Chicago concealed carry gun owner kills robber...

[M14 Shooter]

Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...

I happened to be in the area at the time.
Local news converge was entertaining - "Like a scene from the wold, wild west.."

 

[M14 Shooter]

The article fails to give us the whole story, but what they do offer suggests that the customer was well within his right to kill the gunman.
Had the gunman simply displayed a weapon while ordering the clerk to clean out the register there would have been no need for the customer to intervene.

In this context....
Displaying a weapon = threat of deadly force.
This, alone, justifies the use of deadly force in the defense of one self or another.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Meanwhile 12 killed and another 26 injured in the last 72 hours by a gun in the rest of the country:

Why do you hate the fact that people have the right to use a gun for self-defense?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...

AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ

This substantiates the point I made in another threada bout how we've reversed what upsets us. We celebrate this slaying, this death, this dying shot guy because 'he's bad.' And the guy who killed him 'is good.'

Would we be so quick to celebrate a beautiful high end prostitution service with dozens of top tier pros who announced they were going to provide their services for free for a week? Probably not. Therein lies the problem with our culture. We're ass-backwards.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...

AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ

This substantiates the point I made in another threada bout how we've reversed what upsets us. We celebrate this slaying, this death, this dying shot guy because 'he's bad.' And the guy who killed him 'is good.'

Would we be so quick to celebrate a beautiful high end prostitution service with dozens of top tier pros who announced they were going to provide their services for free for a week? Probably not. Therein lies the problem with our culture. We're ass-backwards.

Dead bad guys are NOT a good thing?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...

AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ

This substantiates the point I made in another threada bout how we've reversed what upsets us. We celebrate this slaying, this death, this dying shot guy because 'he's bad.' And the guy who killed him 'is good.'

Would we be so quick to celebrate a beautiful high end prostitution service with dozens of top tier pros who announced they were going to provide their services for free for a week? Probably not. Therein lies the problem with our culture. We're ass-backwards.

Dead bad guys are NOT a good thing?

Like to enter into evidence exhibit 2 your Honor. (gestures to this post)

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...

AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ

This substantiates the point I made in another threada bout how we've reversed what upsets us. We celebrate this slaying, this death, this dying shot guy because 'he's bad.' And the guy who killed him 'is good.'

Would we be so quick to celebrate a beautiful high end prostitution service with dozens of top tier pros who announced they were going to provide their services for free for a week? Probably not. Therein lies the problem with our culture. We're ass-backwards.

Dead bad guys are NOT a good thing?

Like to enter into evidence exhibit 2 your Honor. (gestures to this post)

You didn't answer my question.

 

[Iron Head]

The article fails to give us the whole story, but what they do offer suggests that the customer was well within his right to kill the gunman.
Had the gunman simply displayed a weapon while ordering the clerk to clean out the register there would have been no need for the customer to intervene.

In this context....
Displaying a weapon = threat of deadly force.
This, alone, justifies the use of deadly force in the defense of one self or another.

Paint doesn't agree with this, as I tried to poi

Yes..another shooting for Chicago concealed carry permit holders......one day the criminals will get the point that democrats can no longer disarm the victims of crime...the victims can finally shoot back...

AP News - Police: Concealed carry license holder kills armed gunman

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago police say a customer with a concealed carry license shot and killed an armed man attempting to rob a neighborhood store.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said a masked man walked into the store and currency exchange about 7 p.m. Saturday on the city's southwest side, displayed a handgun and announced a robbery to an employ

This substantiates the point I made in another threada bout how we've reversed what upsets us. We celebrate this slaying, this death, this dying shot guy because 'he's bad.' And the guy who killed him 'is good.'

Would we be so quick to celebrate a beautiful high end prostitution service with dozens of top tier pros who announced they were going to provide their services for free for a week? Probably not. Therein lies the problem with our culture. We're ass-backwards.

Dead bad guys are NOT a good thing?

Like to enter into evidence exhibit 2 your Honor. (gestures to this post)

Delta - the shit on the bottom of the shoes worn by humanity.

Some people do not deserve a public forum.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The article fails to give us the whole story, but what they do offer suggests that the customer was well within his right to kill the gunman.
Had the gunman simply displayed a weapon while ordering the clerk to clean out the register there would have been no need for the customer to intervene.

In this context....
Displaying a weapon = threat of deadly force.
This, alone, justifies the use of deadly force in the defense of one self or another.

Paint doesn't agree with this, as I tried to poi

Doesn't really matter what HE agrees with...

IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.

Criminal pulls a gun on the clerk; it is legal for you to use deadly force to protect him/her and/or stop the felony in progress.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

PMH is a big criminal supporter. No crime should be punished and he even thinks that humans are a pox on the world so actually adviocates that people be killed. Why he snivels over a criminal getting killed I have no idea.

Paint is apparently also a total moron. This is simple stuff. That shooter is not going to be charged with a crime, even in Chicago. You point a gun at someone and a victim or bystander in the vicinity shoots and kills the guy, then it is self-defense. If he is shot fleeing, then you would probably see a voluntary manslaughter charge, but that is not what happened here.

We'll see, but if there was no threat, it's second-degree murder. Keep that in mind eh?

It would be a truly moronic ADA that would bring that case to court. The shooter would be thanked by the members of the jury. You really have no clue just how stupid your position is, do you....

Kids, you can't just shoot people committing a crime. Now you know.

Sure you can. Break into my house or try and carjack me and I'll prove it.

Only when they are a threat to you in most cases, not just because you see a crime in progress.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.

Well, you go ahead and live by that sword. Let us know if you don't die by it as well.

People who "live" by that rule tend to wind up in the obits sooner than later.

It's hard to even estimate how many people have lived through one or even several armed robberies. Do as they say and most times no one gets hurt. That would have likely been true in this case as well but you little gun nuts just love to think of yourselves as John Shoot'em Up Wayne. Judge, jury, and executioner.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The article fails to give us the whole story, but what they do offer suggests that the customer was well within his right to kill the gunman.
Had the gunman simply displayed a weapon while ordering the clerk to clean out the register there would have been no need for the customer to intervene.

In this context....
Displaying a weapon = threat of deadly force.
This, alone, justifies the use of deadly force in the defense of one self or another.

Paint doesn't agree with this, as I tried to poi

Doesn't really matter what HE agrees with...

IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.

Criminal pulls a gun on the clerk; it is legal for you to use deadly force to protect him/her and/or stop the felony in progress.

Pointing a gun at someone is not force. it's a threat, to that person, but not a bystander.

 

[Meathead]

I don't think America would be hurt with fewer thugs and pussies. What about you?

 

[westwall]

I disagree. Had he locked them both in a room, taken the money and gone, no one would have been harmed. To really be in the clear here, you have to wait until the guy starts shooting, at a person.

Well, you go ahead and live by that sword. Let us know if you don't die by it as well.

People who "live" by that rule tend to wind up in the obits sooner than later.

It's hard to even estimate how many people have lived through one or even several armed robberies. Do as they say and most times no one gets hurt. That would have likely been true in the case as well but you little gun nuts just love to think of yourself as John Shoot'em Up Wayne. Judge, jury, and executioner.

Yes, the number is so low, that no one has even bothered to try and track it. Doesn't matter though. You are advocating that people gamble with their lives. That's a fools bet.

 

[westwall]

The article fails to give us the whole story, but what they do offer suggests that the customer was well within his right to kill the gunman.
Had the gunman simply displayed a weapon while ordering the clerk to clean out the register there would have been no need for the customer to intervene.

In this context....
Displaying a weapon = threat of deadly force.
This, alone, justifies the use of deadly force in the defense of one self or another.

Paint doesn't agree with this, as I tried to poi

Doesn't really matter what HE agrees with...

IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.

Criminal pulls a gun on the clerk; it is legal for you to use deadly force to protect him/her and/or stop the felony in progress.

Pointing a gun at someone is not force. it's a threat, to that person, but not a bystander.

I guess you either missed, or ignored this part eh. I highlighted it for you....


IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Well, he got away with the criminal part. Now time for the civil suit, for wrongful death. Killing a guy with paintball gun, see you in court...


Man with concealed carry license who killed attempted robber won't be charged
Man with concealed carry license who killed attempted robber won't be charged

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The article fails to give us the whole story, but what they do offer suggests that the customer was well within his right to kill the gunman.
Had the gunman simply displayed a weapon while ordering the clerk to clean out the register there would have been no need for the customer to intervene.

In this context....
Displaying a weapon = threat of deadly force.
This, alone, justifies the use of deadly force in the defense of one self or another.

Paint doesn't agree with this, as I tried to poi

Doesn't really matter what HE agrees with...

IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.

Criminal pulls a gun on the clerk; it is legal for you to use deadly force to protect him/her and/or stop the felony in progress.

Pointing a gun at someone is not force. it's a threat, to that person, but not a bystander.

I guess you either missed, or ignored this part eh. I highlighted it for you....


IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.

Robbers want cash, not bodies. That's why the policy of all major chains is hand it over and don't try to play the hero. But I know, you guys like dead *******...

 

[Ame®icano]

That is untrue, why he might be charged, and there was likely no real threat at all, it was just a robbery.

... just a robbery. LOL.

Btw, armed robbery.

 

[M14 Shooter]

IL law:
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading) ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
720 ILCS 5/ Criminal Code of 2012.
Criminal pulls a gun on the clerk; it is legal for you to use deadly force to protect him/her and/or stop the felony in progress.

Pointing a gun at someone is not force. it's a threat, to that person, but not a bystander.

Pointing a gun at someone is a clear, present and imminent threat of deadly force.
According to the law, quoted above; this is sufficient for the justifiable use of deadly force in defense of one's self or another.
The law says you are wrong.

 

[HenryBHough]

Common robbery, if one is of proper skin tone, is not a crime in many jurisdictions. In others it is cause for a nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize or at least a ticket to DC for a Rose Garden ceremony.