Taqueria Texas Shooting | Tactical, Legal & Moral Considerations

Today, using the WPS Defensive Shooting Diagram, John breaks down the Houston Texas Taqueria defensive handgun shooting.
Get our WPS app! | Original shows, training, and much more.
SIGN UP: www.watchwpsn.com
Download at app stores everywhere. iPhone, Android, Amazon, Apple TV etc.
WARRIOR POET LINKS:
• Warrior Poet WEBSITE - warriorpoetsoc...
• Reading List - amzn.to/2yMJJWK
• TRIPS w/ WPS - warriorpoetsup...
• Emergency FOOD - mypatriotsuppl...
• Tier 1 Holster - bit.ly/3GiECjd
PARTNERS:
Sportsman's Guide | warriorpoetsup...
USCCA | www.uscca.com/w...
FOLLOW US:
Instagram | / warriorpoetsociety
Facebook | / warriorpoetsociety
Twitter | / johnlovell275
GETTR | gettr.com/user...
Blog | warriorpoetsup...
(DISCLAIMER: This post may contain paid advertisements or affiliate links. What is an affiliate link? It means that if you click on one of the product links, Warrior Poet Society will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support the channel and allows awesome future content. Thank you for the support!).

[@spartangoku7610]

Don’t go pointing things that look like guns at people unless you are prepared for the consequences.

[@Isaac_5.56x45]

Exactly right, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[@clamum9648]

frick around and find out

[@WestPat23]

Have they found the shooter yet? I think when he picked up the gun and saw it was fake, he got scared and left.😮 it is hard to say what any of us would do in this situation. Thanks as always for making us work our most lethal weapon, our mind.

[@sethkeown5965]

there was a samurai rule of thumb, dont draw your sword unless youre willing to die

[@jllucci]

You forgot "In Texas" after people.

[@ElChupahuahua]

A criminal's life is NEVER worth more than a victim's. Never.

[@duxdawg]

Hoo-Rah!

[@Uberragen21]

💯 But there are evil communist prosecutors who will love to throw you in prison for the rest of your life for that 9th shot.

[@Heiserton]

Won’t be long until all of us are labeled as criminals.

[@CoreyFPiazza]

I wish your reasoning was more prevalent in our backwards society.

[@Nobody-11B]

I like the part when literally everyone took their money back and left before the cops came. Leaving the trash on the floor for the cops to clean up the mess. Criminals should fear that being a common sight.

[@jamesalexander7398]

Welcome to Texas. As a taxpayer in the area thank you to the citizen who helped to protect other lives.

[@cyberlycans4191]

You say welcome to Texas like it's the only place that armed citizens defend themselves, let's get the police down there to help save little kids who are being massacred before you go bragging too much huh? In my opinion it was a good shoot, but he violated the law when he left the scene of a crime where a person lost their lives, and that's not a minor thing

[@finngamesknudson1457]

As a taxpayer, thank you for eliminating cost for medical treatment, trial and confinement for the robber. Hopefully that is not replaced with cost of trying, or worse confining shooter.

[@_Code.Pilot_]

@@finngamesknudson1457 Taxpayer relief shot!

[@jamescrowe7892]

Y'all keep letting those California libs move in it won't be that way for long.

[@nozrep]

yes

[@smcbride8817]

Tactics excellent. Legal is always a concern because it depends so much on the prosecutor, the judge, the jury, and the locale. Moral, I think you missed one important factor. As I watch the bad guy wave the gun and wander around the room, he seems erratic and unpredictable. There is no way to know if he's leaving, or just starting another pass through the area, to come back around and maybe start shooting to eliminate witnesses. I think the good guy was morally OK in his actions.

[@camelshark69]

Exactly what i was thinking. Id sleep just fine after this. Bad guys get the benefit of the doubt way too much in this world.

[@lawrencelyman3372]

Yes! There are plenty of documented instances of robbers turning and unloading on people before they leave, a tactic that could very well give a robber more time to escape, as resources end up on scene, having to deal with multiple casualties, and it's less likely that someone is gonna pop up to see if they get in a car, or what direction they fled to.

[@mynameis6157]

Last shot fired is the only concern here. Everything before that would easily be considered justified.

[@c1kevinc768]

I agree that this was morally OK at the initial shots to stop him. Looked to me that he was making his rounds to everyone. I would have thought he was coming to my row of tables next.

[@lawrencelyman3372]

@C1kevinc Every shot that man fired was "morally" correct. Some "morals" include making sure a threat is COMPLETELY neutralized. I would have a problem if had done the last shot AFTER finding out it was a fake gun, but it wasn't, and ultimately, that's what any possible case will hinge on.

[@LukeKirk1113]

I like how cautious you are about it. If that were me I don’t think “is he leaving yet?” Would be going through my mind. Just “he has a gun, he’s pointing it at those people, he isn’t looking at me and I now have the advantage. Stop the threat”

[@LukeKirk1113]

@@raw7s784 yeah no kidding the last shot was not ok, I was just saying what I would have been thinking. But you can definitely unload and not realize how many shots you threw out to stop someone. Watch Colion Noir’s video with the USCCA about his force on force training with them.

[@brettloo7588]

agreed

[@grizzlygrizzle]

@@raw7s784 -- My take away here is that one should anticipate the difficulty of turning off the amped-up state of mind as soon as the threat is neutralized. You have to be actively looking for that threat-over moment. Saying "In the heat of the moment, I just kept firing" isn't going to cut it in a courtroom or in your moral comfort.

[@vidard9863]

@@raw7s784 ever been in a situation where you had to kill someone? ever had vertigo? mind does strange things, with that much adrenaline something that isn't moving can look like it is moving. it would really suck if he rolled over and shot you when you looked up to make sure everyone else was okay. would you really be okay making your wife a widow and your children fatherless? especially if to you in the moment it looked like he was still moving? there is a reason he took the robbers gun away, it wasn't because he KNEW he had killed him, it was because he still wasn't SURE.

[@vidard9863]

yeah, personally he seemed dangerously erratic. he moved around too much, put his back to people, skipped people. i wouldn't think he was done or leaving, just that he seemed to want the guy in the corner.

[@LDwiggs]

It’s so embarrassing that we live in a world where someone can enter a communal space, wave a gun in people’s faces, take their possessions, and you can be prosecuted for defending yourself against them.

[@T4nkcommander]

That's why you never get tried in civil court, but always ensure you are in a common-law court of record. Special appearance, Sui Juris, as the living man/woman.

[@bobbyb7127]

Exactly!

[@AzzKicker-bz1cb]

@Adam Bruhun That’s embarrassing to you??? It’s a lot of things I can think of, not one of those things equals embarrassing. It’s SHAMEFUL that lawyers have muddied the legal waters as to what constitutes a just shooting, they’ve twisted words and their meanings to the point where every word they use in court has about a thousand different definitions, 999 of which are not in your favor!!! Police officers are very familiar with this fact. Most self defense instructors will tell you to shoot until the threat is eliminated or no longer a threat, and in this case maybe the ninth shot exceeded that threshold! Personally, I’m not gonna she’d any years over the fact that a criminal is no longer going to be a repeat offender nor does it bother me that he won’t live several years in the penal system on taxpayers money, while his victims have to deal with the loss of loved ones or their personal safety(if you’ve ever been in a situation where you felt totally helpless to have any impact on the outcome, you’ll understand this)!!! To John Lowell’s assessment of this defensive shooting situation, I agree with the tactical and the legal implications or aspects, but on the moral aspect, I’d not lose any sleep over this at all!!! Call it one more terrorist removed from this world!!!

[@2A.Freedom]

What a dumb thing to say. The self defense was never in question. The shots after the threat is subdued are. Big difference. Learn the law and you might know the window of imminence.

[@duncan6987]

Shooting a guy in the head while he's on the ground and you have his gun in your hand isn't exactly "self defense".

[@ericcouch]

On the morality of the incident. I watched a video a few years ago where two gunmen robbed a convenience store. As they were literally stepping out of the door, one of them turned and shot and killed a pregnant mother who was lying on the ground. Don't second guess someone who just shot someone who was pointing a gun at a person and waving a gun around in his face right before he shot him.

[@NorthernDope1]

What about the head shot when he had already took the gun? That’s one thing you racist people ain’t gonna answer.

[@ericcouch]

@@NorthernDope1 He shot him cause he was racist, not cause he had a gun and was threatening him with it. genius.

[@longjohnsonshagwell3377]

@@ericcouch what?

[@LDmagnum]

I wish this guy nothing but the best.

[@jeffshermer9361]

Yes, let's keep talking about scenarios like this so we can all learn.

[@US2A]

Pratice

[@nokiot9]

I go to ASP for this. Not WPS

[@Hunterr8]

We give all these criminals all these legal protections. Time to give the good guys even more legal protections.

[@ZeeroDubs]

Amen brother. Not everyone trains for these situations. And not everyone can think clearly during them. Every amount of leniency and grace possible should be afforded to anyone who is thrust unwillingly into a violent altercation like this.

[@savage22bolt32]

Instant Karma, I presume.

[@HTown99]

HEDINDUNUTHN!

[@SuperUnemployable]

Our biggest problem is with our crappy District Attorneys

[@disposabull]

Thank Soros for that.

[@p2a0p2e0r1]

In every big city in the U.S

[@baptizedintheholyspirit9691]

George Soros funded

[@steelboymi]

3 years ago I would say you need to stay and wait for cops...Now with all the Woke DAs I'd consider leaving...so many ASP videos state ..they are still looking for bad guy that killed this innocent person...LEOs and DA are going down a really bad road and they are too stupid to realize they're making enemies of everyone...this will not end well for everyone if we stay on this path

[@vermin9190]

Been saying this for years. But no one on the right listens to me. They keep saying “no bro it’s the system”

[@seansnyder6421]

The situation of being stuck between "is he leaving or did I just potentially give up my only chance for a clean defensive position" is my worst fear.

[@tobiasgarrard9271]

As a general rule in life, if you flash a weapon - real or not - during a robbery and a good guy is also armed, you’re probably in major trouble. For the deceased man in this case, he learned that the hard way.

[@commonsenseisntcommon1776]

Cops treat fake guns as real

[@tierone3895]

He didn’t learn shit. He died. Learning ceases to occur.

[@ponderrous2659]

@@tierone3895 That's what you believe. Doesn't make it true.

[@tierone3895]

@@ponderrous2659 It’s not true that the dead guy did not learn anything? He died. Where’s his learning? How am I wrong? Please, give me feedback.

[@ponderrous2659]

@@tierone3895 There's a spiritual plane of existence where learning can still take place.

[@tylert9533]

John: I'm not a lawyer Also John: "it depends." As a lawyer, this is the most lawyer answer ever.

[@tomsiler6705]

Went through the transcript twice and can't find where he claimed to be a lawyer. Mind pointing that out for us? Or are you just trying to throw dirt on this guy?

[@brianjorgensen8947]

@@tomsiler6705 Looks to me like the op is saying he (Tyler) is a lawyer and is not saying John is a lawyer.

[@tomsiler6705]

@@brianjorgensen8947 after re reading the op, Brian you could be right, it's not how I read it. Looks like he's calling the guy a lawyer not himself

[@Svaren]

@@tomsiler6705 @3:50 in the video, John says "now I'm not a lawyer"

[@tylert9533]

@@tomsiler6705 as many others have said, I'm a lawyer, and as a lawyer, "it depends" is the answer to every question, to the point of being a meme in the industry.

[@QuadeQuick]

"Tactics just care about winning." Excellent breakdown, John, and as always thanks for your service.

[@mesomachines]

I agree mostly with your analysis. As he was leaving there was a person by the door, and also the guy could have turned and shot, it looks like the first 8 shots were tactically and morally justified. The last shot, when the guy was down and separated from his weapon is just a kill shot and hard to justify. I think the defensive shooter will be lucky he's in Texas.

[@brettstewart2386]

I saw Colion Noir's video yesterday. He had some interesting perspective on the shooting in general. What I picked up on is that once the adrenaline starts pumping the thought processes slow down. He used the example of a training session he was involved in with a similar scenario. After the event he was asked how many shots he took at the assailant. His answer was 3. In fact he took 8. We may never know what was going through the defensive shooter's mind other than "neutralizing the threat." In this case he definitely did just that. In this case it will depend on the political nature of the local prosecutor and possibly the Jury...

[@duxdawg]

Jury nullification is under used these days.

[@Timmy2Tough]

Yeah, but Colion’s was a little different. His scenario training he shot 8 shots rapidly as the guy was moving. This guy shot, moved in, shot again, disarmed, then anchor shot him. It’s a big difference although I know Colion is just trying to defend a defender because clearly the robber was a piece of shit.

[@newerest1]

I don't think we can use the adrenaline rush as an excuse in court for why our actions should be determined to be reasonable. It's like courts expect us to be completely calm and never fall into a state where an otherwise reasonable person might be forced to do something that in 20/20 hindsight could be determined to be unreasonable. Like if someone hits you with a concussive punch, you fall backwards, pull out a gun and shoot the guy. Well the DA could make insane arguments like you should have been completely calmed and realized the guy who is attacking you has not pursued you to the ground and therefore the fight is over already, and therefore it's murder. Which is insane, because you just received a concussive punch to the head and therefore how could anyone be 100% calm and reasonable.

[@jimturpin6503]

@@duxdawg I have been called for jury duty a dozen times and never selected. I think that I have jury nullification tattooed on my forehead.

[@sirpibble]

He has been deliberately dishonest this whole time by refusing to address shot 9 coming after the guy was already laid out and disarmed Hes more concerned with promoting 2A even if you have to lie to get there

[@clamum9648]

I can completely see John's hesitancy on the moral part and him having a problem with it, but I don't have much of one. The worst thing I see about it is the last shot, that seemed very unnecessary, even considering the stress/adrenaline of the moment (see Colion's video on this). I just have a problem with these situations becoming more and more common and these criminals continually getting away with it, or getting a slap on the wrist. Yes, he was just taking property (and not a ton of it, most likely), but that should not be acceptable at all. And he went in there with a fake gun, but the citizen shooter didn't know that. So I find someone going into a place with a gun unacceptable and they forfeit their life at that point. I guess I don't know how I'd feel if I actually shot him, but I'm not sure I'd be broken up over it. That's not an innocent person that does something like that.

[@connorperrett9559]

There's no moral issue whatsoever with the last shot. It was, however, legally foolish.

[@jimturpin6503]

Once confronted with deadly violence, perceived or not, I don't think we can hold the defender to the same standards as someone watching a video on YT. One of the surviving roommates of Moscow Idaho murders waited 8 hours to call the police. I work as a volunteer fireman, I remember every dead person that I have worked with. I did not cause their death, but I struggle with what I might have done to prevent it.

[@Mittenman313]

@@connorperrett9559 agreed.

[@mekanik911]

It was definitely not acceptable to the shooter. He should go free toy gun or not. Toy 1911's looks just like the real 1911's.

[@adamt4742]

well said

[@mikepb5536]

Everything you said here is spot on. My biggest take away is you haven't lost a wink of sleep over killing evil. I can't thank you enough for saying that. There are many people both left and right that would have people believe they will be a psychological mess after being involved in a shooting. As long as the legal moral and tactical aspects are correct there should be zero guilt in defending against evil! Thank you for being a voice of reason in the chaos of this world!

[@martymonaco1255]

I totally agree with you, Mike. I don't know how I will react (hopefully not have to find out) but, if I'm stopping evil, in my eyes, I've done good. Thanks for saying this. It really is important.

[@Krelian1]

On one hand, I agree wholeheartedly with everything there. On the other hand, our brains are pretty good at making nightmares out of things we shouldn't have nightmares of. You also have to contend with the reality that the person shooting at you may be a child, a suicide by cop situation, someone mentally ill. You can justify it all day, it may very well save lives, but it doesn't exempt you from nightmares merely by being justified. Something like this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qZ2cZY2hfpmhd6s Absolutely no way i could recover if i had to return fire.

[@matttheautomator]

Is defending your homeland evil though? If China invaded us would you be in the wrong to shoot at their soldiers?

[@victormcox]

100% agree! However, you need to put those circles a little bit closer in your diagram we need a little larger green area! 🤭😉

[@weaponeer8582]

I disagree with the moral part. You’re assuming that this was about money. The guy was pointing a gun at customers. He was a threat. If you look at the full video, the shooter looks at the gun and throws it at the wall once he understands that it was a toy. I’m sure that he didn’t feel good about it. And honestly, even if it was about money, it would be immoral to not stopping the robbery while being threatened with a gun. You have no idea what the guys intentions were after he got the money. Robbers have shot their victims after they got what they wanted before. Not too mention, those people probably need their money more than the robber did.

[@hortyist1]

He took the life of one bad guy but possibly saved the lives of countless other 'want to be' bad guys ...who, after seeing this video... will not make the same mistake

[@Kyle-sr6jm]

This robbery isn't the first time he put lives at risk, but it is the last. The shooter stopped all future threats this robber would present.

[@peyton_uwu]

Insert generic "he could be poor and this was his way of bringing home food and keeping the lights on" sob story here. I share John's take, yeah he "could've been leaving" but he also could just decide to endgame somebody else, who knows, once somebody threatens the lives of yourself and others, who knows how far they're going to take it (disregarding the context of the gun being fake, since the defender didn't know that) The last shot, or arguably, the last 3-5 shots did not need to happen. The dude was clearly down and out of the fight, he could've kept him there at gunpoint to make sure he didn't try anything and had somebody call the police and have them take it from there, but instead of that he did what he did and then scurried off. Most likely was very shocked about the whole scenario and wasn't thinking straight, anybody who would be able to keep their cool and a clear head wouldn't be fidgeting as much as he was in the start. But I do agree with you. He could've gotten away with it and thought he could get away with more, and start using real guns instead. So while I do believe it to be a poor way of going about things, it does serve as a brutal reminder to those who might be considering doing the same, and hey, one less bad guy on the streets.

[@MiCajaDelIdiota]

"...countless other 'want to be' bad guys ...who, after seeing this video... will not make the same mistake.." Right! They will bring a real gun.

[@hortyist1]

@@MiCajaDelIdiota A real gun woudn't have changed the outcome for the guy.

[@MiCajaDelIdiota]

@@hortyist1 Agree. However, my reply was to addressed, not the outcome for the guy, but the possible lessons other misfits might've learned.

[@texas_stone_lets_go_brandon]

I’m here in Houston. This guy is considered a hero on many levels by almost everyone here. It’s all over the news daily. The end of the video shows the shooter obviously in disgust and anger after he picks up the gun and throws it at the wall, realizing it’s a fake gun. It was clear he didn’t expect to find a toy gun. And like you said, he will live with this forever. EDIT:: Go to 1 minute mark for additional video kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZiQpKduaburl6c

[@mleonard411]

You have a link to the full video?

[@brettblack7049]

Even if the guy was doing it to feed his family, the shooter did what was right knowing what he knew. If we hesitate everything we are making a decision we will not make many great decisions in our life. While I would not want to be in this man's shoes, some things that could be comforting, is knowing that even though it was a fake gun this time, it could be a real gun next time and multiple lives taken and others who would think they could get away with the same type of action will now be discouraged from doing so. Be blessed friends.

[@brettblack7049]

@@mleonard411 do you have google?

[@springbloom5940]

Im an instructor in Houston - *CITATIONS NEEDED*

[@texas_stone_lets_go_brandon]

@@springbloom5940 citations for what?

[@gunsgonewilder5058]

I’ve seen plenty of videos where after handing over all the cash the perp still shoots the clerk, just for the hell of it. Now if he has a hand on the door and clearly leaving, different story. The ninth shot is very questionable for sure. As far as him leaving the scene, the way he threw the perp’s gun after realizing it was fake I believe he freaked out over the legality of the situation. Overall I feel a good shoot on all three topics.

[@davidbuquoi2182]

No way can you guarantee me that the bad guy was leaving and would never point a gun at me again. The good shooter ended that threat for good.

[@Asidebar]

but the last shot was not self defense.

[@frankbeardsley2941]

What was it? Mutilating a corpse at best.

[@johnserosanguineous1886]

Leave people TF alone. Whats so hard about that? "In Texas we burn our trash." ~Clint Smith He finds a real gun next time and shoots someone for real, then what? Some diversity judge goes easy on him. Nah, box him up and send him back home to his mother, "Failure" stamped on his forehead.

[@desther]

@@frankbeardsley2941 That we dont know, last shot would need to be investigated. It was not bad per se, but possibly can be.

[@psycicmindpowers]

The last shot was the copper for the bad guy so he can pay the boatman and cross the river Styx. If you wanna be an outlaw like that then you don't deserve protection under the law.

[@bigkrut]

The fact there was still a customer pinned in the corner and the gunman was heading towards him with gun pointed in that direction makes this a good shoot in my opinion.

[@dafunkmonster]

Nah, he bent down, retrieved the robber's gun, then put a round in the back of his head. That's murder. The threat was gone. The robber had no means of posing a threat to anyone. He was motionless on the floor.

[@dafunkmonster]

@@salilgupta9427 There's no reason to put a bullet in the head of someone who's already dead. Which means he didn't think he was dead yet.

[@dafunkmonster]

@@salilgupta9427 Lol he wasn't an old man. He was middle-aged. He clearly had sufficient training to be capable of recognizing when the threat was gone. He even picked up the robber's gun. Then put a final kill shot in the head of the robber, who was disarmed and unconscious on the floor and therefore not a threat.

[@abc456f]

​@@dafunkmonster Yeah, that last shot is in no way justified. After watching tons of these kinds of videos, if I'm somewhere outside of my home, I'm not pulling my gun and shooting unless I'm truly in a "my life or yours" situation. I don't want there to be any chance of second guessing whether I was justified or not. I'm giving the prosecutor zero chance of bringing me up on charges. Putting aside tactics and morals, the legal ramifications of a bad shoot, even the smallest, can completely ruin your life. I'm aware of the saying, better to be judged by twelve than carried by six, but those twelve could end up putting you in prison for the rest of your life. I hope I'm never in a situation where I'd have to use my gun. Obviously if someone breaks into my home, or if I'm in my car, at least here in Florida, I'm going to be justified in stopping the threat. That's also key, not automatically dumping a mag. It means doing the minimum required to stop the threat, because some of these prosecutors' mouths start to water over self defense shootings.

[@CarbonOtter]

It looked like the robber wasn't leaving, but going back for another lap around the room to corral the diners as they fished for their valuables.

[@danm6645]

It looked that way to me as well. Plus that last table near the door..who's to say he wasn't gonna gun them down at the door as he left ... still looks like a deadly threat

[@RealJohnnyDingo]

the way he was wandering around robbing everybody I think that's a reasonable concern.

[@rimcountryoutfitters]

I think it was very kind of the defender to make sure the perp was not suffering

[@PTANV-x2g]

THIS!!! Excellent point. The shooter is a humanitarian even more so than I gave him credit for!

[@ChrisfromGeorgia]

👌

[@edwardborman7380]

Christian even.

[@johnowens9093]

BS...the last shot wasn't a show of mercy! It was a vigilante street execution. Yeah, he had a right to end the threat. But the threat was over when he ended a life. This isn't the Wild West!!

[@rogueldr642smiythe9]

Good analysis John. The crook was on parole for a robbery where a victim lost his life.

[@Patricio007x]

Wow

[@Vod-Kaknockers]

I read where he killed a store clerk back in 2013. Correction...accomplice in 2015 robbery shooting. My bad.

[@Edc-Guy]

Curious why this is not perfectly fine, signaling to those that want to strike fear into people and perceive they are robbing / may kill them, know this is a high likelihood to occur. In turn events like this may make them rethink and decide they’d like to not leave the earth that day. The alternative is too confusing and continues to give criminals and their families reason to pursue situations like this. If it was a real gun and he was going to shoot he would have done so unexpectedly to deter a self defense attack. Just no way to know the armed robbers motives as he “appears “ to be leaving. Plenty of people get killed AFTER giving up their valuables. Having to wait to see if someone is gonna decide to shoot you is idiotic and immoral in itself. Why are only the law abiding citizens expected to perfectly follow the law while this continues to permeate on and on with little to no consequence.

[@desther]

@@markgman4157 Not really, this may play out in shooter favor. It is not a jail free card but atleast there is evidence that he killed before in same scenario so it is completely valid that he may look like he is willing to kill and victims were afraid for their lives.

[@alexzeller2409]

From a legal standpoint, that information would not likely be useful as the shooter, unless he knew the robber, could not have been privy to that info, therefore couldnt affect his decision making. Wouldn't be surprised if this goes to a trial to see that info deemed inadmissible. But from the moral standpoint it may tip the scales closer.

[@willkirk486]

Nice Venn. He is thought this through well before he ever sent down in that booth, and I don’t have any moral problem with his actions. We need more people like him. There’s no way in the world he could’ve known what the guy was holding, and when one bites into us, sour apple, you have to be prepared for the worm.

[@frankjohnson6676]

I bet Kamala doesn't love this Venn diagram... ijs

[@OldCelticWarrior]

As always we pray we will never have to have this happen. Unfortunately we have seen so many times that people submit completely only to have the criminal decide on the way out to turn and fire back into the area and kill a innocent. It happens way too much to just overlook. So incredibly sad that we have to live in so much crime in our cities because of a narrative.

[@jhickssmd]

Exactly, I will never take that chance of put in a similar situation. Only thing that looked bad was this guys final shot… probably should have stopped after 8 and disarming perp.

[@piouswhale]

Like the robbery where the guy forces clerk on his knees. Hes taking stuff and about to leave and he doesnt even look at just executes the guy

[@jwg-dawg4436]

Colion Noir, a lawyer, covers the legal complications well. We should be asking why a person would enter a business and decide to performed an armed robbery.

[@Asidebar]

But that question is something the defendant won't be able to ask in his trial.

[@frankbeardsley2941]

And we'd be better off if that was the case in all armed robberies.

[@US2A]

Man he failed alot

[@cyberlycans4191]

He's a paper lawyer, attended law school to get to JD but never practiced, ALL theory for him. No way in the world does simply having a JD makes someone a use-of-force or trial consideration expert.

[@jwg-dawg4436]

Great points. My thought is: why does the good guy have to prove his innocence when he’s not the one who chose to physically harm and defraud everyone in that room by performing an armed robbery?

[@jasoncole2876]

Everything about this is tragic, but if anyone was going to lose their life that day it happened to the right guy. I hope the good guy does not have any consequences. I hope other criminals might think twice about their next heist after seeing this.

[@andresquintero2436]

There were 2 criminals there that day. One got killed, the other might go to jail.

[@andrewh86sd]

@@andresquintero2436 Loser.

[@andresquintero2436]

@@andrewh86sd lmao...really?...wow

[@michaelmcatee221]

It’s just like John Corria says “Can I? Should I? Must I?” Those are the questions. Also a faster draw allows less time for the situation to change from decision to gunshot. You absolutely must continue to assess the situation even as you draw and decide in the actual moment whether or not to fire.

[@JohnTubiolo]

Fear and stress doesn't allow for rational thought. You do what you believe is right in the moment and never question your actions. Hindsight is always 20/20.

[@fakecubed]

Easiest thing in the world for a defense lawyer to argue in court. Especially when it's an obviously good guy who was shooting and an obviously bad guy who ended up dead.

[@AnUnnamed3vil]

And hindsight is also what will keep you up at night

[@MA-yl1er]

Agreed

[@CD-zl1rl]

That can be stretched all kinds of fucked up ways.

[@josephweisbruch1820]

​@@fakecubed if he was obviously a good guy, he wouldn't have left the scene. Carrying a firearm requires rational thought. Otherwise, innocent folks end up dead.

[@Natezoinks]

The bad guy was all over that diner, front to back, front to back, didn’t feel like he was leaving to me. ❤️🇺🇸

[@Jatoncarjy]

Agreed that he probably was not leaving since he did not stop to take their wallets. Tough situation as if you take aim and not fire until he turns back towards you, he may shoot someone else before turning back, and if you do wait till he faces you and miss, you or your buddy could be shot. Too bad common sense is no longer a thing. I think if you walk into an establishment with a weapon (real or fake), then you forfeit your right to live.

[@jhickssmd]

Yes and sorry, I am not going to cross my fingers and hope he is only there to rob me. That’s how you end up dead. If you get a chance to take an armed threat out, do it… everytime

[@waholoopesorry74]

Doesn’t matter if he was leaving, he was pointing a gun at the guy in the corner when the defender opened fire

[@Asidebar]

@@waholoopesorry74 He was NOT pointing gun or even had a gun when laying on the floor when shooter put additional bullet in him for the kill shot. That is going to get him convicted of murder.

[@2A.Freedom]

@@Asidebar as it should. Let's face it. Ppl like this who can't control themselves make it harder for the rest of us, and it just makes the case against concealed carry that much easier. If you don't know the law, or your own ability to follow the law, you shouldn't be carrying until you have training.

[@drcoffee5588]

Great analysis thanks for your perspective. To me, it looked like the perp was commanding the room from the moment he entered and proceeded to work from one side of the room to the next. The patron could reasonably expect that the perp was working bis way to him and his friend next. In this situation, if the patron had waited to confirm the perp was coming his way, he would lose the tactical advantage and worse, his friend would now be in the line of fire. He did the right thing IMO. I do take pause with him taking the final shot to the perp on the ground facing down. It could end badly for the patron. Last point, he emptied his gun. What if the perp had buddies outside? Round count is important and training should incorporate that aspect.

[@Stevarooni]

Round count is the least thing I complain about with this situation. Someone who hasn't been in a firefight loses track of round count really quickly in the "Empty? I just shot a couple of times!" way.

[@robertperry4439]

In 1963, when I was 9 years old, I went to the grocery store alone. When I was about to walk out the front door, two men pulled out guns and robbed the store. They took all of us back in the storeroom and locked us inside. Later, other customers came in the store and heard us calling for help. No one was hurt, and the robbers got away with less than a hundred dollars. I cannot imagine the robber in this video was going to get more than a hundred dollars. Instead, he was shot in the back and in the head when he was on the floor until he was dead. The only thing I can think of that could have made my experience worse would have been watching the robbers executed in front of me. The vigilante 'Samaritan' who murdered the robber is a greater threat to society than a petty thief with a toy gun.

[@craig30stw9]

I listened to your (as always), terrific commentary and read quite a few comments but I don't see anyone mentioning the bad guy had been imprisoned for a previous armed robbery where a victim lost his life. There was still a guy between the bad guy and the door when the shooting went down. If I'm the good guy with the gun, that would be in the forefront of my mind and thought process. I'm betting that the good guy will suffer far more internally for that last shot, which was fired under duress, than he possibly could from any external consequences he might incur.

[@edwardborman7380]

Something anyone commenting in public should know.

[@brettelizabethspore]

Excellent video. I love that you say Good Guy and Bad Guy. Our society needs to hear that more often. Also I like how you give your evaluation and then ask people to sound off in the comments. I think the additional shots were overkill, but I’ve never been in that situation. Until I am, I find it hard to judge. Everything I’ve heard says “stay on the scene.” I think that was a big oops on the defensive shooter’s part. PS. Now I kind of want to move to Texas! Haha

[@WarriorPoetSociety]

Just don’t rob a taqueria! Thanks for sounding off 👍

[@MikeNaples]

The shooter leaving before the police arrived makes one wonder if he was legally carrying. I suspect there will be even more than the usual police scrutiny.

[@DaveL9170]

@@MikeNaples people leave the scene when they have something to hide.

[@john-paulsilke893]

@@DaveL9170 or if they think they will be treated unfairly like some of us are doing now. Personally I think it was a coup des gras at the end, but it could have been robot actions. As far as I’m concerned ethically I think he should lay low and never pop up. You and I aren’t in his head and don’t know what he was thinking at the time or how we would have acted. In combat I know what I have done, and it certainly wouldn’t have passed scrutiny from the peanut gallery, even though it was definitely ethical and 100% legal.

[@Eluderatnight]

@@john-paulsilke893 straight to the lawyers office to negotiate surrender. Check in check out of booking. Preserve narrative.

[@JP_70707]

It appeared to me the perp was addressing the bystander sitting in the corner who had his arms up, not that he was leaving the store. That last shot is the part that makes me wince. Thank you John for giving us your take on the event.

[@zachscott4867]

Agreed, that’s not a good look for the grand jury or gun owners in general.

[@thrulifegear4709]

You winced… I cheered.

[@michaelr5606]

@@thrulifegear4709 Both might be appropriate. It all depends on the reasons for the reaction. I felt both. Of course my soul loved the anchor shot but I winced because I saw a clean shoot by an armed hero turn into a bad shoot with an armed hero who is now going to prison.

[@agates9383]

Tough to monday morning QB this one as we dont know what was being said there but GENERALLY if you do what he did with that last shot youre probably in trouble.

[@lilstubthumb]

Even if he was leaving, he's a threat to others at that point.

[@njw1977]

I watched the whole unedited clip this morning. Unfortunately I think this shooter will get charged. He stopped shooting then walked up and shot him in the head. He is going to have a hard time explaining that last shot. I'm ok with him using deadly force. He thought it was a real gun and you don't know if that guy would turn around at the last minute and shoot everyone.

[@luisamaro100]

Great analysis, using these three points. Hard call I hope I never find my self in such a situation. Adrenaline flowing, the robber’s gun not being real, after the fact and the way it went down, the moral part the defender will have to live with that. I wish him luck.

[@johnmueller1608]

Difficult circumstances to overcome for the defensive shooter. The reason for the 9th shot and leaving scene is very problematic

[@two5seven14]

It was a bit much. He already secured the firearm and then popped the dude in the head again. It wasn’t premeditated murder but it sure wasn’t defense either.

[@nickc7320]

Yeah, that last shot is the questionable one. Leaving the scene it's not the best move not sure if he left and called his lawyer IDK

[@kurtnulf3362]

At this time when your government favors the criminal over the victim it`s better to either just lay down and take it than defend yourself So it makes sense to flee after this because the bedwetters will try to make you the criminal for defending yourself

[@two5seven14]

@Workingonit doubt anyone here is a lawyer and I don’t think too many people are questioning the legality of it… a DA would be hard pressed to prove malice. I think most are just feeling out the morality of the situation. Id be interested to see if all 9 shots were 3 0’clock to 9 O’clock or in the back as they’d say. Shooting a dude 9 times in the back as he’s approaching an exit will definitely get you in hot water in some places.

[@frey8725]

@Workingonit He had the right to use deadly force to defend himself and the other people until the threat was neutralized. He neutralized the threat, checked to make sure there was no threat, then shot the robber in the head. That's gonna bite him in the ass.

[@MichaelB-84]

He needs a good lawyer to explain that last shot.

[@jamessharpe6699]

It was actually two shots he stood over them after putting seven rounds in them and double tapped them in the head and walked out and got in his truck and went home like nothing happened that's not the way you handle something like this I agree with him shooting him but I'm not on board with after he's down putting more rounds into his head and then leaving before law enforcement got there

[@superdave6415]

@@jamessharpe6699 agree

[@MB-rh1qd]

@@jamessharpe6699 I am good right up until leaving the scene. I understand the legal perspective doesn’t look good, but if you wage war with the innocent, expect a vengeful adversary

[@ATAKTICON]

They haven't found him but the cops wanted to talk to him. I think he was fine except the last shot.

[@DarkPassenger]

@@jamessharpe6699 Seems like he's done it before.

[@jaymorrison5895]

I hope our society never gets to the point where the defense shooter is somehow found in violation of the law

[@WaitWhatsMyName]

Ughhh where have you been? People go to jail all the time for defensive shootings

[@haroldburrell4973]

Love your stuff, John. Not just the videos you post, but the life you lead. Thanks. I am a little confused about your verdict on the moral aspect of the response. We're looking back on it all...1. Knowing now that it was a toy gun. 2. Not really hearing what's being said. 3. Without an absurd adrenaline dump. And 4. Critiquing the whole thing from the comfort and safety of our homes. Now...and as others have said...I do have an issue with shot #9. And to be quite honest, I would hope that I would have stopped after the first 4. But as for the shooting itself? No problem whatsoever.

[@artemthetrain14]

The moral rating surprised me, as far as "him leaving" goes. Ya it looked he was leaving cuz he had a fake gun. But I think crazier things have happened than a man with a gun robbing a place and turning around and shooting somebody.

[@HomesteadDNA]

I dont think he was leaving, I think he was starting to pace back and forth to keep an eye on others. I think the idea of him leaving because hes heading toward the door is the same as the evidence hes ordering as he heads to the counter ;)

[@bryannorris8049]

From the information in the video, I don't think there is enough information that the robber is leaving. It looks like there is equal evidence that the robber is going through the restaurant systematically and his next victim is the guy in the corner with hands up. I wouldn't want him to come back to my table and have to draw for the drop or him to turn and engage me if I'd subconsciously indicated to him that I'm armed. The shooter is going to have to come to emotional grips with what he reacted to doesn't match reality (the firearm wasn't real). I don't think that makes the choice to engage when he did based on the facts available at the time questionable.

[@artemthetrain14]

@@bryannorris8049 ya I wasn't really questioning John's assessment that he was leaving, but rewatching it, I'd call that into question too. My point moreso was that sure he may have been leaving cuz he had a fake gun, but no one else knew that! And even if he was, crazier things have happened than a robber shooting someone as they leave.

[@user-ml2iq7wj1o]

Thanks for making this video concise. It is incredibly annoying when people needlessly drag videos out to 25, 20, 30 min when it can easily be done in much less time.

[@b767greg]

Shots 1-8 are under extreme life threatening stress, so I don't believe these shots were excessive. I have done training where there was extreme pressure and instantaneous decision making involved and after the exercise I was asked how many shots I made, and I honestly thought I took two shots! My brain told me two shots, but in the end it was ten shots! So the first 8 shots in my opinion (which means nothing by the way) were good shots. It's the ninth shot he will have to answer for. The bad guy is down and no longer a threat, taking that ninth shot is an execution shot, not a defensive shot. Unfortunately I don't think the law will not be in his favor.

[@nthannisch]

This is a great analysis and the approach is a very good way to assess the actions taken here. One thing I would like to point out. At the first instant of the robbery, you noted that the defender was already going for his gun. At that point, I feel he made his decision to shoot if he had the opportunity. From that moment forward it was all tactics, regardless of the rest of the events. It was in WPS classes that I learned why my focus gets so very tight when a large volume of adrenaline is flowing. In that first moment, he had already decided to shoot and he was only focused on tactics. The other factors, such as was the gun real or was he leaving the restaurant or was he already dead, all of those get push aside.

[@bvoyelr]

That's fine, but an adrenaline dump won't indemnify you against a 30 second rampage. If you decide to shoot when you get the opportunity and that opportunity doesn't present itself until the threat is over, then you cannot shoot. You have some leeway -- John Correia calls this the reactionary gap, which is the time between your brain making a decision and your body executing on it. This can be used as a defense if, say, you're shooting quarter second splits into a bad guy who turns around and winds up getting shot in the back as he's preparing to flee. You've made the decision to fire and you can't realistically hit the pause button for 1-2 seconds.

[@trevorjoseph81416]

I agree with you and that was my first thought. At some point, you make the decision and unless things drastically change, it is on. Just like clearing the holster. An instructor told me that 100% of the time, if I see his weapon clear the holster, in .2 seconds I will see a muzzle blast. A little different here, but when adrenalin is surging, you have to simplify the situation. He was likely thinking that as soon as he has a chance, he will eliminate the threat and save lives.

[@brettblack7049]

Anyone watching this video, can now add some new tactics to their repertoire and because of that they will/should think about what was discussed in the video if they are ever in a similar situation. I pray none of us ever are.

[@fakecubed]

@@bvoyelr Juries give plenty of leeway. The question is what would a reasonable person do against a violent, armed criminal, in the heat of the moment. I bet you at least 10 of the jurors find it reasonable to mag dump on the scum, and the other two will be persuadable, or go along to get along. Especially in Texas, juries just won't convict a good guy with a gun who stopped a bad guy with a gun. All the nitpicking over the timing of this shot or that shot won't matter.

[@Foxbodys4life]

I live locally to this incident, as of yesterday the guy had turned his self in and was released. He is cooperating with HPD and awaiting word from the Grand Jury on what will happen. Given the city of Houston and how everything is handled, I’d be surprised if anything comes from this. They let murders walk on PR bonds everyday.

[@Caderic]

"... released working." That does that mean?

[@Foxbodys4life]

@@Caderic auto correct added that. I fixed it.

[@russianbot2630]

Yep Houston has gone to hell in a hand basket. I’m glad some people are standing up to these violent psychopaths. It’s demoralizing living here.

[@betweentwomillennium5057]

Yes if you are a Democrat criminal. No if you are a republican good guy.

[@TriStarFamily]

Shot #9 is my only possible problem with this shoot. I was taught that you shoot until the threat is neutralized. Usually, this means until the person does not have the physical capability to move any longer or until you are empty. In this case, he had already picked up the robber's gun before he fired that last shot. I don't know what happened in that moment as he picked up the criminal's gun or how, but on the surface, it certainly looks bad.

[@pbrownxal07]

What a great post I agree with you 100% that’s coming from a CCW holder here in California, I know without a shadow of a doubt if that same shooting occurred here in California he would be in jail for murder especially with the last shot when the threat was down and he picked up his gun. No threat at that point.

[@robsaunders1631]

Agree 100%...I'm fine with everything he did up to that last shot. I just can't wrap my head around that part.

[@contentofcharacter]

The first 4 shots were good. No problem with them at all. The next 4 would be subject to interpretation since the robber was already down on the floor and lost his weapon. He doesn’t appear to be a threat so our hero may need to articulate why he still interpreted the criminal to be one. That last shot, in my mind is not legally justifiable though. Perhaps something occurred that the video doesn’t show but based on what I can see I can’t see a legal justification for that final shot.

[@dmc3489]

Keep in mind - That 9th shot most likely hit a corpse.

[@ratagris21]

9th round was for confirmation purposes. Besides the suspect is a POS and menace to society.

[@Brandon-ou4wc]

If the conceal carry guy didn't waist him, that robber thug would continue to steal, hurt and most likely kill someone innocent eventually. If he went to jail it probably wouldn't be very long and he be back on the streets being a thug again and if he did go to jail for the rest of his life , we the taxpayers would have to support him living behind bars. The robber punk was never going to amount to anything in society. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

[@randomstuff2985]

You can watch the unedited version on the “active self protection” KZbin channel. It’s a pretty recent video too. They also break down shooting and things and give you advice on how to survive.

[@jefferypeplinski3176]

It has been removed by YT

[@Traintech86]

I think someone had said that it was removed but I just checked and it seems like it's still up. Maybe they had to edit it or something.

[@duxdawg]

ASP is a POS. Very little good knowledge there and it's constantly buried in a whole lot of hogwash. Watch at your own risk.

[@TheCreamRisesToTheTop]

ASP is pretty woke just be advised. They refuse to acknowledge a lot of things that conflict with their narrative.

[@mikecamden]

@@jefferypeplinski3176 it's still there: kzbin.info/www/bejne/j3Lbaqaoprl5f9U

[@HeTrainsMyHands]

Hey John, what if you were eating dinner with your family and this exact thing happened. Are you 100% certain the guy is leaving and won't return or turn back for another pass, or even come to your table and point the gun at your loved ones. Can you really rely on predictions of a criminal on what he may or may not do?

[@Will-W]

He was pretty clear about it. Everything but that last shot was pretty much by the book.

[@Nobody-11B]

And how would you react finding out your life is over by doing the right thing but he had a fake gun.?

[@Will-W]

The law doesn't care if the gun is fake when it comes to self defense, why would I? Ending life is of course serious business, knowing the law and and how it applies is important. I'm sure personally there would be a lot of "Could I have done anything different?" moments in the coming nights. But up until that last round to the head, it was again, "by the numbers a clean shoot." Finding out after that it was a fake or airsoft gun would be a "Well shit." moment, but it doesn't change the totality of circumstances from the perspective of someone who thought they were being robbed with a real gun 30 seconds before. The leaving after part is sketchy at best but that last shot and the leaving after are what trips it from good shoot to bad.

[@unnamed_channel]

@@Nobody-11B It wouldn't matter at all whether the gun was fake or not. He expected people to believe it was real. He expected people to believe that he would kill them if they did not turn over their belongings. Treating the gun as if it were real is exactly what the perp wanted, he just didn't want them to respond with deadly force in self-defense.

[@unnamed_channel]

I think you're presenting a bit of a false dichotomy here. The point at which the guy in this video chose to shoot was not the only point at which a shoot/don't shoot decision can be made. You don't have to be 100% certain of anything in order to make a reasonable decision. It's risky to shoot. It's risky to not shoot. If you think he's leaving and will leave without shooting anyone, give him a chance to go and be a good witness.

[@johnridderhof4505]

Every class/training I take always trains to shoot until the threat has stopped. I think you're correct that in this case, the good guys main issues will be leaving the scene and his last shot. As you stated, it's going to boil down to how he and his defense team articulates the reasons. Being in Texas is a benefit for him but it'll be interesting to see the trail or the verdict.

[@perosoygoyito]

Tactical? A+. Legally? Armed robbery is not a capitol offense. Morally? Taqueria pocket change is not worth any person's life. No guns, no loss of life, only the "trauma" of being jacked for your taqueria pocket change.

[@chrisbiro1]

There was still one more customer sitting on the left between the door and the thief. That customer was still facing the thief's gun. The shooter defended that last customer. As far as any reasonable person would understand, the thief's interaction with that last customer could have turned deadly if the thief was not neutralized before that interaction occurred.

[@Caderic]

And don't forget. The criminal walked towards the door several time before that and didn't leave. That begs the question, "How do we know he was actually leaving, and not just walking around, you know?"

[@georgemoomaw9437]

How do you spell bull$hit in your neck of the woods?

[@Caderic]

@@georgemoomaw9437 Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Using a toy for armed robbery...stupid game.

[@robertperry4439]

In 1963, when I was 9 years old, I went to the grocery store alone. When I was about to walk out the front door, two men pulled out guns and robbed the store. They took all of us back in the storeroom and locked us inside. Later, other customers came in the store and heard us calling for help. No one was hurt, and the robbers got away with less than a hundred dollars. I cannot imagine the robber in this video was going to get more than a hundred dollars. Instead, he was shot in the back and in the head when he was on the floor until he was dead. The only thing I can think of that could have made my experience worse would have been watching the robbers executed in front of me. The vigilante 'Samaritan' who murdered the robber is a greater threat to society than a petty thief with a toy gun.

[@Caderic]

@@robertperry4439 You are an idiot. There have been MANY of situations just like this where the "petty criminal" killed someone. And yes, all they got was less than $100. You or no one else knows if that guy would have killed someone. That "petty criminal" played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.

[@dennygee5323]

John, I think the shooting starts out completely tactically, legal and moral . A close look at the video shows the bad guy pointing his "gun" at the man in the far upper left when the first shots are fired. The bad guy was still waiving the "gun" around. There is also a person sitting at the booth in the upper right of the screen. Both person's are in front of the suspect and in danger of death or grievous bodily harm . The part that will get the shooter sent to prison is the anchoring shot to the head . The shooter had recovered the "gun" prior to this final shot. The question will be was the suspect doing something that made the shooter think there was a second weapon. I believe the shooter will likely be charged with a crime. Then we'll see if all 12 Texas jurors will agree, it has to be a unanimous decision.

[@llamabahama4654]

I personally think it's ok on all counts the whole way through. Don't start none wont be none. He decided to bring in a gun (unless it's a nerf gun without spray paint no way to konw if fake or not) and rob this place and people in it. Done with people like that. If you were desperate you can steal without weapons, maybe he should have tried that instead. Good work to the shooter, should have stuck around but I thank him or his work.

[@mikeb4595]

Rewatching it, shooter basically got his hand on the perp’s “Gun” when he fired the final shot. An argument could be made that the shooter saw the perp moving and thought he was reaching for the weapon. I’d be predisposed to believe the guy who was trying to save lives not the one intentionally committing a felony.

[@bwm3013]

He will never, ever be convicted of anything except leaving without giving a statement, perhaps.

[@piouswhale]

If you watch the full hd video it appears the final shot is in the back. You can see some reactive motion in his back

[@syncere010]

As he should be!! 1st 6 shots were All justified, despite being in the back.. 2 of the last 3 were Very Questionable!! But that Final shot 2 the Head should put this Wanna Be Hero, that Obviously let his Hate get the best of him, Straight in Jail!! Which Sadly will look Bad on the rest of Us CCW holders....

[@Learn.The.Hardway]

I worry about the last shot, could be seen as "excessive".

[@spartangoku7610]

We gotta be anti crime, so maybe we let it slide.

[@Learn.The.Hardway]

Full video is on Funker530.

[@danm6645]

With limited sight in the moment at the end...I've wondered if that final shot could've been like a mercy shot...considering the amount of damage done, would it have been more moral to allow him to suffer needlessy?

[@DarkPassenger]

@@danm6645 No.

[@invisiblerevolution]

@@danm6645 🤣 Are you for real???

[@wendelcleghorn7950]

Thank you to the hero citizen for standing up and protecting everyone in that Taqueria. I see -0- fault in anything you did, and I’m sure that any jury here in Texas would/will agree.

[@MrMartyian]

There are several takes/opinions on this particular shooting in Houston. The last shot taken has me questioning myself in the thought of “was it necessary ?” GREAT BREAKDOWN on the way of a Warrior Poet !!

[@athanksgivingbaby570]

That last shot, after the guy was already down and with a deliberate pause before it, makes me uncomfortable - It looks a little too much like an execution rather than defensive. That being said, I think it's probable that the thief was already dead after the prior shots. He certainly wins the Darwin award...Who waves around a fake gun in TEXAS ??

[@piouswhale]

Because fuck the perp thats why.

[@shakespeare127]

Evil can not be dead enough.

[@bly4233]

It usually takes longer to die of handgun wounds than it does to empty a magazine.

[@MA-yl1er]

The robber could have turned and sprayed the room on the way out. I don't think waiting to see if that was about to happen is good defense.

[@NestCamp]

Thank you John, for all you do and for being such a great advocate for our entire community. I've watched many other YT videos from others and while not all have been "bad", you've went the extra mile to elaborate on the different topics that SHOULD be considered. Thank you for educating our ppl because we have one too many trigger happy folks in our community. PS: Finally convinced my wife to cancel Disney+ and we joined your streaming service. Proudly Warrior Poets in our house now! Keep up the good work brother!

[@Zundfolge]

I'm mostly with you on this. Tactical: You can't argue with success. He took the badguy out with little risk to himself. Safety: I think the guy back in the corner under the TV looked like he was in the line of fire so that's iffy. Legal: The only part of his shooting that gives me pause is the final shot ... that really looked like a coup de grace to me. Its clear he didn't know the gun was fake because in the extended video when he realizes the gun is fake he throws it across the room in anger and then pours a drink on the guy's body on the way out. Moral: this is where I disagree with you most. There's plenty of scenarios where a criminal robs multiple people at multiple scenes in a single evening and doesn't kill anyone right away, but eventually does. He's a violent felon fleeing his crime, he's still a danger to the community so shooting him is perfectly moral.

[@bobbyb7127]

Yes a violent felon leaving to commit another felony and kill if he has to. I hope the shooter doesn't get into ANY problem for this. This whole country is so screwed up.

[@MatthewBWebster]

I agree with your disagreement on the moral stance. At what point do we think "he may be done here for now, but who's next?" (yes, I know this may be shaky legally) Also, I haven't seen anybody point out the guy in the upper left corner with his hands up that the perp is walking towards. I could truthfully say I was afraid for his life, so I stopped that threat.

[@steveanderson7554]

My issue with moral was the robber was literally pointing a gun at a victim when he was shot. Sure he wasn’t shooting, but he was certainly threatening to. I feel shooting an armed robber is always moral.

[@Sethhardmandiscgolf]

I think that final shot is were things go sideways on both the moral and legal sides. If he is charged I feel as though that will be a central point of the trial.

[@wd2518]

Charged with what exactly?

[@MrRmacfarlane]

I am a lawyer, and everything you said is spot on. Thank you for sharing your analysis and wisdom.

[@unnamed_channel]

John says that in some states a duty to retreat would be a problem given this scenario, and uses D.C. as an example. D.C. does not have a duty to retreat. No state that I'm aware of would ever require someone to retreat unless it's safe to do so (both for the defender and any innocent third parties). In short, duty to retreat is irrelevant in this case, and would be in anywhere in the U.S. mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/page_content/attachments/District%20Law%20Pertaining%20to%20Self%20Defense.pdf "You should take reasonable steps, such as stepping back or walking away, to avoid the necessity of taking a human life, so long as those steps are consistent with your own safety. However, you do not have to retreat or consider retreating when you actually and reasonably believe that you are in danger of death or serious bodily harm and that deadly force is necessary to repel that danger." Do you still think everything John said is "spot on"?

[@southtownsjoe32]

yea, the whole world you represent ""legal system " is broken & against the honest citizens! !!

[@mynameisjeff6988]

@@unnamed_channel It's still spot on because john is a huge proponent of doing everything you POSSIBLY can to NOT have to shoot someone in a situation like this. The US is also not the only country where firearms are allowed for self defense, and a duty to retreat is pretty much a part of the game in every other place besides America. That being said, just because the law doesn't say you have to retreat, does not mean that you need to take a gunfight where all the man wants is your wallet.

[@unnamed_channel]

@@mynameisjeff6988 No, it's not spot on. He claims that this shooting would be problematic in states with a duty to retreat, and then chooses D.C. as an example. An armed robbery in an occupied restaurant as it occurs in this case is not an example where failure to retreat would be relevant. As I've already pointed out, nowhere in the U.S. are you required to attempt to retreat unless it is safe for you to do so. Obviously not the case here. And if that weren't enough, you're never required to retreat if it would mean abandoning other innocent parties. Finally, D.C. does not have a duty to retreat, so it's a terrible example. It doesn't matter whether a duty to retreat exists outside the U.S. nor what it may or may not require outside the U.S. He's specifically talking about the U.S. and the U.S. legal system. He's talking about the duty to retreat in the legal analysis portion of the video, not the tactical nor moral portions.

[@dietrichjohnson9556]

@@mynameisjeff6988 Before Iowa changed its a law a few years ago, if this happened in Iowa there may have been some grey area around this.-- for the fact he was sort of heading to the door. To me everything is ok except shot 9 then you get back to that grey area

[@bigjimflying7195]

I believe the defender was totally in the clear until the last shot. I also believe he’ll need to articulate very clearly why he took that 9th shot. I’m speculating here now, but after the last shot “it was at this point he realized he effed up” and that’s why he existed “stage left”.

[@jackdawes8577]

He did not exit "stage left" immediately. He collected the stolen property, returned it all to the other victims, and then left.

[@2A.Freedom]

I see all these " he's a hero" comments which tells me they really don't know the law at all and they should be nowhere near a gun. A hero stops when the threat is subdued and certainly doesn't shoot someone in the back of the head execution style after they pick up the gun off the floor.

[@gil57usa]

The criminal was heading toward the door, however he had previously gone back and forth between the front and the rear of the room. It's very likely he may not have been leaving based on his behavior.

[@MichaelWhite76]

I just had a conversation with my coworkers yesterday. I brought up all of the same points you did. This one will be interesting to see how it’s handled legally.

[@Dansal1980]

Agreed. It seems really strange to me that the “good guy” left the scene afterwards and the cops had to investigate to see who and where he was

[@Ventus_the_Heathen]

He'd just shot a guy he was probably stressed and made a bad decision

[@messinger123]

Re: your moral “he looked like he was leaving” assessment: At the moment of the shooting the bad guy had his weapon raised and aimed at the patron seated in the upper-left corner. He was focused on that patron, not the door.

[@jiminauburn5073]

Yeah. I don't think he was leaving. He was just controlling the room.

[@abledemo1]

He was riding the knifes edge until that 9th shot. That’s gonna be hard to overcome in court. There really is a fine line sometimes

[@EseMismo91]

As far as whether he was leaving or not, you have to think about the potential of danger. This guy came in like it was nothing; you can safely assume this wasn't his first time. You just saved someone else from harm or potential death. Remember, you don't know the gun is fake, and you must assume it is real. Also, it wouldn't be out of the norm for the perp to shoot in his way out.

[@exodusz19]

Absolutely nailed it. I think you did a better job than most at articulating the legal/moral nuances coming out of this defensive shooting. Rarely are things black and white and this event is solidly in the grey. Liked and shared, we appreciate it!

[@joshroten3997]

Agreed, and unfortunately I fear the defensive shooter is going to have serious problems here. I really like John’s Tactical, Moral and Legal breakdown, but the Courts only care about the Legal aspects and that’s where I think this (good) guy is going to have some challenges.

[@timesthree5757]

No it’s not gray bad guy comes in robbing defensive shooter sprayed the guy until he stopped twitching.

[@averagejoe112]

@@timesthree5757 *executed in the back of the head when unarmed

[@timesthree5757]

@@averagejoe112 yea bad guy got heated for robben folks. When I was in the army we seen guys start shooting back after getting plugged by a beret. Keep shooting till the body stops twitching.

[@codykoon5520]

As someone who has been fortunate to have never been in a situation similar, I have no problem with the first 8. The last one after he disarms him concerns me.

[@elmamaloon9858]

Just for good measure.

[@michaelr5606]

It’s extremely concerning legally. Morally I’m totally fine with it.

[@fsully3379]

Hindsight is 20/20

[@Asidebar]

@@elmamaloon9858 killing someone while unarmed laying on the ground and no threat to anyone is not good measure.

[@FastEddy396]

Speaking as another combat veteran, my experiences have me averse to pretty much all violence. Seeing a person lose their life is very painful and tragic. Only the person who was in the situation could describe exactly what they experienced, thought, and intended. I'm with you on all three key elements. My inclination is that on the legal part it's very possibly 50/50. Morally, I'd have never done what he did, would have ensured he was unarmed if it seemed safe to do so, and render aid if possible. I've been with more than one person in their final moments and I still think on how that could have gone differently.

[@restlessyouthproductions]

Thank you. Something is NOT right about the defender. I understand he was on adrenaline… but he was just as ruthless as any cold blooded murderer. Plus he left, which is highly questionable

[@jiminauburn5073]

@@restlessyouthproductions his actions, especially shooting the guy in the head at the end almost makes me wonder if he might be a criminal or gang member himself.

[@restlessyouthproductions]

@@jiminauburn5073 That's what I've been telling people. That's not a " good" person. In my opinion the duty of the citizen is to be an extension of a ready, but noble force. If you put the man down and he's down, and you have the gun, there's no need for the extra shot and the dumping of the drink and driving off. That doesn't feel right at all.

[@anthonycole1539]

I absolutely love what Warrior Poet Society stands for! My issue with the shooting was of a legal nature, not trying to go to jail over some knucklehead. Shots 5-9 were questionable to me. He appeared to be spotted. Shot 9, no go! Morally: since I can't see the future, I take no chances.

[@JohnOscar93]

I agree with everything you said. I've seen the unedited footage, and that last shot is what is going to be problematic for me. IMHO, it looked like and could be argued by an anti-2A district attorney that it looked like a straight-up execution.

[@unnamed_channel]

It could be argued by a pro-2A DA that the last shot was not in self-defense. This isn't a pro-2A or anti-2A litmus test. Where you'd expect to find a difference is what he's charged with (or what deal he's offered).

[@hikerbill9248]

I cannot find the unedited footage.

[@warrenharrison9490]

Colion's breakdown was pretty decent in regards to what appears to be "excessive" shots, truth is in the moment you will not know or realize how many shots were fired.

[@Nobody-11B]

100% counting the number of shots and fractions of a second between shots is easy in the court room but impossible on the street.

[@superdave6415]

He disarmed him then shot again that’s not stopping a threat that’s murder

[@WiredForFishing]

Mercy killing, dude was dead already for sure.

[@Asidebar]

@@WiredForFishing He was NOT legally dead until the ME declared him dead. Therefore, he was alive when shot laying on floor. The jury will be instructed on the law and told thug was alive laying on floor when final bullet was fired in him.

[@AlitaGunm99]

Colion did not address the ninth shot at all.

[@jeremyb251]

I have learned that you cannot, in almost all situations, say what one would do in any situation. I carry at all times. I’d like to think that I would’ve done something like the shooter did, minus the last 5 shots. Thing is though, I was not there and there is no way of really knowing what I would have done. Might have shat myself, who knows?

[@shawnholmes7069]

Your statement about articulation is spot on. Depending on how you articulate and describe the events has a huge impact on the outcome.

[@savage22bolt32]

9:13 I so remember learning Venn diagrams in third grade. A valuable lesson, thank you Mrs. Hill! (circa 1962)

[@armyvet7997]

As a prior service 27 year veteran I can’t say if this guy was wrong or right in what he did but he made a split second decision and will have to live with that the rest of his life good outcome or bad. As a concealed carry person, I hope I never find myself in a situation where I have to make a decision to use deadly force. You never can tell what you may or may not do. While I’m in public places I always try to maintain situational awareness and mentally play out what I would do if an incident occurs.

[@precisionleadthrowing4628]

That robber committed suicide. Morally the shooting was justified. don't get misled by left wing demagogues and their speech warfare. 1) The robber FORCED the situation on his victims and judging how everyone was complying with being robbed they were in the situation where they had to make decision to comply or be killed. 2) Whether the gun was real or not is irrelevant because he didn't let his victims to inspect it (duh) - therefore speculating whether the gun is real or not is a way to get potentially killed. As you noted - Always assume the threat is real (for obvious reasons) 3) In Huston area armed robbers do shoot people for no particular reason, at random and even when leaving the scene if they suspect someone was having good look at them. 4) If anything it's the prime time to eliminate potential witnesses because he is leaving anyways and leaving them alive lowers the robbers chances to get away with it Few more good reasons why it was morally right and why it was service to community. 1) It deters FUTURE robbers 2) They can see if they play stupid games they will win stupid prizes 3) It very likely saved someones life and property in the future. THE ROBBER MADE A BAD DECISION AND KILLED HIMSELF. I would not loose any sleep over that and nobody should allow the socialists/fascists to play mind games with them. They can really mess up your head if you are not careful.

[@PTANV-x2g]

Precision Lead Throwing boy, you sound like me! Excellent breakdown. Good shoot, 10/10, would thank and reimburse the shooter for his ammo.

[@precisionleadthrowing4628]

@Workingonit interesting. FIY - if you are not an expert how do you recognize real expert from fake impostor? I bet you are the type that believes Bill Mengele Gates is doctor and "expert" on "vaccines" and you would obey without questioning anyone in a labcoat. Do you need an expert to tell you how to wipe your but or how to pee? FIY - Most of todays "experts" are ignorant, incompetent, influencers, scumbags with agenda (or all of the above). 27 years of handling firearms and making life/death decisions would actually qualify him as a real genuine expert on making life and death decisions. AND - do you have some evidence for your slander that he was killing kids in Iraq? You might be liable in court of law.

[@ickna2002]

John I agree with everything that you said the one thing I would add is if he would have stopped shooting after the first 4-5 rounds I still think morally I would have been ok with it. I have seen a number of videos where the robber was leaving everyone thought they were fine and the robber turns around and just shoots someone for no reason. So if the guy has a gun and is still in your area he is still a threat. That said the last few shots I dont know I could live with those. Great take John.

[@0BAAC0]

At a robbery here about 20 years ago, as the shooter was walking out he turned at the last second and shot and killed an unarmed young woman for no reason. (He hadn't fired a shot before that.) So, you have to end the threat, for sure. Some people are worse than animals. But... that last shot... I wasn't there, as John says, but I think he's going to have to explain that shot in court.

[@tp5401]

Bad guy down and never gets up... Nobody else hurt and everybody got their stuff back. Morality... check. Legal... check. Tactics... check. Screw the world that thinks otherwise.

[@MrAviator81]

I think you did a wonderful job breaking this shooting down in the categories of moral, tactical, and legal perspectives. I do have a few thoughts tho…1) The defender was lucky the perp never saw him reaching for his gun. I think I counted the defender reaching for his gun 3 times. In my opinion had that perp been more aware and had a real gun we’d be seeing a different video. 2) The amount of shots the defender took might bite him in the rear especially that last one. Like you mention the prosecution could take that and turn it into an execution type scenario or just plain cold blood murder. 3) The defender left the scene. This could also potentially be used against the defender by the prosecution. Every conceal carry person knows that after there is no threat to you or others and conditions are safe after a defensive shooting you have to call 911, and then your attorney ect. I’m also not a lawyer, but it’s clear that while this is a justified defensive shooting. The defender took actions that will no doubt be used against the defender. JMHO.

[@nilknoc101]

IMO it’s justified up until the excessive shot(s) at the end, then it becomes dangerously close to intentional killing without an imminent threat of deadly force against himself or others. The amount of shots is legally irrelevant; the point of concern is whether any of the shots occurred when the window of justifiable use of deadly force against the robber had closed.

[@elliottdmann]

Good thoughts. I appreciate your Warrior Poet framework for defensive shooting considerations.

[@Differencemade]

Thanks so much for a thoughtful and meaningful analysis. So easy to jump to a point of view that reinforces our biases. Reality can be pretty complicated. I have to say I agree with your analysis of what we know/can see about what went down.

[@grafixartz1]

Im licensed to carry in 24 States (I live in Chicago/Crook County, Illinois). Texas has probably the most supportive laws (including Florida) regarding defensive shooting and shooter engaged action to save lives of him/herself and those around them- granted. I still see this, with all things considered, as a "good shoot" that turned quite dramatically into the realm of manslaughter. For the singular reasoning any States Attorney/Prosecution/Jury filled with normal people (i.e: people not friendly to 2A/gun owners)... the single most important topic that hangs heavy in any defensive shooting and court trial: "how many shots required to stop the threat". Now don't get me wrong. I conceal carry most of the day thru some very dangerous parts of downtown Chicago and train constantly to defend myself. I've taken quite a bit of training (classroom, active shooter, defensive and live fire). The single-most important take-away that I consider every single day when I leave the house is: 1) if I'm engaged, how will I react? 2) if/when I react, what will the implications be (both criminally and civil)? 3) is the use of deadly force absolutely necessary if I'm faced with a dire threat. So...this leads us to this actual event for which i've seen the entire video, unedited. - Criminal enters restaurant brandishing a weapon. Navigates thru interior threatening others. - Criminal navigates towards subject (shooter) briefly pointing weapon at him and friend. - Criminal begins to walk towards exit, passing by subject. - Subject shoots criminal four times as criminal clearly is walking away and beyond subjects immediate position. - Subject falls to the floor, by exit door, clearly incapacitated. - Subject approached and fires an additional 4 times into criminals back as he lay face down. - Subject apparently picks up Criminals weapon after he fires an additional shot (coup de gras) into criminals head (or) back (unclear). Looking at this from the singularly most important viewpoint- The prosecuting States Attorney (secondarily a jury of Subjects peers), as they will have the most impactful role in how this event will end...examining the singular question all defensive shootings must prove (in both Prosecution and Defense)...is "how many shots were necessary to stop the threat". Period. The subject was well within his rights to defend his life and those in his immediate area. The Criminal was threatening the lives of all of the people within the immediate room of the restaurant...but after 4 shots (within reasonable use of force), sending the Criminal to the floor, face down most likely incapacitating him... were the additional four shots "excessive force" and beyond a "reasonable use of force to stop the threat" (elevating incident to aggravated manslaughter)...moreover...was the final shot (shot #9) a clear and decisive additional measure wholely unnecessary and beyond any reasonable justification (further elevating incident into the realm of 2nd degree murder). -The incident is currently before a Grand Jury to determine if it should go to a jury trial. Unfortunately, I see this not going well for the Subject...at the very least, if a Texas criminal trial hands down a "not guilty" verdict, he will still most likely be convicted in a civil court (if family moves forward with an indictment), ruining his life forever. In many other States (specifically Liberal/Democratic States) this man would most certainly be tried and convicted of aggravated manslaughter (at the very least) and 2nd degree murder (at the very most). ...and this is coming from a person (me) that's as "pro-2nd Amendment" and fervently/aggressively against criminals, as they come... I sincerely hope Texas laws support the actions of the Subject and release him from criminal liability...and most importantly, this incident will reverberate throughout the Criminal community, nationwide, effectively signaling an end to un-armed passive civilians willing to "look the other way" when peice-of-shit worthless thieves come-a-calling. To Note: Anyone that carries to defend their lives and protect their families and innocents. PLEASE consider Conceal Carry Insurance. It will literally protect you and the value of your property/investments from criminal/civil actions, due to a defensive incident that you're forced to participate in. (I hold a 2 million+ criminal defense policy with an additional 2 million civil liability).

[@MB-rh1qd]

Always do the moral thing. Let the legal consequences be damned.

[@MB-rh1qd]

I say this, and I don’t look good in orange…

[@arcane.ranger]

Same but I also don't look good in a coffin either.

[@MB-rh1qd]

@@arcane.ranger I’ll take a coffin over vindictive regret.

[@nospam3409]

@@MB-rh1qd Hind site is always 20/20. I'll do the moral thing, but I'll go out of my way to avoid the coffin because life has regrets either way. Totally agree though. Always do the moral thing. If someone is taking another's property by force, and I have the opportunity to do something about it, I have a moral obligation to do so.

[@averagejoe112]

Cool sorry bro. Tell me again when you execute a dude in the back of the head, your legal defense fund makes your family homeless and you still end up in jail for 10 years.

[@SilkiesPb]

You hit the nail on the head. The last shot was the one thing that may ruin his case.

[@ZOANOM]

Only if it's proven the bad guy was still alive, which can't be proven.

[@AlitaGunm99]

@@ZOANOM Did he check for a pulse before firing that last shot? Did he believe the robber was completely dead? Those things will matter if this goes to court.

[@ZOANOM]

@@AlitaGunm99 Didn’t need to check. Deadly force was authorized. No one will ever know which shot killed him. Case dismissed.

[@Googledybunker]

You and John from ASP need to collaborate on this kind of stuff. That would be great!

[@tinfoilsombrero1439]

John Correia is a blue line Fudd. That’s a dangerous mindset.

[@Googledybunker]

@tinfoilsombrero1439 he carries an HK with a red dot and his home defense weapon is an AR. I don't think you know what a Fudd is. And do you think the warrior poet anti police?

[@beefyoso]

ASP is a wimp.

[@tinfoilsombrero1439]

@@Googledybunker I wrote, he’s a Blue Line Fudd, not a 2A Fudd. There is a difference. I never mentioned John Lovell at all. You are easily distracted.

[@NOT_A_TOP_FAN]

Note to criminals: in today’s society, where there’s a good chance someone in a public place will have a concealed firearm, if you go into a setting displaying an intent to harm, YOU NOW BECOME FAIR GAME. And while yes, the optics don’t look great with shots from behind and 9 shots…I then think he could have gotten to that door, said f-it, and turned around and started spraying bullets….. and then what would this scenario be? The man would have regretted standing down….

[@BeegMike]

The morality of this is what gets me too. Like John says, we weren't there and perception within a situation can be severely distorted by stress.

[@coreyjohnson2998]

Stress is NOT a defense. It is why we should be training. Its is why WPS exists, to condition warriors to function when required. John says so in the video.

[@BeegMike]

@@coreyjohnson2998 agree 100%

[@SiliconDrifter]

@@coreyjohnson2998 do you live fire train with your kids next to you and live gun in your face? Serious question

[@coreyjohnson2998]

@@SiliconDrifter My answer is, and I only understand the first part of your he question, there are ways to train where you induce stress without putting others in harms way. If you watch WPS you will see this in practice and discussions. The point is as responsible gun owners we have a responsibility to be as prepared as possible. I’m not a lawyer and I still contend “It was a stressful situation” isn’t a credible defense. I remember a WSP video where John discussed a home invasion and the use of silencers (he’s not a fan) but what he said was in his home plan everyone has a responsibility. The kids understand where to go and that is not to the threat.

[@hawkspiritweaver6664]

100% with you on this one John.. Per the evidence we have

[@dansparrow1506]

I agree John. The threat was stopped and the ninth shot is the problem. That being said none of us truly know how we would react in the moment. I'm sure the people having a gun pointed at them feared for their life. That criminal will never point a gun at anyone else again. Perhaps it should be regarded as justice served.

[@pcnorton]

When to watch the unedited video on Active self Protection you see the guy pick up the bad guys gun and deliver the final shot. That is tough to defend.

[@rogermorris-zd4dp]

notice how the initial victims cowered under their table, they were in definite fear.

[@Captain077]

The moment the man pulled a gun on those people , he forfeited his right to life.

[@Blaze_Shadowflame]

@@pcnorton wasn't the bad guys gun fake? How could he deliver the final shot if it wasn't a real gun?

[@pcnorton]

@@Blaze_Shadowflame hi picked up the bad guys gun and used his own for a coup de grace.

[@davidbolduc828]

The minute you pull a gun out and threaten lives you've probably painted a big bulls eye on your back. I don't believe its my "duty to die" to save the bad person's life. Seems like there are too many laws protecting criminals and not enough for us law abiding taco loving citizens. However, in the end you can't deny that these actions send a strong message to any future would-be thieves (at least in Texas) not to threaten and rob people at gun point without the possibility of dire consequences. Who knows what the courts will think?

[@KyleMoses]

Love this guy. Great content and tries to stay unbiased. Good stuff.

[@windmolenfarm8030]

Good presentation with well designed and thought out questions and answers. Assessment is valid! You d' man bro!

[@josephbalon2777]

Great Breakdown, your Moral, Legal & Tactical DSD is a great way to help silo one's logic in a situation like this. Thanks for creating a simple memory mnemonic-that can help you wrap your head around a stressful situation from out of no where. Colion Noir also did two slightly different monologs which goes as a perfect trilogy of a real life scenario that everyone should be aware of who CC's. Legal is slippery and you got that also with you after action breakdown. "Armed Attorneys" would say as you did. Legally the sad thing is you can't kill for "Only Property" and it is not moral. Police will unload if a gun is pulled on them to "stop the threat" eight rounds is tactically sound. If there were three cops that would be 3 clips being emptied if the shots were clear front and background. Moral, Legal & Tactical is also a way to explain to not so gun friendly friends. You need to make a WP bumper sticker or patch to sell.

[@A_Marine_and_his_rifle]

In Texas we have the right to use firearms to protect property also. Not everyone agrees with it, but it is the law.

[@leon24191]

I notice that a lot of these videos don't mention the fact that the defensive shooter obtained the robber's "firearm" before putting that 9th shot into the robber. It was after he grabbed the gun & shot the robber that he found out the "firearm" was fake and threw it at the wall and broke it. It makes me wonder if they saw the actual video & are just avoiding that damning piece of evidence or if they just go off a general account of the situation. Honestly, i see shots 1-4 as 100% justifiable, shots 5-8 are iffy & relies on the defender's perspective, & the 9th shot unjustifiable. It'll be pretty hard to argue any "defense" when the robber is down, shot, & you gained control over their weapon before you let out a 9th shot into them.

[@josephmiller7152]

I love they way you broke this down. My first reaction watching the video was that the defensive shooter may be in trouble. I'm far from an expert on this stuff, but I very much appreciated your comments when used as a meter against my own reaction. It sure is hard to say what I would do in that situation, but I think I would have trouble sleeping afterward.

[@msmeyersmd8]

Even without the final shot. I seriously doubt this Protector of Innocents will have slept soundly for a long time. Having Woke Communist blue haired sexual deviant's "feelings" people judging him in 20/20 hindsight is a travesty. It is, literally, what is wrong inside the US today.

[@patrickhart6440]

Would you have a harder time sleeping if you had not engaged the threat, and upon leaving, the criminal turned and fired, killing an innocent person just having dinner?

[@anatineduo4289]

I appreciate your sober consideration of this situation.