Wendy's Owner Shoots And Kills Masked Gunman During Robbery - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33972523]I can hardly call it self-defense when the guy ran in pursuit of the robbers with his gun on him.[/QUOTE] Are people not allowed to go out after a robber attacks? You'd have a point if he shot the robber in the back but the fact that the robber pointed a gun at him makes it perfectly valid self defense.

[QUOTE=Sanius;33971935]yep which is why they shot the o-- oh wait[/QUOTE] So with your flawed logic you must wait to be shot at until you shoot back? Thank god the rest of us possess a brain.

He was already leaving... Should have done a legshot

[QUOTE=dass;33967802]I hope he doesn't gets sued or anything. Sometimes the law takes such a wrong turn...[/QUOTE] Depends on if he actually shot the guy out of revenge. You can defend yourself and property but i doubt you're allowed to shoot robbers already fleeing the scene.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;33972571]Are people not allowed to go out after a robber attacks? You'd have a point if he shot the robber in the back but the fact that the robber pointed a gun at him makes it perfectly valid self defense.[/QUOTE] Use common sense. Do you really think it's a good idea to have fast food people encouraged to chase after armed robbers and to encourage them to shoot it out with armed robbers in the parking lot? Or is it smarter to just have everyone consider firing a gun a LAST resort, when you literally have no other viable choice? This guy was safe and sound in the Wendy's, his life was in no danger once the robbers left. He himself placed his life in danger by leaving the security of the Wendy's. Just because in this case it ended with no innocent people getting hurt and the bad guy dying doesn't mean that's the way it always goes. It's dangerous in other ways too. Now everyone knows there is a gun in this Wendy's. You think there aren't guys out there who won't rob this place because the guy has a gun? Haha, they'll rob the place just to get that gun, and the money. And it's likelier that they'll just shoot the guy first next time. You ever notice how armored car guards always get shot? It's because they have guns and will use them. The guns don't stop people from robbing them, it just makes it so the robbers have to shoot them first.

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;33973092]Use common sense. Do you really think it's a good idea to have fast food people encouraged to chase after armed robbers and to encourage them to shoot it out with armed robbers in the parking lot? Or is it smarter to just have everyone consider firing a gun a LAST resort, when you literally have no other viable choice? This guy was safe and sound in the Wendy's, his life was in no danger once the robbers left. He himself placed his life in danger by leaving the security of the Wendy's. Just because in this case it ended with no innocent people getting hurt and the bad guy dying doesn't mean that's the way it always goes. It's dangerous in other ways too. Now everyone knows there is a gun in this Wendy's. You think there aren't guys out there who won't rob this place because the guy has a gun? Haha, they'll rob the place just to get that gun, and the money. And it's likelier that they'll just shoot the guy first next time. You ever notice how armored car guards always get shot? It's because they have guns and will use them. The guns don't stop people from robbing them, it just makes it so the robbers have to shoot them first.[/QUOTE] It's not illegal to put your life in danger, the fact is, the robber pointed a gun at him and got shot, and because of the robber pointing the gun it should be perfectly legal.

I don't see a reason to cheer over this. Yes, he did aim a gun at someone, and yes, he sort of had it coming, but it's still sad. Especially since the robber was leaving. He wasn't going to turn around and shoot the owner. Depending on how it happened, I think the employee should be charged as well.

Legally he's in hot water. Taking the gun out with him shows intent. If you deliberately put yourself in a state of danger and prepare for it with a gun, and there's no valid reason for you to do so (I. E. protecting someone else) then the self defense argument isn't going to work in the US. Putting up a plea bargain is probably going to be his best bet from a legal perspective.

Looks like he's getting a raise!

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;33968027]Yeah, but that's not what happened, they had the money and escaped, when the owner followed them outside and took a shot at one. Therefore someone could argue that he killed the guy not in self defence, so he could technically be tried for murder or wtv.[/QUOTE] The guy pointed his gun at the worker when the worker was leaving, are you stupid or just didn't read the entire article? Or both? [editline]30th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=carcarcargo;33972369]For all we know he could have had the gun as protection in case the robbers pointed the gun at him, which they did, and was merely going outside to make sure they'd gone.[/QUOTE] Honestly this makes a lot of sense, not to mention he was also probably A. leaving the store for the night and / or B. trying to get their plates from the car.

To the people disagreeing with the store owner that shot the robbers, shut the fuck up. Seriously. When you have a gun pointed directly at you not knowing whether or not you're going to die anyways after handing over the money or not, I'd be glad to hear your opinion on whether this is wrong or not.

If you aim a gun at someone, should you be prepared to pull the trigger?

[QUOTE=Speedhax;33974849]If you aim a gun at someone, should you be prepared to pull the trigger?[/QUOTE] Yes, you should also prepare to be fucking shot. It'd be like me pressing a knife to your neck and not being willing to slice it, you don't generally threaten people with death without having the intent and ability to do it.

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;33968027]Yeah, but that's not what happened, they had the money and escaped, when the owner followed them outside and took a shot at one. Therefore someone could argue that he killed the guy not in self defence, so he could technically be tried for murder or wtv.[/QUOTE] Facepunch: bandwagon, then they see that other people make the same case as I. oh yeah he might be onto something.

[QUOTE=Alex_DeLarge;33974845]To the people disagreeing with the store owner that shot the robbers, shut the fuck up. Seriously. When you have a gun pointed directly at you not knowing whether or not you're going to die anyways after handing over the money or not, I'd be glad to hear your opinion on whether this is wrong or not.[/QUOTE] I don't think anyone said that firing the gun was wrong People are saying that pursuing the robber after they left was wrong, and I tend to agree

Now a question for the guys saying the owner is at fault: If he went out there with his gun, and the robbers surrendered, would you still be against him? For all we know, there's as much of a chance he went out there to make a citizen's arrest as there was for him to kill the guys in cold blood.

hey guys, i have a suggestion like, this has never been thought of maybe you shouldn't rob anyone??? cause unless those two robbers had C4's inside their jackets and was told by another man to rob wendys, i think they're at fault! there is something called free will, for people blasting religious people about free will being a right and inside every man, they sure as hell think robbers or criminals are devoid of it somehow

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;33976290]hey guys, i have a suggestion like, this has never been thought of maybe you shouldn't rob anyone??? cause unless those two robbers had C4's inside their jackets and was told by another man to rob wendys, i think they're at fault! there is something called free will, for people blasting religious people about free will being a right and inside every man, they sure as hell think robbers or criminals are devoid of it somehow[/QUOTE] What in the ever-loving fuck does religion and free will have to do with this?

[QUOTE=Cuon Alpinus;33976596]What in the ever-loving fuck does religion and free will have to do with this?[/QUOTE] Cause high moral facepunchers who probably has been comfortable in their lovely safe house (get ready for them to pull the card saying they're from a bad place or something) criticizes religious people for not believing in free will but they think criminals don't have any and they're forced to It's like [I]personal responsibility[/I] is a foreign concept to them. "OH HEY, MAYBE THAT OWNER SHOULDN'T HAVE COME OUTSIDE" but they never think about criminal shouldn't have robbed anything in the first place, this isn't Somalia, we have something called laws here.

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;33976715]Cause high moral facepunchers who probably has been comfortable in their lovely safe house (get ready for them to pull the card saying they're from a bad place or something) criticizes religious people for not believing in free will but they think criminals don't have any and they're forced to It's like [I]personal responsibility[/I] is a foreign concept to them. "OH HEY, MAYBE THAT OWNER SHOULDN'T HAVE COME OUTSIDE" but they never think about criminal shouldn't have robbed anything in the first place, this isn't Somalia, we have something called laws here.[/QUOTE] yes we have laws like [i]not being allowed to kill someone just because they steal your property[/i] if you shoplift and are then summarily executed by the shop owner is then your fault because you've shoplifted?

[QUOTE=notxmania;33976756]yes we have laws like [i]not being allowed to kill someone just because they steal your property[/i] if you shoplift and are then summarily executed by the shop owner is then your fault because you've shoplifted?[/QUOTE] are you pointing a gun and then threatening them on gunpoint that you will cause like, that's a huge difference but i guess every criminal in existence is being mind-controlled to rob people because free will doesn't exist by facepunch's standards.

He pulled a gun, he shot him. Is there something wrong with this? Is he supposed to have multiple arguments going on in his head if it's moral or not, or if the robber is really going to kill him?

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;33976290]hey guys, i have a suggestion like, this has never been thought of maybe you shouldn't rob anyone??? cause unless those two robbers had C4's inside their jackets and was told by another man to rob wendys, i think they're at fault! there is something called free will, for people blasting religious people about free will being a right and inside every man, they sure as hell think robbers or criminals are devoid of it somehow[/QUOTE] the owner should have used his free will to not charge out in pursuit like rambo, bystanders could have been killed it was an incredibly irresponsible decision, but unfortunately it made shooting the robber necessary [editline]31st December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Bleach Qeef;33976792]He pulled a gun, he shot him. Is there something wrong with this? Is he supposed to have multiple arguments going on in his head if it's moral or not, or if the robber is really going to kill him?[/QUOTE] that's not the argument, please read the thread or at least the article

[QUOTE=Zeke129;33976871]the owner should have used his free will to not charge out in pursuit like rambo, bystanders could have been killed it was an incredibly irresponsible decision, but unfortunately it made shooting the robber necessary[/QUOTE] whys it always the other guys why did the owner have to do this why did the owner have to do that where is ever the argument or discussion as to why someone had to bring out a gun and try threaten innocent to give their money or lose their live?? Cause if the robber never decided to rob anyone, this case wouldn't have arise in the first place.

Although I agree completely with Megafanx13 that what he did was hardly necessary self-defense, you have to take into account what the brain does in situations such as these. When adrenaline is flowing through your veins, the brain shuts down many sectors of activity in order to increase focus on the main objective; and this can often lead to poor and emotional decision-making. Punishing a guy for killing someone in the heat of the moment after they were just robbed at gun-point seems a little ridiculous in this situation.

[QUOTE=lolwutdude;33976887]whys it always the other guys why did the owner have to do this why did the owner have to do that where is ever the argument or discussion as to why someone had to bring out a gun and try threaten innocent to give their money or lose their live?? Cause if the robber never decided to rob anyone, this case wouldn't have arise in the first place.[/QUOTE] because personal responsibility doesn't evaporate just because you're the victim of something you preach about how we all have free will and how the robbers made the choice to rob the store so that same logic damn well needs to apply to the victim as well