TexasCHLforum.com

The shooter is a step closer to having her day in court. According to kwtx.com, the case is being referred to a grand jury.

Assuming the charges being sought were reasonable and assuming no further information other than what appears to have happened in the video, I would vote to indict.

That is not out of sympathy with the apparent punk. He defied law, order, and decency, if the full story is out. But if one were to be shot in the commission of a purse snatching by a good samaritan, it ought to be done within the constraints of a bystander's responsibilities - and prosecuted otherwise.

Deadly force can be used to prevent the fleeing after the robbery.

And you could always try the stretch part. It might also be justified as preventing an escape after a lawful arrest. The purse snatching was a felony and all citizens have the legal authority to make an arrest in that case. The men trying to hold him down show that force was necessary. When he breaks free from them, it is technically an escape from a lawful arrest and the fact that the suspect did break free from multiple people holding him could lend credence to a claim that less than deadly force was not working so deadly force was needed.

I don't think you can prevent someone from fleeing, or can use deadly force to keep someone from escaping. In fact, I think deadly force is probably never justified by someone fleeing.

As to whether you would get prosecuted for potting a fleeing suspect, it probably depends on whether his name is Osama Bin Laden or not.

Approaching to render aid, that was OK. Drawing a gun, possibly lawful but I would argue it was a poor idea. Firing a shot, incredibly bad idea.

With a small twinge of regret, I side with those who wouldn't have shot. It appears the purse snatcher was asking for proactive evolution, but it wasn't right to humor him.

According to kwtx.com, the armed bystander observed the punk, either getting taken down or actually seizing an elderly woman's purse. The bystander got out of her truck with her pistol, and it looks to me like she took up a position waiting for a shot.

Although I would rather that snatcher's oxygen had gone to a more worthwhile creature, a sewer rat, perhaps, it looks to me like the shooter was solidly in the wrong. She attempted to shoot someone in the back. I suspect the alleged stolen property had already been abandoned.

It's disgusting, too, that she missed, even though the shot was uncalled for. She shouldn't have fired, and she sure shouldn't have launched an uncontrolled round in a public area. No, strike that. None of us, her included, should ever launch an uncontrolled round anywhere. It seems worse in a public area.

This incident, and the Arlington undercover officer shooting, has inspired me to be a little more firm with myself, philosophically.

It sounds heartless and wrong to tell oneself that it's ok to let others bleed while cravenly taking cover, but I think that's the right kind of self programming. Don't shoot, avoid, and if others get killed, it's not your bad.

Shocking, but here's my thinking. If my default tactic is to not be a superhero I will have a stronger habit of evaluating before shooting. In the heat of a situation, particularly if there is the situational pressure of others acting too quickly, I'm not, excuse the pun, going off half-cocked.

If I daydreamed about being the one true knight on a white horse saving the day, I might bring myself to looking too eagerly for the chance.

Now, if the punk had been charging the armed bystander or if the punk had been assaulting someone, fire on the up-roll and aim for the mainmast. But after the snatching, while he's running away, when he's no longer threatening anyone - that's not right, and it reflects very badly on those who wish to rightfully, morally, keep self-defensive tools peacefully at hand.

She left the scene. Waco police are looking for her.