The late robber in this case had a fake pistol, and was stopped forever by a good guy patron with a very real pistol. As the saying goes, do stupid things, win stupid prizes. Because the idiot robber was black and the hero was white our race baiting media may actually not ignore this incident of something they claim never occurs: a firearm being used to stop a gunman.
I agree with Attorney Branca that the final head shot was not justified under Texas law. Under the circumstances I hope that the District Attorney of Harris County will not prosecute. Law and morality often do not follow the same path, and this was true in this case where the hero was caught up in the heat of the moment. His angrily throwing the fake gun against the wall after the fact indicates to me that he was sickened that the dead felon had brought about this situation where he posed no actual risk of deadly force to the patrons. Morally I think the hero was completely justified in making sure that a seemingly armed felon posed no further risk to him or to others.
In the state of AR you can kill somebody if they are about to commit some felonies and/or are in the process of committing them. If what this guy did is against Texas law, it shouldn’t be. When people hit the ground from loss of blood in such a situation, their body being rear n the same level as their heart can result in the person getting back up, again. That is why police will still handcuff people they have shot multiple times who appear to be unconscious. These people who are whining about how many times this idiot was shot make me sick. Police unload their guns in folks. But it isn’t ok when a civilian does it for the same reason? I have been in a position where I & children were being threatened. When that self defense/protective instinct kicks in—people will get seriously hurt. I should have known by the way the robber was swinging that gun around that it was fake. But you can just never be sure. Have the police actually said the robber’s gun was fake?
I’ve killed a lot of animals and have only done so if there was cause. Taking the life of a human being is something entirely different. IF the person is threatening the lives of others (not their wallets).. , they forfeit their right to life. IF not, they do not. And that situation is fluid, it can change, as it did.
Someone who is threatening “the wallets” of others is making it clear that he is willing to harm others; it is absolutely unjustified to expect that he will restrict himself to only that transgression. (See also, the various nonsense demanding that those being beaten to death not use effective weapons in defense, because it was “just” an “ass whuppin.” Hey, trust them, it’s just assault, not murder!)
Given the speed with which it happens, the idea that the guy was obviously not a threat is not supported. You can look up body cam footage, generally from where the cop did not survive, where the attacker goes down, holds still for a moment, and then returns to attack; that the defender then went for the weapon and got it the heck away from the almost-certainly-now-corpse indicates that is what he was looking at, as well.
There is no obligation to restrict use of force to that chosen by the attacker, nor to behave as if the assaults they have committed are the most that they are going to, ESPECIALLY when they are using an explicit threat of death in order to commit their assault.
“… all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)
Context matters.
The Betrayal and Arrest of Jesus.
47
x While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, arrived, accompanied by a large crowd, with swords and clubs, who had come from the chief priests and the elders of the people.
48
His betrayer had arranged a sign with them, saying, “The man I shall kiss is the one; arrest him.”
49
Immediately he went over to Jesus and said, “Hail, Rabbi!”* and he kissed him.
50
Jesus answered him, “Friend, do what you have come for.” Then stepping forward they laid hands on Jesus and arrested him.
51
And behold, one of those who accompanied Jesus put his hand to his sword, drew it, and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his ear.
52
Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its sheath, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.
53
Do you think that I cannot call upon my Father and he will not provide me at this moment with more than twelve legions of angels?
54
But then how would the scriptures be fulfilled which say that it must come to pass in this way?”
55
* At that hour Jesus said to the crowds, “Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs to seize me? Day after day I sat teaching in the temple area, yet you did not arrest me.
56
y But all this has come to pass that the writings of the prophets may be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples left him and fled.
https://bible.usccb.org/bible/matthew/26
The video I saw cuts off, but it sure looks like he shot the robber in the back. Is that right?
Yep, and a good shot it was. Never give a bandit and even chance.
Waited for the likely path of the bullet to be clear, and for the weapon the goblin was using to threaten his victims with to not be pointed at an innocent, and then removed the threat.
Could have shot both his knees out and accomplished the same thing.
… and a good shot it was
Which one Donald?
Shot is the back several times as he was leaving, his weapon, as foxfire said, not trained on anyone … the danger all but past.
Or maybe you refer to the single kill shot as he lay bleeding, unarmed and incapacitated?
The shooter’s actions were not heroic. Vengeful, prideful, perhaps even cowardly. Certainly not virtuous. The end does not justify the means.
No one in heaven is rejoicing that the robber died that day.
Could have shot both his knees out and accomplished the same thing.
Yes, that does generally result in the target being dead, eventually, though without the benefit of preventing him from harming others, while causing a massive amount of pain and suffering with a notable chance of the knee-capped individual surviving to be a cripple as well as a murderer.
So, if you wanted the worst of all possible options, attempting to shoot someone in the kneecaps is the best route, although one might argue that a gut-shot would have a similar high rate of brutality against the attacker with a minimal amount of protecting the innocents he’s attacking.
Shot is the back several times as he was leaving, his weapon, as foxfire said, not trained on anyone … the danger all but past.
I most assuredly did NOT say anything of the sort, and the assumption that the attacker was leaving before he finished robbing everyone– or proceeded to step two, murdering everyone slowly– is not supported by the video.
To repeat:
Given the speed with which it happens, the idea that the guy was obviously not a threat is not supported. You can look up body cam footage, generally from where the cop did not survive, where the attacker goes down, holds still for a moment, and then returns to attack; that the defender then went for the weapon and got it the heck away from the almost-certainly-now-corpse indicates that is what he was looking at, as well.
The nonsense of appeal to scorn, rather than morality– calling a man who acted against deadly threat to innocents a coward, because he was effective, and did not put them in additional danger, and guarded his own life as well, against an unjust threat of death— is, frankly, vile. It’s a bare step above those psychotics who abuse any other victim for not dying, because they resisted an attacker effectively, using good tools.
No one in heaven is rejoicing that the robber died that day.
They are rejoicing that a man cared enough about his fellows to lay down his life and defend them from unjust aggression, even though it put him directly in the line of fire for the attacker.
Shot is the back several times as he was leaving,
How in the world do you know that he was leaving? What we do know is that he was robbing people at gunpoint. Putting him down was a public service, like hanging pirates in more morally sane times. Your assessment of the hero is completely at odds with the simple fact that he was taking out someone who had been robbing and threatening others.
Shot more than once after the shooter had disarmed him and was holding his gun. … No justification for that.
he was taking out someone who had been robbing and threatening others
He shot a man in the back several times. This is not self-sacrifice, it’s lawlessness.
and for the weapon the goblin was using to threaten his victims with to not be pointed at an innocent
Weapon not pointed at restaurant patrons.
He shot a man in the back several times. This is not self-sacrifice, it’s lawlessness.
Why in the world not when that man had been robbing people at gun point? The hero had no way of knowing what the bandit was going to do next. He might have decided that dead men tell no tales and shot his victims if he had a real gun. That is precisely what this bandit did 15 years earlier to a cell phone store owner who he shot to death:
https://abc13.com/houston-taqueria-shooting-customer-shoots-robber-eric-eugene-washington-killed-suspect-death/12681554/
More than a few crimes begin as robbery and end in multiple murder. What the bandit deserved was precisely what the hero gave him.
Moral considerations aside, when pursuing that line of work the chances of coming to a bad end are quite high.
The hero had no way of knowing what the bandit was going to do next.
Bingo.
We actually have a popular mythology that examines this problem, including the petty notion that robbery is not going to lead to anything really bad.
It’s Spiderman’s origin story. Uncle Ben died because even though he had the ability to safely stop the deadly threat, he chose not to do so.
So, when Uncle Ben resisted… he died.
That is rather explicit in the act of POINTING A GUN AT PEOPLE and telling them to do something.
“IF the person is threatening the lives of others (not their wallets).. , they forfeit their right to life.”
Anyone who denies civil rights to others forfeits their own civil rights.
Yes David WS
Turns out the now dead attacker had a history of armed robbery followed by murder of the innocents he targeted.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/galleries/article-11620273/Robber-30-shot-dead-vigilante-TX-long-prior-rap-sheet.html
Court documents also confirmed that Washington was released on parole in 2021 for a conviction of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, for which he had been sentenced to 15 years behind bars. Washington had been convicted in 2015 in connection to the murder of 52-year-old Hamid Waraich, the owner of a Boost Mobile cell phone store, who was fatally shot in the back during a robbery. He was paroled in 2021 after serving six years. One of the victim’s sons, Sean Waraich, called Washington ‘an evil criminal that took joy from harassing and robbing innocent families.’ He called the taqueria vigilante a ‘true hero,’ and said he ‘did the right thing in stopping the robber and protecting the community from a dangerous perpetrator.’
He was paroled in 2021 after serving six years.
Even in Texas, parole boards are stacked with useless people. Get rid of them.
No one in heaven is rejoicing that the robber died that day. – CAG
Maybe…however each time Sean Waraich visits his father’s grave he can be assured that Washington will never again be a participant in taking away the future of an innocent dad from his son. Obviously 6 years of incarceration did nothing for him to choose right over wrong, and for that reason I believe the end of Washington’s career will extend some father’s ability to enjoy another day spent fishing with his boy. That is something to rejoice about.
“ Even in Texas, parole boards are stacked with useless people. Get rid of them.”
Sadly, the deep blue cities and counties of Texas vary little from their counterparts elsewhere. The local politicos who run Bexar, Dallas, Harris, and Travis Counties (and the cities of San Antonio, Dallas, Houston and, especially, Austin) would be perfectly at home in San Francisco, Chicago, New York City, or any other blue h***hole. During the Covid madness, crossing over from Collin County into Dallas County was like entering a foreign country in some ways. If we lose the suburban ring counties, as the GOP often threatens to do these days, Texas could go purple or even blue, depending on how much fraud they can get away with north of the Rio Grande Valley, where Landslide Lyndon Johnson perfected the art of the steal generations ago.
My mistake, should have looked this up before commenting. It’s not the County Judges, but rather the Governor who appoints the parole board members for six year terms. Gov. Abbott should have done better. Blue Texas counties are still Dem fortresses, but it’s a statewide appointment system, with approval by the State Senate. 🤷🏻♂️
Aman Waraich, another son of Hamid, said: ‘If the guy who stopped Eric was around 10 years ago, maybe I’d still have my dad.
But hey, JUST threatening the wallets when he was doing armed robbery THIS time, right?
Another armed robbery in another state foiled by armed citizens:
https://www.wsbradio.com/news/local/armed-citizens-foil-robbery-attempt/QJZWCHZVWNEK5A6TI2YMOR74XA/
This was yesterday’s MOM doing her due diligence;
https://www.wwltv.com/article/news/local/northshore/hammond-mother-kills-home-invasion-suspect-break-in-shooting/289-5cf2bb6d-af27-4001-b86c-455c7272d7e1
Tire iron and shovel v. Glock 40