Armed citizen's heroics caught on video

[Bruce for NH State Rep]

http://www.nbc10.com/news/11200756/detail.html

PHILADELPHIA -- The owner of a small breakfast restaurant who has been robbed in the past killed one alleged robber and injured another during a robbery gone bad in Philadelphia Thursday morning, police said. After several rounds were fired, a witness captured the aftermath on his daughter's cell phone video recorded.

[snip]

The video could be considered distrubing to some.

The video in question shows an armed citizen defending his family and detaining an armed robbery suspect (whom the armed citizen had previously shot in the face) at gunpoint.

"Disturbing"? Try "f***ing glorious"!

And, yes, there's a link to the video.

 

[drgrant]

I wish the best for this guy... Philadelphia is one of the top 10 places
you -DON'T- want to get put on trial in. The entire city government
is corrupt to the core, and the mayor and the prosecutor etc are all
virulent anti gun nazi shitcamels. Hopefully there are more than
enough witnesses/political pressure to throw the case in his favor.

Note that, just about anywhere else in PA isnt nearly that bad. The problem
is that Philadelphia is like a foreign country in comparison to the rest of the
state.

-Mike

 

[Duane Allman]

I bet if something like this had happened at his house, he'd be sitting in a jail cell, thinking about selling his business to pay a lawyer.

 

[Ripach]

That is just awesome. The only thing I find disturbing is the liberal news site referring to the perp that got shot as an alleged robber. I know it's innocent until proven guilty but if you get shot while robbing someone I think it is safe to just say "the robber was shot" I'm no lawyer though so it could be a legal issue in our over litigated society.

 

[Bruce for NH State Rep]

Also, they call it a "robbery gone bad".

Robberies are pretty much bad from the get-go, I always thought.

This one was a robbery "gone good", as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Bruce for NH State Rep]

That is just awesome. The only thing I find disturbing is the liberal news site referring to the perp that got shot as an alleged robber. I know it's innocent until proven guilty but if you get shot while robbing someone I think it is safe to just say "the robber was shot" I'm no lawyer though so it could be a legal issue in our over litigated society.

I'd go with "would-be robber", seeing as he never got to complete to process of robbing the guy. Though, he did take some of the guy's property with him when he left the restaurant - mainly one .38-caliber slug.

 

[Phantom6]

"robbery gone bad. Robberies are pretty much bad from the get-go..."

All robberies are bad just like all sucking chest wounds suck!

 

[Moderator]

I just hope some moonbat don't feel bad for the family's of the robbers and demand a settlement.

 

[tele_mark]

I just hope some moonbat don't feel bad for the family's of the robbers and demand a settlement.

Gee, that's just the type of case Deval would kill to represent.

 

[Bruce for NH State Rep]

Gee, that's just the type of case Deval would kill to represent.

Yeah, there's pretty much zero doubt as to how he would have preferred the situation to go down. Besides, the restaurant owner probably voted Republican. %#@& him.

 

[Scrivener]

I bet if something like this had happened at his house, he'd be sitting in a jail cell, thinking about selling his business to pay a lawyer.

Nonsense. He'd be in a BETTER position defending against a home invader. Mass. law doesn't cover businesses; only your home.

In states with "no retreat" laws, he'd be fully covered.

 

[Jaxon]

virulent anti gun nazi shitcamels.

Wow... interesting description.

And the video will be disturbing to who?

 

[Chris]

Though, he did take some of the guy's property with him when he left the restaurant - mainly one .38-caliber slug.

That was a 'donation' to his rehabilitation. (^_^)

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

Nonsense. He'd be in a BETTER position defending against a home invader. Mass. law doesn't cover businesses; only your home.
In states with "no retreat" laws, he'd be fully covered.

If this is so, then why is this bogus argument used by chiefs of police in the issuance of licenses to carry? Someone had better get their story straight.

 

[drgrant]

If this is so, then why is this bogus argument used by chiefs of police in the issuance of licenses to carry? Someone had better get their story straight.

I think he meant in the sense of MA law -not- having a duty to retreat
clause when @ home as opposed to it being in effect pretty much in every
other situation. There's no arguing that you could still have a legal self
defense situation in a place of business or elsewhere, it's just a lot
dicier legally than it would be if the same event had occurred in your home.

-Mike

 

[Jose]

They look like Korean or Vietnamese immigrants.

Two groups of people who are hard as nails and are not to be screwed with.

 

[Lugnut]

Nonsense. He'd be in a BETTER position defending against a home invader. Mass. law doesn't cover businesses; only your home.

In states with "no retreat" laws, he'd be fully covered.

In this case he was protecting himself and his wife anway, not the restaurant. Anytime someone points a gun at me or myself for money or otherwise- it's a threat to me. I just hope that if it happens things work out as well as it did for this guy.

I'll be honest with you.. I love when I hear these stories. I'm also pleased that the police said he did the right thing.

 

[MichaelJ]

The Chief of Police says "He did what he had to do" "I guess he did the right thing is the best way I can put it". Police do not expect charges against the shop owner.

This is good as far as I am concerned.