San Antonio shooting

[TB1999]

An unarmed man attempted to stop the robbery and was shot and killed. A second man pulled out his concealed weapon and shot one of the suspects. The second suspect fled the scene, shooting as he ran. Their condition has not been released.

Did the guy think he was Batman or something?

Man killed trying to stop robbery at Rolling Oaks Mall in San Antonio | WOAI

I just watched suicide squad..remember, batman is just a guy in a suit.

 

[TB1999]

No, he was a man that thought more of everyone else, than himself! While I agree he should have been armed, how dare you demean him for doing the RIGHT thing?

Gutsy thing, yes. Right thing, that's debatable.

 

[KellyinAvon]

I'velooked at several follow-ups on this story. I haven't seen where anyone's life was in danger or threat of serious bodily injury. Description, direction, and phone it in. No matter who you are and you are not invincible. Two armed Bad guys don't make for good odds.

 

[indyjoe]

I'velooked at several follow-ups on this story. I haven't seen where anyone's life was in danger or threat of serious bodily injury. Description, direction, and phone it in. No matter who you are and you are not invincible. Two armed Bad guys don't make for good odds.

We will learn more over time. However, it very well might be that the initial unarmed good samaritan started into a situation that would have just been thugs walking out of the mall.

I'm curious if the armed good samaritan had decided to engage prior to the shots on the marine.

It is also possible that had the marine not go involved, the CCW might have gotten shot first and would have left two health armed thugs.

Wonder if there is any security video on this. There are always lessons to learn.

 

[BugI02]

Just read an update where the wife of the marine was quoted as saying he was shot while standing in front of her as a shield, but no information about what sort of interaction led up to that point

 

[gregr]

Are you sure about the GFZ thing? From what I read, one unarmed man tried to stop the robbers and was killed. Then, a second man intervened by drawing his concealed weapon and shooting one of the robbers.

Man killed trying to stop robbery at Rolling Oaks Mall in San Antonio | WOAI

You`re exactly correct. Either this mall isn`t posted as a gun-free zone, or the armed good guy ignored the signage. Either way, good for him.

 

[gregr]

No, he was a man that thought more of everyone else, than himself! While I agree he should have been armed, how dare you demean him for doing the RIGHT thing?

 

[gregr]

I'velooked at several follow-ups on this story. I haven't seen where anyone's life was in danger or threat of serious bodily injury. Description, direction, and phone it in. No matter who you are and you are not invincible. Two armed Bad guys don't make for good odds.

I wondered that too, about whether the perps were actively threatening anyone, or whether the unarmed good Samaritan just wanted to try to stop them from making their getaway...God bless him, his heart was big, and in the right place...

 

[Alamo]

Unlawful use of deadly force (force that can cause death or serious bodily injury) is inherent in robbery. That's why it is a robbery instead of a theft.

The wife of the dead Samaritan has been quoted as saying he was standing in front of her, shielding her. They were at the jeweler getting their wedding rings cleaned.

I haven't been to Rolling Oaks Mall in awhile but I never noticed it being posted against licensed carry. From postings to gun boards around here it appears the mall is not posted against licensed carry, but the jewelry store is.

The robber that initially escaped wounded two other people on his way out, but not life threatening wounds. Another man was taken to the hospital for chest pains, and a pregnant woman was treated at the scene for... something. Some reports said "going into labor." I'm thinking "scared s***less" but at least she was not physically wounded.

Both robbers are caught now, facing capital murder and aggravated assault charges.

The wounded robber is at San Antonio Military Medical Center (formerly BAMC for you Army types) in critical I think condition, where I checked in my wife a little while ago. Hopefully they keep them separate. I noticed SAPD cars in the "LEO Only" parking slots by the Emergency Department.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I just watched suicide squad..remember, batman is just a guy in a suit.

No, NO! You're wrong!

 

[indyjoe]

Looks like the the man just got in front of his wife. No fighting back. The robber just started shooting. One to the head and one to the check. Sounds like it was immediate with the head wound. Last stand was protecting the ones he loved and that demands much respect.

Rolling Oak Mall shooting widow: ?The guy just started...

Apparently this was a 30.06 Gun Free Zone for TX. That is Class C Misdemeanor to carry there (no jail, $500 fine).

Why can't a victim of gun violence in a gun free zone sue the company the made it illegal for them to carry, but failed to protect them?

 

[T.Lex]

Why can't a victim of gun violence in a gun free zone sue the company the made it illegal for them to carry, but failed to protect them?

That is basically a developing area of law, I believe.
http://justiceatwork.com/wp-content/media/victim_advocate.pdf
Injuries Caused by Inadequate Security Can Lead to Premises Liability Lawsuits

Google "premises liability inadequate security."

 

[indyjoe]

From what I understand, Missouri is working on a bill. The ability to sue if injured in a gun free zone created by the business is in the works.

Here it is: https://bearingarms.com/jenn-j/2016...gun-free-zones-liable-for-disarming-citizens/

 

[Alamo]

Looks like the the man just got in front of his wife. No fighting back. The robber just started shooting. One to the head and one to the check. Sounds like it was immediate with the head wound. Last stand was protecting the ones he loved and that demands much respect.

Yes, this is a lot different than saying he tried to "intervene."

Apparently this was a 30.06 Gun Free Zone for TX. That is Class C Misdemeanor to carry there (no jail, $500 fine).

The jewelry store was Kay Jewelers. It appears they have a corporate policy of no licensed concealed or open carry and post the proper signs. The mall management put out a wishy-washy statement about how they have a "code of conduct" posted against carrying weapons, but recent visitors say they did not see any of the statutorily required signs, so the "code of conduct" doesn't mean anything legally to a licensed carrier as far as the rest of the mall goes. I don't know where the licensed carrier was who shot the robber, I doubt anyone will care.


Police are looking for a third suspect, apparently they believe (as I had speculated) that these are the same guys who robbed another jewelry store at another mall in San Antonio a couple days prior.

 

[Alamo]

According to latest news from San Antonio PD, the two people who were shot as one of the robbers ran away were actually hit by "shrapnel," so seems they weren't' directly shot, but showered with debris from misses and maybe some bullet fragments. They, along with the guy who had chest pains, have been released from hospital.

The story has changed quite a bit from two Samaritans intervening to stop a robbery and six shot.

SAPD IDs second suspect in Rolling Oaks Mall shooting

 

[BE Mike]

According to latest news from San Antonio PD, the two people who were shot as one of the robbers ran away were actually hit by "shrapnel," so seems they weren't' directly shot, but showered with debris from misses and maybe some bullet fragments. They, along with the guy who had chest pains, have been released from hospital.

The story has changed quite a bit from two Samaritans intervening to stop a robbery and six shot.

SAPD IDs second suspect in Rolling Oaks Mall shooting

Face and neck tattoos, like those in the photo, should be reasonable suspicion for a police officer to stop and frisk IMHO.

 

[ATM]

...Why can't a victim of gun violence in a gun free zone sue the company the made it illegal for them to carry, but failed to protect them?

Because the victim chose to disarm and enter the place, nobody forced them to be there.

 

[CraigAPS]

Face and neck tattoos, like those in the photo, should be reasonable suspicion for a police officer to stop and frisk IMHO.

Not to get too off topic, but judging likelihood of a person to commit a crime and, therefore, be subject to a violation of the 4th Amendment based solely on physical appearance is ridiculous not to mention illegal. Bad tattoo choices shouldn't lead to violations of civil rights anymore than skin color, race, religion, etc.

 

[KLB]

Because the victim chose to disarm and enter the place, nobody forced them to be there.

Not to get too off topic, but judging likelihood of a person to commit a crime and, therefore, be subject to a violation of the 4th Amendment based solely on physical appearance is ridiculous not to mention illegal. Bad tattoo choices shouldn't lead to violations of civil rights anymore than skin color, race, religion, etc.

Both points are spot on.

 

[BugI02]

Because the victim chose to disarm and enter the place, nobody forced them to be there.

So are you saying "... shall not be infringed" is immaterial to this discussion? I know that the situation is better in Indiana, but would you really want to be held to such a standard? Would you wish the onus to always fall upon you if your business took you to a GFZ and you obeyed the demands of the law and became a victim because of it?

If nothing else, I think personal and/or business liability for the danger establishing a GFZ on premises would perhaps have some entities rethink what amount to kneejerk anti-gun stands. I also think the state should be liable without the need to get their permission to sue if you are injured or killed by a perp who gets out of control in their GFZs