Restaurant Shooting

[joeyturtle]

There was a shooting at a popular Mexican restaurant in September. The shooter ran into the restaurant, got in an argument with a guy at a table, pulled his gun, shot him and ran out. My daughter had friends in the restaurant but I was not at the restaurant. The discussion came up about what a law abiding citizen with a weapon (and permit) would do at that point. No one truly knew the shooters frame of mind at the time. His gun swept across the restaurant as he was turning to leave. Do we have a duty to protect other innocents when someone is in the act of violent crime?

Assume that the shooter was in an area where a safe shot could be taken.

What do you think and why?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[OldVet]

As you described it, it was quick and dirty. I would have most likely ducked and covered.

[jryan630]

I agree with oldvet. i would probably have made sure my family is safe and on the ground.

[archer51]

Yes, you do have duty. A duty to insure you return home that night to your family. Take cover first. Do what you have to do to protect yourself and family. If he moves towards you, take him out if you can.

[Chaplain Scott]

Joeyturtle: Hey, WELCOME to the forum. Stick around, lots of wise and very experienced folks here, and mutual respect is the norm on this forum.

[rammerjammer]

Yes, you do have duty. A duty to insure you return home that night to your family. Take cover first. Do what you have to do to protect yourself and family. If he moves towards you, take him out if you can.

Yup

[Bill MO]

Sounds to me as the fight was over before you would have known there was a fight. If that's it and he leaves then you are not LE so be a good witness get all the details you can, on what he looks like.

If he threatens all those who are in the restaurant, then the situation has changed and all including you and yours are in danger. Stop the threat as soon and the best you can.

Also welcome to the forum!

[royal barnes]

Secure your loved ones and, unless he threatens you and your family, be a good witness.

[DaGunny]

First: Welcome to the forum.

Second: To answer your question...it depends on State law. In NC, once an assailant moves to withdraw, use of deadly force is prohibited (he's leaving and thus no longer posing an imminent threat).

[JayTee]

I guess I'm going against the grain with most people here. Even if my family was totally secure and the bad guy posed no threat to me personally, I don't know if I could simply remain a "good witness" and stand idly by while he executes innocent people.

[suntzu]

I guess I'm going against the grain with most people here. Even if my family was totally secure and the bad guy posed no threat to me personally, I don't know if I could simply remain a "good witness" and stand idly by while he executes innocent people.

Nobody is standing "idly by as he exucuted innocent people". The OP said he was leaving AFTER he shot someone where there was no time for anyone to react. Different scenario.

[OldVet]

First: Welcome to the forum.

Second: To answer your question...it depends on State law. In NC, once an assailant moves to withdraw, use of deadly force is prohibited (he's leaving and thus no longer posing an imminent threat).

He's still armed and dangerous, isn't he. Is NC really that restrictive? If he's pointing at me, I'm likely pointing back--regardless of his direction of travel.

[Mike1956]

First: Welcome to the forum.

Second: To answer your question...it depends on State law. In NC, once an assailant moves to withdraw, use of deadly force is prohibited (he's leaving and thus no longer posing an imminent threat).

Not saying whether I would engage or not, but how, precisely does one surmise he is moving to withdraw, rather than, say, retreating to a more defensible position? Unless he drops the gun, throws his hands in the air and screams "Don't shoot, I give up!!!", it reasonable to believe he still harbors lethal intentions to all present. He has shot one person, so why would he not shoot some more?

[suntzu]

Not saying whether I would engage or not, but how, precisely does one surmise he is moving to withdraw, rather than, say, retreating to a more defensible position? Unless he drops the gun, throws his hands in the air and screams "Don't shoot, I give up!!!", it reasonable to believe he still harbors lethal intentions to all present. He has shot one person, so why would he not shoot some more?

I see what you are saying in a tactical sense. But I highly doubt a person that killed someone during an arguement will be finding a defensible positionin the resteraunt to kill more people instead of just leaving........jusr saying it makes no sense. Every time we here of shootings like this the dude is leaving.

That is not saying he is not a threat, but he isn't looking for cover and concealment.

[LaraCroft10]

In this particular situation, it sounds like there's not much you can do. Now, you ARE legally justified to use deadly force in a defense situation if he is infringing upon the lives of others. So if he was "executing innocent people", yeah, I might try to get a good vantage point and take him out. But it's not your DUTY. If it's too risky - you do whatever you need to to protect yourself first and foremost. But in the OP's situation, sounds like he was out the door before you could really register what happened. I would not shoot if the dude was leaving the establishment. Get in a safe area and call 911 ASAP.