|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 21, 2012, 07:05 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: November 9, 2010
Posts: 38
|
Deadly Force Smash & Grab Robbery's
In the Houston Tx area there have been a series of "smash & grab" robbery's, mostly in jewelry stores. The crooks come in with hammers, smash the jewelry cases, grab the merchandise, and are gone within a couple of minutes. Videos show these guys seem to totally disregard clerks and/or customers, and do not appear to be brandishing weapons (except the hammers).
I would like to get your thoughts on these: 1. What would you do if you are the store owner/employee and you were armed?? 2. What would you do if you were a customer and you were armed? Personally, I would love to see the crooks dead on the floor, but I am not sure it would be justified (since the hammers were only being used to break the glass). Thoughts??? |
February 21, 2012, 07:30 PM | #2 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
I'd get the shatterproof glass for the cases.
If they wack the case and it doesn't break and then they threaten bodily harm with the hammer, then its BLAM BLAM But I think this is in the wrong forum... |
February 21, 2012, 07:35 PM | #3 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
|
I would read the law. My fuzzy recollection is that Texas allows the use of lethal force to stop a burglary or to prevent a thief from escaping with stolen property. IF my recollection on this is correct, a proprietor (or I suppose any customer) could draw down and open fire.
If I were a customer, I don't think I would shoot a thief over a smash-and-grab. Not worth the legal aftermath to protect someone else's property (which is likely insured anyway). If I owned the store ... then I might consider shooting. IF legal. |
February 21, 2012, 08:21 PM | #4 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
February 21, 2012, 09:15 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
|
I'm licensed to carry a concealed weapon for the purpose of self-defense, and if necessary, the defense of others. It doesn't make me a "junior deputy" or anything like that, and it doesn't give me the same rights/responsibilities as law enforcement personnel.
As such, if it's my assessment that the thieves are just interested in doing the smash/grab/run thing, then no, I'm not going to intervene. I do agree with you that whether or not the loss will be insured doesn't really enter into it. |
February 21, 2012, 09:25 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
There are other ways of stopping a smash and grab robbery without using deadly force. However I would think that an unarmed thief is taking a big risk that some unknowing and well armed shop keeper won't know or won't care.
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
February 21, 2012, 09:26 PM | #7 |
Member
Join Date: September 26, 2011
Posts: 25
|
I live in Houston, and I carry. I would probably stop the threat. The video of these robberies are disturbing. They come in swinging hammers, and pushing innocent bystanders away. Who knows if they are going to hurt someone? And in Texas, I would be completely justified for stopping the threat. Deadly force CAN be used to stop a felony.
|
February 22, 2012, 04:04 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
I'd say if the robbers went directly toward display cases, not my problem.
OTOH, if they moved toward me or anybody for whom I felt responsible, while behaving aggressively and wielding a hammer, then "shoot until threat behavior ceases" might very well apply. |
February 22, 2012, 07:25 AM | #9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,512
|
Quote:
|
|
February 22, 2012, 08:27 AM | #10 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
|
Texas Penal Code, Title 2, Chapter 9, Subchapter A:
Quote:
So it seems all that is up for discussion is whether you, personally, would shoot someone to stop a robbery, since the question of legality has been answered by the law. |
|
February 23, 2012, 07:09 AM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
February 23, 2012, 09:14 AM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,592
|
Quote:
As far as being shoved, yes, it is a type of assault, but one I would not shoot someone over.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen. |
|
February 23, 2012, 02:30 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2004
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
There isnt a thing in any of those cases worth shooting 1,2 or 3 people for, including the ideological concept of "protection of property". In addition, it would be tactically foolish. 3 guys with hammers, in close quarters, are likely to beat you dead before they all bleed out. Rest assured they'd being doing the math on whether you with one gun could really take all three of them - if one jumps they're all probably going to. And I agree with Scott above - I carry for myself and to protect loved ones. I'm not LE and will not act as if I am. Last edited by Dashunde; February 23, 2012 at 06:48 PM. |
|
February 23, 2012, 04:58 PM | #14 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
However, the mere fact that it is a felony under Texas law isn't enough to justify deadly force. Otherwise, I'd be able to use deadly force to stop aggravated perjury, which would tend to make for an unworkable system of justice. |
|
February 23, 2012, 05:01 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Some of you are confusing robbery with burglary.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
February 23, 2012, 05:26 PM | #16 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,434
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
February 23, 2012, 11:34 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,512
|
Quote:
An employee behind the counter of an open store with the keys to a box containing jewelry is in immediate control of the jewelry. If someone breaks in later when its closed or if a person is not behind the counter in control of the items it is a burglary. |
|
February 24, 2012, 12:36 AM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,295
|
The shop keeper possibly will spend less in insurance premium to replace the merchandise than I will lose to lawyers and lost work time dealing with the aftermath and I highly doubt he would offer to pay for the attorney fees. If attacked, defend, other wise be a good witness.
|
February 24, 2012, 02:23 AM | #19 | |
Staff In Memoriam
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
|
Quote:
Totally justifiable use of lethal force in florida under two directions of defense. One is that a reasonable person has reason to fear death or GBH from such a person committing such an aggravated and violent felony robbery that self defense would be justified... Another avenue is that florida gives citizens the power to detain persons they personally witnessed committing certain violent felony crimes... of which, aggravated armed robbery (hammer is a lethal weapon as well as universal jewelry case key) is just one of many... But simply stating the reason you used lethal force was because the robber had busted your glass fronts and took your wares is not so justifiable... Brent |
|
February 24, 2012, 12:00 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 8, 2000
Location: SLC,Utah
Posts: 2,704
|
I tend to be reluctant to turn a property crime into a possible shoot-out, especially when there are a number of bystanders about. In addition to the moral and ethical issues there are liability issues to consider. To take the chance of financially impoverishing myself and my family to safeguard someone else's property doesn't strike me as a particularly wise decision.
Please note that this POV is based on the assumption that there is not an active threat to the safety of others, in which case other sections of law apply. |
February 24, 2012, 08:31 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 18, 2010
Location: Luthersburg, PA
Posts: 311
|
Deadly Force Smash & Grab Robbery's
What if the stores owner did not have insurance? What if the stores owner had been repeatedly robbed? Many repeat robberies happen because the thieves got away with the crime. What will happen if the robber knows no one will shoot him because its a "shame" to kill a thief for just stealing a few rings or necklaces? How many times will an insurance company insure a store that is robbed time after time? Is it immoral to protect your property and stop robbers?
|
February 24, 2012, 09:10 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
Robbery is not really a property crime; there's violence or threat-of-violence (perhaps implied) against the people being robbed. A robber getting killed is a good thing.
Burglary is a property crime. You can debate the morality on this one.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
February 24, 2012, 11:26 PM | #23 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
This thread started on shaky ground, and is taking a morbid turn into vigilantism. Closed.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|