Masked men rob Houston Waffle House, customers

[matefrio]

He had a CHL, why was his handgun in his car?

Also, this "legal analyst" is an idiot:

T. Treece

 

[MR Redneck]

He had a CHL, why was his handgun in his car?

Also, this "legal analyst" is an idiot:

The way I understand it, is you have a right to recover your property. I dont remember reading anything about the fresh pursuit comment he made.
Correct me if im wrong, but since it all went down at night, the man had legal right to use force to recover his property even though they were fleeing. Now if they didnt have his $600, Im not possitive.
During the day, he couldnt do that while they were fleeing, Only while robbing him.
CHL, has nothing to do with it.

 

[Bithabus]

The way I understand it, is you have a right to recover your property. I dont remember reading anything about the fresh pursuit comment he made.
Correct me if im wrong, but since it all went down at night, the man had legal right to use force to recover his property even though they were fleeing. Now if they didnt have his $600, Im not possitive.
During the day, he couldnt do that while they were fleeing, Only while robbing him.
CHL, has nothing to do with it.

They robbed him so he could use deadly force to get his property back, if all other criteria in the justification were met.

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.

But referring to it as "right of fresh pursuit" is about as intelligent as talking about the "castle doctrine law". And I bet the thugs did not have automatic weapons.

 

[Bithabus]

T. Treece

Maybe he was trying to dumb down his response for the audience. I wish professionals wouldn't do that. Makes everyone look bad.

 

[Jakashh]

In the comments:

Tanya78 said on May 4, 2011 at 8:30 PMI was at this waffle house when it was robbed and it was horrible. My friends and I were the ladies that you see sitting at the table wearing white. Had we had a gun... I'm not so sure we would have used it because they were so close up on us and it all happen so fast. Sometimes trying to be a hero will get you killed. I'm thankful that we all were able to walk out of there alive and I hope that someone speaks up and report these thugs who stole our belongings and sense of security. All we wanted to do was get something to eat after a "girls night out" at the club. Why would anyone think that Waffle House of all places would be somewhere unsafe to eat at after hours?

And yes, I've been to an IHOP or denny's at in the middle of Houston at 3 AM.

Some extremely ghetto as people in there. At first I was wondering why a Denny's was this busy and full of these types of people, but then I remembered that the clubs just closed.

 

[Texas1911]

The surveillance video was played here. It was scarry. They came in so fast that I doubt anyone with a CCW could have reacted. Only if perhaps one was in the back of the place. Then one would have to watch out for patrons.

The robbers did not check the entire restaurant and were fixated on the one booth ... it would not have been hard to engage them so long as you weren't in the first booth by the door.

The problem is drawing discretely from a seated position is not exactly easy from a 3 o'clock hip carry with a straight draw.

 

[Texas1911]

Correct me if im wrong, but since it all went down at night, the man had legal right to use force to recover his property even though they were fleeing. Now if they didnt have his $600, Im not possitive.

Aggravated Robbery is what they committed, not theft at nighttime. Night has nothing to do with his justification.

During the day, he couldnt do that while they were fleeing, Only while robbing him.
CHL, has nothing to do with it.

He could so long as he met the above criteria for stolen property.

 

[Texas1911]

If it were me, I would have done the same thing, but I would have had a AR15 in my PU. I wouldnt have stoped untill all the were dead or had their hands out in front of them while laying on the ground! I would have been so damn made simply because of the way that little POS punk threw that old man on the ground.

If I had a gun on me while inside the store, I dont think I would have used it. 3 of them and too many other people. I wouldnt have wanted to create a gunfight where others would have gotten shot.

What that man did was very respectable to his community and the others in that waffle house. I just wished he would have killed all 3 of those SOB's.

So you don't want to fire your gun inside the store for fear of hitting people you see, but it's perfectly OK to mag dump a moving car in the middle of one of the most populous cities in the world in the middle of the night?

What he did was absolutely negligent. This isn't the Wild West, and $600 isn't going to cover the bill if he goes to jail for the numerous counts of discharge of a weapon within city limits, criminal negligence, deadly conduct, etc. I'm absolutely amazed that the DA hasn't charged him. They've charged people with far less scrupulous incidents.

 

[Medic218]

So you don't want to fire your gun inside the store for fear of hitting people you see, but it's perfectly OK to mag dump a moving car in the middle of one of the most populous cities in the world in the middle of the night?

What he did was absolutely negligent. This isn't the Wild West, and $600 isn't going to cover the bill if he goes to jail for the numerous counts of discharge of a weapon within city limits, criminal negligence, deadly conduct, etc. I'm absolutely amazed that the DA hasn't charged him. They've charged people with far less scrupulous incidents.

I agree. Hes not a cowboy, a cop or batman....hes not a crime fighter is what I'm getting at.
I would have gotten my pistol and gone back in the store and waited for police.....sure as heck wouldn't have chased after them.
3-on-1 is never favorable when you're the "on-1" part of the equation...especially when they have long guns and all you have is a pistol.

If I had to choose one word to describe his actions I would call it "reckless".

They were leaving=Threat eliminated

 

[kyletxria1911a1]

yeah combat situations are very dangerous, i could only pray to stay calm under that kind of
pressure. if you ccw do it all the time, but if some one has the drop on you what can, you do?
But comply, if you can deploy your weapon and use it fine but to run after long guns is a tad bit risky

 

[GlockontheRocks]

The guy at the register had his weapon tucked under his arm facing behind him, the other with the bag was gathering loot, the third was gathering loot with a gun in his hand and taking it to the bagman.
Not an easy scenario. Depending on where you'd be sitting, I'd say take out the two gathering loot when they got together, and shoot the register guy last.
I know that the reality and pressure of the situation would dictate otherwise, but that would be a nice ending. Damn shame that all 3 aren't at the coroners office.
I know it could be "what if'" to death, but at least no one was physically hurt. The emotional hurt will be there for a while. I hope that each patron would get their CHL and some training. (Hoping that they all can pass background and tests).
The guy that came out on TV that shot at them, just became a target for the bad guys. IMHO, it was a mistake to run out after them unarmed. A "smarter" crew might have had someone watching the door for just that "one" that comes out behind them. He's lucky that he did not lose his life for $ 600. The threat was gone your family is safe. Stay there, report everything you saw.

 

[Texas1911]

Most of us carry but what would we do if we were actually in this situation?

I would just hand over whatever I had (begrudgingly) and let them run out.

With three guys, only two appear to be armed, in various positions in the store it is extremely risky to start a gun fight on those terms. After watching the video again, the only real point you had to gain the upper hand is immediately on entry. If you drilled the first guy through with the HiPoint carbine, the second probably would have got drilled on a follow-up, and the third more than likely was unarmed or would have ran.

In the end ... identifying, reacting, drawing, and putting 7 - 10 rounds on target on multiple armed assailants inside of a crowded building is not a risk you take for some thug posturing and robbery in my opinion. I could probably get two ... but the third ... it's one too many, and the chance of hitting an innocent is pretty high at that point.

On average it takes someone with an average skill-set about 3 - 4 seconds to put 6 aimed shots on two spaced out targets. That's knowing the course of fire, knowing where the targets are, without adrenaline and fear, and without the concealed holster draw. We did this at an IDPA match; the master class shooter did it in 2.50 seconds roughly, and I did it in the fastest time of 2.02 seconds. Here's a video of the 2.02 run.



Ask yourself what can happen in that 2 seconds of shooting ...

 

[M. Sage]

Tactically, your only hope to win in this one would be if you were in the restroom when they entered...

 

[SIG_Fiend]

This is why I don't understand the people out there that carry, but don't train, and don't really feel like training or feel they need to train. They clearly have no idea the sheer number of odds stacked against them. The more I train and the more I learn, the LESS prepared I feel because I see so many other areas where I need to train and improve.

 

[Texan2]

This is why I don't understand the people out there that carry, but don't train, and don't really feel like training or feel they need to train. They clearly have no idea the sheer number of odds stacked against them. The more I train and the more I learn, the LESS prepared I feel because I see so many other areas where I need to train and improve.

thats a weird dynamic isnt it? train more and feel less prepared...but I understand what you mean.

 

[Texan2]

this is my new favorite thread.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

On the whole training thing, I think it is just pure dumb luck that more good people don't die in these sorts of defensive situations. Imagine the outcome and the massive improvement to society, and corresponding decrease in crime that would occur with a higher percentage of people trained, proficient, and with real confidence in their abilities.

I vote that we create a new IDPA course of fire called Waffle House Madness and model it after this........minus the running to the car to get your gun part. LOL

As far as winning this sort of scenario, here are my thoughts. If it is justified and warranted to shoot in that sort of situation (say they start shooting people), even outnumbered and outgunned, I still feel mindset plays a vital role and could be the deciding factor. The thing I've worked on telling myself, having resolved in my mind, and training to is understanding the ballistic wounding factors at play. Once you understand that only a perfect CNS shot, or upper spinal shot on YOU is what will stop YOU instantaneously, you start to understand that unless 1 of those 2 happens you still have time (if only a few seconds) and you can fight through unimaginable pain and physical trauma. Once you begin to understand those things, not only from the perspective of damage you're doing to the attacker, but what damage can be done to you, it will make you realize you still have choices. Build on that until you have resolve, purpose, and intent, and I think you will significantly increase your odds of surviving these sorts of situations.

 

[lalonguecarabine]

From what I saw, those guys never intended to shoot.
They just didn't look like they were prepared for anything more than intimidating a small amount of unarmed people that wouldn't fight back and gaining some petty cash.
My two cents.

 

[M. Sage]

I vote that we create a new IDPA course of fire called Waffle House Madness and model it after this........minus the running to the car to get your gun part. LOL

I like "Awful House" better.

But it's a tough situation to be in. The layout of that restaurant sucks for trying do defend against a situation like that, especially with the way the attackers spread out.

 

[proforguns]

On the whole training thing, I think it is just pure dumb luck that more good people don't die in these sorts of defensive situations. Imagine the outcome and the massive improvement to society, and corresponding decrease in crime that would occur with a higher percentage of people trained, proficient, and with real confidence in their abilities.

I vote that we create a new IDPA course of fire called Waffle House Madness and model it after this........minus the running to the car to get your gun part. LOL

As far as winning this sort of scenario, here are my thoughts. If it is justified and warranted to shoot in that sort of situation (say they start shooting people), even outnumbered and outgunned, I still feel mindset plays a vital role and could be the deciding factor. The thing I've worked on telling myself, having resolved in my mind, and training to is understanding the ballistic wounding factors at play. Once you understand that only a perfect CNS shot, or upper spinal shot on YOU is what will stop YOU instantaneously, you start to understand that unless 1 of those 2 happens you still have time (if only a few seconds) and you can fight through unimaginable pain and physical trauma. Once you begin to understand those things, not only from the perspective of damage you're doing to the attacker, but what damage can be done to you, it will make you realize you still have choices. Build on that until you have resolve, purpose, and intent, and I think you will significantly increase your odds of surviving these sorts of situations.

Ive thought about this situation (luxury of having time) and probably would of unholstered my weapon (I have practiced drawing conspicuasly from a sitting position) but thats as far as I could imagine.If I would of opened fire on any of the three, the thought of the other gunman (I only saw 2 guns)shooting blindly in my direction would not be ideal for me or the other patrons.I have concluded that everyone, except the man who ran after them, acted perfectly.Not very hollywood but everyone survived.