Fort Worth CHL Holder Shooting of Robber Video

Here is the video...
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/myfox/pages...ale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1

Here is a version of the story that was printed before the video was released...

http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_n...ry/158522.html
Man shares story of shooting suspected robber at store
By ALEX BRANCH
abranch@star-telegram.com

FORT WORTH -- It was a phone call he says he'll never forget — his wife's voice on his cellphone pleading "there's nothing in my purse" to someone pointing a gun at her face.

That's what a 56-year-old Fort Worth man, who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon, said he heard before he shot an armed robber late Tuesday at a grocery store.

"I still can't believe it," the man said. "You tell yourself this will never happen. Then you run to the store in your house shoes and practically your pajamas ... and it happens."

A police spokesman said an investigation is ongoing but called the man a Good Samaritan. The Star-Telegram is not identifying the man because he said he is afraid for his family's safety.

One suspect is recovering from gunshot wounds in the hospital, but at least two suspects remain at large, police said.

The Samaritan said he and his wife made a late stop at the store for yogurt and soda. He sat outside in the car while his wife went inside. He soon noticed two men crouching suspiciously in the parking lot.

About 11:30 p.m., three men carrying semiautomatic weapons burst into Albertsons, 3525 Sycamore School Road, in an "invasion-style manner," said Lt. Dean Sullivan, a police spokesman.

The robbers took purses and wallets from customers, he said.

Outside, the Samaritan said he watched the robbers go in and dialed 911. He said he told the dispatcher he was worried about his wife and was going inside.

"I was hoping she was still at the back of the store near the yogurt," he said. "But as I walking up, she called my cellphone. I heard her talking about her purse and then a heard a loud banging sound."

He would later learn, he said, that the bang was his wife dropping her phone when a robber ripped the purse from her hands. But, at the time, he said, he thought she might have been hurt.

The Samaritan said he entered the store and saw a man pointing a gun at him, so he raised his hands in the air.

They both started to speak at the same time. Then, the Samaritan said, he sensed that the man was about to shoot him.

“He has his finger on the trigger,” he said.

So, he said, he drew his Berretta and fired first.
 
Did anyone watch this video???

I live in TX and per our laws you can use deadly force when facing immediate danger (or an "innocent" is) or under a few other circumstances. This guy did a helluva thing by rushing into the store to save his wife (not sure how intelligent/tactically smart but took big cohones) but to chase them out blasting one handed???

Am I not the only one shaking my head at this fool playing Jack Bauer?

I don't know what I'd do in this situation but finding cover to observe/make sure my wife was OK and not wanting to escalate the situation putting my wife/others into even more danger by running in brandishing a weapon comes to mind. Am I not gung ho enough to be packing or what????
 
We'd all like to say we'd be cool, collected, and textbook. But when it's my wife getting robbed... I won't fault the man, and apparently the cops won't either.
 
There are a few of schools of thought. The first is that since everything turned out okay, he did fine. The other is that things turned out okay only because the bad guys screwed up even more than he did. I am of this school and as such think this is something that can be used as a learning tool. The last school of thought is that the guy should have just waited outside for his wife, calling 911 or whatever, as the cops suggest. I don't think much of that notion.

The guy is a hero, no doubt, but in being a hero, he did many things that were not very good. He was lucky that only the bad guy got injured.

So he sees the bad guys and figures they are up to no good and the bad guys go into the store where his wife is located and start robbing people. Does he call to warn his wife that possible thugs have entered the store? Nope, she has to call him.

So on the video, we see him enter the store with the cell phone in his RIGHT hand which turns out to be his gun hand. On entering the store, he walks right past one of the bad guys who fortunately either isn't armed or decides not to try to stop the hero. From the video, it does not even appear that the hero even saw the bad guy. He has something of target fixation whereby he is trying to get to his wife and is unaware of his surroundings.

So, he knows bad guys are in the store and his wife calls for help and he charges into the store, but is he ready to deal with the circumstances? Not really. In order to draw his gun, he will have to drop the cell phone first. That means a delay in responding to a threat. Given that he was wearing blinders, he walked within feet of the first bad guy at the door. Simply put, that isn't a great way to go into a situation you believe to already be very bad.

Chasing the bad guys wasn't real great either, but it worked. However, he should never have left the store.

He hit the bad guy twice while shooting on the move and shooting one-handed. He is taking large steps. He is trying to hit a moving target while negotiating objects in the store. In short, he has a crappy shoot on the move platform in a less than ideal environment while trying to shoot a moving target. There is nothing he could have done about the robbers running and the environment, but his shooting on the move could have been much better.

I believe there are three shots on the video fired by the hero. He hit the bad guy twice and one shot was a lower shot (hit the foot). That means that probably at least one shot went wild and of the other shots, they didn't appear to be COM. Maybe the guy just has a flinch or maybe his shooting platform could have been better. Either way, chasing the bad guys out the store and firing was risky. Given the time of day and lack of customers, there was no problem. Had the store been busy, maybe the guy would not have attempted such a chase. I don't doubt he was making up things as he went along, just like we would all do in a similar circumstance.

I have to wonder if the bad guy with the .22 actually had a loaded gun or not or if loaded, if it was ready to fire or not. Apparently, the bad guy never fired a shot. As good guys, we are fortunate that there is so much incompetence amongst bad guys. No doubt the bad guy will work on refining his craft and will commit other crimes in the future. Few good guys ever see action and of those that do, few ever actually see it more than once. They don't get to drawn on a lot of experience when they are called into action because they don't have a lot of experience in such matters.
 
Folks, I live in FW and it is easy to over analyze his actions and motives, but give the guy credit for doing his best under a very emotionally charge situation. By his own admission he hoped this never would happen and he is not professionally trained. He is a citizen that chose to become licensed and take responsibility for his families protection and he did what he was committed too.

Are you?
 
No charges filed against the good guy? Bad guys hit, and arrested? No one else injured? Good shoot. Improvements could be made, mistakes that could have been bad were also made, but it ended well.
I hope he is able to attend some formal training - all the critics here want to donate? Formal training is very expensive for many of us, and all the talk about "what's you life worth" won't feed the family while trying to save up.
So, kudos to the good guy.
 
My wife's life is worth more to me than my own. We have been together for my entire adult life. If she were in the store and I saw a couple of subhumans putting on ski masks and heading in to engage in nefarious activities you bet your bippie I would go in with the intent of keeping her from harm. God help the weasel who would injure her. Maybe chasing them out while shooting 1-handed wasn't textbook, but it sure sent them scurrying.
 
Again, I don't fault the guy for wanting to protect his wife, I'd lay down my life for my wife or son without any thought (other than is my life insurance policy in effect yet).

I guess I had two issues, one legal and one tactical.

Again, in the heat of the moment I have NO CLUE what I would do or how I would react...I am very glad to be in Texas where a cop will say on TV that the guy wasn't charged even though he was trying to shoot people who no longer posed a threat and had done no harm other than scaring people (done no harm is very important in this situation). I hope that if I am ever in that situation my local cops are that supportive...but even in my CHL class the difference between a threat and a fear was pounded into me. One could say the he prevented the guys from going somewhere else and possibly kill someone but that's all conjecture...

The tactical issue is way too complex for an untrained individual like me to analyze BUT watching 24 has given me a great deal of informal training right??? Just kidding. I guess my greatest fear is that me intervening would be more likely to get my wife shot in that situation...in case of a simple theft it's not worth the risk to me but in a hostage/kidnap/murder scenario I already know what I would do (we have discussed that).

In all reality that's a common thing that could happen to any of us, reading everyone's responses gives me new angles of thoughts...I'm not just trolling here. I have very little contact with people to discuss tactical issues as most of the ex-military guys I know don't enjoy rehashing combat scenarios and the others are paintball warriors...the thread regarding headshots was pretty interesting to read too.

Anyways, thanks for the comments and please understand I was trying to get a convo going re: tactics and legality of the actions...not just to criticize the guy but to discuss what happened vs. what would be ideal to do in that crazy situation.
 
What's the problem, anyhow?

Sigma 40 Blaster said:
Am I not the only one shaking my head at this fool playing Jack Bauer?
Sigma 40 Blaster said:
. . . watching 24 has given me a great deal of informal training right??? Just kidding.
Hummm - - TWO mentions of that very entertaining tv program. In order to enjoy "24," you pretty well need to accept that Mr. Bauer is a superlatively trained and experienced government agent. I enjoy the show, too, but, hey - - - Is that your main training film?

Sigma 40 Blaster said:
. . . I was trying to get a convo going re: tactics and legality of the actions . . . .
How so, Sigma? The FWPD spokesperson has ALREADY characterized the shooter as a good Samaritan, and ALREADY SAID he wouldn't be charged. Do you want to second guess the cops' assessment of the legality? Should they charge him after all? Do you feel there's something wrong with what the guy did?

No battle plan is perfect, and it is axiomatic that, "No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy." It usually true that a hastily put-together plan of action, implemented instantly, is far more apt to work out than a carefully staffed, cunningly crafted and polished strategy placed in operation somletime next week.

It turned out okay. Good guys won this time. I think that's great.

Johnny
 
__________________ some of you give me headache.:mad:

Thugs robbing people in a large grocery get popped by an Honest John and right off you start saying " HE SHOULDA' THIS OR HE SHOULD NOTTA' THAT".

Give the guy his due and clap your hands that the good guy wins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Darn right.

In "some" parts of the country (and most of the "civilized" :rolleyes: world), the hubby would be facing charges for:
a) having the audacity to defend himself and/or his wife by carrying a pistol in the first place
b) discharging rounds within city limits
c) wounding some "poor misunderstood yout" without (what some would claim as) "just cause" :rolleyes:

I haven't said it in a couple weeks, so now seems like a good time:

God Bless Texas. Oh, and lest I forget...
I love a happy ending. :)
 
The very reason we train and talk about scenarios is to do the best we can in a shooting. It seems this man did the best he could. Hats off to him he won.

Losing pretty in gun play means possible death. Winning uglys only downside is it leaves Monday morning quarterbacks to bust your chops:D.
 
Yes, some folks are happy with being lucky instead of good. I don't figure you can count on luck, however. This guy was lucky and this is partially the reason why this example should be used as a learning tool. So while it is good he won, it isn't like his success is a pattern other folks should follow. He won in spite of his errors. Such errors in other situations have been costly to the good guys.

And here is the thing about it, had the bad guy at the door simply turned and capped the hero in the back a couple of times, we likely would never have seen the video or not the critical parts of it. That didn't happen and so we can see the mistakes being made and use them instructively.
 
What more could the hero have done with the 2nd bad guy at the doors entrance? The 2nd bad guy at the entrance wasn't necessarily identifiable as a threat, and therefore you can't exactly treat him as such.

Entering a building to confront the unknown... you're assuming a certain level of risk with that. Risks that involve being shot from behind by a clandestine bad guy.
 
Am I not the only one shaking my head at this fool playing Jack Bauer?

In his defense, I would be kinda freaked out and pumped up on adrenaline if some guy came up to me and pointed a gun in my face.

If this happened in California, the guy with the CCW license would have gotten arrested, too :) That's CA for you.
 
I won't comment on his tactical soundness. I think we could analyze it to death but it probably won't change our actions in our "moment of fire". For that, there's practice.

I give our good sam a hearty pat on the back. The BEST side affect of this is yet another news story showing goblins what they face in this state. There are some things I disagree with Texas about but gun laws and attitude are NOT one of them!
 
Let's turn this around for a moment.

Three bad guys enter a national grocery chain store -- one that can certainly afford security cameras, hold-up alarms and maybe even security people -- with the intent to commit armed robbery of patrons inside. They're willing to forcefully take property (purses) and money from their victims, potentially shoot victims and/or anyone trying to stop them. We know at least one of them is armed.

In otherwords, three violent men who will terrorize and perhaps kill people over the $8.53 in a purse... and are threatening the love-of-your-life. They are NOT afraid of being identified by security cameras and apparently think they can do as they damn well please. They are willing to put multiple lives at risk to get just the few dollars shoppers have in their wallets.

This time they may only take money and threaten people. Next time they may hit a few of 'em for holding on to a purse or wallet. The time after that they'll pistol-whip a senior citizen for being too slow to hand it over. This is a typical progression for armed robbery teams.

If someone engages these guys, the question shouldn't be which direction the bullet came from as long as the BGs are still an active threat -- and they are an active threat until they've left the area or incapacitated.
 
Those of you that have been following this thread have probably noted that a few posts have "disappeared". Someone awhile back asked why all should be punished by closing a good thread instead of focusing on the trouble makers.

Good question.

Rather than close this one, I've deleted a flame post and a few that responded to it. A couple were civil; a couple weren't. The authors of those that weren't know who they are, and should heed the warning.

This is remaining open for civil discussion.
 
Back
Top