• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

ATM customer with a carry permit takes down robber in KC.

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

A bank customer shot a robber after an armed confrontation in a Kansas City parking lot Saturday.The robber was wounded in the head and was in stable condition at a hospital, police said.
The shooting happened about 9 a.m. when a man and a woman were in a car using the automated teller machine at the Bank of America at North Oak Trafficway and Barry Road.
They were robbed at gunpoint, but as the gunman walked away, the man in the car got out armed with his own gun, said Sgt. Chris Lantz of the department’s robbery unit.
The man yelled for the robber to stop. When the robber turned around and pointed his gun, the man fired at him, hitting him in the head, Lantz said.
At the scene Saturday, investigators were collecting evidence from a dark sedan parked next to the ATM. An object that looked like a handgun was lying on the pavement. Nearby were apparent bloodstains.
Police interviewed the couple and witnesses.
The robbery victim had a permit to carry a concealed gun, Lantz said. Under the circumstances, Lantz said, that would not matter because he could legally carry the weapon in his car.
No criminal case has been presented, and authorities are waiting to see whether the patient recovers, said Jim Roberts, spokesman for the Clay County prosecutor’s office.
 

AWDstylez

Banned
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
2,785
Location
, Connecticut, USA
imported post

I wonder what the guy was carrying or where the robber was hit that he's in stable condition with a shot to the head. Good for that guy for having the balls to go for a head shot though.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Dr.Coy wrote:
Wow. I do not think I can even imagine how I would feel if I had my wife with me and someone pointed a gun at us.

Wow.

Scary world.
I can somewhat imagine how I would feel. Besides the sinking feeling in my stomach from fear that she would be injured, I would be so angry with the SOB who threatened her life that in a perfect world I would rip off the arm he used to hold his gun and beat him to death with it.

Actually I am more worried about my ability to effectively use lethal defense if my family is with me than if I am alone. I tend to get very calm and deliberate when faced with crises, however, I'm not sure how the anger I would feel at someone threatening the lives of my family would effect that. By myself I feel extremely confident stressed (my advanced handgun instructor asked me how it is that I shoot better under stress) but I am concerned that with them there I would be overly aggressive or overly cautious and not be as effective.
 

Task Force 16

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
2,615
Location
Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
imported post

deepdiver wrote:
Dr.Coy wrote:
Wow. I do not think I can even imagine how I would feel if I had my wife with me and someone pointed a gun at us.

Wow.

Scary world.
I can somewhat imagine how I would feel. Besides the sinking feeling in my stomach from fear that she would be injured, I would be so angry with the SOB who threatened her life that in a perfect world I would rip off the arm he used to hold his gun and beat him to death with it.

Actually I am more worried about my ability to effectively use lethal defense if my family is with me than if I am alone. I tend to get very calm and deliberate when faced with crises, however, I'm not sure how the anger I would feel at someone threatening the lives of my family would effect that. By myself I feel extremely confident stressed (my advanced handgun instructor asked me how it is that I shoot better under stress) but I am concerned that with them there I would be overly aggressive or overly cautious and not be as effective.
Let's hope you don't ever have to find out, bud.
 

VAopencarry

Regular Member
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
2,151
Location
Berryville-ish, VA
imported post

aloe wrote:
If the robber walks away and he shoots the robber in the back, is it legal? Because there is no intent to harm?
No, generally speaking (laws vary by state) you need to be in fear of your life or serious bodily injury. Someone walking or running away from you no longer poses a threat. There are some states that allow for protecting property with deadly force.
 

xd.40

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
399
Location
Manassas, Virginia, USA
imported post

VAopencarry wrote:
aloe wrote:
If the robber walks away and he shoots the robber in the back, is it legal? Because there is no intent to harm?
No, generally speaking (laws vary by state) you need to be in fear of your life or serious bodily injury. Someone walking or running away from you no longer poses a threat. There are some states that allow for protecting property with deadly force.
Make sure you check out your state laws though - we aren't lawyers here. :lol:
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

aloe wrote:
If the robber walks away and he shoots the robber in the back, is it legal? Because there is no intent to harm?

Welcome to the forum!

I've never heard of a state where such would be legal for defense of person. I've heard of at least one state where one can shoot to protect property.

As the others mentioned, check the law in your state.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

I'll probably get creamed for it, but I have to ask the wisdom of engaging after the initial encounter a man who is armed with a gun while your wife is close.

I'm not arm-chair quarterbacking so much as I'm glad the opportunity came up to think about it.

The crook's leaving. You demand he stop. He turns fast and fires. A gun fight breaks out. Your wife gets hit. Or, you go down, and your wife is open for revenge.

Unless she says, "Gimme the carbine, honey! I'll take his right flank!" :)

I think I'll make it my policy to get the heck out of dodge if I've got somebody with me. Heck, even if I don't, I think the most I'll do is follow at a distance, birddogging for the police. It just doesn't make sense to me to1)risk having to shootanother human beingunless I really, really, have to; 2) risk a wrongful prosecution; 3) risk a civil suit fromhis family.

There is the moral issue of letting an armed predator free to prey and possible injure or kill another person; but I'm wondering if I'm morally obligated to risk myself. I can hear the press howling "vigilante" already. Toss in an anti-gun prosecutor, or an unsypathetic or swayed jury, orsensational press. Hmmmmm. Tough call.

Then there isthe wholesituational awareness question. Withalertness andany luck, I'll be flooring the accelerator beforehe initiatesaggression.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
I'll probably get creamed for it, but I have to ask the wisdom of engaging after the initial encounter a man who is armed with a gun while your wife is close.

I'm not arm-chair quarterbacking so much as I'm glad the opportunity came up to think about it.

The crook's leaving. You demand he stop. He turns fast and fires. A gun fight breaks out. Your wife gets hit. Or, you go down, and your wife is open for revenge.

Unless she says, "Gimme the carbine, honey! I'll take his right flank!" :)

I think I'll make it my policy to get the heck out of dodge if I've got somebody with me. Heck, even if I don't, I think the most I'll do is follow at a distance, birddogging for the police. It just doesn't make sense to me to1)risk having to shootanother human beingunless I really, really, have to; 2) risk a wrongful prosecution; 3) risk a civil suit fromhis family.

There is the moral issue of letting an armed predator free to prey and possible injure or kill another person; but I'm wondering if I'm morally obligated to risk myself. I can hear the press howling "vigilante" already. Toss in an anti-gun prosecutor, or an unsypathetic or swayed jury, orsensational press. Hmmmmm. Tough call.

Then there isthe wholesituational awareness question. Withalertness andany luck, I'll be flooring the accelerator beforehe initiatesaggression.
Those are good questions and thoughts. I re-read the story and note that without a diagram of the area it is hard to determine if there was continued risk. Also, the fact that the BG "walked" away instead of "running" makes we wonder if the couple were still at risk and perhaps had to pass by him again or if perhaps he were in a position where he could have harmed them as they tried to drive away. The fact that the BG was walking and not running indicates to me a great amount of audaciousness and experience in such criminal enterprises.

Your questions and comments do point out how very situational these matters are and how very difficult it can be even after the fact, let alone in the heat of the moment, to evaluate the correct course of action. I don't think any of us, unless we have experienced combat or a self-defense shooting situation, can begin to say exactly what we will do. Certainly we fall back to our training, however, there are numerous situational variables from environmental to physical to mental to emotional that come into play. I do enjoy these type discussions and the multitude of input as I see it as a form of mental training that may one day save my life or the life of a loved one through a decision to act or even not act based on one of the scenarios we have discussed.
 

Dahwg

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2008
Messages
661
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
aloe wrote:
If the robber walks away and he shoots the robber in the back, is it legal? Because there is no intent to harm?

Welcome to the forum!

I've never heard of a state where such would be legal for defense of person. I've heard of at least one state where one can shoot to protect property.

As the others mentioned, check the law in your state.

In AZ you can threaten to use deadly force or use deadly force to stop one of many felonies. A Bank robbery would qualify as one (justified use of deadly foce 13-1704, burglary in the second or first degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508)

So then what is First or second degree burglary?

13-1508. Burglary in the first degree; classification

A. A person commits burglary in the first degree if such person or an accomplice violates the provisions of either section 13-1506 or 13-1507 and knowingly possesses explosives, a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument in the course of committing any theft or any felony.

B. Burglary in the first degree of a nonresidential structure or a fenced commercial or residential yard is a class 3 felony. It is a class 2 felony if committed in a residential structure.

Therefor in AZ it would be a legal justification for to threaten to use or to use deadly force in such a situation. Regardless of whether he was faciing you or away from you.
 

Flyer22

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
374
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
I'll probably get creamed for it, but I have to ask the wisdom of engaging after the initial encounter a man who is armed with a gun while your wife is close.

I'm not arm-chair quarterbacking so much as I'm glad the opportunity came up to think about it.

The crook's leaving. You demand he stop. He turns fast and fires. A gun fight breaks out. Your wife gets hit. Or, you go down, and your wife is open for revenge.

Unless she says, "Gimme the carbine, honey! I'll take his right flank!" :)

I think I'll make it my policy to get the heck out of dodge if I've got somebody with me. Heck, even if I don't, I think the most I'll do is follow at a distance, birddogging for the police. It just doesn't make sense to me to1)risk having to shootanother human beingunless I really, really, have to; 2) risk a wrongful prosecution; 3) risk a civil suit fromhis family.

There is the moral issue of letting an armed predator free to prey and possible injure or kill another person; but I'm wondering if I'm morally obligated to risk myself. I can hear the press howling "vigilante" already. Toss in an anti-gun prosecutor, or an unsypathetic or swayed jury, orsensational press. Hmmmmm. Tough call.

Then there isthe wholesituational awareness question. Withalertness andany luck, I'll be flooring the accelerator beforehe initiatesaggression.

A couple of thoughts. . . .

I've thought about similar scenarios. I believe that I would have acted in much the same way. In the Old West, it was considered cowardly to shoot a man, even an armed man, in the back. Thus, by calling out to the perp, and getting him to turn around, you solve that problem, and also lessen the risk of getting charged with anything, because he is now pointing his gun at you.

You mention that the perp might "turn fast" and fire. For all practical purposes, you can ignore that possibility, because unless he's within 5 feet, he's almost certainly going to miss.The possibility thatan average criminalwould be thinking about tactical stance and proper aiming isnonexistent. We all know how often cops miss, and they typically are already facing and observing the suspect before they open fire.

Also, the story says that the people were IN their car. It's harder to maintain situational awareness inside a vehicle, because of support pillars, engine noise, etc.
 

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
imported post

The BG had committed the crime, robbery in the first degree. The LAC (law abiding citizen) who was robbed told the man to stop. The BG turned, pointed a weapon at him (again), and the LAC fired.

If the same situation had occurred with a LEO, the BG would have been shot in the back. If the BG turned with even a gun in his hand, the BG would have been shot.\

I do think the man was justified. He did what was right (even if it wasn't 100% legal) in defending himself and his wife. Sure we're speculating, but what if he came back? What if he demanded their car? What if he shot the wife, then left? Too many what-ifs in such a situation, but the response was appropriate - better to not find out, IMHO.

The only thing I would say though... is not in the head! You can take out a lung or a kidney (something the BG has 2 of) if you do have to open fire. But if he dies, it's now manslaughter on your hands if things don't pan out in your favor.

Nobody will enjoy blood on their hands.
 

usSiR

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
258
Location
Ogden, UT, ,
imported post

so wait... is it ok what he did???

The robber was walking away, the threat stopped and was leaving... The vic. got out yelled at the robber to get him to face him then shot him

I could only assume he could not get his gun from his position in the car, but he got out of the car and pursued the robber...

I don't know if what he did was ok. Thoughts..
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

Follow up story:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/735834.html
By GLENN E. RICEThe Kansas City Star Clay County authorities on Tuesday charged a 17-year-old who was shot in the head after he allegedly tried to rob a couple Saturday at a Northland automated-teller machine.
Christian D. Johnson of Gladstone was charged with attempted first-degree robbery. He was also charged with first-degree robbery in connection with a separate holdup at a convenience store earlier Saturday.
The bond for Johnson, who remained hospitalized Tuesday, was set at $100,000.
According to court records, the attempted robbery at the ATM occurred about 9 a.m. Saturday. Johnson was shot in the head by his alleged intended victim outside a Bank of America at North Oak Trafficway and Barry Road.
Johnson is accused of trying to hold up two people at gunpoint at the machine, court records said. As he was leaving, his victim got a gun from his car and ordered the robber to stop. Johnson allegedly pointed his gun at the robbery victim, who then fired at Johnson, court records said.
Clay County Prosecutor Daniel White said no criminal charges are being considered against the 61-year-old man who shot Johnson.
“It’s clear from the statement he gave police that the victim felt his life — or his wife’s life — was at risk,” White said. “He only fired when Johnson turned back toward him, gun in hand.”
“The shooting appears completely justifiable,” he said.
White said Johnson survived the gunshot and is expected to be released from an area hospital by the weekend.
Authorities said that before the attempted ATM robbery, Johnson allegedly held up the Pour Boy gas station in the 4200 block of North Oak Street Trafficway.
Just before 7 a.m. a gunman walked into the store, paced the aisles and then brandished what appeared to be a handgun. The clerk gave money to the gunman, who then fled, court records said.
 

akpoff

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
63
Location
Houston, Texas, USA
imported post

Dahwg wrote:
Citizen wrote:
aloe wrote:
If the robber walks away and he shoots the robber in the back, is it legal? Because there is no intent to harm?

Welcome to the forum!

I've never heard of a state where such would be legal for defense of person. I've heard of at least one state where one can shoot to protect property.

As the others mentioned, check the law in your state.

In AZ you can threaten to use deadly force or use deadly force to stop one of many felonies. A Bank robbery would qualify as one (justified use of deadly foce 13-1704, burglary in the second or first degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508)

So then what is First or second degree burglary?

13-1508. Burglary in the first degree; classification

A. A person commits burglary in the first degree if such person or an accomplice violates the provisions of either section 13-1506 or 13-1507 and knowingly possesses explosives, a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument in the course of committing any theft or any felony.

B. Burglary in the first degree of a nonresidential structure or a fenced commercial or residential yard is a class 3 felony. It is a class 2 felony if committed in a residential structure.

Therefor in AZ it would be a legal justification for to threaten to use or to use deadly force in such a situation. Regardless of whether he was faciing you or away from you.
Texas Penal Code, Chapter 9, Section 9.41:
Code:
§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY.
 (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
 (b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
 (1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
 (2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
The Texas Penal Code is an interesting read for use of force with regard to property. Look at chapter 9 for all the affirmative defenses.

Disclaimer: IANAL. Speak with your own attorney about what the penal code means.

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm
 

aloe

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2008
Messages
11
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
imported post

Things I dont understand. Imagine you are the BG,

someone shouts at you to freeze or stop, will you turn your head back and look back over your shoulder in a super cool poise or in reality you will turn your whole body back. you setup a situtaion in which you may have to fire. when you turn around you see someone pointing a gun a t you. you will pee in your pants or be so scared and so crazy that you lift your gun to fire back.

Now back to us being the "victims".When the Bg turned back,I hope in this case, my reflexes are fast enough to fire before his gun come up. which is why I brought up the question of shooting in the back.

But what if the BG start running away? Ok to fire?

If I'm that guy and I get back home and after having my wife crying in relief, she will probably grab the skillet and boing my head shouting, "what the hell were you thinking just now!! He had a gun!! Either shoot him in the back or let him go, why did you make him turn around?!?!?"

well thats fictional becasue I'm not married, but what my fictional wife said sounds sensible?

Looking at what the Texas codes say, "intangible assets", perps at atm will make you draw the max and give it to them. thats $300 max for me. Living on a tight budget, $300 is 3 months food for me. Or one full month of bills excluding rent.

Is $300 worth a man's life? of course not. Not to sound vilgilante, but if I had a gun and let the BG get away only to spend the next month or two worrying about how to pay bills, then whats the use of getting a gun?

At the current moment, I'm saving up to get a gun. Learning how to shoot is one thing, Knowing when to shoot or not and the consequences is another.

Just updated my profile, I'm in Las Vegas
 

demnogis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
911
Location
Orange County, California, USA
imported post

I couldn't make the judgment call for anyone else on whether or not it's right to take another person's life in that situation, I could only answer for myself, and I would have fired, but not at the BG's head. :? I believe the purpose of deterring crime is to set precedence for other criminals that their opportunities are becoming more scarce, and that their actions may carry lethal consequences.

aloe wrote:
[...] Is $300 worth a man's life? of course not. Not to sound vilgilante, but if I had a gun and let the BG get away only to spend the next month or two worrying about how to pay bills, then whats the use of getting a gun?

At the current moment, I'm saving up to get a gun. Learning how to shoot is one thing, Knowing when to shoot or not and the consequences is another. [...]
 
Top