Never rob a market with an armed cashier. We have a prize winner!

[nra4ever]

Armed Robber Picked The Wrong Market To Hold Up, Ends Up With Two Slugs In The Back

Brazil- A 29-year-old robber was shot in the back twice remains hospitalized at the Hospital do Pronto Socorro João XXIII ( HPS ) after attempting a robbery at a cell phone store in Bairro Castelo , in Belo Horizonte. The case is seen as self-defense , and one of the proofs is the video...

vidmax.com

I guess over there you get you medical attention after you are booked in if you survive.

 

[KellyinAvon]

That’s the almost as scary as Honduras Brazil, not the Clay County Brazil.

 

[Ark]

Life saved by Brazil finally opening up gun ownership and CCW.

 

[maxwelhse]

Dude would be going to jail for doing that here. The robber was walking away, wasn't even holding his weapon anymore, and was shot twice in the back. As the second shot hit him he was literally running away.

I'm not crying a river for one less scumbag out there, but that wasn't a self defense shooting at that point. 60 seconds prior it would have been.

 

[churchmouse]

I like that. Shot the POS down in his thieving tracks. Left the thieving POS lay there. The LEO's carted him off like a corpse and pitched him into the wagon.

We need that here. Seriously.

 

[IndyDave1776]

That’s the almost as scary as Honduras Brazil, not the Clay County Brazil.

Brazil Clay County isn't much better.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Dude would be going to jail for doing that here. The robber was walking away, wasn't even holding his weapon anymore, and was shot twice in the back. As the second shot hit him he was literally running away.

I'm not crying a river for one less scumbag out there, but that wasn't a self defense shooting at that point. 60 seconds prior it would have been.

Different perspective. Overall they place less value on life and in a case like that the local officials are going to smile at having one less slimeball at large.

I do wonder whether the perp got shot with a .38 Special or a. 32 ACP. Under Brazilian law last I heard civilians were limited to revolvers no larger caliber than. 38 Spl and autopistols no larger than .32 ACP.

 

[maxwelhse]

Different perspective. Overall they place less value on life and in a case like that the local officials are going to smile at having one less slimeball at large.

Ehh... They place a "different" value on life. Brazil is a crazy place from what I can tell. I want to say they're incarcerating one of the world's most dangerous serial killers and only have a maximum 30 year sentence no matter the crime(s). The guy has already said when he is released he plans to go out and murder as many people as he can before they catch him again. I can't find any news about whether or not he was ever convicted, but, yikes.

This one killed 47 people while he was in prison, and they still had to release him after 30 years. He's back in for other reasons now, but, wow.

They have a very weird scale of acceptable behavior from what I can tell. Anyhow... My bigger point was that you can't do what that clerk did in the US and expect it to be called "self defense" no matter how much better off the gene pool is without the robber in it.

 

[Ark]

I like that. Shot the POS down in his thieving tracks. Left the thieving POS lay there. The LEO's carted him off like a corpse and pitched him into the wagon.

We need that here. Seriously.

Yeah I'm pretty much on this team, morally speaking. I only see error with his shot placement.

The world would be a better place if the trash got taken out more expeditiously.

 

[tetter]

Dude would be going to jail for doing that here. The robber was walking away, wasn't even holding his weapon anymore, and was shot twice in the back. As the second shot hit him he was literally running away.

I'm not crying a river for one less scumbag out there, but that wasn't a self defense shooting at that point. 60 seconds prior it would have been.

I agree that this is not a defense shooting.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I agree that this is not a defense shooting.

Not in terms of US law but it can be argued that it is in that it prevents s repeat performance at a later time. I doubt that this was to have been the perp's last robbery before retiring from crime.

 

[tetter]

Not in terms of US law but it can be argued that it is in that it prevents s repeat performance at a later time. I doubt that this was to have been the perp's last robbery before retiring from crime.

Hmm. As far as preventing loss of merchandise, the shots are preventing that this time.
As a preliminary intervention, or as a punishment for cell phone theft, this is not a reasonable shot to take. This is not a dgu to celebrate.

 

[OurDee]

From what I understand of Indiana Law, only the first shot is legally considered to be self defense. I have been told that the first shot should have ended the threat. Works for my .454 Casull. The 9mm, not so much. I ain't a lawyer. Can any legal eagles comment?

 

[maxwelhse]

Not in terms of US law but it can be argued that it is in that it prevents s repeat performance at a later time. I doubt that this was to have been the perp's last robbery before retiring from crime.

You're suggesting vigilante justice. Despite overwhelming evidence of guilt, that scumbag never had his day in court and that's not how we're supposed to do it here. Even if we did, the penalty for armed robbery isn't a firing squad. Like or not, faults and all, that's what we've agreed to in this country.

I'll say it again that the right time to shoot the guy was pretty much any time except when he did it. There was a strong case for lethal force through most of the video, just expressly not when he deployed it. Shooting a guy in the back who has empty hands is almost certainly going to land you in prison.

 

[churchmouse]

Hmm. As far as preventing loss of merchandise, the shots are preventing that this time.
As a preliminary intervention, or as a punishment for cell phone theft, this is not a reasonable shot to take. This is not a dgu to celebrate.

Come on people this is not the USA here. Those people do not put up with this crap and that guy is off to a place that Hell is envious of.

He "POINTED A GUN AT THE MAN" to steal a cell phone. Did you see him "POINT" a gun at that man.

I need to have a stiff drink.

 

[Grim]

I wouldn't convict. The robber was still armed, still in the store, and the clerk had no idea if the guy was finished. He took the opportunity as the guy was making his way back around the counter. He wasn't, necessarily leaving the store.
(Of course I don't speak the language, so there may be more clues in the exchange)

 

[actaeon277]

From what I understand of Indiana Law, only the first shot is legally considered to be self defense. I have been told that the first shot should have ended the threat. Works for my .454 Casull. The 9mm, not so much. I ain't a lawyer. Can any legal eagles comment?

I have NEVER EVER heard ANYTHING like that.
NEVER.

 

[tetter]

I need to have a stiff drink.

Haha ok. To celebrate, or to mitigate the exasperation?

 

[churchmouse]

Haha ok. To celebrate, or to mitigate the exasperation?

In truth I do not celebrate any injury or loss of life.

What I do see is idiots and asshats stepping outside the box doing stupid things that will never end well for them and it is in fact "ON THEM" for those decisions. You point a gun at anyone in that context and what ever comes your way for it is just fine with me.

We coddle our criminal subculture far to much. To the point they are no longer fearful of being caught because people will feel sorry for them.

 

[maxwelhse]

We coddle our criminal subculture far to much. To the point they are no longer fearful of being caught because people will feel sorry for them.

There's a big difference between that message and "Hey... You're probably going to prison if you do that in America".

I only feel bad that the guy needed 2 shots. I shudder to think what the ammo prices are in Brazil right now.