On the Texas self-defense shooter
Here’s a post by Andrew Branca at Legal Insurrection on the Houston taqueria shooting and self-defense. As always with Branca, it’s well worth reading and very comprehensive.
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
Shot number nine is problematic.
Perhaps it can be shown to be irrelevant.
As I see it, this was overkill.
The lawyer who taught in my handgun license class, a couple of decades ago, stressed that you should not just empty the entire magazine into a perp, just as you shouldn’t shoot a perp in the back as he is running away. This in fairly liberal Northern Virginia.
Both actions, he said, would look, or could be made to look, very bad to a judge or jury.
Shooter of course does not know of the perp’s past history of armed robbery leading to a death, but very likely knows, as most neofans do, that the criminal justice system no longer functions as intended. Shooter knows that there is a very high likelihood that the perp has committed similar crimes before, and/or will commit them again, possibly against me or mine, no matter what the police do if/when they catch him.
If I’m on the grand jury, no bill, and a silent thanks for doing what needed to be done.
If I’m on the petit jury, I might go as far as negligent discharge in order to get a verdict, otherwise we hang (the jury).
That could happen, West TX, but the grand jury is in the Houston area, so maybe not.
The ninth shot was a righteous execution. In the past, the rule of law was active and law abiding citizens had a reasonable expectation of justice with criminals facing prosecution to the full extent of the law. That no longer being the case, we are left with Thomas Sowell’s observation; “If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.”
Make no mistake, the barbarians have entered the gates.
The grand jury refusing to vote for trial would be defending civilization, sending the message that, until the rule of law is reestablished, that it is acceptable for its citizens to defend civilization with force. Charging the shooter, effectively declares that we are at the mercy of the merciless, sending the message that we must accept barbarism.
BTW, the Houston prosecutor is a George Soros guy.
GB and I are on the same page.
Kate, the fact that the DA did not decide to prosecute, but instead punted to the Grand Jury, tells me that he knows he can’t get a conviction. Yes, it happened in Houston, but the jury pool is Harris county, still blue but 55-45 or so. I think GJ just needs majority vote to indict, but they’ll never get a unanimous vote for conviction at trial.
Geoffrey, West TX, you may be right that vigilante justice is going to be the only justice for a while. Here at home, I have a shotgun and I know how to use it.
That is an excellent analysis. Andrew Branca never disappoints in that regard.
Geoffrey Britain, thank you for saying that so well.
Kate,
I too have a shotgun for home defense, though it is really a hunting weapon.
Shotgun vs handgun.I have those duck hunting rounds loaded with literal ( 17 caliber ? ) BBs as the in house round.
A 3 inch long 12 gauge shell loaded with #4 buckshot has 41 pellets, each of which is .24 inch or 6.10 mm. Basically, and roughly speaking, that one shell is like getting shot by 41 pellets each larger in diameter than a 22 projectile , but maybe or maybe not as massive, all at once, since the shotgun pellets are round and 22 projectiles are typically conical on the front. I have not compared the powder between 41 each 22 shells and one shotgun shell.
Hand guns are deadly. Shotguns are devastating .
I have never shot a human, but I did kill three large, grown pit bulls that broke into a goat pen with the described buckshot shotgun shells.
000 Buck shot is .36 inch or 9.14 mm. I do not know how many are in a three inch shell. But it would be equivalent to multiple handgun rounds at once.
One of government’s God given mandates is to punish the criminal element- Romans 13:4 – Sad that our governments are increasingly slack on that.
I pray that I never over react if I am ever in some ” situation ” , but that God would grant me the courage and wisdom and self restraint to act in the proper , balanced, way.
Concealed Revolver verses semi automatic.
Semi auto advantages: More rounds to fight with, more rapid deployment of rounds on the target. Generally easier to conceal ( Flatter). Quicker reloading.
Revolver advantage: Less rounds available to ” overkill” and get prosecuted for that ninth round to the head.
If you have the time for a “round table” discussion, the comments at the LI post are excellent, many from former and current law enforcement persons, some lawyers, and many serious students of self-defense.
Many, in fact most, agree with Branca’s analysis, but opinion is divided as to whether the shooter should be indicted for the ninth shot, or given a ticker tape parade. If the former, a second division into reluctant conviction, or enthusiastic nullification.
The most commonly accepted defense narrative seems to an accidental firing of the last shot under stress.
I particularly recommend a “lived experience” story from Subotai Bahadur, a retired peace officer, about having to make a split-second decision NOT to fire when in hot pursuit of a gun-shooter chasing another person, and how that applies to the situation at issue.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/01/houston-taqueria-shooting-legally-justified-killing-or-simply-an-execution/#comment-1363025
I feel that everyone is overthinking this. No one knows what was in that man’s mind. He may have been thinking “Yeah! I get to kill-legally!” Or, he may have been out of his mind with fear. Or something else. How many people are clear headed and rational in a situation like that?
RE: the 9th round; lacking any verificable confirmation, I’ll offer that it was a negligent discharge (ND) and not a deliberate act. Those who are inexperienced in firearm use violate Rule 3 at every juncture (“keep your finger off the trigger and outside the trigger guard in a register position until the sights are aligned with the target and you have made the decision to fire the gun”).
I’ve taught thousands in NRA Basic Pistol classes, NRA F.I.R.S.T. Step classes, NRA Basic Rifle classes, NRA Basic Shotgun classes, and community firearms training events. In class students are instructed with the NRA’s 3-Rule version (contained in the Instructor’s Guide, the student’s handbook, and the NRA safety poster students receive as part of class materials), plus the “outside NRA 4+1-Rule Version” which is repeated constantly on pro-gun blogs and web sites. I also tell them when we get to the live fire portion of the class the one thing they will hear from me most often is “why is your finger on the trigger? Where should it be?” It is stressed, repeatedly and often, that anytime one attempts to handle a gun or any gun-like object – I use a common hair dryer and a banana in class as examples – one’s index finger should automatically go to the “register position”, outside the trigger guard and extended straight along the side of the gun frame. I also stress that “keeping your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire is very much a learned skill that you will have to teach yourself.”
The reason is there is a condition in humans called “(maximal and submaximal) bilateral muscle contraction” which is a motor control function autonomously executed by the central nervous system: contraction of a muscle group on one side of the body will cause the central nervous system to also contract the similar muscle group on the other side of the body. Squeeze or grasp with your left hand and your right hand will also squeeze or grasp. This condition is heightened by stress as adrenaline forces more function into the autonomous nervous system as reaction to stimuli. If you have ever missed a step while traversing stairs and whichever hand you had on the handrail instinctively tightened to prevent falling, your other hand also instinctively tightened even though it was not in a position to provide any support.
Despite the instructions and cautions, the students still can’t keep their finger off the trigger. In “cop world” there is a condition that occurs frequently enough to have garnered a name – “Glock Leg” – caused by holstering the gun with the index finger still on the trigger; the finger encounters the side of the holster and pressing the gun into the holster presses the finger back against the trigger and BANG! Officer Dumbass now has a permanent record of his ineptitude.
There is conjecture, and possible video evidence, that the shooter in the Houston event discharged the 9th round when he was picking up – a grasping function while bending over – the criminal’s gun. Given that there was probably no immediate foolproof confrmation of the criminal being sufficiently incapacitated as to offer no threat it was very reasonable that the shooter was still pointing his self defense device – the gun – at the criminal and the discharge was an ND caused by bilateral muscle contraction.
Lacking confirmation or evidence to the contrary I will assume that the shooter in this instance has received the minimal level of training and instuction necessary to obtain a concealed weapon permit and, probably, has not practiced beyond maintaining basic firearm operational skills and almost certainly, not in the presence of a coach who would stress correction of Rule 3 violations.
In other words, an inadvertent and unfortunate “oops” that Is The Price of Doing Business under such circumstances.
Should laws be adjusted to require more training, and more coaching? No, but modification of laws, business regulations and tax structure to facilitate the greater availablilty of more, and less expensive, training and coaching during practice would be a Good Thing to do.
So would keeping the Bad Guys locked up, but in lieu of that Other Means will be employed to deal with the situation.
Richard Aubrey said to start this excellent thread:
“Perhaps it [the 9th shot] can be shown to be irrelevant.”
Yes, beyond a reasonable doubt.
For the perp to go down that fast, he likely took one or more shots to the heart, stopping essentially all of his cardiac output. (A brain shot can take a man down similarly, but it appears that Shooter was appropriately aiming for center of mass). This leads to dysfunction of the midbrain reticular activating system, causing immediate loss of consciousness. Perp tried to lift his head at ~00:11 seconds but was unable. This was before #9. At this point, without cardiac output, there would be no detectable pulse, and would meet at least one definition of clinical death. In a self defense setting, the prosecution should have the burden of proving that the excess shots were into a live body. No one can prove that perp was alive at the time of #9.
I’m still going with negligent discharge. I don’t think that this particular corpse is capable of being desecrated, but YMMV.
Cavendish-
Thanks for that education.
To the extent that the #9 shot deviates from the central plane of the head in any direction, it supports your theory. There is no reason of course that we can not both be correct- it was a reflex shot into a dead man.
Video: Why is the man at the table farthest from the door on the floor from the time the video clip begins? Was he the sole target of the robber, and what prior event might have made him the focus? He was ducking under the table right from the start. Note that the robber walked past the other patrons and that those people did not appear especially fearful, even when the robber headed for the door the people in his path did not even duck below the tables.
This has some indications of being a personal matter between the two, up until….
Another Mike.
The others would be chill only if they knew they were not potential targets. Even if the guy came in yelling a name, when bullets start flyimg….
That said, their behavior is odd.
you know in this lawless berg, you cannot let the subject live
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2023/01/paul-auster-purveys-notion-that-black.html
The 9th shot seems a “coup de grace”, but there’s a chance a jury wouldn’t care.
We gotta frame this thing a bit differently.
Let’s try this:
Why do SOROS-PROSECUTORS WANT THESE THUGS BACK ON THE STREET?
Very simply…so that they can terrorize ordinary citizens, mostly minority citizens as it happens, BUT ALSO—so that those thugs can BE KILLED.
Very simply….
That’s right! Vote Democrat!! So that you can help to wreak havoc in minority communities!! (And as a BONUS, turn entire urban areas into wastelands!!!)
because this is an insurgency in all but name, orchestrated since 2020 by susan rosenberg
I thought Texas had a “he deserved killing” practice. If anyone qualified, the guy who ended up dead certainly did.
(Written only partially tongue-in-cheek.)
F:
More accurately-
“Why did you shoot him?”
“He needed killin'”
@ F & West TX – the de jure legality of the Texas Rule is a legend, not a fact; but it was de facto operational in a past world no longer extant.
The dangerous part about it has always been that far too many people take it upon themselves to decide who needs killing.
For today’s progressive-climatista-enviro-socialists that includes most of the planet’s normal people, but especially the Deplorables.
(Someone needs to make a Western about The Magnificent Deplorables.)
miguel cervantes on January 15, 2023 at 12:33 pm said:
you know in this lawless berg, you cannot let the subject live
I have no idea what that sentence means, but miguel’s link to Althouse’s post turned up a lot of good commentary on Paul Auster, why he’s advocating gun control aka banning, and the history of the public perception of the Second Amendment in law and society.
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2023/01/paul-auster-purveys-notion-that-black.html?showComment=1673795523906#c7483942658227038392
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2023/01/paul-auster-purveys-notion-that-black.html?showComment=1673813380436#c6125128323235398097
I don’t subscribe to his advice on teaching children (or adults) to hate any person or even group of people, but it is appropriate to oppose whatever evil those persons are perpetrating, and to oppose the ideology that propels that evil.
AND teach them how to shoot.
Frankly, in the video it looks like premeditated murder. The likelihood of a conviction for some kind of murder is actually pretty high. At the moment of the shooting, the shooter was in no personal danger, nor was anyone else, the robbery being over and the robber leaving. Shooting in the back, and excessive shooting seal the deal.
“Pre-meditated” can happen in seconds, is that right?
I don’t buy the no-danger point. The robber did not look as if this were his day job. Erratic and unpredictable. We are not required to explain to anyone how it would make no logical sense for him to spin and shoot, and therefore he certainly wouldn’t.
Cops are exonerated when they shoot somebody who is pulling up his pants. The dread waistband reach. This dude was armed and in control of whatever nutcase idea occurred to him.
The 9th shot:
The good Samaritan somehow knew that the perp did not have another weapon and he knew that the perp was down and out for the count.
He knew this how???
How was he to know the perp was not playing dead or not wounded “enough” such that he could pull out another weapon and shoot dead the good Samaritan??
After the fact , all is known.
During the heat of action, nothing is known for sure. And making assumptions in real time , if wrong, can get the good guy placed into a body bag.
How often have we heard of instances where police officers – more than one – basically unload their guns on a perp. and kill him.
Should the police be limited to no more than 3 shots? Is anything in excess of that grounds for murder?? And cops are trained (though probably not enough) in these sorts of life and death decisions.
If a perp commits a crime, he should expect to be killed; whether or not he is armed. Too bad for the perp.
If perps knew this, we would not be seeing fast becoming routine “legal” thefts (under $900) in SF or somewhat similar events in NYC where robberies (or worse) are for all intents and purposes, legal.
The individual(s) that should be arrested are the judges and DA’s that intentionally and purposefully allow criminals – REPEATEDLY – to walk free.
Who thinks that if repeat felons began violently targeting the loved ones of these DAs or judges, that the “lets release the felons” policies would be continued?
bob sykes:
“we knows”
We knew what happened in Minneapolis(?) and what that perp died from. That video probablly did lead to a conviction, or was that another case of “we knows?”
Speaking to the sykes, aubrey & tyler [sounds like a law firm 🙂 ]–
About 4 decades an officer working for me was confronted, while in his vehicle, parked and writing a report, by a hostile man. The officer got out of the car to be on an even footing and a fight ensued. The officer, complying with department escalation of force doctrine, attempted to use his police baton (“the wood”) to defend himself. The subject wrested it from him and struck him, damaging his elbow and knocking him down… the assault continued and the officer shot the man at least twice, causing him to momentarily back off; those shots did strike the assailant.
The officer regained his feet and backpedaled as the assault continued. He backpedaled across an intersection of 2 four-lane streets, firing 8 more shots. He backed into a gas station, still pursued until the assailant tripped in some landscape plants and fell to the ground. This ended the event as the assailant was unable to regain his feet. He died there. He had 10 bullet wounds, two in his arms and hands, the rest in upper torso and head. [Wheel gun, 1 reload; .38Spec +P] The officer’s left elbow was broken. There were several choices for the pathologist to choose from to determine “the” fatal round. The moral to this story is that some people refuse to die; and some do not know they are dead. There is not a correct number of rounds to fire.
I trust some here know “the dream”.
Setting aside the “9th” shot matter for a moment, this scene has by far more the look of a self-defense action than say Michael Byrd’s single shot into Ashli Babbit’s neck . . . and yet, Byrd reaped what for that execution, eh?
sdferr: You are so 100% correct. Byrd was a Capitol cop, aka licensed murderer. Plus, he was black.If charged, he would have been exonerated by the large majority of blacks in DC who make up the jury pool.
But to not charge him, to defend his conduct? Immoral.
Another Mike.
I recall some footage of a cop shooting a guy who hardly flinched and kept coming and she kept shooting. Took a few moments to drop him. Shooting is not like clicking on a video figure. To stop the person, you have to stop his mobility–serious leg hit, perhaps. Or hit him where it’s extraordinarily painful–belly wound, presuming he’s not juiced up–or cause a drop in blood pressure due to major bleeders emptying.
Even a heart shot gives him a couple of seconds. The only guaranteed instant shot is the sniper’s triangle which is pretty small for a pistol shot from a person moving at another person moving.
And no matter how badly hurt somebody is, possibly the last physical capability to disappear is the ability to tickle the trigger.