Pharmacist charged with murder (*with actual video*)

guns are kept in the store not to protect the money and goods but to protect workers from crazy [SNIP] like this. i am self employed. i know what it's like. there has been more than one occasion when i felt much safer having the option.

once while at work, a client looks out of the store window and sees a van pulling up in the turning lane. the side door flings open and there are four guys with ski masks and shotguns. he goes into hysterics. so we go for the guns. they saw us preparing ourselves for war and decided to move on. we called the cops and the dirtbags were caught behind another place of business just before they kicked in the door. (this happened just a few weeks after a girl was murdered in a similar scenario.)

i am going to second the 'having a gun in your face' motion. if you have ever had it happen then you know exactly to what extent you will react. you will either curl up and die, or you will fight for life.

also, mentioned before... the adrenalin released from such a traumatic event can last a long time.

i'd like to adress the value of life issue: when someone knowingly places the lives of others in danger, while in the commission of a violent crime they lower the value of their own life. rehab? what a joke.

so he was a kid... weren't we all? and probably not many (if any) of us got where we are today by pulling stunts like this. so why sympathize? a hard life is no excuse for taking part in an armed robbery.

just the fact that they jacked a pharm during business hours says a lot. retards. you break in after hours, no guns, no people. they get the insurance claim, you get the dope, the lab gets to fill out another big order, everyone is happy.


[edit on 29/5/2009 by gravykraken]

Mod Edit: Removed censor circumvention.

[edit on 29-5-2009 by Gemwolf]

[edit on 28-5-2009 by MysterE]

If he got back up after being shot, I would perceive the robber as a threat and so the answer is not only yes, but hell yes, he deserved to be shot again. There's nothing more dangerous than a wounded animal.

The pharmacist was most likely still running on adrenaline and instinct kicked in when he saw the guy back up.

I don't think it matters what we 'feel" is right or justified. It's illegal, and it's murder.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
People who don't own guns are wondering why you're all murdering each other, especially over replacable insured material items.

I'm saddened by many of the replies here and I guess this English soul can never understand why shooting someone is an instinctive response to any kind of threat.

Perhaps the Brits just do NOT have a good understanding of brutal violence against innocent citizens? Is your media that censored?

Where I live there are FREQUENT stories about robbers getting hte money and shooting the victims for fun. Just last week an elderly couple had 3 thugs attack them at their home and rob them of $117.

Oh, and after they had the money? They pistol whipped the 70 year old woman multiple times smashing her face, her arms, her hands. She has been in intensive care for over a week and her face is so smashed she has to have reconstructive surgery. She is "unrecognizable".

But maybe she just didn't give them the money fast enough huh? Yeah maybe she provoked that. It must have been her fault.

www.myfoxatlanta.com...

Sad that some people have apparently lost TRUST in armed robbers. It is good to know that there are civilized Brits in the world that believe armed robbery is actually a harmless endeavor and if all parties are polite and hand over the goods fast enough no one needs to be hurt!

[edit on 29-5-2009 by Sonya610]

it clearly isn't murder, I don't think the pharmacist planned to shoot a robber that day

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t this guy a veteran? The reason I am saying this is after you get out of the military you forget many things but there is one thing that you never forget and that is your weapons training, Troops are taught to kill, not wound six shots may have been to much even after the kid was down, but hey he’s the idiot he tried to Rob a store I bet somewhere a few would be robbers in Oklahoma have decided not to carry through with it.

An armed society is a polite society because one knows they may have to back up their actions with their life.

[edit on 29-5-2009 by Galvatron]

The pharmacist didn't ask to have an armed intruder come apon him that day; there is no telling how a frightened civilian would react when trying to defend their life and the lives of others. The kid knew in advance what his plan was, but the pharmacist just had to act on impulse, out of fear for his life.

Our justice system and the people who run it are as bad or worse than our politicians now; just further evidence that our govt. system has gone wacko and needs to be reset.

Perhaps the Brits just do NOT have a good understanding of brutal violence against innocent citizens? Is your media that censored?

Well i've had my fair share of beatings, i've stopped a robbery, i've disarmed a man with a knife and i've been jumped by six guys. But i certainly didn't need a gun to deal with any of them.

Where I live there are FREQUENT stories about robbers getting hte money and shooting the victims for fun. Just last week an elderly couple had 3 thugs attack them at their home and rob them of $117.

Well that's probably because your country has a very backward look at life. Where life is worthless and your people belive that somebody should deserve to die just for attempted robbery. Maybe if the robbers stopped sharing YOUR mentality then your country would be a better place.

Oh, and after they had the money? They pistol whipped the 70 year old woman multiple times smashing her face, her arms, her hands. She has been in intensive care for over a week and her face is so smashed she has to have reconstructive surgery. She is "unrecognizable".

Barbaric and tragic, but again it reflects the mentality of such people. Sounds more like a psychopath than a robber.

But maybe she just didn't give them the money fast enough huh? Yeah maybe she provoked that. It must have been her fault.

That's not even funny. Maybe, just maybe your country is filled with scum and an ingrained mentality of violence and hatred?

Sad that some people have apparently lost TRUST in armed robbers. It is good to know that there are civilized Brits in the world that believe armed robbery is actually a harmless endeavor and if all parties are polite and hand over the goods fast enough no one needs to be hurt!

Well that's the fine line between an armed robbery and an attack. Gotta ask yourself a few questions as to why violence is so popular in your country eh? Maybe it's because you're all obsessed with war and guns?

Originally posted by blueorder
it clearly isn't murder, I don't think the pharmacist planned to shoot a robber that day

That just means it wasn't pre-meditated murder.

-E-

Originally posted by mr-lizard
That's not even funny. Maybe, just maybe your country is filled with scum and an ingrained mentality of violence and hatred?

Yes, exactly! It is!!!!! Which is why many of us feel the need to protect ourselves because we KNOW the scum is out there, and for many of us a fist fight is NOT an option!

The scum doesn't need guns, they didn't need a gun to beat that elderly lady nearly to death, they could easily do it with their fists or a baseball bat. The scum is the problem. Not the guns.

Were they psychopaths? Probably so, is it rare? Nope. Three of them, all from the same small town, I believe most had multiple felonies on their record. Common place, so common place 3 can meet up and decide beating the elderly to death is not a problem.

[edit on 29-5-2009 by Sonya610]

Originally posted by nunya13

Originally posted by MysterE

Originally posted by Dr Love
[Once the courts get done with him, he'll probably be wishing he was the one who got killed.

I think they should charge the other guy with murder also. Kind of like charging the driver in a drunk driving accident where the passenger dies. He was partially responsible for his friends death.

-E-

I see your point. But...do people really get charged with murder if your drunk driving and your passenger willingly rides in the car with you knowing full well the danger he just put his life in?

[edit on 28-5-2009 by nunya13]

Oops, the term is "involuntary DWI manslaughter" or "vehicular manslaughter" and yes they get charged, see link.
Drunk Driver Scheduled for Sentencing in Passenger Death

-E-

reply to post by Sonya610


So you're saying we arm the elderly?

Lizard- I live in the UK and it is filled with violent cretins who couldn't give a s**t about anyone

We are hardly in a position to lecture the US about a propensity for violence

I support legally held weaponry- the criminals will possess them regardless

Originally posted by blueorder
Lizard- I live in the UK and it is filled with violent cretins who couldn't give a s**t about anyone

We are hardly in a position to lecture the US about a propensity for violence

I support legally held weaponry- the criminals will possess them regardless

Well these violent crettins are our responsibility. They are our offspring and before we start shooting them in the head, maybe just maybe we should try alternative methods.

If you'd bother to read my post a few above my reply, you will see that i am no stranger to violence or confrontation.

But arming ourselves is a losing battle (just look at the USA). It doesn't matter who has a sgun, because chances are someone else (victim or assailant) will have a bigger gun. So next time, the other person gets a bigger gun and then the whole cycle continues.

Do you really wish to see a child's brains splattered all over the street? Do you really wish to see our police force armed with guns and itchy fingers?

Because trust me, it'll be you who will be moaning when all this starts to happen.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
Well these violent crettins are our responsibility. They are our offspring
and before we start shooting them in the head, maybe just maybe we should try alternative methods.

Society in the UK has a problem- like the US- violence and murder has exploded from the 1960s onwards thanks to welfare programmes and the destruction of "normal" family life and accepted standards of behaviour

We are in the s**t- these people are not my "offspring", although you are probably talking in a society sense- put it this way, none of these cretins are starving, they are stealing because of moral poverty not economic poverty (maybe some are just hardwired bad as well, who knows)- if they threaten someone with a gun they should accept the possibility of getting shot dead

If you'd bother to read my post a few above my reply, you will see that i am no stranger to violence or confrontation.

good for you

But arming ourselves is a losing battle (just look at the USA).

no it isn't- violence in the USA exploded from the 1960s onwards (without an explosion in legal gun ownership)- the states in the USA with the highest crime rates are those with tighter gun controls- it is more complex than you paint

It doesn't matter who has a sgun, because chances are someone else (victim or assailant) will have a bigger gun. So next time, the other person gets a bigger gun and then the whole cycle continues.

this isn't really true- there is the limit to the "size" of a gun- a standard hand gun gives you more protection against a shotgun than a knife or an ability, as you seem to possess, to single handedly disarm entire mobs of people

Do you really wish to see a child's brains splattered all over the street?

do you wish to see kids being interfered with? Are we just asking each other random bizzarre questions

If you want to see child's brains splattered over the street, visit some crime scenes in London

Do you really wish to see our police force armed with guns and itchy fingers?

The police is a separate discussion

Because trust me, it'll be you who will be moaning when all this starts to happen.

I'll decide what I moan about, I'll not rely on your "trust" for that

I watched this video and this is my take on it.

The two suspects come in, one holding a gun, the other pulling a mask over his face. The employee pulls his weapon and fires, shooting one of the two ARMED ROBBERY SUSPECTS. The employee pursues the second suspect because he is still a threat to the employees of the store. (who knows if he'll come back and decide to take them all out)

The employee returns, having scared off the second suspect. He goes behind the counter & appears to call 9-1-1. Then he stops what he is doing and rushes back over to the injured suspect. (as fast as an older gentleman can rush) IMO, that shows the injured man was still moving & since the employee still did not know if he was armed, the injured man was still very much a threat. His shooting four more times may seem extreme, but no one knows how they would react if they were in the same situation.

Also, I don't know if this has been brought up, but the suspect who got away is the one who should be charged with murder. This boy died while the other suspect was in the commission of a felony & therefore, the surviving suspect is guilty of homicide.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
So you're saying we arm the elderly?

In my state any citizen without a criminal background can obtain and carry a firearm with a license.

Do you think only the elderly can be beaten to death by thugs? Nope, men can too if outnumbered, and women certainly can.

In Atlanta they recently started a "police escort program" so women coming home after dark can get a police escort when available. No one has screamed sexism yet, perhaps they will though. But it is pretty bad when the police start offering escorts to females after dark because the tension and fear of violent crime is so high.

ATLANTA (MyFOX ATLANTA) - Atlanta police unveiled a new initiative Thursday night that may give residents in midtown more peace of mind. The police escort program was conceived in response to recent crime in the midtown area.

The program is only intended to be used by women at night and only if police manpower is available.

Originally posted by lynn112

The employee returns, having scared off the second suspect. He goes behind the counter & appears to call 9-1-1. Then he stops what he is doing and rushes back over to the injured suspect. (as fast as an older gentleman can rush) IMO, that shows the injured man was still moving & since the employee still did not know if he was armed, the injured man was still very much a threat. His shooting four more times may seem extreme, but no one knows how they would react if they were in the same situation.

Also, I don't know if this has been brought up, but the suspect who got away is the one who should be charged with murder. This boy died while the other suspect was in the commission of a felony & therefore, the surviving suspect is guilty of homicide.

The pharmacist dialed 911 AFTER he shot the guy 5 times. It's easy to miss since he walks up with no sense of urgency. The DA claims the robber was unconsious on the floor when he was shot 5 extra times. And yes, I brought up earlier that the other robber should be charged with murder, and likened it to a DWI intoxication manslaughter where the passenger of a DWI wreck dies.

[edit on 29-5-2009 by MysterE]

On Fox News right now, he is out of jail today.

Probably will return to work next Tuesday and prosecuting attorney asked the judge if he could modify the terms of his release to allow him to use a gun since he may be a target now. The judge refused.

Local polls are on his side by as much as 75% and people have stopped by the pharmacy to drop off thousands of dollars for the man.

reply to post by blueorder

Society in the UK has a problem- like the US- violence and murder has exploded from the 1960s onwards thanks to welfare programmes and the destruction of "normal" family life and accepted standards of behaviour

We are in the s**t- these people are not my "offspring", although you are probably talking in a society sense- put it this way, none of these cretins are starving, they are stealing because of moral poverty not economic poverty (maybe some are just hardwired bad as well, who knows)- if they threaten someone with a gun they should accept the possibility of getting shot dead

They are not starving, but put it this way. If you are brought up in an environment were dad is in jail, mum is on medication, you're dumped in front of an xbox and brought up on violent games, sick movies, soap operas dealing with rape, incest, murder.... Music that promotes gang warfare and drugs. You live in an area with drug dealers living above you, gangs of youths with nowhere to go.... nothing to do (lack of family values) and then boredom creeps in..... Newspapers glorifying hatred and war.
Your local area is either off limits, a no-go area or a toxic wastegrounds (again a result of greedy bastards that existed long before the kids were born).

DON'T YOU SEE?

We have all done this to ourselves. The kids may be ignorant, but ultimately our selfish actions of yesteryear have shaped us all into what we are now. Shooting people is just ten steps backwards.

Unless you've had it any different, then common sense will dictate that the thugs we speak of, will know of only one way of life.

And yes, you're right... welfare systems may have started it. But ultimately our leaders could have changed this mess. Class division was massive, people were made to feel inferior or superior.... The Uk is nannied and oppressed with dreadful buerocracy, contradictory laws and a twisted legal systems.

And then some people are suggesting ARMING the citizens.

That's crazy. How about we retrace our steps, step up and modernise the education system (I remember seeing a shocking video of the results of kids playing on a railway line - let's put it this way, i never played on the railway line)..... How about we make our children feel welcome and give them a good life?

Give them something to respect. Something to live for. Or are we just avoiding the tougher but more rewarding of the few options?

no it isn't- violence in the USA exploded from the 1960s onwards (without an explosion in legal gun ownership)- the states in the USA with the highest crime rates are those with tighter gun controls- it is more complex than you paint

Okay fair enough. I can accept that.

this isn't really true- there is the limit to the "size" of a gun- a standard hand gun gives you more protection against a shotgun than a knife or an ability, as you seem to possess, to single handedly disarm entire mobs of people

Of course it's true. Don't deny it. So you're telling me nobody has tried to rob a bank with an automatic rifle? What about a trigger release bomb?

I've never disramed a mob. Never said that. I disarmed a guy with a knife at a house party, he was threatening a girl with it. I was quicker than him and pinned him to a table and grabbed the knife from his hands. I may not have been that lucky. I could have ended up dead. I didn't think about it. The only mob incident you speak of, was getting jumped by six lads on a bus. It hurt. I may not have been so lucky....

But again, i never wanted a gun.

do you wish to see kids being interfered with? Are we just asking each other random bizzarre questions

If you want to see child's brains splattered over the street, visit some crime scenes in London.

Nope, my question was relevant. Yours was childish.
I believe Manchester has a higher rate of gun crime than London. I may be wrong, but ultimately arming citizens will see a greater number of dead children. Since, as you say Americans have always had guns and they know how to deal with such things. They shoot them back.

At least one family will mourn per incident. One more life in the book of tabboo statistics.

The police is a separate discussion

Agreed.

I'll decide what I moan about, I'll not rely on your "trust" for that

That's my point exactly. Nobody trust anybody. Yet i've taken ALL your SENSIBLE replies into consideration. I trust your opinion to educate me or at least challenge me. Whereas you seem to be unwilling to change your mind on any matter.

Regards, Mr L







[edit on 29-5-2009 by mr-lizard]