Armed Citizen: Oklahoma Pharmacist Defends Employees from Robbers

[Kyo]

the pharmacist is an easy target everywhere now that the judge screwed him. Who wants to bed he's gonna get a drive by before he even goes to court? This is so sad. stupid judge. He's not guilty yet you idiot, how can you put a bull's eye on his head? DA seems like he was made to press charges. I don't think he wanted to. He sounded regretful and was strongly advocating that it is ok to defend yourself.

[Trooper Tyree]

Kyo, you're letting your age show through here. Buck up.

He screwed himself. The fight was over, the perps had split and the remaining one, unarmed from the start, was lying incapacitated on the floor.

This is a great example of what not to do. I would like to think most of us wouldn't need this example of what not to do. You don't walk back inside, walk past a downed perp, walk over to a locked drawer, unlock it, retrieve your other gun, then walk over to the downed perp and empty it into him at close range. That's not self defense, that's an execution.

He had prepared extensively for another robbery, and I think he had thought over what he would do so much that he just went overboard neutralizing the threat. He seemed to be operating under the delusion that it was OK for him to do so. He very calmly finished the kid off, then promptly called the police. Very business like. I'd say he was gravely uneducated and ignorant of what he could and couldn't do. I'd venture the guess that perhaps he was thinking an armed robbery = a right to terminated anyone evolved. Unfortunately he was either uneducated on when his right to use deadly force stopped, or he was flustered and steamrolled right into what appears to have been a cold blooded murder.

It's an unfortunate event, as even the DA pointed out, if he just hadn't done that one last act he would have been fine. He stepped over a line. What's scary is any one of us could find ourselves in a similar place.

I have empathy for him, when these things go down everything hits the fan. Things speed up, things slow down, the world turns upside down and spins all around, it's ****ty.

It looked like his field of vision was somewhat obstructed from his location, he saw two masked robbers, a gun, they were screaming at him, it's reasonable for him to assume they were both armed, and once he started shooting it's going to be hard to tell if one or both are shooting or in this case, if you're just shooting yourself. It's possible what he did was just a terrible misjudgment made in the heat of the moment. That's no excuse for what he did though.

You have to educate yourself and make certain you know your laws and what you can and cannot do to defend yourself, and you can't loose control like that and murder someone, even out of ignorance or heat of the moment. Something in your head should click when you're looking down at an incapacitated person with a gun in your hand, if you go ahead and empty your weapon into them then you have some issues. Not only that, but you will have some issues, legal ones. The law doesn't care if you know it or not, saying you're sorry you didn't know won't cut it, saying I'm sorry I thought I was following the law won't cut it. Not on this scale at least.

[Shadi Khalil]

I still can't make sense of the gun switch.

[Tucker 1371]

Ouch... just watched the video. That was an execution... I really hope the NRA or any other gun rights group does not try to back this guy or it's going to make for great ammo for Brady & Co.

EDIT:

I know that sounds cold and selfish that the only thing I am concerned about is how this will affect my rights but I'm pretty confident that everyone involved will get what they deserve. While it is sad and regrettable that someone had to die because of this Parker knew (or should have known) that he was gambling his life when he decided to become an accomplice to armed robbery. He suffered the consequences of his actions. In regards to Ersland, common sense should dictate that shooting a person who is incapacitaed while they are on the ground is 1) morally wrong and 2) illeagle.

Some may argue that he acted in the "heat of the moment" and was not thinking clearly but the fact that he went and retrieved another handgun and very calmly approached Parker and proceeded to finish him off as opposed to rushing back directly to him and using the remaining rounds in the original gun as he reentered the store shows that this was no longer an issue. Also, even if he acted in the "heat of the moment" there are plenty of husbands who came home too early sitting in jail for the same reason... no excuse.

[David Armstrong]

Also, when animals defend, and dominance is made the predator leaves, and if he doesn't he gets killed. The animal knows when the other is knocked out, and it will keep going until its dead.

Once again, that is factually incorrect.

[David Armstrong]

if i were to need legal advice i would much sooner seek it from Irvin Box than any of the internet experts involved in this thread.

Irvin is about as good as they come in that area. I remember him from back when he was doing public defender work, and most of the guys at the S.O. agreed that if they were in trouble they would want him on their side.

[David Armstrong]

What else would give a "cripple" the energy and fearlessness

Maybe I missed it in the noise, but why do yo usay he was a cripple? He's wearing a back support, but for about a year my Dad wore one that appears to be much the same and he walked, worked in the garden, and did other assorted physical activity without too much trouble.

[surg_res]

There is a hint of sarcasm there, being that the man is a self-proclaimed "cripple" in one of his interviews--a term I often reserve for someone with one eye, no arms, and no legs.

You guys (esp PBP) might be right, he does look quite comfortable as he strolls through the room. He wouldn't have turned his back to the downed intruder if he were still a threat. I must be in denial to think that someone who is presumably honorable would have the upper hand in such an encounter and use that to enact his own will. I'm still disturbed, however, that this professional's life will be forever disrupted because of an event initiated by a criminal. Without details of the dead boy's injuries, I'd hope that a manslaughter-type charge could be reached. Even with the video evidence, there are still a lot of details we don't know; some of which might support his actions.

If the head shot were fatal--that is causing instant brain death--they could argue that the remaining shots were at a brain-dead body (not a person). Depending on the state's laws about brain death, once someone is brain dead, the living body is more like property of the next of kin. Of course, most states require that brain death be pronounced by a physician after the usual bedside and ventilator tests. IOW this case is a forensic nightmare.

[garryc]

http://www.kfor.com/news/local/kfor-...,1136511.story



He went back and casually finished the guy off, this dude is toast.

[Double Naught Spy]

Maybe I missed it in the noise, but why do yo usay he was a cripple? He's wearing a back support, but for about a year my Dad wore one that appears to be much the same and he walked, worked in the garden, and did other assorted physical activity without too much trouble.

He is crippled in that he has lost function of his back. That isn't to say he has lost all function as he isn't totally crippled, but he has lost some function as a result of some sort of insult and has to wear a brace to compensate. His mobility is not fully functional. In fact, he appears significantly impaired in his ability to move normally, so he is in fact, crippled, though certainly not completely crippled just like not all handicapped people are completely handicapped.

a term I often reserve for someone with one eye, no arms, and no legs.

My grandmother had all of her eyes, arms, and legs, and yet she was crippled by arthritis. There were a tremendous amount of things she could not do as a result, yet she refused to be put into an assisted living facility, drove herself around, and made all sorts of compensations in her behavior to overcome her physical deterioration. She could walk, but to call her ambulatory would have been generous.

Several of us have mentioned the ease at which he strolls around. My guess is that may be his best speed as a result of the brace. He never runs and seems to proceed everywhere in a stiffened fashion.

With that said, being crippled, previously injured, handicapped, or whatever you want to call it, has no real bearing on Ersland's secondary shooting of Parker. Parker had been "crippled" by Ersland's first shot to the head, rendered unable to function.

[Xrayeyes]

Virtually all animals do not continue aggressive actions against others in their species when the threat is over and dominance established.

This brings up a question I have. I have recently become a hand gun owner. I have had several gun owners tell me that it is NATURAL to empty your gun into a perp when you are threatened because of adrenalin. In fact, the LEO often look at that as a sign that the gun owner truly felt fear.

There have been several cases where LEO opened fire on perps, only to hit them with tens of bullets, obviously an adrenalin rush. And in most cases I've read, have been exonerated.

I recognize this situation is a bit different, the pharmacist seemed more calculating, but is it really? I have been in situations that the adrenalin rush lingered well after the issue had resolved, and yet, I could not calm down for quite a while.

Another point..you all that condemn this pharmacist based on this video alone...how do you feel about the gent in Texas that shot the burglars in his neighbor's yard last year?

[OuTcAsT]

This is also pure speculation, but it may turn out that the public has not seen the entire security video that is available. More often than not there will be cameras placed so that there are several views of a storefront, in this case we have seen only a couple. Hint: There is usually a face-on view from the register area. I would not be surprised that if this goes to trial, there may not be an angle which shows the final moments of the event in more detail. These would be kept out of the public domain for obvious reasons.
usually things of this nature may not surface until well into the trial process.

[garryc]

These would be kept out of the public domain for obvious reasons.

True, Rodney King comes to mind, where they only show enough to inflame the public.

[OuTcAsT]

I have had several gun owners tell me that it is NATURAL to empty your gun into a perp when you are threatened because of adrenalin. In fact, the LEO often look at that as a sign that the gun owner truly felt fear.

There have been several cases where LEO opened fire on perps, only to hit them with tens of bullets, obviously an adrenalin rush. And in most cases I've read, have been exonerated.

There is no doubt that this happens frequently, but you have answered your own question;

the pharmacist seemed more calculating,

I will venture that had Mr. Ersland fired several rounds into the suspect during the initial attack we would not be discussing this much more than the first page or two.

The fact that he scored a head shot with his first volley, then strode past the downed suspect calmly, and without little more than a glance twice (once while changing the weapon into his off-hand and digging in his strong side pocket) returned to retrieve a second weapon, then calmly strode over and fired to slide-lock does not support the "fear" factor, nor the adrenaline rush.

[OuTcAsT]

where they only show enough to inflame the public.

Actually I was thinking just the opposite, imagine how inflammatory the view of a motionless suspect being hosed by a .380 shown repeatedly on the news (especially after the initial public outrage) would be.

[skydiver3346]

Wow, I can't believe it but I have to agree with David Armstrong on that comment.

The pharmacist (who did state that he was a cripple), sure did not look like a person who was a cripple in the video, (that I have watched numerous times). To me, his gait and deliberate movements do not indicate any disability (to my unprofessional eyes). Also, after watching it again this morning, I have to agree with PBP's comments as well.

We will probably never know what was really going on in the pharmacist's mind at this time (he may have been extremely scared and wanted to end the threat no matter what). But to me, its getting harder and harder to disagree with the video. Everytime I watch it, it just seems the pharmacist is so calculated and professional and does not look as threatened as I originally thought.

[David Armstrong]

He is crippled in that he has lost function of his back. That isn't to say he has lost all function as he isn't totally crippled, but he has lost some function as a result of some sort of insult and has to wear a brace to compensate. His mobility is not fully functional. In fact, he appears significantly impaired in his ability to move normally, so he is in fact, crippled, though certainly not completely crippled just like not all handicapped people are completely handicapped.

True, one does not need to be completely handicapped to be considered handicapped, but I'd suggest crippled is generally considered to have lost the ability to use a limb, as opposed to handicapped with its connotation of reduced ability. Looks like a semantics issue, thanks.

[Tucker 1371]

He wouldn't have turned his back to the downed intruder if he were still a threat.

This is an excellent point that will undoubtedly come up in court if the DA is worth is salt. If he felt comfortable enough to turn his back on Parker while no other potential threats were in the store then he showed that he had little fear of any further action from Parker.

Edit:

However, I must revise my earlier statements that I believe it was in fact an execution. When Ersland retrieved the other handgun and walked over to Parker I would say if Parker was moving at all Ersland was justified. I say that because of the stories I've heard about cops who have believed they had a suspect down after shooting them and were shot and killed because the suspect had a concealed weapon. The only way Parker was still a threat was if he was moving.

Regardless of what the law says I think Ersland being found innocent in this case will send a good clear message to criminals (something that the federal/state/local governments have not done nearly an adequate job of) about the possible consequences of their actions.

[Shadi Khalil]

An autopsy determined Parker was still alive after being shot in the head.

He wasn't pumping bullets into a corpse.

[Tucker 1371]

Edit: nevermind, had my facts wrong. I think Ersland was using the Judge (but was he using .45 or .410?) first and not the .380 Kel-Tec. Still, not to start a caliber war here but I will never trust my safety to a .380.

[Trooper Tyree]

I think a lot of our posters need to watch the video. It's the DA's release, they show the surveillance tapes twice from two different cameras with different vantage points, he points out the reasons why he chose to charge him, his feelings on the matter of self defense and concealed carry (He supports it), and what constitutes self defense.

Before making anymore comments, watch the tapes, watch his body language, get a feel for the situation. A lot of the hot water he is in is because in the videos he walks past the downed perp with no apparent concern for his safty, shifting his Judge from his right to left hand as he walked past, walked with his back to the subject over to a drawer with his second gun locked in it, retreived said gun, walked back to the subject on the ground where it appears he leans forward and empty's the gun into the subject at close range from above. He then calmly proceeds back to the counter and calls the police.

This isn't to say he's guilty, that's for the judge and jury. However, the surveillance tapes do not support his version of events and present him in a very bad light.


http://feeds.newsok.tv/services/play...id=24432794001

Above is the video link.

[David Armstrong]

However, I must revise my earlier statements that I believe it was in fact an execution. When Ersland retrieved the other handgun and walked over to Parker I would say if Parker was moving at all Ersland was justified. I say that because of the stories I've heard about cops who have believed they had a suspect down after shooting them and were shot and killed because the suspect had a concealed weapon. The only way Parker was still a threat was if he was moving.

So you would think it OK for LEOs to execute anyone they have in a similar situation? They shoot someone, and the guy is still twitching a bit when they come up to him, you would support them emptying their guns into him because he might have a concealed weapon on him?

[Wildalaska]

Philisophically, I wonder if anyone here would have a problem if the pharmacist would have cowered behind the counter with his gun waiting for the shooter to get up or for the police to arrive.

WildperhapsweneedapollAlaska ™

[Tucker 1371]

So you would think it OK for LEOs to execute anyone they have in a similar situation? They shoot someone, and the guy is still twitching a bit when they come up to him, you would support them emptying their guns into him because he might have a concealed weapon on him?

Honestly, I don't know. It's a tough call because there are situations in which officers die because they let their guard down. Maybe emptying your weapon into a downed perp isn't the best course of action but I think Ersland may be able to reasonably argue that if Parker was still moving that he was justified.

[Shadi Khalil]

Trooper, thanks for posting that link.