Florida restaurant employee shoots, kills masked gunman

[Red Wind]

Why? Because you think there is some big conspiracy about not taking very localized events and making them national news? It isn't really national news. That it made national coverage with USAToday is a bit of a surprise. It did make a couple dozen Florida news outlets, which is appropriate because it is a singular local event about a local worker who stopped a local thug.

I could not agree more. Until Cable News cropped up in the late 1970's, this would have been strictly a local story. No national newspaper or network would have picked it up.

We wouldn't be talking about it here. This is why,even with homicides at an all time low since 1960, the anti-gun frenzy and cries of gun "violence" and "epidemic" still resound in the MSM.

 

[CLP]

Just don't understand why police are leery of people defending themselves and others. Their official stance is to caution people from taking matters into their own hands- I.e., allow yourself to be victimized.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

It should also be considered that in Florida and many other states, the use of lethal force for self defense is still illegal. Homicide is illegal. So you are still committing an illegal act for which it must be determined if you qualify to be "immune from prosecution" (Florida statute wording).

A lot of folks will fail to understand why a person defending themselves gets arrested and they got arrested because they broke the law. The question then remains as to whether or not they are immune from prosecution, a judgment sometimes made on the spot by the cops (hence, no immediate arrest) or left up to a DA or grand jury to decide later (after arrest, booking, possible time in jail).

So a lot of cops are hesitant to suggest folks break the law. That is their job. ;-)

 

[lemaymiami]

Well said.... all it takes is one foolish officer (or anyone else connected with the agency) to encourage someone who later is involved in something awful to learn the hard way just why every cop counsels restraint, etc. when in life threatening situations. Those same guys (or gals) will act quite strongly if in need on their own (and yes, the difference between what is said and what is done can be striking....).

Police themselves aren't immune (nor should they be....) from the process either...
I fired one shot on the job years ago and had to wait six months before a court ruling (and inquest in that case) ruled that the killing was justified.... In and out of court during that time span - it left a permanent memory that I'll take to my end. It took several years to get my head sorted out as well. At the time I was five years on the job, made it to twenty two years without ever firing another shot on the street (with many opportunities since I was usually in the middle of things if I could manage it). When the folks on our SRT (our version of SWAT) asked me to be their commander (maybe the biggest honor I ever got on the job....).... I carefully turned them down. No one who goes through the system after a shooting would volunteer to go there again - unless you had no other choice....

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by CLP:

Just don't understand why police are leery of people defending themselves and others.

Most police officers these days, if not their superiors, personally understand that the need for citizens to defend themselves occasionally arises.

Their official stance is to caution people from taking matters into their own hands-....

"Caution" is the operative word. Neither they nor anyone else wants anyone to do something reckless or foolish if it can be avoided.

....I.e., allow yourself to be victimized.

That's not it.

 

[MEHavey]

...in Florida and many other states, the use of lethal force for self defense is still illegal.

Uuuh... Can you expand on that, particularly as Florida Law [as in the case in a increasing numbers of other states] explicitly provides that:

(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she
reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to
prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another...
Florida 776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.—
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

 

[Panzerschwein]

She cautioned people against taking matters into their own hands.

I think the Miramar PD needs to find a new spokesperson.

No! Don't take matter into your own hands my GOD! If someone walks into your restaurant with a ski mask waving a pistol in your direction... don't worry! Just pick up the phone right in front of them and dial 911. While you're on there with the dispatcher, I'm sure they'll tell you what to do. I am sure the misunderstood criminal will just politely walk out when they see you dialing 911, or maybe through the power of teamwork, peace and love, the dispatcher will help you make that diamond in the rough tenderhearted pistol-wielding misfit put down his gun and everyone in the restaurant can hold hands and sing Kumbaya over some shrimps and hush puppies!

Good grief! Meanwhile here on planet Earth, business was taken care of by someone obviously more competent than that spokeswoman. Plus one for the good guys.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Uuuh... Can you expand on that, particularly as Florida Law [as in the case in a increasing numbers of other states] explicitly provides that:

Sure, "justified" does not mean "legal." I would direct you to...

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use or threatened use of force.—

In statistics, it would be akin to failure to reject the null hypothesis which is NOT the same thing as acceptance of the null hypothesis.

Homicide is still illegal, but there are circumstances whereby it may be deemed justified and the person immune from prosecution. Here, it should be pointed out that immunity from prosecution only pertains to acts that are illegal under the law.

You may be detained, arrested, booked, and even be in jail for a time before somebody decides that you were justified.

However, you are only immune from prosecution if it is determined apriori that your act was in fact justified. You may still go through the entire court process before people figure out about your justification.

 

[MEHavey]

You've made my point -- court process or not -- self defense under the law is legal... ipso facto the court finding.

To say otherwise is akin to say that picking your own child up at school is a priori illegal kidnapping, and you can be arrested until you prove your innocence. Whereas it's just the other way around in that the state must prove you guilty.

"Homicide" is an act -- no more no less than the taking of the child from the school.
Whether it is an illegal act is all in the circumstance.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Bogus example. Picking your kid up from school legal until otherwise determined. Homicide is illegal until otherwise determined.

 

[MEHavey]

Homicide is the killing of a human being at the hands of another.

Homicide, per se, is not of itself illegal (any more than a patient dying under the hands of a surgeon)
It is the context of the killing that makes the act lawful (e.g., self defense as codified in the legal code)
or conversely, illegal.

Note also that in 49 states, self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning it is the state's burden
to prove that the homicide was illegal.



postscript: ...and the "taking of a minor child" by another is a precise analogy.
It's all in the context as codified under the law.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

It is amusing that Florida law doesn't have to provide immunity from prosecution for picking up your kid at school, but does have to provide it for specific contexts of illegal acts.

"Immunity from prosecution" is not the same thing as being legal. People get granted immunity from prosecution for many crimes they committed, often in plea deals, but that does not make they crimes they committed as legal. It just means that they won't be prosecuted.

There is no prosecution for legal acts, but the law does specify immunity from prosecution for certain illegal acts during given circumstances.

 

[MEHavey]

...specify immunity from prosecution for certain illegal acts

Lawful self-defense is not a case of immunity from prosecution.
If the act was in fact lawful on its face, it was not illegal in the first place.
One can't have it both ways.

"Justification does not make a criminal use of force lawful; if the use of force is justified, it cannot be criminal at all."

NOTE: I bow to the fact that things in theory vs things in fact can get messy.
One need only read a classic article on the Castle/right of self-defense to
get this understanding
http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1290&context=mulr

.

 

[230RN]

Worth watching. Lance Thomas, expensive watch dealer. Trained and ready after so many robberies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkWgp2abM2w&feature=player_embedded

Kept several guns around the store, I guess on the theory that a second loaded gun is faster than any reload.

Uncle Terry, 230RN

 

[ATLDave]

Why? Because you think there is some big conspiracy about not taking very localized events and making them national news?

Except that CNN over the past 2 years has made a point of covering local news events as national ones when they have involved guns being used for ill.

 

[230RN]

Let's face it. It is apparent that "the word" from on high is to take every single negative instance of firarms usage, even if minor and even if local, and make a Big Deal out of it.

This is not to say that there aren't Big Deals which deserve legitimate attention, but that we are facing a perhaps unprecedented public relations thrust.

So double-up on the care and safety with which you make use of your firearms.

Uncle Terry, 230RN

 

[old lady new shooter]

in 49 states, self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning it is the state's burden to prove that the homicide was illegal.

That's really interesting. In which state is it not an affirmative defense?

 

[SSN Vet]

Unfortunately, in todays racially charged "some lives matter more than others" environment, how the event is perceived will likely have a lot to do with what the color of the perps skin is, and whether the person shooting in self defense is the same color or not.

In many states, no charges filed does not mean no wrongful death lawsuit.

Nor does it mean no crowd of "protestors" outside your door, killing your business, or rioting and looting.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Worth watching. Lance Thomas, expensive watch dealer. Trained and ready after so many robberies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkWgp2abM2w&feature=player_embedded

Kept several guns around the store, I guess on the theory that a second loaded gun is faster than any reload.

Uncle Terry, 230RN

The word awesome is so overused but that guy totally deserves it. Really inspiring to watch, thanks for posting the link.

 

[Red Wind]

"Black Lives Matter" gets the Award for most immaterial group of the 21st Century. No second place winner.

 

[MEHavey]

In which state is it not an affirmative defense?

Would you believe..... Ohio?
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/0...lf-defense-as-an-affirmative-defense-kind-of/

 

[Slamfire]

A perverse fact about business and employees is that armed employees shooting criminals is a greater financial risk to the business than armed criminals killing employees and patrons. If an employee hurts a criminal, the business is at risk for being sued. If a criminal comes in and wipes out every employee and patron, it is a law enforcement matter and the business is not at any financial risk. In fact, with "Dead Peasant Policies" ( Walmart for example had 350,000 of them) when an employee dies, the business gets all the life insurance. This is a very perverse incentive, as it is very profitable to have the employee's killed!

So it is very rare for a business to allow an employee to be armed, and the universal company policy is for employees to employ non resistance techniques and if necessary, get killed doing so. It is not about optimizing employee safety, it is about optimizing profits and cutting loses.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Would you believe..... Ohio?
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/0...lf-defense-as-an-affirmative-defense-kind-of/

Fascinating, and the article is very well written. Thanks very much.

 

[shootniron]

I think if you are going to defend your business or your employer's business you should first mentally go through the possible scenarios and practice for them with snapcaps. Maybe you won't think of / practice for every single possible one but however many you think of and practice for will be more than zero.

Apparently, this person had thought through it and then he was successful doing it. AND, they can investigate all they want...this was a good shoot and they can't touch this employee. Most states, and I think Florida is one of them, have in their statute that deadly force can be used during commission of forcible felony such as this.

 

[lemaymiami]

Criminally, you're quite right - clearly justified if the facts cited are accurate... Now for the things you won't hear about. Every robber has family and friends (believe it or not...), if it were me I'd be making plans to defend myself - after the fact... Remember as well that the employee (who gets an "attaboy" from this old retired cop....) now has a history and will be looked at a little closer if involved in a shooting incident again.

Lots of downsides to doing the right thing.... wish it weren't so