Shooting after robbery at Shell station 34th and Sherman.

[Robertpetry]

Man arrested in gas station shooting

If the robbery is over it is too late to shoot. Another proof point that the decision to carry is a big responsibility and the decisions you make while carrying will affect you and others forever. Whether I agree or not, I know I am responsible for understanding the law and that there will be gray areas.

Thoughts?

 

[pudly]

Although the article doesn't go into great detail, what little it says indicates that this was not self-defense.

Johnson walked away after the robbery. Holder grabbed his own handgun and pulled the trigger, Adams said.

 

[2A_Tom]

 

[bwframe]

Good or bad shoot, that fellow won't be robbing anyone else at gun point, now will he?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

There's not enough information in that article to really know what the circumstances are. It might even be fair to say that the issue is even more cut and dried based on the totality of available information available to the investigating agency then the smidgen presented, sort of/mostly truthfully, in the media account. Perhaps. Maybe.

Now, on with the rampant speculation and discussion of hypotheticals.

 

[Robertpetry]

True there isn't a lot of info in the article, but if a guy is out in public, has turned and is walking away, he is no longer considered a threat to you and you shouldn't shoot him. If you do, you will find legal problems.

 

[Alamo]

...

Now, on with the rampant speculation and discussion of hypotheticals.

So when is a Hoosier robbery "over?"

Hereabouts, deadly force in defense of yourself or a third party is justified to prevent the imminent commission of robbery. Robbery is defined as causing bodily injury or threatening to cause bodily injury "in the course of committing theft." "In the course of committing theft" includes "attempt to commit, during the commission, or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission of theft".

"Immediate flight" kinda sounds like running or walking away. Maybe it's over if you give them more than three steps, mister?

 

[2A_Tom]

That is a point,

• an officer can pursue a felon and make an arrest
• A citizen can make a citizens arrest

If a citizen is robbed and while the perpetrator is walking away, Gomer yells citizens arrest, if the criminal turns and points his gun at you can you shoot him.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Not too far from work! Woo!

 

[MCgrease08]

This man pointed a gun at me and demanded money. At this point it was clear I was the victim of a robbery. I was in fear for my life. I handed over my valuables like he demanded.

I hoped it was over when he turned away, but he repositioned himself and started to turn back in my direction. Knowing he had a gun I was still in fear for my life at that moment. I drew my own handgun and fired in self defense.

I will not answer any further questions until I speak to my attorney.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

So when is a Hoosier robbery "over?"

Hereabouts, deadly force in defense of yourself or a third party is justified to prevent the imminent commission of robbery. Robbery is defined as causing bodily injury or threatening to cause bodily injury "in the course of committing theft." "In the course of committing theft" includes "attempt to commit, during the commission, or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission of theft".

"Immediate flight" kinda sounds like running or walking away. Maybe it's over if you give them more than three steps, mister?

There's several questions there. When a robbery is over for the ability to charge someone with robbery is one question. When deadly force is reasonable is another. What is "imminent" is another.

While exceptions exist, as a general rule I would not shoot at someone walking away or engaged in headlong flight if I could not articulate an imminent threat (remembering "imminent" means looking forward, not backward) to the life of the victim or a 3rd party. State of mind and intent will always matter. One of the examples I tend to use is a guy shoots a fleeing robber that just shot his wife. The robber is still armed but is in headlong flight. The prosecutor had zero interest in that case due to the fact the wife had just been shot and the state of mind of the shooter. Change the details slightly, perhaps the gun was only brandished, and the outcome may be quite a bit different.

If the robber is now fleeing, my suggestion is to let them do so. Shooting for revenge, to recover property, or because your OODA loop just now caught up to what was happening is probably going to get your backside in a sling.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I hoped it was over when he turned away, but he repositioned himself and started to turn back in my direction.

...and if he didn't?

The benefit of these posts is to get people thinking about what you would do now, and pre-plan. It increases the odds of making good decisions under stress.

 

[bwframe]

Video tape?

 

[singlesix]

This man pointed a gun at me and demanded money. At this point it was clear I was the victim of a robbery. I was in fear for my life. I handed over my valuables like he demanded.

I hoped it was over when he turned away, but he repositioned himself and started to turn back in my direction. Knowing he had a gun I was still in fear for my life at that moment. I drew my own handgun and fired in self defense.

I will not answer any further questions until I speak to my attorney.

So why is the entrance hole in his back ... , yeah I know a robber died ...

 

[singlesix]

From the article, "seemly deadly gun" WTF?

 

[pudly]

From the article, "seemly deadly gun" WTF?

From the same article: "Police recovered a toy airsoft pistol from Johnson's pocket"

 

[Alamo]

... (remembering "imminent" means looking forward, not backward) ...

But practically/legally speaking, "imminent" also means "now" or "during", not just "future" or "forward", doesn't it? If the guy is standing there in front of me pointing a gun and saying "give it up" I can legally shoot in my defense, the robbery is still ongoing, it is now, it is not just about to happen. But I can't follow him to his house two hours later and then shoot him, because the robbery is over.

But if "immediate flight" is legally within the definition of robbery, then it seems at some portion during his exit I am still eligible for justified self-defense.


I whole heartedly agree with the wisdom of not shooting at someone who is really hightailing it, for revenge etc, of course, not arguing with out, but I use this little what-ifs to hone my understanding of the law and how it is applied.

 

[gregkl]

I can't think of any of my personal possessions that I would kill someone over. They can have the "stuff". I can replace it or live without it. I would only want to deal with the physical, emotional and legal issues of utilizing deadly force if it was to save the life of myself or a loved one.

 

[MCgrease08]

...and if he didn't?

Then you let him run away as posted above.

Not saying anyone should be looking for excuses to shoot people in the back.

 

[GIJEW]

I can't think of any of my personal possessions that I would kill someone over. They can have the "stuff". I can replace it or live without it. I would only want to deal with the physical, emotional and legal issues of utilizing deadly force if it was to save the life of myself or a loved one.

In general, I agree but there a few situations where it's about more than just the property. I would shoot a thief to prevent him from stealing one of my guns, knowing that he might abuse it to commit some violent crime, or sell it to someone who would; in the proverbial SHTF situation, I might shoot someone to prevent them from stealing my food, knowing that it might become a matter of starvation for me.

Guy Relford's suggested criteria: "Do I have to do this?"