Pizza Hut SD Shooting

M

madmag

New member
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/09/29/1725241/pizza-driver-hit-by-bandits-i.html

This happened in my area.

Inside a cooler at an east Charlotte Pizza Hut, two would-be robbers were hitting and pistol-whipping a delivery driver. All the while, the driver said, he kept his right elbow pinned tightly against his body - holding a Glock 22 under his shirt and out of view.

He didn't want to use the gun unless he was forced to, he recalled Tuesday. But as he felt one of the men lifting his shirt, nearly exposing the gun, the deliveryman opened fire.
Click to expand...

As you can read the delivery man had a LE background. It looks like he did everything right and maybe even held off defending himself longer than necessary. I think there is a chance these BG's would have killed him and the store manager just to eliminate any witnesses.

So, do you have any fault with how this guy defended himself? Should he have pulled sooner rather than later?
 
I can't find any fault with anything he did. He's alive, 2 of 3 bad guys are dead and the third is probably cleaning the ca ca out of his under trou.

Now that the dust has settled, the delivery driver will likely be fired by Pizza Hut for violating their no firearms policy.

My response is not to buy a Pizza Hut pizza ever again if they fire him, and to send an email to the corporate mailbox of Yum! Brands (parent) to let them know that this employee deserves a commendation and more ammunition.
 
Favor, Please!

Anybody local to the Charlotte area, please keep us informed, especially if Pizza Hut Fires this guy.
 
I would have pulled sooner, if I could. I'm not going to wait to be pistol whipped before I open fire.
 
I, too, would have fire early, around the time I was asked to kneel in front of a person with a gun. At that point they had already showed no regard for my personal safety and I would have been expecting an execution-style killing. In MI it would have been lawful to shoot them when they first hit the delivery man (and probably when they first made clear their intent to rob the building).

I expect hellfire should Pizza Hut fire this guy. Especially after he showed restraint that very very few people have. I am failing to understand how one beaten and permanently scarred innocent employee and a successful robbery is a better policy than 2 dead robbers/convicted felons and an unsuccessful robbery.
 
jimbob86 said:
Anybody local to the Charlotte area, please keep us informed, especially if Pizza Hut Fires this guy.
Click to expand...


I am local and I will follow this story. Pizza Hut will probably fire him, but I am sure that's a minor issue to him.

This story illustrates one of my robbery fears. Who knows if these guys would have been satisfied with just money....if you wait to find out then it's too late.
 
Pretty tough to argue with those results. The good guys won. This guy was put in a "kill or be killed" situation, through no fault of his own, and he took the only option that he had left. The robbers made the classic "fatal error in the victim selection process". Still, as has already been said, it will be a big surprise if Pizza Hut doesn't fire him. They should instead be giving him a promotion, a raise, and a long, paid vacation.
 
This "Thugs targeting Pizza Hut" thing is getting pretty common. We just had a Pizza Hut delivery driver stabbed to death for less than 30 dollars in Omaha recently, and the Pizza Hut delivery driver that shot his attacker and was fired for it in Des Moines, Iowa (last year?) was supposed to be on the local morning radio this AM.....
 
This story illustrates one of my robbery fears. Who knows if these guys would have been satisfied with just money....if you wait to find out then it's too late.
Click to expand...

I think he was overly patient, myself..... why wait to see how many blows to the head you can take with a heavy metal object (pistol) before you lose consciousness? "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie pop?" ......

Me, I'm not nearly that patient.
 
But...but...the two VICTIMS of this flagrant slaughter were in the process of turning their lives around. :( They were somebody's precious little babies once, and they hadn't even met all of the babies they had sired themselves due to the slowness of getting dozens of paternity test results back from the lab. :mad: Life is so unfair! ;)

I have to say that I like the deliveryman's version of a "three strikes" law--three bullet strikes. :D Looks like there will be no more repeat-offending for those two dirtbags. :cool:

As for his tactics, I think he was right to be compliant at first, especially since they "had the drop on him," outnumbered him, and didn't know that he was armed, but after he couldn't open the safe and they got aggravated, I think he should have acted far more quickly because the immediate danger to his life just increased exponentially at that point.
 
Last edited:
Even if he gets fired...

... unemployed and alive beats spousal benefits for a widow.

I'm amazed more convenience stores, pizza drivers, cabbies etc aren't packing.

Back when I was in college, and driving pizzas, a fellow driver got robbed. At the time, we were using canvas bags to carry cans of soda, if sodas were ordered. He used his bag full of Coke cans to whack the robber in the head, then ran to his car and drove back to the store.

Result: He got a reprimand. The company ditched the canvas bags, and instead got clear plastic sleeves, that were not strong enough to be used as weapons, in order to encourage us not to try to resist.

He and I quit shortly thereafter.

Next college job, I was working at a BP station. Never got robbed, but several stores within two blocks did. The McDonald's had a murder; turned out the robber/killer was an employee of the store. No gun policy at work. Decided I didn't need that job.

But looking back, I should have been packing, then, policy or no.
 
Maybe Now the BGs will consider the consequences

Maybe Now the BGs will consider the consequences of their actions. Glad the man was able to walk away with his life. He most likely saved the life of the store manager. There are alot of people that carry weapons with and without CCP than one would think.

Lemmon
 
Friend of mine was a prison guard...

... and we were talking once about a case where a trustee on a road work team attacked my friend over something stupid (my friend made him put out a cigarette, which the trustee thought of as a loss of face, so he attacked him from behind with a bush axe).

Luckily, I knew my friend from the dojo, where he'd started training because of a previous time, when he'd been attacked with a shiv, hadn't known what to do, froze up, and got stuck in the shoulder.

So he heard the other prisoners react to the impending attack, turned, saw the trustee coming at him with the bush axe, and he executed a weapon takeaway our sensei had made us drill hundreds of times. End result, my buddy had the axe, and the trustee was KO'd.

Where this ties in, though: I expressed some surprise that a trustee, somebody who'd earned relative freedom of movement, would attack a guard over something so petty.

My friend said, "These guys aren't in there because they have good impulse control."
 
If they could think beyond the immediate "want money-take his", they'd be investing in mutual funds, not robbing folk.
Click to expand...

Or the government :D

This story illustrates one of my robbery fears. Who knows if these guys would have been satisfied with just money....if you wait to find out then it's too late.
Click to expand...

This kind of argument is a basis for many a good self-defense law. In MI, we have a legal "rebuttable presumption" of rape, murder, or great bodily harm if someone breaks into our home. This means that, under the law, unless actions of the BG prove otherwise, they entered the house with the intention of rape, murder, or great bodily harm to the inhabitants. This, in turn, means that deadly force can be used upon a person break and entering into your home while you are in it. I do not think it applies to businesses like in this case.
 
In MI, we have a legal "rebuttable presumption" of rape, murder, or great bodily harm if someone breaks into our home. This means that, under the law, unless actions of the BG prove otherwise, they entered the house with the intention of rape, murder, or great bodily harm to the inhabitants. This, in turn, means that deadly force can be used upon a person break and entering into your home while you are in it. I do not think it applies to businesses like in this case.
Click to expand...

I would think that a BG beating folks in the head with a hefty metal object (a gun) has demonstrated intent to inflict great bodily harm.... and I don't think it much matters where he does the beating.
 
I would think that a BG beating folks in the head with a hefty metal object (a gun) has demonstrated intent to inflict great bodily harm.... and I don't think it much matters where he does the beating.
Click to expand...

Right but the legislation in MI means that you can assume that's what the BG is there for even if he hasn't done it or made it clear that he is going to do it yet. That fact that he is breaking into your home is legal grounds for deadly force under the fact that you can assume he is there to hurt you.

I was using this to add to the "when to fire" debate to say that in some localities there are added legal protections to people in situations like the delivery man was in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top