Wendy's Employee Kills Robber

So, while it has risk, there is a definite societal benefit when people actually try to determine where the bad guys went, and how they went.
Click to expand...

So Dasher saw which way the accomplice went, but at what benefit to society? From all the information gathered so far, it turns out that his good witness information on direction of travel provided no benefit to society and it almost cost him is life.

Why? Because he didn't go about his actions in a very smart way. He rain out into the parking lot after the robbers and drew attention to himself in the process that resulted in one pointing a gun at him.

Yes, there may be some benefit to society - a tremendously noble cause, but you have to weigh that against personal risk. Is putting yourself into harm's way for the sake of gathering information that may or may not be useful a good idea?

But you shouldn't treat it as a stupid or worthless action.
Click to expand...
Never said it was stupid or worthless to gather the information, just that running out into the open for that information with no comprehension of what was outside was not a smart thing to do from a tactical or personal safety standpoint, which you agreed about.
 
Is putting yourself into harm's way for the sake of gathering information that may or may not be useful a good idea?
Click to expand...

It certainly would not be the the first time, or the second or hundredth.
 
Fair enough on the KC incident.

Nobody said you were obligated to risk your life ...... I am however advocating, and have an issue with anyone advocating against, the idea that we have a duty to help maintain a civil Society. If you want to tell everybody, "I got mine, and it's not my job.", well fine ...... just try not to discourage the folks doing the right thing...... it smacks of the atheists sneering at the Sunday crowd .....
Click to expand...

Sure they are. It has been argued that is was necessary for Dasher to go outside after the robbers to get information on the car and direction the robbers went. That endangered his life.

Why would you have issues with the idea that you have a responsibility to help the Police?
Click to expand...
I have no issues with helping the police. If you look back at what was said, I suggested that he could have gone about the task in a much safer manner.

LOL, I am the son of a cop. I am completely on board with helping the cops. I am not on board with doing it in a stupid or reckless manner.

You want a civil Society, or do you want the Law of the Jungle? If you want a civil Society, then wanting it and not doing things required to make it happen is as bad as the Occutards wanting all their stuff paid for ....... ain't gonna happen.
Click to expand...

I know. I know. The sky is falling and society is going to collapse if we don't get a license plate number. Got it.
 
DNS:
From all the information gathered so far, it turns out that his good witness information on direction of travel provided no benefit to society and it almost cost him is life.
Click to expand...

Wow, I gotta disagree with that. From Dasher's actions, we have one felon (Clark) dead, and another probable one (Holder) pursued, probably because he was a known accomplice of Clark in the past.

If Dasher had stayed in the office, all he could have told the police was height, build, and maybe race. They both would still be a threat to the area.
 
Is putting yourself into harm's way for the sake of gathering information that may or may not be useful a good idea?
Click to expand...

I think so. If I shied from every risk, simply because I was unsure if my efforts might not prove useful ...... then I would not be making much effort at anything...... If everybody in my community did that, then the entire concept of the "Volunteer Fire Deptartment" would be unworkable ..... folks involved in accidents would have to drag themselves to a hospital.....

I live in a decent place, and it is a decent place in part because I work to make it better ..... most people here do..... the "Little Things" do matter.
 
Wow this discussion is still going!

So here's something i'm thinking about. What makes this different than say a home invasion where the armed robber may have run off with some jewelry/electronics? Do you pursue to get their tags or a better description? Are these differences favorable or unfavorable to pursuit? And how close does one need to get to obtain an adequate description?

How far does our obligation to society allow us to go legally? Does obligation to society conflict with my obligation to my family/ - (regarding self preservation) or does putting personal safety first in a situation like this (sounds selfish i know) somehow enhance society through my role while i am still alive?

Something comes to mind: although it wasn't the case here as the cash in the register was the goal, i've read of a tactic where a mugger baits someone into following them only to find themselves outnumbered and boxed in. Or a less elaborate version is possible where baiting i unnecessary and the mark finds someone in front and behind in a narrow place.
 
I know. I know. The sky is falling and society is going to collapse if we don't get a license plate number. Got it.
Click to expand...

IDK that the sky is necessarily falling, but I have eyes ..... I see the disaster areas that the inner cities have become, and the prevailing mentality there. The I see that mentality advocated elsewhere....... I don't want that here, so I will oppose it when I see it.

ETA: I will also support the actions of folks who are trying to do the right thing. Mr. Dasher should have a medal pinned on him. Instead, he is labeled "reckless", or "foolish".....

Maybe I'm foolish, or even reckless, but I'm going to try to do the right thing as I see it.
 
How far does our obligation to society allow us to go legally?
Click to expand...

It does not, at least is should not. In some places (Texas for example) any law officer can impress you into service to assist him with stopping a crime. Failure to assist is a crime itself.

Most people are not equipped mentally or physically to deal with an armed thug, therefore there should be no general duty.
 
Do you pursue to get their tags or a better description? Are these differences favorable or unfavorable to pursuit? And how close does one need to get to obtain an adequate description?
Click to expand...

That is entirely up to the "you" involved.
 
So here's something i'm thinking about. What makes this different than say a home invasion where the armed robber may have run off with some jewelry/electronics?
Click to expand...
My house? Your house? Don't matter to me... It is not my or your property I am after... It is a violent felon I am pursuing to place under citizen's arrest...

Home invasion is another violent felony I can chase the perpetrator over...

And yes I will chase... And yes I will order them to stop and if they refuse I will deploy a level of force that will stop this person from fleeing...

And that may require the BIG DOG!!! The one that barks here but bites out yonder...

Now if more floridians knew what their state allows them to do... the bikini state would be safer...

Brent
 
Is putting yourself into harm's way for the sake of gathering information that may or may not be useful a good idea?
Click to expand...

Gotta wonder if jumping into a freezing river to find out if some kids that are trapped upside in the car are still alive is a good idea? Guess not.
 
I think some of us, who have spent most of our lives in occupations where an assumption of risk is the norm, and who have been in positions of responsibllity and accountability for the well-being of others, would have to say that there are many cases where assuming some risk is not only worthwhile, but expected.
 
Totally agree with this MLeake. The only thing I would add is that we expect it from ourselves making it a normal reaction.
 
MLeake: I would venture to say that those folks you refer to have developed over the years a keen sense of assessment: when and how to intervene, when to wait for backup/professionals, when to MYOB, and so on. I would also hazard, based on some of the posts in this and other threads, that some of those who haven't had the benefit of those years spent in the college of hard knocks may have, let's say, a greater ration of zeal -- however well intentioned -- than of that assessment skill you guys have earned. Frankly, some of what I've read sounds like vigilantism.

I know some may be inclined to turn my words into an argument for "living on your knees vs dying on your feet" -- that's not my point at all. Don't get me wrong, this isn't about questioning anyone's bravery, or their sincerity in believing that this country should not be turned into a nature preserve for lowlifes and predators (like some places -- DC, NYC, Chicago, etc.). Those are sentiments I hope everyone here can agree with.

My concern, though is with some of the saber-rattling I see, and that it may cost someone their freedom, or the use of their limbs, or their life, through a lack of good sense.
 
dev_null, I think in many cases the guys with the most training and experience are the last ones seeking an excuse for violence.

icedog88, you are right, and I should have been more clear - we expect things of ourselves. That does not imply a requirement that everybody should behave in that manner. Some may not have the capability or mindset. (In my experience, most don't. See Kitty Genovese for an example; the more people observe a thing, the more they all seem to think that somebody else will surely take care of the problem...)

A lot of my decisions tend to be driven by the "look myself in the mirror test." If I have a hard time doing that, then I made the wrong decision.
 
I think in many cases the guys with the most training and experience are the last ones seeking an excuse for violence.
Click to expand...

My point exactly. It's the ones who haven't seen the elephant who are more likely to talk about what they would do, by jingo, etc., etc.
 
The Wendy's employee cannot legally carry a weapon on the premises because he is not a security person contracted to Wendy's to do so and therefore he is fully respondsible on his own for all the consequences of his actions.

Wendy's corporate is in the clear on this one and the guy is fully respondsible for all costs due to his actions.

Loss of his job is guaranteed.

The fact that he pursued the robbers out of the store will make it very hard for the local prosecutor to ignore the case and let the guy go.

Just because you carry does not mean you have the right to chase down robbers and shoot them especially if they havent shot someone or fired their guns first.

Their defense attorney's will say,they only used the guns to intimidate the victims and would have never fired (proving that when they left the premises without firing the guns used) had you not placed them-(yes it's b-s but legally effective b-s)-placed THEM (!) in harm's way.

If this guy gets really lucky he won't be charged but I'd be surprised if some charge is not brought against him.

Crazy world,you know.
 
You might want to look into Georgia citizen use of force laws in the detention of a person known to have committed a serious offense such as armed robbery...

So far I see nothing prohibiting the use of lethal force in this situation but still searching for the statute to cite exact law.

Brent
 
B.N. Real, did you not read the part where the franchise owner said he had no problem with the guy carrying, and Wendy's Corporate said they don't tell franchises how to run their business with regard to safety regs, etc?

Your dire predictions are not based on anything that has come from Wendy's, the franchise, or the DA.

So I am pretty sure you are wrong on all counts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top