CNN Article about armed-Pharmacist defending drugstore

I'm glad that the pharmacist and his staff weren't harmed, and I applaud the man for defending his store. Although chasing after the criminal may not have been the best course of action, I commend him for his courage.

I am also pleased that an armed citizen was able to take action to thwart a serious and potentially deadly crime.

From a tactical standpoint, having made the decision to take action, I would like to have seen the defender take a position of cover and issue commands rather than exposing himself and advancing in the open. As it turns out, he opted for a "violence of action" to overwhelm the aggressor. Though leaving cover to overwhelm an assailant is a viable course of action in some situations, arguably not in this one.

Nonetheless, it did work out well and I am always happy to see the good guys prevail while the bad guys turn tail and run, especially when no shots have to be exchanged on either side.

I'm glad that the pharmacist and his staff weren't harmed, and I applaud the man for defending his store.

Click to expand...

Same here, but self defense ended once the threat retreated and left the store. He should not have followed the crook outside....if that is what happened. It is hard to tell by the way the article is worded.

I saw this on Fox news; they said that he got fired for it.

Browns Fan said:

I saw this on Fox news; they said that he got fired for it.

Click to expand...

No that was another pharmacist a week ago, named Jeremy Hoven in Michigan who had a robber holding a gun in someone's face. Different footage and that guy worked at a Wallgreens.
This story is about Mike Donohue.

Wallgreens and CVS and similar chain stores often fire their pharmacists if they defend themselves or others with a firearm.


This story is about a private owned pharmacy that does not appear to be a chain store and is named 'Bob Johnson's Pharmacy'. The article also refers to it as "his store". He is either the owner or the manager/pharmacist, not just a disposable employee working in a large chain store like Jeremy Hoven was at Wallgreens.
My take from the story is that Mike Donohue is in charge of the store, installs his own security upgrades as necessary (like the cameras and glass), and is probably the sole pharmacist working with assistants.


Lesson that criminals will understand? Rob chain stores that fire people and don't allow self defense, mom & pop stores are dangerous to victimize.

Zoogster said:

Lesson that criminals will understand? Rob chain stores that fire people and don't allow self defense, mom & pop stores are dangerous to victimize.

Click to expand...

Lesson to armed consumers? Shop in the chain stores because the ones that rob those don't expect armed resistance. I want the criminal in and out with the least amount of contact and shots fired, ideally zero.

Bah, as an armed consumer, it is your duty to plug someone that holds the place up with a gun, in my opinion. I mean, sure, you could get shot, but, if you don't do anything, you will hate yourself for the rest of your life, because that is one moment when you COULD have made a difference, and didn't.

Good point. If he'd shot the robber the pharmacist may have been in a bad way.

Click to expand...

I am sure that may depend on state laws. In the Oklahoma pharmacy robbery and conviction of the pharmacist for murder, the DA specfically said the pharmacist was within his rights and the law to chase down the armed robber who took flight and attempting to stop him because he was considered a threat to the public. Self defense includes the defense of others.

Only a matter of time before the victims will start shooting first instead of trying to give the robbers orders.

One hopes that the lesson has been learned that there's a difference between shooting someone in self defense and executing an incapacitated person.

Bah, as an armed consumer, it is your duty to plug someone that holds the place up with a gun, in my opinion. I mean, sure, you could get shot, but, if you don't do anything, you will hate yourself for the rest of your life, because that is one moment when you COULD have made a difference, and didn't.

Click to expand...

Depends entirely on the situation and you can't use that as a general rule. You may harm more innocent people in the crossfire for instance if there are dozens of people there. Then you've done nothing but make a bad situation worse.

azmjs said:

One hopes that the lesson has been learned that there's a difference between shooting someone in self defense and executing an incapacitated person.

Click to expand...

And that is yet another story completely unrelated to the linked story.


Clearly some people don't actually read what the story is before commenting..


The pharmacist convicted for executing a downed robber was Jerome Jay Ersland of Oklahoma City.

This story is about Mike Donohue of Seattle Washington.


One guy comments about it being Jeremy Hoven, and another just a few posts later about it being Jerome Jay Ersland.
While anyone that even read part of the article or watched the video would know it was neither case.
Beware of the one liners from people that didn't read the article.

There is a large number of pharmacists being robbed across the country, and so several different current stories about pharmacists who responded with firearms of their own.

Depends entirely on the situation and you can't use that as a general rule. You may harm more innocent people in the crossfire for instance if there are dozens of people there. Then you've done nothing but make a bad situation worse.

Click to expand...

I can use wanting to protect the innocent against evil as a general rule. Obviously, individual situations will vary, but that really wasn't my point, and I thank you kindly for not twisting my meaning.

Good on the pharmacist! Hopefully more follow his example.

And that is yet another story completely unrelated to the linked story.


Clearly some people don't actually read what the story is before commenting..


The pharmacist convicted for executing a downed robber was Jerome Jay Ersland of Oklahoma City.

This story is about Mike Donohue of Seattle Washington.

Click to expand...

Both pharmacists chased robbers from their stores. Ersland fired at his robber, never hitting him, but the DA said his actions were justified up until that time. Donohue chased a robber out and it was stated above that he might have been in a lot of trouble had he shot the robber since the robber was not longer a threat once he ran. That simply isn't a universal truth and will possibly vary by state law since a fleeing armed robber most certainly can be considered to be a threat to the public.

See, reading the whole thread did indeed happen and the comments were relevant.

As far as I am concerned, if someone points a gun at me they are a threat whether or not the gun is still pointed at me.

Kliegl said:

I can use wanting to protect the innocent against evil as a general rule. Obviously, individual situations will vary, but that really wasn't my point, and I thank you kindly for not twisting my meaning.

Click to expand...

His response was to the words as written. There was no "twisting" of your original text: "as an armed consumer, it is your duty to plug someone that holds the place up with a gun, in my opinion".

If the pharmacist had shot the fleeing robber, I hope that it would have been done so in accordance with state and local law. No sense in giving more ammo to the antis.

He can always give the perp a pain killer, if he has to shoot him.

Good one, gym!

So I guess he did not get fired... still burns me up about the Wallgreens guy- http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fire...n-pharmacist-filled-robbers/story?id=13705438

Zoogster:
> I saw this on Fox news; they said that he got fired for it.
> No that was another pharmacist a week ago, named Jeremy Hoven in
> Michigan who had a robber holding a gun in someone's face.
> Different footage and that guy worked at a Wallgreens.
> This story is about Mike Donohue.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/fire...n-pharmacist-filled-robbers/story?id=13705438

Just remember, a chain like Walgreens is interested in avoiding a lawsuit not protecting their employees. Having a "policy" of not allowing employees to be armed protects the the chain's assets. They have no regrets about firing the person who just saved lives by saying "They ignored policy".

chuck

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kliegl View Post
I can use wanting to protect the innocent against evil as a general rule. Obviously, individual situations will vary, but that really wasn't my point, and I thank you kindly for not twisting my meaning.
His response was to the words as written. There was no "twisting" of your original text: "as an armed consumer, it is your duty to plug someone that holds the place up with a gun, in my opinion".

If the pharmacist had shot the fleeing robber, I hope that it would have been done so in accordance with state and local law. No sense in giving more ammo to the antis.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I didn't say he HAD to. I didn't say he should do it with hundreds of people milling around. I didn't say he should do it if there were other ways. Rather, I said it was your duty to stop someone holding up others. Sometimes you can't do your duty, but, if you don't carry to protect yourself and other innocents around you, you shouldn't carry at all, and this sort of selfish attitude some of the people on this thread seem to have disgusts me.

lots of pharmacists getting in gunfights in the news lately....

The difference between the two first mentioned Pharmacists is they stopped once the threat was gone.

Mr. Ersland, here in Oklahoma stepped over the line. Not only did he pursue the gunman out into a busy city street but he fired on him.

Then went back inside and unload 5 shots from a 380 into a downed suspect. That got him a murder conviction. He did himself no help by both lying to the police and media.

Personally, if you partake in a robbery and your vic caps you, well, you got what you had coming. Karma is a harsh mistress.

I'm not condoning what Ersland did. However, I do not think he should have been found guilty of murder.

The other two guys have my respect for standing up to these thugs.