7/11 robbery with robbers shot

If that video was altered through cgi or re-enacted to show a white cop, the repercussions would be horrific. Black on black is acceptable to most people because it can't be interpreted as racially motivated. Come on, the guy walked into the place and escalated straight to shooting them.

The video is open to interpretation by anyone who watches it. It doesn't matter what information he had, he showed no fear or concern. He didn't even call it in or instruct the victim to do so. He just stood there, rocking back and forth, talking street.

I know that a lot of people are okay with it, but if that was my son and a cop was caught on tape doing it, after I was through ripping the kid's broken arm off, I'd have a talk with the chief.
 
Briandg said:
The video is open to interpretation by anyone who watches it. It doesn't matter what information he had, he showed no fear or concern. He didn't even call it in or instruct the victim to do so. He just stood there, rocking back and forth, talking street.
0:45 "Call 9-1-1"
 
The video is open to interpretation by anyone who watches it. It doesn't matter what information he had, he showed no fear or concern. He didn't even call it in or instruct the victim to do so. He just stood there, rocking back and forth, talking street.
They were holding a hostage at gunpoint...
As posted above, he told the clerk to call 9-1-1 as soon as the situation was under some semblance of control.
 
I didn't understand what that he had said.

At the point that he fired the third shot there was no hostage. I'm not sure where you would actually define that as a hostage situation.

Apparently you two have no qualms about a non police security guard shooting so casually.
 
Apparently you two have no qualms about a non police security guard shooting so casually.
I'm amazed he stopped shooting when he did. I thought his reaction was quite reserved. Usually people nearly empty the gun in such a situation.

If you don't want to get shot DON"T COMMIT ARMED ROBBERY!
 
Apparently you two have no qualms about a non police security guard shooting so casually.
Dunno bout all your other gas, but I'm here to say that I have no qualms about armed thugs getting shot. Feel free to add me to your list.
 
briandg said:
I didn't understand what that he had said.

At the point that he fired the third shot there was no hostage. I'm not sure where you would actually define that as a hostage situation.

Apparently you two have no qualms about a non police security guard shooting so casually.
If you missed when he clearly told the clerk to call 9-1-1, you weren't listening. I heard it the first time I watched the video, and I had no trouble going back and finding it. So your complaint that he didn't even call it in was unfounded. It's not his fault that you didn't understand what he said.

Correct, after he had shot both robbers and ascertained that the robbers' gun(s) was/were fakes, there was no hostage. However, when he came through the door and opened fire, there WAS a hostage, apparently being held at gunpoint. That's a "hostage situation." What's your point? Once the hostage has been rescued, NO hostage situation is a hostage situation.

The only qualm I have about the event is that if the robber's gun had been real, the hostage might have been shot. Was it the wisest decision to burst in shooting? We can't possibly know. If he had been the police, they would have called in backup, and then a hostage negotiating team, and if the robber's gun was real they still might have shot (and even killed) the hostage. It's axiomatic that "action beats reaction." The guard did what he did, it ended well for everyone except the robbers, so why should we have problems with it?
 
Compton and Gardena are very close, like across a street, Not at all a good area to mess around.

My biggest question is What Powder was in his revolver shells, because there is NO MUZZLE FLASH. I am envious! Is it BE86? Silhouette? [OK, shot #1 had minor flash.]

Assuming it is California, the Firearms permit systems for guuards is based on Caliber: 38 and 357 are the same caliber, so are 40 SW and 10mm. To get multi caliber certed you jsut shot the same course with the 2nd or third caliber. Been there, done that. However, that all means little or nothing when you work for a 9mm only or 38 only client or company. Yes you need the credential, but having the credential does not mean you can carry it.

The guard is too calm, it seems. There is a shots fired reporting requirement. I happen to agree with the shooting as justified. Personally, when I did that training, we had a hardened Narco Detective teaching it and he made his opinion clear: shoot and keep shooting until the threat is ceased. There is no half way. You do not take prisoners in a shootout. I agree. Multiple rounds into the chest. No arm shooting wingshots. Standard tactics for Security and Police require shooting until the threat is gone. You do not want wounded idiots with a gun or guns moving around, and you need to secure the scene. When perps cross that line (armed robbery), there is no requirement to keep them alive: they play with guns with big boys they should end up dead.

Police in that area, Compton and Gardena are in LA County and policed by the LASD are known for "contagious fire" and over 100 shots have been fired at lone perps. But lately they seem to have effectively reduced that drastically.
*****
Update: It may well have been Los Angeles County:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-gardena-robbery-video-20180118-story.html
There are multiple reports on the same incident, here is NJ:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/15/watch-security-guard-shoot-two-thieves-point-blank-video/
 
Last edited:
Another thing: Expect the store clerk to file a complaint and lawsuit against the guard, his company, and the store.

If you were the clerk would you expect, or want, this course of action (before you knew the outcome). Yes, it turned out good.
 
The full story

"An armed private security guard recently thwarted a robbery in West Compton by shooting two would-be thieves, and surveillance video of the incident is circulating on social media, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department said Thursday.

The security guard was sitting outside a convenience store – the Los Angeles Times identified it as a 7-Eleven – in the 15200 block of South Avalon Boulevard on the night of Dec. 30, 2017, when two teenagers entered the business, according to a sheriff’s news release. [7/11 @ 15228 S Avalon Blvd, Compton, CA 90220; cross Avalon to So Bay Scaffolding, 15209 S Avalon Blvd, Gardena, CA 90248, and you are in Gardena]


Moderators Note: Edited to remove the copyrighted story. Read the entire story Below.

http://ktla.com/2018/01/18/mines-re...uld-be-robbers-1-with-fake-weapon-in-gardena/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Marco Califo said:
Another thing: Expect the store clerk to file a complaint and lawsuit against the guard, his company, and the store.

If you were the clerk would you expect, or want, this course of action (before you knew the outcome). Yes, it turned out good.
You mean, before he knew the gun pointed at him was fake, would the clerk have wanted to be rescued? I suppose there's a small mathematical possibility that the answer might be "No," but I think it's unlikely that he'd have preferred being shot over being rescued.
 
Endangering the hostage with reckless intervention in a hostage crisis, not complying with the Cal. Budiness and Profession Code for armed guards, not referring a hostage situation immediatley to quailified law enforcement, associated stress, workplace safety violations. You may not ahree with me. But you have not heard the last of this ahooting yet.
 
Marco Califo said:
not complying with the Cal. Budiness and Profession Code for armed guards,
How about posting the specific provisions of this code that you think the security guy violated, and then post a link to the document on an official State web site so we can read the language for ourselves, in context.
 
Last edited:
If you were the clerk would you expect, or want, this course of action (before you knew the outcome). Yes, it turned out good.

I would want and expect security to do its job: protect employees, customers, and property. It's the bad guys that forced this outcome, no one else. Any bad outcome is totally on the bad guys.

I used to be a rental cop but in a very pro-gun state. We had to provide our own arms but there was no limitation. .357 Mag revolvers ruled the day for about half my time there but then Glocks seemed to become very popular all at once.

One guy, a unique character but the best backup you could imagine on a call, carried no less than 9 weapons, if you include his shotgun and guns he carried in his patrol car (yes we had cars provided by the company).

I held true to my Browning BDM the entire time. I think the guard did extremely well, my only complaint is the clerk didn't shoot those scum bags.

Marco.....geeze! Your reply just gave me another reason to have no desire to live in Kalifornia.

****

Apparently you two have no qualms about a non police security guard shooting so casually.

How was dead on target shots "shooting so casually?"

What I have a problem with are criminals and the politicians and mindset that encourage their activities. At age 16 I was working, studying, and volunteering my time with the Civil Air Patrol. Why weren't these kids doing the same thing? That's the question society should be asking.
 
Last edited:
The clerk is working a crap job making crap wages.
If he files a complaint using a crap lawyer someone will probably throw him some money to get rid of it irrespective of the merits. So, he will likely try it. There will certainly be lawyers willing to help him.

As much as I do not blame the guard for his actions, I could see the clerk not being all that happy. Most convenience store armed robberies don't end in a shooting. Usually the clerk gives up the money and that is the end of it. This involved quite a bit of extra excitement.
 
Back
Top