2 robbers shot by customer, shakes community

Didn't see this but if it is already posted please delete.


In reading this story it seems 2 people tried to rob a store and a concerned citizen took matters into his own hands, "As the two masked robbers fled Krick's store with money, cigarettes, and lottery tickets, they were confronted by the man, whom police describe only as a concerned citizen in his 40s with a military background and a license to carry a concealed weapon. He ordered the bandits to stop. They pulled guns. He shot and killed both."

On one hand I applaud this citizen and hold true to my stance of people are accountable for their actions. If the robbers never ripped off the store then they would not have been shot.

On the other hand I have to think what if the cops did the exact same thing..if they shot and killed the robbers..The ATS segment that refuses to blame or hold criminals accountable would be in an uproar about the shoot first\ask questions later approach of the police.

Both scenarios are the same to me and again ultimately come back to if they didnt want to get shot then don't take part in armed robbery.

Of course their is a family member with the typical ,"he was a good kid, he didn't deserve this , he should have shot them in in the leg" That shows to me how naive people are when they make statements like that.


Here is the story for anyone wanting to read more...2 Robbers Killed by Citizen

reply to post by opethPA


If robbers pull guns on police they get shot. ATS is concerned when police shoot unarmed people when there is no proof of weapons.

There are multiple stories in the news of police shooting armed suspects.

Police are all over news murdering innocent civilians and no justice is given to them the same way it would be given to a civilian who shoots someone who is unarmed.

In the case of this story, you stated they pulled a gun on the civilian which means that he has every right to defend himself. If the robbers had pulled guns on police, the police would have shot as well.

The robbers pulled guns. That's what does it for me. If they had just run and THEN were shot, that doesn't seem justifiable to me, but if they pulled guns, they intended to use them, and that makes it justifiable.

reply to post by opethPA

a concerned citizen in his 40s with a military background and a license to carry a concealed weapon. He ordered the bandits to stop. They pulled guns. He shot and killed both."

That pretty much says it all. "Good riddance to bad rubbish" as my mother used to say.

The robbers deserved what they got. Glad no on else was hurt.

I don't care who shot them just as long as they were shot.

Cleaning up the gene pool one bullet at a time.

reply to post by opethPA


I have never seen ATS members cry foul when police have shot an obvious robber, burglar (caught in the act)..etc..

They pulled guns when all he did was tell them to stop ( totally legal) So he defended himself legally.. IMO

I'm surprised they did not mention a neighbor who was a brutal beating victim of one of the robbers. Based on what I heard, these two thugs had nothing to contribute to society. I've been to Reading. Parts of it looks like my old neighborhood in North Philly
Read more at www.philly.com...

One of the comments from the article.

Nobody deserves to be shot for merely threatening to use violence. If the thieves have fled without using violence, it's not up to random passers-by to up the ante to a possible shoot out in a public place. Had any of his shots missed and hit a bystander, there'd be less dancing around and whoops of joy.

"An armed society, is a polite society" - Mick, Fallout: New Vegas


If you knew everyone had a firearm on them, how likely are you to attempt to rob anyone?

IvanAstikov
Nobody deserves to be shot for merely threatening to use violence. If the thieves have fled without using violence, it's not up to random passers-by to up the ante to a possible shoot out in a public place. Had any of his shots missed and hit a bystander, there'd be less dancing around and whoops of joy.

Awesome, the only way this could have been better/safer would be if the store owner defended himself instead of getting lucky that a CCW was walking by.

I assume you are joking that armed robbery is OK.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


So with your reasoning if someone pulls a gun at someone, they need to wait for them to shoot them before being able to defend against it?

That's not how guns work. If someone pulls a gun on you, your life depends on shooting first. It's not the same as getting in a fist fight with someone.

I swear sometimes, the comments on these things.

reply to post by alienreality


Do you really believe he told them to stop before he had his gun drawn and pointing at them? Is that the job of members of the public, whatever their military experience? The mention of the robbers pulling out their own guns before being shot suggests that they weren't brandishing them before The Hero shouted "Stop!" at them, hence they were no threat to him if he'd just minded his own business.

IvanAstikov
Nobody deserves to be shot for merely threatening to use violence. If the thieves have fled without using violence, it's not up to random passers-by to up the ante to a possible shoot out in a public place. Had any of his shots missed and hit a bystander, there'd be less dancing around and whoops of joy.

You kidding right? If store robbing thieves pull guns on you what would you suggest, polite language?

Your hypothetical questions aside the man had every right, I would even say responsibility to step up and put an end to this.

Restricted
I don't care who shot them just as long as they were shot.

Cleaning up the gene pool one bullet at a time.

Exactly.

Now they won't rob anymore stores, innocent people may have died in the future as they got braver or more desperate.

IvanAstikov

Do you really believe he told them to stop before he had his gun drawn and pointing at them? Is that the job of members of the public, whatever their military experience? The mention of the robbers pulling out their own guns before being shot suggests that they weren't brandishing them before The Hero shouted "Stop!" at them, hence they were no threat to him if he'd just minded his own business.

If one had read the article, one would know
that not only do the police feel that the
citizen took the right action, they are going
to charge the get-away driver with murder,
for his part in the robbery.

On Tuesday, police said they had also arrested Alexander Garcia-Bialek, 21, of Fleetwood, whom they identified as the getaway driver. Garcia-Bialek will be charged with second-degree murder for the deaths of both gunmen because they died in the commission of _his_ felony, police said.
Read more at www.philly.com...

reply to post by opethPA


lol, more like they shouldn't have pulled guns on the citizen who had them at the end of his barrel. That was it. That was the moment they could have changed their destiny...but they didn't want to get caught and were willing to kill the man to get away.

Now they are no longer here. Good riddance.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


Wow, are you psychic? Can you remote view?

Were they dressed fashionably? Did they go out in style?

IvanAstikov
Nobody deserves to be shot for merely threatening to use violence. If the thieves have fled without using violence, it's not up to random passers-by to up the ante to a possible shoot out in a public place. Had any of his shots missed and hit a bystander, there'd be less dancing around and whoops of joy.

Yeah, stupid guy should have waited for them to pull the trigger but NOOOOoOOOooOOO,
Just because 2 people both pointed guns at him he assumed they were loaded and were meaning to actually pull the trigger.
A real man would only fire back once he saw the bullets coming at him!!

Asktheanimals

IvanAstikov
Nobody deserves to be shot for merely threatening to use violence. If the thieves have fled without using violence, it's not up to random passers-by to up the ante to a possible shoot out in a public place. Had any of his shots missed and hit a bystander, there'd be less dancing around and whoops of joy.

Yeah, stupid guy should have waited for them to pull the trigger but NOOOOoOOOooOOO,
Just because 2 people both pointed guns at him he assumed they were loaded and were meaning to actually pull the trigger.
A real man would only fire back once he saw the bullets coming at him!!

Agreed, Two guys doing bad stuff with guns is not a threat?

Take them out I say.
Regards, Iwinder

opethPA

On one hand I applaud this citizen and hold true to my stance of people are accountable for their actions. If the robbers never ripped off the store then they would not have been shot.

On the other hand I have to think what if the cops did the exact same thing..if they shot and killed the robbers..The ATS segment that refuses to blame or hold criminals accountable would be in an uproar about the shoot first\ask questions later approach of the police.

Both scenarios are the same to me and again ultimately come back to if they didnt want to get shot then don't take part in armed robbery.

I'm surprised the OP is that preemptive enough to hold 'that ATS segment' accountable for the 2nd scenario(cop shoot robber), but presume they wouldn't be irate about the 1st(civilian/veteran shoot robber).

Why? the robbers were armed, and pulled guns. Thus, its a no-brainer whatever 'segment'. I felt this topic purports that the issue is cops shooting robbers when the issue most ppl if not all have, is with cops shooting/killing unarmed ppl.

But, thanks for the info; I had not known some licensed carry military dude shot armed robbers in self defense.

Now the real underlying question is, why do you have to be military or police to defend yourself, in America? What about civilians? Less than 1% Americans are currently in the military.