Wow can't stop rewatching it. Terrible for the cashier. Knife was already out and ready so don't know I'd deadly defense meets the petty crime. Will depend on interpretation of the local law.

Private PoopyPants said:

---

Again, where is the imminent threat to the clerk's life? The clerk closed the distance. The clerk stabbed the robber in the back as the robber was not even facing him. The robber's attention was on stealing stuff, not on the clerk. As much as people want to conflate what the law should be, we have to look at it for what it is.

A prosecutor probably has a case here. Will he be convicted? Maybe not. But this clerk's life is now going to be a living hell because he chose to stab someone who was likely not an immediate threat to him. That's what people don't seem to get. His life is changed forever.

This mindset of "hardy her her I'm gonna kill these here dadgum criminals" doesn't account for the aftermath of the decision. If you think you'll ever be in a position to use force against anyone in self defense you better be sure you know what you are allowed and not allowed to do. It's possible you will still be prosecuted even if you think you were in the right. You may go bankrupt defending yourself. You may still end up in prison.

Would really recommend following Branca on Youtube and Twitter. If you are a firearm owner I strongly recommend looking at his free resources on the elements of self defense.

---

The thief was still fighting until the final stab. The worker had absolteuly no way to determine whether or not the thief had a firearm and would, if he got away, draw it and shoot him with it resulting in his serious damage or death.

This isn't a baseball game where the winner is the one with the most runs. The only way to win this "game" is to survive.

Quote:

---

The worker had absolteuly no way to determine whether or not the thief had a firearm and would, if he got away, draw it and shoot him with it resulting in his serious damage or death.

---

That dog won't hunt.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Borderline either way. Really going to depend on how the state's law is written. (Personally, I'm not losing any sleep over the guy being killed.)

Biggest question is if the perp displayed a weapon which I didn't see. Also, the perp did not advance on the clerk or even really pay attention to him. He looked to just be trying to grab the smokes.

I think the owner is probably going to be in trouble.

---

You right.

I see the clerk as the aggressor here.

I'm pretty sure he has a duty to retreat here.

He wasn't in imminent danger of serious bodily harm … imo.

Bottom line is he ran towards the guy.

You can't use deadly force to defend personal property. At least not in this situation.

So thats the problem the guys got. If somebody brought this case under the right circumstances … I think you in real trouble. Jury might nullify but if they follow the law you might be in real trouble here.

Everybody on here would have shot the mfer 8 times. I get that.

But,

You got to really look into and think about whats going on here. And it might not be what you think.

---

Your weakness is part of the problem.

FrioAg 00 said:

---

I wouldn't stop to find out if a burger in my house were armed either. To me it's perfectly reasonable to assume someone hopping the counter to commit a crime is a threat, and retreating a few feet is certainly not an extinguishment of that threat.

Would be an easy no bill for me

---

Agree. And it would be beyond maddening if this guy gets prosecuted while the Soros DA's let hundreds of violent criminals off without charges.

Please post Johnny F'in Nguyen's legal defense donation link if any of y'all find it.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm not stabbing some fool over $50 because a lawyer costs WAY more than that

---

Well, if it's only about economics, how much would your funeral cost?

In a half second, you must surmise the criminal's intention, armament, disposition, skill set and determination.

Choose your actions wisely my friend for it may well be the last decision you ever make.

agz win said:

---

Wow can't stop rewatching it. Terrible for the cashier. Knife was already out and ready so don't know I'd deadly defense meets the petty crime. Will depend on interpretation of the local law.

---

They had already robbed him once that day.

There's a lot of all hat and no cattle on here.

The same folks itching to defend personal property with lethal force are the same people that spread their cheeks last year on defense of bodily autonomy.

One great thing about laws in the US is that we can change them. Soros knows how to do this and is doing it through all three branches of government.

Elect DAs at the local level who are hard on criminals and protect property owners. Elect representatives who will write new punishments for criminals and new protections for law abiding citizen.

Personally, the law should be if someone is stealing your stuff, you can determine what force to use to prevent and / or recover your stuff. If you walked up and got on another man's horse in the old days, you could reasonably expect to be shot and the one shootin would have been slapped on the back and handed a glass of whiskey.

We have too many laws protecting crime and not enough protection of reasonable, rationale law abiding citizen. That store owner is a hero.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Borderline either way. Really going to depend on how the state's law is written. (Personally, I'm not losing any sleep over the guy being killed.)

Biggest question is if the perp displayed a weapon which I didn't see. Also, the perp did not advance on the clerk or even really pay attention to him. He looked to just be trying to grab the smokes.

I think the owner is probably going to be in trouble.

---

You right.

I see the clerk as the aggressor here.

I'm pretty sure he has a duty to retreat here.

He wasn't in imminent danger of serious bodily harm … imo.

Bottom line is he ran towards the guy.

You can't use deadly force to defend personal property. At least not in this situation.

So thats the problem the guys got. If somebody brought this case under the right circumstances … I think you in real trouble. Jury might nullify but if they follow the law you might be in real trouble here.

Everybody on here would have shot the mfer 8 times. I get that.

But,

You got to really look into and think about whats going on here. And it might not be what you think.

---

Your weakness is part of the problem.

---

Theres a lot of folks in the jailhouse think just like that too.

FrioAg 00 said:

---

I wouldn't stop to find out if a burger in my house were armed either.

---

Now burgers have weapons, too!?



Trrrruuuummmmmmppppp !!!

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Borderline either way. Really going to depend on how the state's law is written. (Personally, I'm not losing any sleep over the guy being killed.)

Biggest question is if the perp displayed a weapon which I didn't see. Also, the perp did not advance on the clerk or even really pay attention to him. He looked to just be trying to grab the smokes.

I think the owner is probably going to be in trouble.

---

You right.

I see the clerk as the aggressor here.

I'm pretty sure he has a duty to retreat here.

He wasn't in imminent danger of serious bodily harm … imo.

Bottom line is he ran towards the guy.

You can't use deadly force to defend personal property. At least not in this situation.

So thats the problem the guys got. If somebody brought this case under the right circumstances … I think you in real trouble. Jury might nullify but if they follow the law you might be in real trouble here.

Everybody on here would have shot the mfer 8 times. I get that.

But,

You got to really look into and think about whats going on here. And it might not be what you think.

---

Your weakness is part of the problem.

---

Theres a lot of folks in the jailhouse think just like that too.

---

and still more in an early grave

To me, when the guy jumped over the counter, it's a reasonable probability he may hurt you since he is in the middle of a crime.

Where the clerk may get in trouble is the fact the guy was trying to run at the end.

That said, if I'm on the jury I wouldn't convict.

Ragoo said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Borderline either way. Really going to depend on how the state's law is written. (Personally, I'm not losing any sleep over the guy being killed.)

Biggest question is if the perp displayed a weapon which I didn't see. Also, the perp did not advance on the clerk or even really pay attention to him. He looked to just be trying to grab the smokes.

I think the owner is probably going to be in trouble.

---

You right.

I see the clerk as the aggressor here.

I'm pretty sure he has a duty to retreat here.

He wasn't in imminent danger of serious bodily harm … imo.

Bottom line is he ran towards the guy.

You can't use deadly force to defend personal property. At least not in this situation.

So thats the problem the guys got. If somebody brought this case under the right circumstances … I think you in real trouble. Jury might nullify but if they follow the law you might be in real trouble here.

Everybody on here would have shot the mfer 8 times. I get that.

But,

You got to really look into and think about whats going on here. And it might not be what you think.

---

Your weakness is part of the problem.

---

Theres a lot of folks in the jailhouse think just like that too.

---

and still more in an early grave

---

True.

DamnGood86 said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

I'm not stabbing some fool over $50 because a lawyer costs WAY more than that

---

Well, if it's only about economics, how much would your funeral cost?

In a half second, you must surmise the criminal's intention, armament, disposition, skill set and determination.

Choose your actions wisely my friend for it may well be the last decision you ever make.

---

While I don't really have a lot of issues with what the clerk did, as I think enough reasonable people would have done the same in his situation due to a legitimate concern for safety, I also think that escalating the situation to physical confrontation when not already being physically assaulted is significantly more likely to get you killed than just trying to avoid getting involved altogether. Most of these scumbags are not looking to physically harm anyone, they are just looking to grab and run.

I can't recall seeing such a clear video of a multiple stabbing and death like that. Can't imagine a jury going after him. I hope the clerk will be ok.

agz win said:

---

I can't recall seeing such a clear video of a multiple stabbing and death like that. Can't imagine a jury going after him. I hope the clerk will be ok.

---

The robber isn't dead

Too bad. Kills the movie script.

There may be a technical legal argument made that the clerk was not justified in his actions. But in light of everything that has been going on over the past few years, I have zero sympathy for the punk who jumped the counter. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Bwahahaha! Stab! Stab! Stab! Stab….

Clerk discretely grabbed the knife by the register but was still backing off and playing it cool. Then these guys basically flank him, with the 2nd coming over the counter. I would have been in fear for my life and can understand him too. He's been flanked behind the counter by guys who both move with sudden aggression. You can also see that as he deals with the counter-jumper, he is worried about the other guy which rightfully so, he just got outflanked once

That thigh stab was effn gangster

This would be a no bill on the grand jury, and a not guilty on the jury.

angryocotillo said:

---

The guy did an AMA (ask me anything) post on Reddit where he attributed being calm and collected during the robbery to playing a lot of League of Legends. Apparently he said he could see the guy wasn't armed, but i don't see that comment.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220805215100/https://old.reddit.com/r/robbersgetting****ed/comments/wh5tq4/las_vegas_smoke_shop_robbing_owner_ama/

Edit- the **** In the link is the F word if you feel inclined to view it

---

That's got to be a troll, right? No way that guy goes on reddit for an ama. And he said his lawyer said it was cool? Gotta be fake.


Edit: nope, I guess it's real. Here's his proof pic. https://www.icloud.com/photos/#01dU--6zN2JSu-XBtmujecpQA

Dude is a ****** for posting on reddit.

SociallyConditionedAg said:

---

It seems that the robber closed the distance. The store owner had the counter between him and the 2 robbers when one jumped it and put the owner in danger.

---

That's not what the video showed. The clerk was looking at the guy on the right as he was reaching over the counter. He sees the guy jump over the counter to the left, but the guy on the left isn't even looking at the clerk. He's grabbing stuff off the shelf. The clerk runs toward him and stabs him.

And if this guy really is blabbering to the media and to Reddit he's going to get himself in trouble. He will say something wrong (may already have) and it will be used against him.

I approve. Kill them all.

Consider the process to get to that point.

What's his life going to be like once he gets arrested? He goes to jail to await trial. Considering his likely income and absent a massive funding campaign he likely can't afford to make bond. So he sits in jail for a year.

His lawyer explains the actual law to him and he realizes he may not be as justified as he thought he was. He knows there's a chance he could be convicted of something and spend significant time in prison, even for the rest of his life. The stress of that thought alone weighs down on him.

His life is now in the hands of 12 people he's never met, with the law being explained by a judge who may be incompetent, argued by a prosecutor who could potentially be an unethical hack who uses every trick in the book to win a conviction. Everything he's been blabbering about on Reddit or to the media is going to be micro analyzed and spun against him.

But sure, he might be acquitted.

All I'm saying is if you use deadly force you better be darn sure it's necessary and justified and you better be ready to deal with the consequences.

Private PoopyPants said:

---

Consider the process to get to that point.

What's his life going to be like once he gets arrested? He goes to jail to await trial. Considering his likely income and absent a massive funding campaign he likely can't afford to make bond. So he sits in jail for a year.

His lawyer explains the actual law to him and he realizes he may not be as justified as he thought he was. He knows there's a chance he could be convicted of something and spend significant time in prison, even for the rest of his life. The stress of that thought alone weighs down on him.

His life is now in the hands of 12 people he's never met, with the law being explained by a judge who may be incompetent, argued by a prosecutor who could potentially be an unethical hack who uses every trick in the book to win a conviction. Everything he's been blabbering about on Reddit or to the media is going to be micro analyzed and spun against him.

But sure, he might be acquitted.

All I'm saying is if you use deadly force you better be darn sure it's necessary and justified and you better be ready to deal with the consequences.

---

Yes, and these are split-second decisions. You don't have time to study, rewind, and mull it over.

Ideally, you walk away unharmed and also make the right choice legally.
Worst case is to be a victim and lose you life or suffer severe bodily injury.
In-between scenario is to walk away unharmed but have legal troubles.

I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Branca going live now to discuss the event.