into this, the more I think "WTF is wrong with this guy?" If two guys break into my house, one is pointing a gun at me and the other is putting a mask on....If I'm going to shoot, I'm going to shoot the a**hole with the gun....it's common sense. That also takes some of the justification out of the shooting. I'm very skeptical as to why he shot the unarmed person.

[kenw 293]

The right to defend yourself with deadly force carries the responsibility to refrain from "crazy things" like thoughtfully and deliberately retrieving a second gun and willfully killing an injured and unarmed person who poses no threat.

[bbk 188]

I seriously don't understand how anybody can actually defend (or remotely defend) the actions of the pharmacist. He executed a man, in cold blood, knowingly. Adrenaline or not, he made that conscience decision. To say that he was a 'victim' went right out the door with his innocence as soon as he partook in his actions.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I wonder what punishment the store owner will get.

[Soju 153]

Interesting to hear that not only did the accomplice get charged with his murder, but so did two others who "helped plan" the robbery. So a 16-year-old dies and it appears 4 people are charged with his murder. I haven't heard of a law like that before, but it makes sense. I only wish it would have had the impact I think it was trying to have, in deterring people from things like, trying to rob a pharmacy at gunpoint.

 

The pharmacist's actions were fine...until he came back in, walked by the kid, got another gun, walked up to him, and shot him dead. That is why he was convicted, and rightfully so. It is unfortunate though, only because had the place not been robbed, who knows, maybe this guy never does anything else wrong in the rest of his life. I really don't know what he was thinking. That doesn't really matter though now.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

The pharmacist's actions were fine...until he came back in, walked by the kid, got another gun, walked up to him, and shot him dead. That is why he was convicted, and rightfully so. It is unfortunate though, only because had the place not been robbed, who knows, maybe this guy never does anything else wrong in the rest of his life. I really don't know what he was thinking. That doesn't really matter though now.

 

Yup, all was well until he killed him in cold blood.

[vjf915 456]

I haven't heard of a law like that before, but it makes sense.

The same thing happened within the past year, when a man at a party defending himself against 2 gang members who got violent when trying to steal beer. He was not charged, criminally or civilly. The other two gang members (accomplices) who were waiting in the car were charged with the murder. I sincerely think that laws like that come from states that REALLY know what they are doing.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

The same thing happened within the past year, when a man at a party defending himself against 2 gang members who got violent when trying to steal beer. He was not charged, criminally or civilly. The other two gang members (accomplices) who were waiting in the car were charged with the murder. I sincerely think that laws like that come from states that REALLY know what they are doing.

Which is why NJ would never have a law like this...

[KpdPipes 388]

Which is why NJ would never have a law like this...

it does..ANYONE involved is charged with the crime as well as with Conspiracy.

[vjf915 456]

it does..ANYONE involved is charged with the crime as well as with Conspiracy.

Yep. It only takes two to make a conspiracy. And if I'm not mistaken, once you're part of the planning, simply not going through with the crime does NOT make you innocent.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

it does..ANYONE involved is charged with the crime as well as with Conspiracy.

But if your robber buddy dies you dont get charge with his death...

[Zell959 40]

I'm only 35 seconds into the live leak video, and I have another huge problem with this. Two people ran into the store. One had a gun, the other did not have a weapon visible. He shot the person who DIDN'T have a gun. The deeper I go into this, the more I think "WTF is wrong with this guy?" If two guys break into my house, one is pointing a gun at me and the other is putting a mask on....If I'm going to shoot, I'm going to shoot the a**hole with the gun....it's common sense. That also takes some of the justification out of the shooting. I'm very skeptical as to why he shot the unarmed person.

 

I've agreed with many of the points you've raised regarding what this guy did wrong, but I'm inclined to disagree with finding fault on that particular detail. This guy was 100% in the wrong for finishing off the incapacitated suspect in the manner that he did, but there are a lot of reasons that a reasonable person might come to engage these two in the "wrong" order. He could have simply missed. Handguns are tough to aim, and the suspects weren't that far apart to being with. Also, given the stress of the situation, he may have honestly thought both suspects were armed.

 

I think the guy is wrong, but I don't think this piece of the puzzle necessarily ties into his guilt and/or should be considered proof of wrong doing when a defensive shooting takes place.

[KpdPipes 388]

But if your robber buddy dies you dont get charge with his death...

Yes..You do.

[Cylinder Head 22]

Upon reading about this case a part of me wanted to shrug and say "another dead scumbag, so what?"

 

After watching the video, the pharmacist is a wackjob.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Yes..You do.

So if i set up a robbery and have someone do it for me and he is killed i would get charge with murder in the 1st degree and all the rest? I know about the conspiracy charges and all the rest but i never herd of NJ charging assailants with the deaths of co-conspirators. If so, good for NJ.

[jermz1987 243]

Hope that Pharmacist likes prison food..............and penis.

[vjf915 456]

I've agreed with many of the points you've raised regarding what this guy did wrong, but I'm inclined to disagree with finding fault on that particular detail. This guy was 100% in the wrong for finishing off the incapacitated suspect in the manner that he did, but there are a lot of reasons that a reasonable person might come to engage these two in the "wrong" order. He could have simply missed. Handguns are tough to aim, and the suspects weren't that far apart to being with. Also, given the stress of the situation, he may have honestly thought both suspects were armed.

 

I think the guy is wrong, but I don't think this piece of the puzzle necessarily ties into his guilt and/or should be considered proof of wrong doing when a defensive shooting takes place.

It's something to be considered....and if shooting the unarmed suspect first was the ONLY thing he did that was wrong, then I would tend to agree with you. You're right, with the stress of seeing two people run into your shop like that....yes. I highly doubt it was a miss though. Handguns aren't hard enough to aim that he would shoot 4 feet to the left and 2 feet high at a target 10 feet away. They weren't far apart, but they weren't close enough that I think a miss is the reason. If anything, I can see that the stress caused him to have tunnel vision and he just opened fire not checking to see if the second suspect had a weapon. However I'm still skeptical due to the other poor decisions that he made.

[Maksim 1,504]

You shoot what you focus on, hence why so many people are shooting at hands, where the gun is held, and not center of mass. Will let an LEO explain.

[Soju 153]

Handguns aren't hard enough to aim that he would shoot 4 feet to the left and 2 feet high at a target 10 feet away.

 

You would be surprised. For many many people, it would be very easy to miss by, in this guys case, a few feet to the side, from that distance.

 

1. Not everybody shoots as much as most people posting on a gun forum. I have personally witnessed people shooting at paper full sized silhouette targets at 7 feet, while stationary, and miss completely, repeatedly.

 

2. Shooting at moving targets while you are moving is vastly more difficult then shooting at the range. Add a stressful situation to it, and missing isn't difficult. There are gun fights all the time where many rounds are fired and nobody gets hit, or the bystanders, etc.

 

You are delusional if you think it is like shooting at the range, or in a video game, where you always hit what you want and where you want. He may very well have been shooting at the other guy. He might have shot at the kid he did hit. I don't know. But this specific incident isn't the issue with your statement.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

You shoot what you focus on, hence why so many people are shooting at hands, where the gun is held, and not center of mass. Will let an LEO explain.

 

 

Object fixation, had to teach people when I was teaching Hang Gliding not to fix on a target they didn't want to hit or they would fly right into it.

 

Harry