Dissecting the Texas Taqueria Shooting

The headlines read “Customer shoots robber in Houston”. You can find the video of the incident if you Google the phrase. It’s worth looking for the unedited video. Was it justified? At first glance, it would appear so. But the customer (who has not been identified at the time this article was written) does an amazing job of trying to steal victory from the jaws. Credit: KHOU 11, First of all, the robber used a fake firearm. This fact could be used as evidence that the shooter’s use of deadly force was not justified, but a first-year student in law school could argue this point successfully. The elements of robbery are the taking of property through the threat of illegal force. Here, the robber used illegal force to take the property. He actually committed multiple robberies as he threatened people with deadly force while taking money from them. Even though the gun is fake, if the victim believes it’s real, then that’s enough for the crime of robbery. The shooter would have been justified in firing if he felt that his life or someone else’s life was in danger. The robber took possessions from other customers of the taqueria. The robber, even as he was moving toward the door and at the time of the shooting, was still threatening another patron. Shooting the robber, even in the back, was justified because the robber was threatening a patron’s life. The majority of instructors I know advise against shooting when the gun is held on you or another person due to the possibility that a spasm in the hand could cause the gun to fire. Most people would agree that the initial shot was justified. The video shows that the shooter fired four rapid-fire shots into the backside of the robber while he was walking to the door. After the second shot the robber was not threatening anyone. This includes the shooter. The robber was clearly not a danger, but two more shots were fired as he fell. Were these shots needed? The argument could be made either way. The shooter then gets up and follows him, shooting him four more times as he lay on the ground. The shooter then picks up the gun and fires a shot at the robber. After the rapid fire of four shots, four more shots were fired at a slower pace – about one shot per second. If these shots were not justified, then how does this work against the necessity of any use of force including deadly force being reasonable in the circumstances? The prosecutor or grand jury will have to answer this question. I wonder if the last shot fired was fatal. But wait, there’s still more! The actions of the shooter after the shooting is done do not favor him either. The shooter, leaning over the robber and retrieving the fake gun that had fallen, broke it when he realized it was a plastic fake gun. He then returned the money to the robber and placed it on a table, telling the customers to return their money. The shooter leaves and, as he passed the robber he threw the coffee cup on the now-dead robber. The outcome of the grand jury proceeding will be heavily influenced by the local district attorney. It is said that a prosecutor can indict a ham-sandwich if they so choose. I believe that there is enough evidence to press charges against the shooter. However, there are also some evidences that point towards a justifiable murder. The target grids and bullseyes are measured in MOA. Subscribe to the Gun Digest newsletter and we will send you your print-at home target pack immediately. Enter your email below.