Defensive Carry banner

Milwaukee Aldi's Shooting Update

7K views 84 replies 42 participants last post by  Snub44 
#1 ·
Some of you may remember when Wisconsin was granted conceal carry, and Nazir Al-Mujaahid was the first to use his weapon under this new law.
Well this is an update that he finally recieved his gun back after 14 or 15 months. Longer then one of the one of the badguys. He was released before Nazir got his gun back.

Anyway CCW Advocates just posted the video of this shooting.


Concealed Carry Holder Stops Armed Robbery - YouTube
 
#6 ·
From the security footage, it seemed like no one was behind the BG.

I am not sure what I would have done in a situation like that. The BG's nervous and erratic behavior would make me uneasy. He was sweeping back and forth trying to keep eyes on everyone. As much as I would have wanted to just leave the scene, my conscious would have nagged me as I left. Even trying to leave, I would have wanted to have my weapon drawn down just to ensure my own safety. However, once the BG notices, it could turn out badly (for me).

Even if I did escape, I would be fine.. but what about everyone else. And if someone would have been injured, I might have felt like I could have prevented it. I know I don't have the social obligation to, I am not an officer of the law, but I am still a compassionate human being too.
 
#7 ·
Wow looks like he wasn't carrying with a chambered round and forgot to rack one in even while waiting in ambush? That could have cost him if the bad guy had decided to fight instead of run. Anyways I don't disagree with him engaging the robber with the way he was waving the gun around at everyone especially directly towards the clerk before he began to back out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phaedrus
#11 ·
What if...he should have...he shouldn't have...he could have...

It's over and the good guy won this one...the bad guy lost, end of story.

I'm not going to second guess anyone, I wasn't there.
I would like to think that the good guy may just have saved some lives down the line.

I think it stinks that it took the State Attorney over a year to get the gun back to the good citizen.:hand1:


Yet another reason I purchased TWO Glock-36's.:yup:
 
#12 ·
What if...he should have...he shouldn't have...he could have...

It's over and the good guy won this one...the bad guy lost, end of story.

I'm not going to second guess anyone, I wasn't there.
I would like to think that the good guy may just have saved some lives down the line.

I think it stinks that it took the State Attorney over a year to get the gun back to the good citizen.:hand1:
I concur why did they retain possesion of his firearm so long? Seems completely unnecessary.
 
#15 ·
Nobody has mentioned the GG's conscious and how he'll have to deal with shooting another person. In this case the robbery appears to be over and the BG is leaving without firing a shot. Did the GG have to shot? Legally apparently he had a right to shoot. Morally might be another matter. That's a choice we'll all have to make if the time comes like it did for him.
Based on the video I wouldn't have shot. But he was there and made his choice.
 
#17 ·
In this case the robbery appears to be over and the BG is leaving without firing a shot. Did the GG have to shot? Legally apparently he had a right to shoot. Morally might be another matter.
I don't know whether I would have shot or not. I wasn't there.

For me, though, there is no morality issue here. As soon as this individual decided to bring out a deadly weapon to take by force what was not rightfully his, his choice was already made, and if he loses his life it's by his own decision regardless of who pulls the trigger. There is no argument you could make that will make me think otherwise.

This is something you need to have settled in your mind before ever facing a situation like that. If I hadn't thought through that part of it long since, I wouldn't be carrying at all.
 
#18 ·
The guy was leaving. The threat was ending. The problem is that when he opened fire it could have been the catalyst for a shoot out to erupt in the store. It wasn't that there was no one behind the thief...what if the thief fired back? There were plenty of people that could have been hit.

He should have been a good witness. Instead he acted like a vigilante and DID put people unnecessarily at risk.
 
#22 ·
Arm chair "quarterbacking" is great, isn't it..............
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike1956
#24 ·
I too agree that there is a gray area in "when the threat ceases."

I think the GG in the video did a pretty good job of showing he wasn't really trying to kill anyone (including the BG), but rather diffuse the situation without endangering himself (or allowing anyone else to be endangered by the BG). Some things I noticed were how he reholsters his weapon, checks the main entranceway and stays insides rather than chase after the BG with his gun drawn. To me that showed he was interested solely in defense, not being the aggressor.

I know he is not a cop, but I think a cop would have handled the situation almost identically even just for his own safety and not for apprehension. When someone has a gun drawn and is waving it around in your general direction, I think the appropriate response is to be ready to get on equal footing.
 
#25 ·
From what I could see the CCW carrier was jockeying for a position to fire from for quite a while but was blocked by that one dude standing at the counter with his hands up. He wasnt a wild eyed trigger happy guy from the looks of it.

I may be off on my own thinking here but again the famous crystal ball is being used to say the threat was over. BG has had about everyone at gun point off and on, moved around, etc. Yes when hes being shot at hes walking toward the door but a long way from it.
He has demonstrated that hes willing to use a firearm in the commision of a crime. That he hadnt fired as yet is luck of the draw. And unless someone can read minds what reasonable person could determine that simply because he is walking in the direction of the door that he will not spot another cashier and go for that one, perhaps shoot that one or someone else instead of going on out the door????

The GG waited for an opening in a lethal force situation that he could not know was going to end unless he is a mind reader , and presented with a clear opening to fire did so. Its not a wonder he faced no charges. He was defending his life and the lives of others. Not everyone will or should try that. But this GG did nothing illegal or wrong.
 
#28 ·
This story is a good example of exactly why we all need a second carry piece. Hopefully he didn't have do go a whole year unarmed because of a glacial bureaucracy.
 
#29 ·
The Milwaukee police department wouldn't give him his weapon back even tho the judge told them to. He did recently(finally) recieve his weapon back. Bad news he had to get an attorney(at his expense) and fight over one year to get it back.
 
#33 ·
Nearly this exact scenario was presented at my CCW class. The instructor, a lieutenant with the sheriiff's office and over 20 years of experience, presented the hypothetical situations and asked the class members what their response would be. In this case the instructor indicated green light.

Beyond that, I feel that society has to start taking care of itself. Law enforcement is totally overloaded and most situations will not wait for help to arrive. If the BGs believe they risk a good chance of being shot by a civilian then that may deter the crime. I'm not advocating vigilante action, but if someone has decided to bring deadly force near me or mine then they are subject to the consequences, up to and including the loss of their life.

The reason I started carrying again is that an armed robbery happened in the middle of the day at a convenience store less than half a mile from my families home. Enough is enough. The evil and misguided in society need to be shown that the common man will stand up for what is right.

Shooting another human being is one of the last things I would ever want to happen. I shudder to think how that might affect me, but in the end if that is what is needed then I will be thankful that I was prepared to protect my own life and the lives of others.
 
#35 ·
Kentucky revised statutes states

503.100 Prevention of a suicide or crime.
(1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent such other person from:
(a) Committing suicide or inflicting serious physical injury upon himself; or
(b) Committing a crime involving or threatening serious physical injury to person, substantial damage to or loss of property, or any other violent conduct.
(2) The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable under subsection (1)(b) only when the defendant believes that the person whom he seeks to prevent from committing a crime is likely to endanger human life.
(3) The limitations imposed on the justifiable use of force in self-protection by KRS 503.050 and 503.060, for the protection of others by KRS 503.070, for the protection of property by KRS 503.080, and for the effectuation of an arrest or the prevention of an escape by KRS 503.090 apply notwithstanding the criminality of the conduct against which such force is used.
Effective: January 1, 1975
History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 35, effective January 1, 1975.
503.080 Protection of property.
(1) The use of physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable when the defendant believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent:
(a) The commission of criminal trespass, robbery, burglary, or other felony involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to KRS 503.055, in a dwelling, building or upon real property in his possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection he acts; or
(b) Theft, criminal mischief, or any trespassory taking of tangible, movable property in his possession or in the possession of another person for whose protection he acts.
(2) The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable under subsection (1) only when the defendant believes that the person against whom such force is used is:
(a) Attempting to dispossess him of his dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession; or
(b) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary, robbery, or other felony involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to KRS 503.055, of such dwelling; or
(c) Committing or attempting to commit arson of a dwelling or other building in his possession.
(3) A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
Effective: July 12, 2006
History: Amended 2006 Ky. Acts ch. 192, sec. 5, effective July 12, 2006. -- Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 33, effective January 1, 1975.
Why do you think they wrote these statutes to include defenses for instances when violent felonies were being committed? If you believe the bad guy poses a serious threat to others while fleeing or in the commission of the mentioned crimes.
 
#41 ·
Obviously, we're glad things turned out the way they did," said Jeri Bonavia, of the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort. "But we believe a robbery is bad enough and that adding this grocery store shoot'em-up just increases the risk there will be a bad outcome."
What they should've said is: "Robbery is bad enough; surviving a robbery is far better, no matter the cost to the BG(s). Kudos to those who stood up for their very lives and survived it intact. The robbers are in jail awaiting their trial date, for robbery and multiple counts of attempted murder."
 
#42 ·
Coulda', shoulda'..whatever!

Compliance in the face of a gun wielding BG does not insure your safety. Heck of a risk playing those odds.
A gun is drawn..I'm in the line of fire. To me; someone has just thrust deadly force on me.
Not a cop argument? Nonsense. Cops answer the call and must walk into harms way.
The good guy did not go looking for this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tcox4freedom
#43 ·
Let's see. The cops disarm you and the media puts your name in the paper so the BG's relatives can come after you. Not a good thing. One reason I will never draw when the BG is leaving or insert myself in the situation when it's possible to withdraw and be a good witness. Get the license plate on video, call 911 but leave the gun where it is. You're no good to your family in jail.

Also, another reason it's good to have access to a second firearm, b/c you know yours will be taken (WHY?? They know it was you in a SD situation - it's just another chance for the cops to act like thugs by proxy).
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top