Ft.Worth CHL Holder Shoots Robbery Suspect

bigolbigun · #1

Fort Worth Robbery Suspect Shot, But Not By Police
(CBS 11 News) FORT WORTH Gunshots rang out at an Albertsons grocery store in Fort Worth after a robbery attempt on Tuesday night. A suspect was shot, but not by the police.

The incident took place at about 11:30 p.m. at the store located on Sycamore School Road.

According to the Fort Worth Police Department, three armed men walked into the store and began robbing customers and employees. One of the victims called a family member who was waiting just outside of the store. That man then walked into the store with a concealed handgun and confronted one of the suspects.

"We certainly don't encourage that," said Lt. J.D. McCarthy with the Fort Worth Police Department. "We ask that, most of the time, contact the police department and let patrol officers handle those situations."

The suspect, identified as Raysun Johnson, was shot in the backside as he was leaving the scene. He is undergoing surgery at JPS Hospital in Fort Worth.

Police are calling the shooting an act of self-defense, and not charging the man.

(Â© MMVII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Sludge · #2

another one for the good guys

phddan · #3

Sludge wrote:another one for the good guys

I concur.

Dan

Wildscar · #4

Good job to the CHL in the story.

I just wonder if hes going to catch flak for shooting the guy in the back.

Liberty · #5

Wildscar wrote:Good job to the CHL in the story.

I just wonder if hes going to catch flak for shooting the guy in the back.

"The suspect, identified as Raysun Johnson, was shot in the backside as he was leaving the scene."
I don't understand the legal justification for him shooting the BG. I wouldn't have taken the shot. The bad guy was leaving and doesn't sound like a threat at this point.

phddan · #6

Liberty wrote:
Wildscar wrote:Good job to the CHL in the story.

I just wonder if hes going to catch flak for shooting the guy in the back.
"The suspect, identified as Raysun Johnson, was shot in the backside as he was leaving the scene."
I don't understand the legal justification for him shooting the BG. I wouldn't have taken the shot. The bad guy was leaving and doesn't sound like a threat at this point.

If he was moving away from you but turned at the waist looking back at you, while making a threatening motion with his weapon, = legitimate defensive shoot.

Dan

Greybeard · #7

Hopefully there's more to it than stated. Lots of potential grief - over someone else's money ...

stroo · #8

Protecting the family member may have been his main concern. This is a heroic act in my book.

chewy555 · #9

Wildscar wrote:Good job to the CHL in the story.

I just wonder if hes going to catch flak for shooting the guy in the back.

We have to remember that we only have the news story, normally it does not have all of the info.
We do not know what the BG was doing at the time the trigger was pulled. The BG could have turned afterwards but before he was hit.
From the story it seems that the police think that everything is ok. But who knows about the D.A.

Paladin · #10

Legal shoot on 2 counts:

1. armed robbers (still a threat while exiting)
2. robbery isn't complete till the robber gets away with what they stole, therefore an aggravated robbery was still in progress.

p99guy · #11

backside=buttocks, buns,

when in defense of a third party for instance there is no requirement that they be facing YOU...he also may not have been in the process of leaving UNTILL that metal bumblebee stung his buns...was probly leaving at that point lol.

Staying withen the rule of law of course, because everything you do as a citizen , you will have to answer for later....but get over the good guys wear white hats/Tom Mix gun fight morality(no back shoot'in, No Bush'whacken,No Sta'bbin, No Bite'in,and wait till Black Bart gets back up on his feet to resume the fisticuffs etc) When you are dealing with a savage, extending him any courtisy he wouldnt extent to you just puts you on the losing end.
There is NO fair gunfight, there is only winning......while yelling out a warning to the bad bad person your about to shoot, so they can turn around all proper would indeed get you a gold star in the Roy Rodgers good cowpoke club...its also a good way to get you and the third party you are attempting to protect killed.

Remember Buckaroos...stay withen the law, but be absolutely ruthless when lives are at stake.

I think every law abiding male/ and law maker should have to work in the county jail for 3+ years to get them a true picture of what they are up against, and the attitude would adjust to stark realism.

flintknapper · #12

Greybeard wrote:Hopefully there's more to it than stated. Lots of potential grief - over someone else's money ...

Its doubtful the motivation was to stop the thief from taking someone else's money:

One of the victims called a family member who was waiting just outside of the store.

My guess it that this person reacted the same way I would if a family member was in danger. What actions I might take would depend upon the totality of the circumstance, but one thing is certain, I won't be sitting out in the car.

Without benefit of additional information.....I can't say whether the shooting was justified or not. As it is written, it does not sound like a good shoot. However, I can think of a dozen ways a person could be threating you while offering only his posterior as a target.

Frost · #13

Remember that the media constantly gets these stories wrong. He may have actually been shot in the backside while he was threatening one of his family members inside the store before running away for all we know.

Paladin · #14

stroo wrote:Protecting the family member may have been his main concern. This is a heroic act in my book.

Absolutely. While I may not have confronted the BG's in the manner implied in the article, my backbone would prevent me from doing anything other than helping a family member who called me in desparate need.

Seburiel · #15

And, typically, the Police say that they would rather someone call them instead of protecting themselves and their loved-ones...
Why?
So that they can get some sort of 'glory' out of it?
Do police departments' budgets suffer if they aren't the ones protecting the populace?
I'm not a police hater by any means, but it's getting ridiculous, in my opinion, whenever a justified shooting takes place, it seems that the police say they'd rather everyone just 'roll over and take it' instead of providing for their own defense.

I'm sorry, I know that this isn't a rant forum, but it just chaps my hide, I guess.