Armed Citizen: Oklahoma Pharmacist Defends Employees from Robbers
- Thread starter Blue Steel
- Start date
- Status
Double Naught Spy
New member
My take from the articles is that the pharmacist downed the threat who was then out of the battle (shot in the head) and the pursued threat #2 that ceased being a perceiced threat via flight. Then the pharmacist discovered threat #1 wasn't neutralized after all and engaged the guy for a second time as an active threat.
Sounds plausible.
Sounds plausible.
Wildalaska
Moderator
No more than yours...and need I emphaisze again...
"But as he started to chase after the second robber he looked back to see the 16-year-old he had shot in the head getting up again. Ersland said he then emptied the Kel-Tec .380 into the boy’s chest."
Perhaps my "what ifs" are a lot less than yours.
But then again, it seems folk are more concerned with vindicating this guy instead of thinking about the ramifications of this scenario. I would have thought that responsible gun owners would have preferred to analyze the situation in a critical manner, as opposed to screeching yahoo.
WildguessiwasmistakenAlaska TM
Hey, I'm not wanting to vindicate this guy just because he is a 'gun owner', and I, for one, am not thinking yahoo! I certainly consider myself a responsible gun owner, thankyou very much, and would imagine the majority on this forum are also. Again, all we know is what we've heard, any analysis will be up to those investigating the crime scene. As far as I can see, the only Irresponsible gun owner was the deceased.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Yep, let's hold off until an investigation is performed. Tune in a few months. Tapes, forensics, etc.
He could be righteous or not. CSI-TFL will have to wait.
He could be righteous or not. CSI-TFL will have to wait.
I doubt he'll walk.
In the report it only mentions him firing 1 shot before he "emptied his .380 into the boys chest" The Kel tec p3at (which im assuming it was) holds 6+1 rounds. And if he truly emptied the gun, thats at least 5 rounds into an already down person. I could see a second shot, but pumping 5 rounds in a row, even someone who opposes an immiadiate threat (which the kid probably didn't) . . . he's gonna need a hell of a lawyer. I know adrenaline was probably a major factor in all this, and legal ramifications were probably the last thing on his mind, but thats some hard explaining to do
In the report it only mentions him firing 1 shot before he "emptied his .380 into the boys chest" The Kel tec p3at (which im assuming it was) holds 6+1 rounds. And if he truly emptied the gun, thats at least 5 rounds into an already down person. I could see a second shot, but pumping 5 rounds in a row, even someone who opposes an immiadiate threat (which the kid probably didn't) . . . he's gonna need a hell of a lawyer. I know adrenaline was probably a major factor in all this, and legal ramifications were probably the last thing on his mind, but thats some hard explaining to do
You are assuming the mag was full and a round in the chamber. I only had 5 HP's in mine as it fed better that way.
You may have missed this in the OP.
You know, if I had shot someone in the head and they were still in the fight, I am going to use ANY and ALL means that I have available to stop the threat.
Last edited:
Yeah, no kidding. What precedent of New York law have to do with a case in Oklahoma? You are also assuming the DA is even going to prosecute. I think you will find that we in the south use a lot of common sense, based on facts, and don't just go to court for the heck of it. In Texas, if it is considered self defense, there is also no civil liability.
If he gets in trouble, it's going to be because of the excessive amount of ammo used.
Alaska is right, we don't know everything.
What if the pharmacist shot the kid x amount of times in the chest before attempting to chase the other kid, failed to chase and then shot the 16 year in the head? I'm not calling the pharmacist a liar but I won't rule out the possibility.
I won't be taking sides on this, I will wait for a security tape.
I fear this post will take on more flak than a B-17 over Germany.
Alaska is right, we don't know everything.
What if the pharmacist shot the kid x amount of times in the chest before attempting to chase the other kid, failed to chase and then shot the 16 year in the head? I'm not calling the pharmacist a liar but I won't rule out the possibility.
I won't be taking sides on this, I will wait for a security tape.
I fear this post will take on more flak than a B-17 over Germany.
Wildalaska
Moderator
Most lawyers recognize that because of the advanced state of the law and judicial decisions in NY, there is universal applicability, especially in criminal matters.
It doesnt surprise me that Oklahoma decisions mirror the Goetz case cited
"Oklahoma's standard of reasonableness may be gleaned from past decisions of this Court and is set forth in OUJI-CR 743, which reads as follows:
A person is justified in using deadly force in self-defense if that person reasonably believed that use of deadly force was necessary to protect herself from imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. Self-defense is a defense although the danger to life or personal security may not have been real, if a reasonable person, in the circumstances and from the view point of the defendant, would reasonably have believed that she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.
The aforesaid instruction was given in this case. While the instruction explicitly states that the fact finder should assume the viewpoint and circumstances of the defendant in assessing the reasonableness of his or her belief, i.e. subjective, it also requires the defendant's viewpoint to be that of a reasonable person, in similar circumstances and with the same perceptions, i.e., objective. Thus, Oklahoma's standard is a hybrid, combining both the objective and subjective standards. This Court has considered the issue of the clarity of this instruction on several occasions, the latest in Goulsby v. State, 742 P.2d 567 (Okl.Cr. 1987), where the appellant in that case argued that the reference to "if a reasonable person" make it appear to a lay jury that the defendant's viewpoint had to conform to that of a reasonable person. There, we held that the instruction correctly stated the law in Oklahoma and found it to be sufficient. See also Adams v. State, 70 P.2d 821, 827 (Okl.Cr. 1937); Alcorn v. States, 56 Okl.Cr. 156, 35 P.2d 735, 739 (1934); Turner v. State, 4 Okl.Cr. 164, 111 P. 988, 998 (1910); Brantley v. State, 15 Okl.Cr. 6, 175 P. 51 (1918); Baker v. State, 22 Okl.Cr. 224, 210 P. 292 (1922); Jamison v. State, 35 Okl.Cr. 302, 250 P. 548 (1926); Guthrie v. State, 87 Okl.Cr. 112, 194 P.2d 895, 901 (1948); Haines v. State, 275 P.2d 347, 354 (Okl.Cr. 1954)."
BECHTEL v. STATE 1992 OK CR 55
Mmmmmm....yes Im sure, perhaps sometime we could compare the court dockets of Houston and NYC
WildnowyouarearguingjusttoargueAlaska TM
DonR101395
New member
If I'm in a back brace from surgery and this guy just tried to rob me and he's still getting up. Yep, he a threat and I shoot him again.
Also, you're not just asking questions, you're doing what you always like to do in a thread such as this, you like to stir up things.
Double Naught Spy
New member
This may clarify things a bit as to the number of times the suspect was shot, apparently 2 in the head and 2 in the chest.
http://newsok.com//article/3370984?custom_click=rss
I found this interesting from Wildalaska...
No, of course we don't have all the facts here. We have news accounts only. Since we don't have all the facts, then I don't see how we can actually analyze the situation in a critical manner as called for. All that can be analyzed is what has been stated in the news and as noted, that isn't all the facts. So there is something of a Catch-22 here in noting that we don't have all the facts, but that we should be discussing the situation in a critical manner instead of being exuberant for the pharmacist.
Those who current have all the current facts, law enforcement, have not acted against the pharmacist. Until which time they do decide the move against the pharmacist, "yahoo" may be in order. Certainly, if the pharmacist had blatantly acted in an unlawful manner, he would have been arrested. If it appeared he acted in an unlawful manner to the officers on scene, he would have been arrested. So thusfar, indications by law enforcement do not indicate he acted unlawfully. That does not mean he necessarily acted in a lawful manner and some the analysis is ongoing, but there is no indication at the current time that the pharmacist is being considered as a suspect in the death of the would-be robber.
I think many responsible gun owners are perfectly happy with the results so far based on the information given and the fact that Jerome Ersland thusfar hasn't been arrested and that there is no current public indication that he will be arrested.
http://newsok.com//article/3370984?custom_click=rss
I found this interesting from Wildalaska...
No, of course we don't have all the facts here. We have news accounts only. Since we don't have all the facts, then I don't see how we can actually analyze the situation in a critical manner as called for. All that can be analyzed is what has been stated in the news and as noted, that isn't all the facts. So there is something of a Catch-22 here in noting that we don't have all the facts, but that we should be discussing the situation in a critical manner instead of being exuberant for the pharmacist.
Those who current have all the current facts, law enforcement, have not acted against the pharmacist. Until which time they do decide the move against the pharmacist, "yahoo" may be in order. Certainly, if the pharmacist had blatantly acted in an unlawful manner, he would have been arrested. If it appeared he acted in an unlawful manner to the officers on scene, he would have been arrested. So thusfar, indications by law enforcement do not indicate he acted unlawfully. That does not mean he necessarily acted in a lawful manner and some the analysis is ongoing, but there is no indication at the current time that the pharmacist is being considered as a suspect in the death of the would-be robber.
I think many responsible gun owners are perfectly happy with the results so far based on the information given and the fact that Jerome Ersland thusfar hasn't been arrested and that there is no current public indication that he will be arrested.
Everything so far has been opinion based on the information available.
TACTICALLY,HOW COULD THE SHOOT SHOULD HAVE GONE DOWN BETTER WITH THE ROBBERS SAME RESPONSE TO BEING SHOT?
1)Robber enters, threatens, then fires and shoots Pharmacist.
2)Pharmacist shoots back and Double taps the head(assume the C of Mass shot unavailable).
3)Pharmacist reassesses after these shots and notes the other assailant leaving.
4)Pharmacist DOES NOT pursue the fleeing suspect with his loaded gun(danger from this perp no longer present)
5)Say the perp who was shot starts moving and getting up.(some brain damaged folk can move purposefully and with coordinated movement, some carry on as before)
You have the perp who shot you getting up/moving after 2 to the head, what do you do?? You have a back injury and are not physically fit and cannot wrestle with him.
You gonna watch him, get physical, or put 2 in the C of Mass? The perp was shot in the chest so he must have been facing the pharmacist--
What is the best tactical response of the pharmacist?
TACTICALLY,HOW COULD THE SHOOT SHOULD HAVE GONE DOWN BETTER WITH THE ROBBERS SAME RESPONSE TO BEING SHOT?
1)Robber enters, threatens, then fires and shoots Pharmacist.
2)Pharmacist shoots back and Double taps the head(assume the C of Mass shot unavailable).
3)Pharmacist reassesses after these shots and notes the other assailant leaving.
4)Pharmacist DOES NOT pursue the fleeing suspect with his loaded gun(danger from this perp no longer present)
5)Say the perp who was shot starts moving and getting up.(some brain damaged folk can move purposefully and with coordinated movement, some carry on as before)
You have the perp who shot you getting up/moving after 2 to the head, what do you do?? You have a back injury and are not physically fit and cannot wrestle with him.
You gonna watch him, get physical, or put 2 in the C of Mass? The perp was shot in the chest so he must have been facing the pharmacist--
What is the best tactical response of the pharmacist?
- Status