Surveillance Video: Concealed Carry Stops Milwaukee Robbery

[JFootin]

Interesting story. Pretty clear surveillance video. Made Aldi reversed their policy of posting no CC allowed in their Wisconsin stores, the DA was OK with it even though the CCer ignored the sign, but the police were very stubborn about giving his gun back.

Surveillance Video: Concealed Carry Stops Milwaukee Robbery

For those who don't like blind links, here is the very long and messy address: "http://view.weapons-community.com/?j=fec21271706c027e&m=fe9715707463077476&ls=fdf715 727062077f7c1d7375&l=ff66117176&s=fe2a167371630278 771371&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe5815767d6601757612&et_mid=61 5863&rid=234765271&r=0"

[OldLincoln]

Glad it wasn't CA because he may have been charged with attempted murder for shooting at a robber after the fact as the robber was trying to get away.

CA has very strict criminal protection laws that state life trumps property so you can't kill somebody attempting to steal your car or other property unless they pull a home invasion.

There is another string of daylight home robberies around here now but they are being careful to only pick empty houses. One trick is they have some kind of universal garage door opener to see if there's a car at home.

[muggsy]

Who you gonna believe Linc, the CCW holder or that lying camera. Just sayin.

[CJB]

So did he actually hit the bg, or did the bg just drop the dough and bolt. Sort of unclear in the films

[7shot]

He sneaked up looking for a gun fight, not sure I agree with his actions. Pretty daring and risky on his part. But I can see why he did it, who knows if the BG was going to go off on everyone.

[FLBri]

He sneaked up looking for a gun fight, not sure I agree with his actions. Pretty daring and risky on his part. But I can see why he did it, who knows if the BG was going to go off on everyone.

I'm not sure I agree with that assessment. If a BG is standing in the open with a weapon pointed at human life (you or others) it's pretty hard to say "he sneaked up looking for a gun fight", isn't it? Seems like the gun fight was there waiting for a victim. I do agree that it was risky and questionable from a safety perspective.
I was also wondering if the guy was hit. I doubt it or it would probably would have been mentioned. So .... being a grocery, where did the bullets go? Front windows? Nothing seems apparent from the views shown.

[7shot]

I'm not sure I agree with that assessment. If a BG is standing in the open with a weapon pointed at human life (you or others) it's pretty hard to say "he sneaked up looking for a gun fight", isn't it? Seems like the gun fight was there waiting for a victim. I do agree that it was risky and questionable from a safety perspective.
I was also wondering if the guy was hit. I doubt it or it would probably would have been mentioned. So .... being a grocery, where did the bullets go? Front windows? Nothing seems apparent from the views shown.

i can agree with that too, maybe it was better to say he sneaked up to engage if neccessary.

[aray]

I agree that as long as the BG had his gun up and pointing at innocent victims, that the hero had every right to "sneak up" and fire to protect life. Good shot from my perspective.

However OldLincoln is also right in that in most states (not just CA) life is considered more valuable than property. You can't use lethal force to protect mere things in most locations. That's especially going to be true if your shots are on target and the BG dies. Even if the prosecutor won't pursue charges, you'll likely spend a lot of money on legal fees defending yourselves against the perp's family in a civil suit. "He was such a good boy; he was just about to turn his life around; no one should die over $127; etc. etc."

[knkali]

in calif Jerry Frown would have made sure the BG got an award or some nonsense

[7shot]

these types of situations are very tricky if your the cc guy. due to the BG is not threating you or your family personally. but he is threating others, so do you engage or not, you really have to know the laws of your state. like calif. appartently the BG has to shoot someone first in order for there "life before property law" to become a non issue.

[Bawanna]

I disregard the robbery part of it completely. He had a gun, waiving it around in a threatening manner. All customers and employees were in immediate danger of serious injury or death if BG panics and starts to shoot.

I think good guy was wise to let him get away from the checker, probably not wise to engage, better to let him just go BUT he was spot on to deploy and get position in case BG decides to shoot. Of course it would probably be too late for at lease one victim which is sadly usually the case for those who overthink or worry about lawyers which is a very viable worry.

Also a huge factor in the death of most LE officers in this country. Hesitate, have lawyer thoughts, die.

[JERRY]

it is lawful to use lethal force to defend yourself or a third party from a violent felony.

he did just this.

[OldLincoln]

At the moment of shooting, the bad guy was facing the doors and headed that way, not pointing the gun at anybody. I agree he HAD been pointing it at people but not at the moment the good guy shot at him. On the video, watching the good guy was like watching a hunter waiting for the prey to turn down the path. I'm not sure this is over and will be interested to see if anything comes about from it.

That said, I wish it were open season on robbers without consequences so we could stop that nonsense. Also was pleased the store saw the public support for CC carry and took down their signs.

[getsome]

That one is a tough call....If the CC guy hit or killed the BG as he was leaving there would be criminal charges because the immediate threat was leaving with no harm no foul except for the stores money and scaring everyone to death....If the CC guy missed and hit a kid coming into the store or in the parking lot there would be criminal charges.....If the CC hit and paralyzed the BG the civil suit would destroy the CC in the end because like aray said he was a good boy and his family was hungry and needed the money bla bla bla...

I'm glad it ended like it did but it really makes you think what events need to take place before you pull a weapon and intervene into a situation unless your life is in immediate danger and even then its iffy....Ask George Zimmerman if he in his wildest dreams thought his case which was pretty much cut and dry self defense would end up as it has with him financially losing everything and still possibly going to prison if a jury doesn't see it his way... It's sad but thats just how things are now days

[knkali]

That one is a tough call....If the CC guy hit or killed the BG as he was leaving there would be criminal charges because the immediate threat was leaving with no harm no foul except for the stores money and scaring everyone to death....If the CC guy missed and hit a kid coming into the store or in the parking lot there would be criminal charges.....If the CC hit and paralyzed the BG the civil suit would destroy the CC in the end because like aray said he was a good boy and his family was hungry and needed the money bla bla bla...

I'm glad it ended like it did but it really makes you think what events need to take place before you pull a weapon and intervene into a situation unless your life is in immediate danger and even then its iffy....Ask George Zimmerman if he in his wildest dreams thought his case which was pretty much cut and dry self defense would end up as it has with him financially losing everything and still possibly going to prison if a jury doesn't see it his way... It's sad but thats just how things are now days

That sums it up right there. In fact, It has prompted me to start another thred. "Is it worth it?"