Two Samaritans Shoot Robbery Suspect

[Kythas]

The robber had a really bad day. Not only was he shot by the Good Samaritans coming to the aid of the robbery victim, but after being shot he was attacked by a German Shepherd.

I wonder if the victim will rethink his stance on guns after this.

http://www.khou.com/news/local/Robbery- ... 72461.html

[texanjoker]

I was watching a video on that via a news channel. I liked how he said he is not a gun owner, and believed the savior sent those 2 to protect him...good story.

[suthdj]

After reading the story I wonder about the part where they chased the guy down and started to shoot at him then the robber returned fire, looks like some charges could be filed aginst the samaritians.

After he was robbed, Dorsey began running down the street and says two men in a Mercedes asked him what had happened.
Dorsey told them and they not only caught up with the suspect, but they started shooting at him.
The suspect fired back. In the end, the two witnesses turned vigilantes won and took down the bad guy.

[Robert*PPS]

After reading the story I wonder about the part where they chased the guy down and started to shoot at him then the robber returned fire, looks like some charges could be filed aginst the samaritians.

That's what I was wondering....glad it worked out, but I think prosecution of the Samaritans is definitely a possibility ....well, unless one of them was David Gregory

[JP171]

I doubt any charges will be filed against the samaritans, simply because the law allows what was done. protection of property of a third party, unable to get the property back by any other means because the perp had a weapon, pursuit immediatly after the fact. yea I know about how so many here have thrown down wallets and it isn't worth it to them and that you should never chase a perp. but the law allows all those things. me I have done the chase and shoot and will again if it is necessary in my mind. Case law even supports the law and right to give chase and shoot

[baldeagle]

Given the way the story is being portrayed in the media, I would think it would be politically unpopular for the DA to pursue charges - especially since the victim called them his "saviors" and especially in today's environment where liberals are trying to take our guns.

Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Robbery at gunpoint is aggravated robbery. So I think their actions would be justified under the law.

[tbrown]

Where did it say what religion they were?

[philip964]

If I payed attention during the sermons, A Samaritan was someone from Sumer (now Iraq), they were considered evil and hated by Jews. So a Sumerian helping a fallen Jew was to make a point.