Good samaritan opens fire, misses carjacking perps, hits victim in hea (1 Viewer)

[Apple Jack]

Thanks for the help, partner!

http://www.khou.com/story/news/2015/09/27/one-man-injured-after-carjacking-shooting-at-gas-station/72923278/

HOUSTON -- One man is injured after a carjacking and shooting at a gas station in north Houston Saturday night.

Houston police responded to a shooting call around 11:15 p.m. Saturday at a Valero gas station on Jensen Drive at Reid Street in north Houston. Officials say two men jumped another man in the gas station parking lot and took the victim's Chevrolet pickup truck. Police say a witness then pulled out a gun and began shooting at the suspects, accidentally hitting the carjacking victim in the head.

The victim was transported to a nearby hospital where he remains in stable condition. Police say the witness who shot at the suspects picked up shell casings and left the scene. Police found the stolen pickup truck about a mile down the road but are still searching for the suspects.

 

[NCCommish]

This is what happens when wanna be Wyatt Earps get involved. Dude was smart enough to grab his brass though.

 

[[icon]]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

 

[McGarnicle]

So this happened in Texas you say?

 

[Fat Nick]

This thread should end well...

 

[onionsack]

This guy's a "Good Samaritan" about as much as Ahmed Mohamed is an "inventor".

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

This guy's a "Good Samaritan" about as much as Ahmed Mohamed is an "inventor".

Officious intermeddler.

Loose cannon.

Trigger happy nut-job.

Accident looking for a place to happen.

I think if we made the expressions poll choices, along with 'good Samaritan", that "good Samaritan would not fair well.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

What rule?

 

[Cliff Clavin]

This never would have happened if the victim had a gun.

 

[BowieMercs]

Stealing a man's pickup truck is a shooting offense in Texas. They were never clear on who was to be shot. The devil is in the details.

 

[[icon]]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

What rule?

The vast majority of the time, armed citizens are actually MORE effective at deterring crime, and are more than 5x less likely to injure an innocent ctiizen when use of force is required.

Criminologist Gary Kleck's analysis of a U.S. Justice Department victimization study was published in the journal "Social Problems." He concluded:

"Victims who used guns for protection were less likely either to be attacked or injured than victims who responded in any other way, including those who did not resist at all," and "When victims use guns to resist crimes, the crimes usually are disrupted and the victims are not injured."

Current estimates show that up to 2.45 million criminal acts are thwarted by firearms every year in the U.S., most without a shot being fired ("Should You Own a Gun," U.S. News and World Report, Aug. 15, 1994, p. 27.) Even conservative estimates place the number at well over a million.

Don B. Kates Jr., at the St. Louis University School of Law, found that while police were successful in shooting or driving off criminals 68 percent of the time, private citizens did so 83 percent of the time. Moreover, 11 percent of the individuals involved in police shootings were later found to be innocents mistaken for criminals, while only 2 percent of those in civilian shootings were so misidentified. Private citizens in urban areas encounter and kill up to three times as many criminals as law enforcement personnel ("Gun Control and the Subway Class," Wall Street Journal, Jan. 10, 1985.)

The reasons are simple: Private citizens who carry firearms are far more likely to know who the "good guys" and the "bad guys" are, since they have generally witnessed the situation from the beginning. Police, called to the scene well after trouble has started, don't have that advantage.

Don't get me wrong... I'm hugely in favor of training, testing, and licensing required for carrying. And there are certainly unfortunate incidents like this... but they are the exception to the rule.

 

[RCon]

No one has considered the possibility that shooter didn't miss his intended target? Maybe he was in on it with the carjackers? Maybe the carjacking itself was a ruse designed to cover a murder attempt?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

If only the victim's head had been carrying.

 

[Bucky86]

From hero to zero

 

[Mr. Soup Nazi]

This never would have happened if the victim had a gun.

Per the link above, probably not.

 

[Otis]

I reckon this didn't turn out as he hoped.

 

[The Commish]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

 

[glock]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

Certainly not the "carry" crowd.

 

[Bucky86]

I'm pretty sure if I were carrying I would've been able to hit the gas tank and make the car explode before they got away. Just saying....

 

[msommer]

This never would have happened if the victim had a gun.

He could have returned fire!

 

[dutch]

Officious intermeddler.

I like this one.

 

[Clifford]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

What rule?

The vast majority of the time, armed citizens are actually MORE effective at deterring crime, and are more than 5x less likely to injure an innocent ctiizen when use of force is required.

Criminologist Gary Kleck's analysis of a U.S. Justice Department victimization study was published in the journal "Social Problems." He concluded:

"Victims who used guns for protection were less likely either to be attacked or injured than victims who responded in any other way, including those who did not resist at all," and "When victims use guns to resist crimes, the crimes usually are disrupted and the victims are not injured."

Current estimates show that up to 2.45 million criminal acts are thwarted by firearms every year in the U.S., most without a shot being fired ("Should You Own a Gun," U.S. News and World Report, Aug. 15, 1994, p. 27.) Even conservative estimates place the number at well over a million.

Don B. Kates Jr., at the St. Louis University School of Law, found that while police were successful in shooting or driving off criminals 68 percent of the time, private citizens did so 83 percent of the time. Moreover, 11 percent of the individuals involved in police shootings were later found to be innocents mistaken for criminals, while only 2 percent of those in civilian shootings were so misidentified. Private citizens in urban areas encounter and kill up to three times as many criminals as law enforcement personnel ("Gun Control and the Subway Class," Wall Street Journal, Jan. 10, 1985.)

The reasons are simple: Private citizens who carry firearms are far more likely to know who the "good guys" and the "bad guys" are, since they have generally witnessed the situation from the beginning. Police, called to the scene well after trouble has started, don't have that advantage.

Don't get me wrong... I'm hugely in favor of training, testing, and licensing required for carrying. And there are certainly unfortunate incidents like this... but they are the exception to the rule.

For the love of God, please stop using that discredited Kleck study. It's embarrassing.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

Good News: I almost stopped those guys from stealing your truck....I was this close.

Bad News: You got a bullet in your head.

 

[CGRdrJoe]

Good News: I almost stopped those guys from stealing your truck....I was this close.

Bad News: You got a bullet in your head.

You should write a song about the bad news part

 

[The Commish]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

Maybe he was an off duty cop who knew the consequences of his actions, career-wise.

 

[Bucky86]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

Maybe he was an off duty cop who knew the consequences of his actions, career-wise.

An off-duty cop wouldn't do that. No way they'd even have charges brought up against them.

 

[CBusAlex]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

He just shot a dude in the head. You want him to tack on a littering charge too?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

Maybe he was an off duty cop who knew the consequences of his actions, career-wise.

An off-duty cop wouldn't do that. No way they'd even have charges brought up against them.

I was not advocating that it was an off duty cop, but rather postulating simply that one would have at least the knowledge of a career criminal, as postulated above.

Also, an off-duty cop could get charged if there was an indicia of drug or alcohol use, as could an on duty cop. again not advocating, but just arguing for the hell of it.

 

[Bucky86]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

Maybe he was an off duty cop who knew the consequences of his actions, career-wise.

An off-duty cop wouldn't do that. No way they'd even have charges brought up against them.

I was not advocating that it was an off duty cop, but rather postulating simply that one would have at least the knowledge of a career criminal, as postulated above.

Also, an off-duty cop could get charged if there was an indicia of drug or alcohol use, as could an on duty cop. again not advocating, but just arguing for the hell of it.

I know. I'm just playing. I figure it was more of a situation where a CC permit owner watches a lot of the First 48 and was excited for his hero moment. ####ed up and got the hell out of there.

 

[ATC1]

He probably thought he was a sharp shooter and shot from a distance. Then he trys to cover up? I would like to know how much training this guy has. Does he even have a concealed carry permit, or did he have a gun in his car?

http://concealednation.org/2015/05/armed-citizen-pulls-gun-on-suspect-who-was-brutally-beating-police-officer-with-baton/

http://concealednation.org/2015/09/ccw-in-action-armed-citizen-holds-suspected-kidnapper-at-gunpoint-until-police-arrive/

Notice all the successful cases the good samaritan doesn't have to "open fire".

 

[NCCommish]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

What rule?

The vast majority of the time, armed citizens are actually MORE effective at deterring crime, and are more than 5x less likely to injure an innocent ctiizen when use of force is required.

Criminologist Gary Kleck's analysis of a U.S. Justice Department victimization study was published in the journal "Social Problems." He concluded:

"Victims who used guns for protection were less likely either to be attacked or injured than victims who responded in any other way, including those who did not resist at all," and "When victims use guns to resist crimes, the crimes usually are disrupted and the victims are not injured."



Current estimates show that up to 2.45 million criminal acts are thwarted by firearms every year in the U.S., most without a shot being fired ("Should You Own a Gun," U.S. News and World Report, Aug. 15, 1994, p. 27.) Even conservative estimates place the number at well over a million.



Don B. Kates Jr., at the St. Louis University School of Law, found that while police were successful in shooting or driving off criminals 68 percent of the time, private citizens did so 83 percent of the time. Moreover, 11 percent of the individuals involved in police shootings were later found to be innocents mistaken for criminals, while only 2 percent of those in civilian shootings were so misidentified. Private citizens in urban areas encounter and kill up to three times as many criminals as law enforcement personnel ("Gun Control and the Subway Class," Wall Street Journal, Jan. 10, 1985.)



The reasons are simple: Private citizens who carry firearms are far more likely to know who the "good guys" and the "bad guys" are, since they have generally witnessed the situation from the beginning. Police, called to the scene well after trouble has started, don't have that advantage.

Don't get me wrong... I'm hugely in favor of training, testing, and licensing required for carrying. And there are certainly unfortunate incidents like this... but they are the exception to the rule.

Seriously? You do realize his numbers have been debinked right? For those numbers to be right the victim would be at least 3 to 4 times more likely than the criminal to have and use a gun.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

I bet I could shoot a bullet over them mountains.

 

[[icon]]

Seriously? You do realize his numbers have been debinked right? For those numbers to be right the victim would be at least 3 to 4 yimes more likely than the criminal to have and use a gun.

For the love of God, please stop using that discredited Kleck study. It's embarrassing.

Yah, but the thread doesn't get entertaining unless we got folks worked into a lather.

Next step in the dance...

 

[NCCommish]

Seriously? You do realize his numbers have been debinked right? For those numbers to be right the victim would be at least 3 to 4 yimes more likely than the criminal to have and use a gun.

For the love of God, please stop using that discredited Kleck study. It's embarrassing.

Yah, but the thread doesn't get entertaining unless we got folks worked into a lather.

Well played

 

[George Jefferson Airplane]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

What rule?

This one?

 

[[icon]]

Very unfortunate, but very much the exception to the rule.

What rule?

This one?

That's at least the 3rd best rule, evah. Maybe 2nd.

 

[[icon]]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

Maybe he was an off duty cop who knew the consequences of his actions, career-wise.

An off-duty cop wouldn't do that. No way they'd even have charges brought up against them.

I was not advocating that it was an off duty cop, but rather postulating simply that one would have at least the knowledge of a career criminal, as postulated above.

Also, an off-duty cop could get charged if there was an indicia of drug or alcohol use, as could an on duty cop. again not advocating, but just arguing for the hell of it.

Good theory, IMO.

 

[cstu]

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

 

[Ditka Butkus]

oops my bad...I bet you thought you were having a bad day when they stole your truck.

 

[Clifford]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As in why someone supposedly trying to stop a crime has the wherewithal of a career criminal? Yeah. It's odd.

Right....picking up the shells, driving off (not waiting for police etc)...none of that makes sense

It makes sense if after the cool off from the Rambo hard on you got you realize you have just committed a major felony and will likely do jailtime as a result. I mean even in today's murder-friendly climate, it would be hard to explain how you feared for your life from the carjacking victim.

 

[BowieMercs]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As someone who shoots at a range regularly and reloads his own ammo this does not strike me as odd.

Always pick up your brass, don't leave a mess. Reloading ammo is typically less than HALF the cost of buying new ammo.

just sayin.

 

[Clifford]

And leaving the scene after you accidentally shoot someone?

 

[The Commish]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As someone who shoots at a range regularly and reloads his own ammo this does not strike me as odd.

Always pick up your brass, don't leave a mess. Reloading ammo is typically less than HALF the cost of buying new ammo.

just sayin.

Well yeah....I guess shooting at a range and shooting a carjack victim by accident are similar enough for this to be a valid analogy

 

[Clifford]

I know every time I shoot someone in the head the first thing I think about is being a good steward of the environment and the second thing I think about is saving money on ammo by reloading.

 

[BowieMercs]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As someone who shoots at a range regularly and reloads his own ammo this does not strike me as odd.

Always pick up your brass, don't leave a mess. Reloading ammo is typically less than HALF the cost of buying new ammo.

just sayin.

Well yeah....I guess shooting at a range and shooting a carjack victim by accident are similar enough for this to be a valid analogy

Ever hear of the phrases "You play like you practice" or "muscle memory"?

Didnt think so.

NEXT QUESTION!

 

[The Commish]

Holy Crap

 

[Prince Myshkin]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As someone who shoots at a range regularly and reloads his own ammo this does not strike me as odd.

Always pick up your brass, don't leave a mess. Reloading ammo is typically less than HALF the cost of buying new ammo.

just sayin.

Well yeah....I guess shooting at a range and shooting a carjack victim by accident are similar enough for this to be a valid analogy

Ever hear of the phrases "You play like you practice" or "muscle memory"?

Didnt think so.

NEXT QUESTION!

Do you also practice running away after firing?

 

[NCCommish]

Strike anyone else as "odd" that the shooter made sure to pick up his casings before leaving the scene

As someone who shoots at a range regularly and reloads his own ammo this does not strike me as odd. Always pick up your brass, don't leave a mess. Reloading ammo is typically less than HALF the cost of buying new ammo.

just sayin.

Well yeah....I guess shooting at a range and shooting a carjack victim by accident are similar enough for this to be a valid analogy

Ever hear of the phrases "You play like you practice" or "muscle memory"?Didnt think so.

NEXT QUESTION!

Are you delusional? It was an obvious attempt to remove evidence.