Gas Station Robbery Victim Shoots Getaway Car As He Is Run Down

Bob Irwin dissects the latest self defense and other shootings of the week. What went wrong, what went right and what we can learn from defense with a gun.

Gas Station
Gas Station
Bob Irwin
Bob Irwin

Las Vegas, NV –-(Ammoland.com)- FOX-TV 59 & ABC-TV 6 in Indianapolis, Indiana reports this week (5/16/2016) an attempted robbery turned violent on Indianapolis’s northwest side Monday. Around noon, a customer walked out of the gas station office to go back to his car. As he got into his car at one of the pumps, a man came up and tried to rob him.

The intended victim resisted the robbery. After a brief confrontation between the suspect and victim, someone driving the apparent getaway car, sped into the parking lot. That driver hit the intended victim with his car, knocking the victim to the ground.

The injured victim then pulled out a gun and fired at the car as it drove away. One person inside the car was hit by the gunfire. Detectives describe the shooting as an attempted robbery gone wrong.

A witness told the media “All of a sudden….there were gunshots. They were pop pop and then a car squealed away. It was quick. It was a split second this all happened. You can’t believe it all happened in the time that you hear it.”

The witness didn’t blame the victim for reacting the way he did. “I mean obviously the poor fella is being attacked and carrying a gun for his safety,” she said.

The man who was shot walked into St. Vincent’s Hospital and is listed in good condition as of this writing. Six people were taken in for questioning. The customer who was struck by the vehicle had only minor injuries.

The incident was caught on surveillance video. Right now, police do not believe the victim did anything wrong.

Comment:

The rule is always expect more opponents than you can see, although getting run over by the get-a-way vehicle is really unusual.

Probably not a good idea to fire at the car driving away but the timing really matters in this case. The impact from the car and the shooting are compressed into just a few seconds.

The reaction of firing at the vehicle is clearly reasonable and understandable as an extended reaction of the vehicle impact.

Bob Irwin, The Gun Store, Las Vegas

About Bob Irwin

The writer is the owner of The Gun Store in Las Vegas and has a gun talk radio show “Fired Up with Bob Irwin” Firedup is now on KSHP 1400 am radio from 5 to 6 pm on Thursdays and at the same time also on YouTube “Fired Up with Bob Irwin“.

20 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Papa 313

Note to all criminals :: Before attempting a robbery, burglary, kidnapping, rape attack, or any other crime – ask the victim to be if they are a Liberal. If the answer is yes, you can be assured they won’t be armed, will not call police, will give you their money, car, keys to their home anything you want. Because they understand stealing is how you make you living. They will probably offer you a VOTE for HILLARY bumper sticker, just take it even if you don’t want it, it will make them happy.

Tony's Take

“Officer, He tried to kill me with his car once. I was in reasonable fear he was going to try it again. Can I please speak to my lawyer before answering anymore questions.”

Wild Bill

Tony, here in Texas, we would say that is a proper recital of Probable Cause! We may even give you a medal and a bigger gun!

Brian

It appears to me that the victim was not shooting the bad guy during the get-away, but marking the bad guy for later identification. Since the bullet can be traced back to the victim’s gun this seems like a perfectly acceptable way to mark a bad guy and prove he was at the seen of the crime.

Old 1811

Firing a weapon is an act of deadly force. Deadly force cannot legally be used to “mark” a vehicle for identification. And besides, what good what it do if the vehicle was stolen and wiped, or later burned? And shooting someone who is leaving the scene “with your hubcaps under his arm” is illegal, and has been for over 40 years. (See Garner v. Tennessee.) If the offender is no longer an imminent threat to you, you can’t shoot him. Unlike the police, you have no duty to pursue and apprehend. That’s what you pay taxes for. The police, unlike… Read more »

RCAC

So the person who has burned down your home and is now fleeing shouldn’t be shot?

Like to see someone prosecute someone who did shoot such an animal. Really poor advice.

Old 1811

That’s right. Shooting a person fleeing from a completed crime, if the fleeing felon is not presenting an imminent threat to you (which he isn’t; he’s running away from you) does not prevent the crime,does it. It’s only a revenge shooting, and it’s illegal.
I didn’t make the law, but I do try to follow it.
If the law doesn’t say what you you wish it did, you can’t pretend it doesn’t apply to you. That’s how people go to prison. I’ve seen it happen.

Wild Bill

@ RCAC, here in Texas, we can shoot to stop certain enumerated serious crimes. TPC 9.32 gives you the presumption of right action if you shoot to stop certain serious felonies. Some people may tell you that the serious crime of burglary is complete it the criminal is standing just outside your door with the fruits of the crime in his hands. In Texas we don’t see it that way. People are flooding into Texas every day to escape foolish acts of their state’s legislature, to escape foolish prosecutors, foolish judges, and foolish LEOs. If you have an email address… Read more »

Wild Bill

The law of self defense does not include “marking the bad guy” Where did you hear about this “marking the bad guy concept, Brian?
I don’t think that a Tennessee case is going to be controlling law or even authoritative in Indiana. The Indiananas will probably want to follow their own authoritative case law. Just guessing.

Wild Bill

Oops, my bad. Tennessee v. Garner is a U.S. S. Ct. case. But not real bad. Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that, under the Fourth Amendment, when a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may not use deadly force to prevent escape UNLESS”the officer has PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE THAT THE SUSPECT POSES A SIGNIFICANT THREAT OF DEATH OR SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURY TO THE OFFICER OR OTHERS.” So Garner says nothing about non-law enforcement officers, and Garner does say that… Read more »

Old 1811

You’re right, in a sense. Garner refers to LEOs. But bear in mind, police have more leeway than you and I do, because of their duty to pursue and apprehend, and consequent qualified immunity. In Garner, the LEO (who shot a fleeing unarmed burglar who posed no known threat) did so pursuant to that duty. A private citizen has no such duty, so using deadly force to apprehend a fleeing felon is illegal, period, barring extremely exigent circumstances (e.g., the offender is firing randomly at people as he’s fleeing). But as a general rule, if a person committing or fleeing… Read more »

Wild Bill

Garner applied to LEOs. Got any cases that apply to non-LEOs? In my state, using deadly force to apprehend a fleeing felon is legal, period, because my legislature and Governor have not valued the fleeing felon above the person who was harmed by the theft. Even by Garner, all you have to do is recite the right Probable Cause. Which is why I live here.

Old 1811

I just read the Texas statute (Section 9.31 of the Penal Code) and it says nothing about shooting people while fleeing; it only says you can shoot people who are committing or attempting to commit certain crimes. It offers more leeway if the crime is being committed in the nighttime, but I could find no section or subsection authorizing deadly force against fleeing subjects who are no threat to anyone. (And there’s more to it than “recit[ing] the right probable cause.” Your PC has to be backed up by articulable facts.) I’ve never seen a law anywhere that grants more… Read more »

Wild Bill

Nor will you ever find that the legislature anticipates the words that you want used. TPC9.31(a) requires the person reasonably believe that force is immediately necessary to protect himself…etc, etc. combined with TPC 9.32 A person is presumed justified in using deadly force to protect… or to prevent certain serious felonies such as burglary…etc, etc. If you can articulate that force is immediately necessary or to prevent the completion of the burglary, in Texas you get the presumption of justification if you shoot the fleeing felon. Articulating the facts is reciting the right PC. You look to the government to… Read more »

Gene Ralno

Indiana’s stand your ground law smacks of liberal tolerance. I’d be surprised if the shooter doesn’t at least face a grand jury. Some states that recognize the principle of stand your ground don’t allow victims to shoot criminals when fleeing a scene. Everyone I know believes if you find a cretin fleeing with your hub caps under his arm, you not only are allowed to shoot him but you’ll be doing a public service, especially if he learns his lesson, regardless of his health. Fact is most Americans are fed up with criminals who waltz into their lives, harm their… Read more »

Tionico

the now perforated perp needs to be charged with not only armed robbery but attempted murder, or at least assault with a deadly weapon/vehicle. Since he had apparently left the scene, then returned, it seems reasonable to charge him with attempted first degree murder.

Too bad the intended victim was not able to bring his gun into play before he got hit. Then the whole thing would have come down REAL RIGHT.

Wild Bill

“Detectives describe the shooting as an attempted robbery gone wrong.” Gone wrong?! How did the LVPD detectives think it was supposed to go?

truckeral

I’m surprised they didn’t describe the punk that got shot as the “victim”.

Wayne

I guess if it “went right”, then the robbers would have gotten the money, car, “prize”, whatever the hell they were after & driven away quietly & peacefully, with the victim thanking them for not hurting him.
More robbings & muggings a & criminal acts need to be made to “go wrong “.

Tony's Take

Well first, this didn’t happen in Las Vegas. Try Indianapolis, Indiana.
Now if someone had already tried to run me down once, I sure wouldn’t give them another chance to turn around and try again. I believe what the PD was attempting to say is that the crooks picked the wrong citizen to try and rob that night.