# Police Praise Concealed Permit Holder for Stopping Waffle House Robbery........



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Police Praise Concealed Permit Holder for Stopping Waffle House Robbery


----------



## shaolin (Dec 31, 2012)

I thought the Waffle House hates people who carry guns. I would have let the robber have the money had it been me unless lives were at risk.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

"Give me the waffles and no one gets hurt."

"No, No, Leggo my eggo!!!!"


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Apparently, the concealed carrier ignored the policy. I would really like to know how this all turns out, and hear the circumstances of the actual shooting. It appears that the police onsite are satisfied about the 'righteousness' of the shooting, but the lawyers haven't weighed in, yet.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Yes, it will be interesting to know of the outcome once it has been established. It's one thing to draw your weapon in defense of your life or that of another. 

It's quite another thing to draw your weapon to stop a robbery in progress w/o any indication that someone is going to be shot. Things could have gone terribly wrong if the suspect hadn't been hit and the shots began flying around.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

It would be stupid, but the waffle house could try to sue him for endangering their staff and customers.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

BackyardCowboy said:


> It would be stupid, but the waffle house could try to sue him for endangering their staff and customers.


The vast majority of those that carry, either open or CC, simply don't fully realize that they are doing something that requires awesome responsibility. Just possibility the most responsibility laden thing they'll ever do.

You pull that gun and if things don't go as you hope they will, your life and those of others, can change for the worst ever in a split second.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> The vast majority of those that carry, either open or CC, simply don't fully realize that they are doing something that requires awesome responsibility. Just possibility the most responsibility laden thing they'll ever do.
> 
> You pull that gun and if things don't go as you hope they will, your life and those of others, can change for the worst ever in a split second.


I struggled with that for years before deciding to carry. Having a gun changes nothing except that you might have the capability to save a life or prevent a grievous injury to yourself or some other innocent person. Even then, you are gambling that you really do understand what's happening, that you are justified to use lethal force, and that you have the courage and ability to succeed.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

> A concealed carry permit holder was praised for shooting an *armed robbery suspect* around 5 a.m. on October 10, thereby stopping the robbery of a Waffle House in Charleston, South Carolina.


The article did say "armed robbery suspect". One employee said, "He saved us, that's what he did." The police applauded the actions of the permit holder. "POLICE PRAISE CONCEALED PERMIT HOLDER FOR STOPPING WAFFLE HOUSE ROBBERY". So it would seem to me that in this case the actions of the permit holder were justified. What if he didn't intervene and the armed robber was all doped up on meth or some other mind altering substance and decided to leave no witnesses? Of course none of us were there and the article doesn't mention the type of weapon the "suspect" was armed with. The question is: What would you do if you were armed sitting in a restaurant or any other public place and someone walked in *brandishing* a weapon? If you can't answer that maybe it's not such a good idea to carry at all.


> bran·dish (brăn′dĭsh)
> tr.v. bran·dished, bran·dish·ing, bran·dish·es
> *To wave or flourish (something, often a weapon) in a menacing, defiant, or excited way.*


----------



## packrat (Jul 30, 2015)

Are you saying your going to shoot the first open carry person you see walking into a store, restaurant......
Every situation needs to be evaluated first.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

desertman said:


> The article did say "armed robbery suspect". One employee said, "He saved us, that's what he did." The police applauded the actions of the permit holder. "POLICE PRAISE CONCEALED PERMIT HOLDER FOR STOPPING WAFFLE HOUSE ROBBERY". So it would seem to me that in this case the actions of the permit holder were justified. What if he didn't intervene and the armed robber was all doped up on meth or some other mind altering substance and decided to leave no witnesses? Of course none of us were there and the article doesn't mention the type of weapon the "suspect" was armed with. The question is: What would you do if you were armed sitting in a restaurant or any other public place and someone walked in *brandishing* a weapon? If you can't answer that maybe it's not such a good idea to carry at all.


We can play "what if" all day long, and never come to a 100% agreement what should have been done. The scenario has as many possibilities as Hillary has deleted e-mails.

My point was, and still is, carrying a firearm in public and making a decision to involve yourself in something that you may or may not feel comfortable doing, needs to be addressed.

Many people just don't fully realize the outcome of using a firearm when things don't go as they had hoped. It's one thing to protect your family at home. It's quite another to immerse yourself in a situation in public with others around, and the possibility of having to trade multiple shots with one or more persons in the middle of a criminal act.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Waffle House may have a company policy against firearms in their restaurants. In SC, Open carry is not allowed, so the CC permit holder had to be carrying concealed. In addition, if the local Waffle House wanted no firearms, SC has very strict sign posting requirements which notify anyone at the entrances that firearms are not allowed. If those signs were not in place and not posted correctly, there is no basis to convict a carrier for carrying concealed on the property.

To the next point, I think in a general sense, this person has immunity under the Castle Doctrine.

PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ACT

The stated intent of the legislation is to codify the common law castle doctrine, which recognizes that a person's home is his castle, and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person's place of business. This bill authorizes the lawful use of deadly force under certain circumstances against an intruder or attacker in a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle. *The bill provides that there is no duty to retreat if (1) the person is in a place where he has a right to be, including the person's place of business, (2) the person is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and (3) the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily injury, or the commission of a violent crime. A person who lawfully uses deadly force is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known the person is a law enforcement officer.*
H.4301 (R412) was signed by the Governor on June 9, 2006.

you might argue that under SC law, the Castle Doctrine only applies to a person's home or residence however, it appears that Law Enforcement is interpreting it as applicable anywhere in this situation. I say, good for them and for legally armed citizens. It is unfortunate that a stupid 19 year old boy had to die as a result.

I think it might have taken more than just a robbery for me to draw down on someone in this situation. IMO, money is not enough of a reason, someone's life is.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

packrat said:


> Are you saying your going to shoot the first open carry person you see walking into a store, restaurant......
> *Every situation needs to be evaluated first.*


Well no kidding? Where did I say that I would shoot the first open carry person I see walking into a store? If you can read properly I said "brandishing". Here in Arizona there are plenty of people who open carry. There is a big difference between that and brandishing a weapon. Again the meaning of brandishing: *To wave or flourish (something, often a weapon) in a menacing, defiant, or excited way. * What would you do, wait to get shot?


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> We can play "what if" all day long, and never come to a 100% agreement what should have been done. The scenario has as many possibilities as Hillary has deleted e-mails.
> 
> My point was, and still is, carrying a firearm in public and making a decision to involve yourself in something that you may or may not feel comfortable doing, needs to be addressed.
> 
> Many people just don't fully realize the outcome of using a firearm when things don't go as they had hoped. It's one thing to protect your family at home. It's quite another to immerse yourself in a situation in public with others around, and the possibility of having to trade multiple shots with one or more persons in the middle of a criminal act.


No argument here, anyone who chooses to carry a firearm in public should understand the full ramifications of using one. I don't dispute that one iota. I'm certainly not going out and purposely looking for trouble and I'm certainly not going to go out and try to play cop. In all likely hood very few of us will ever have to use a firearm for self defense. Of course no one can predict what type of situation they may find themselves in or where. It could be at home, by the side of the highway, in a store, restaurant, anywhere you go about your daily business. I guess my point is that if you're going to carry a firearm you have to understand that one day you might have to use it. If you are not willing to do so to save your own life or that of another innocent person than it makes no sense to carry it at all. In the situation that is the subject of this topic, obviously that individual made the right decision. Had he not intervened we might be looking at another mass shooting. Of course we'll never know.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

desertman said:


> No argument here, anyone who chooses to carry a firearm in public should understand the full ramifications of using one. I don't dispute that one iota. I'm certainly not going out and purposely looking for trouble and I'm certainly not going to go out and try to play cop. In all likely hood very few of us will ever have to use a firearm for self defense. Of course no one can predict what type of situation they may find themselves in or where. It could be at home, by the side of the highway, in a store, restaurant, anywhere you go about your daily business. I guess my point is that if you're going to carry a firearm you have to understand that one day you might have to use it. If you are not willing to do so to save your own life or that of another innocent person than it makes no sense to carry it at all. In the situation that is the subject of this topic, obviously that individual made the right decision. Had he not intervened we might be looking at another mass shooting. Of course we'll never know.


Yes I agree! My point was to get people to take some time and actually think about a situation that they might happen upon, or be actively involved in. Many think that shooting at someone else will come automatically and naturally. That it will be a reflex action of some sort, and, that each of their shots will find it's target precisely, just like at the local shooting range.

It's not like that!! Not at all. You don't even need to speak to someone else about it. Just take some time to yourself, think long and hard about a scenario where you feel the need to take your handgun and point it at someone else. Also, take time to think about scenarios where you don't have the best opportunity to draw first, but yet you have to do something. What would you do? Just by running this thru your head numerous times at different times, will give you a preconceived notion as to how you would react.

If there are tactical firearms courses available in your area, check into them. These classes go thru "what if" scenarios and are of a great benefit. They'll make you sweat, make your butt pucker, make you all kinds of anxious, and embarrass you more than once in front of others. Don't worry though, everyone will get their chance at being embarrassed. :smt033


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> Yes I agree! My point was to get people to take some time and actually think about a situation that they might happen upon, or be actively involved in. Many think that shooting at someone else will come automatically and naturally. That it will be a reflex action of some sort, and, that each of their shots will find it's target precisely, just like at the local shooting range.
> 
> It's not like that!! Not at all. You don't even need to speak to someone else about it. Just take some time to yourself, think long and hard about a scenario where you feel the need to take your handgun and point it at someone else. Also, take time to think about scenarios where you don't have the best opportunity to draw first, but yet you have to do something. What would you do? Just by running this thru your head numerous times at different times, will give you a preconceived notion as to how you would react.
> 
> *If there are tactical firearms courses available in your area, check into them.* These classes go thru "what if" scenarios and are of a great benefit. They'll make you sweat, make your butt pucker, make you all kinds of anxious, and embarrass you more than once in front of others. Don't worry though, everyone will get their chance at being embarrassed. :smt033


Right on there brother! Great advice. I have taken enough firearms courses over and above what was required to obtain a Concealed Weapons Permit (CWP) As you already know a CWP is not required here to carry either open or concealed. Neither is it a license to become a vigilante. I was taken to task on this forum at one time when I stated that if my home were broken into and if I had the opportunity to safely get out I would rather get out than shoot the invader. Same as if the intruder were running away with their arms full of stolen items. The legal ramifications may just be not worth it over a few stolen items. Obviously there could be other situations where you had no choice other than to shoot an intruder. The most important lesson I learned from those courses was first and foremost to avoid any type of confrontation if at all possible. Especially if your life is not in danger.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I grew up during an era when fist-fights were not uncommon, even for average folks who weren't looking for trouble. They often happened for no good reason, other than that some smart-ass needed to be straightened out, and there was usually somebody around who was capable and willing to do just that. Such fights almost never resulted in a killing or maiming, because there were unwritten rules about what was fair and what wasn't. It was just a disagreement or conflict of personalities that had to be settled, because neither person would 'back down.' 

This was the context that made me reluctant to carry a weapon - not because I thought I would lose control and use the gun unnecessarily, but because I didn't want to have one of these types of fights while wearing a gun, and have it fall out on the ground for the other guy to pick up, or for any spectators that might be around to draw conclusions from. There were so many bad scenarios that could branch off from such an incident that I did not make the decision to carry concealed until I believed that I was too old to be getting involved in such incidents. 

The way I looked at it was that I had to not only make the commitment to be willing to use lethal force to defend myself or my family from a life threatening situation, but also to be willing to back away from any kind of disagreement that might lead to physical violence. Anyway, by this time, that era of non-lethal 'dust-ups' pretty much went away, and was being more often replaced by the likelihood that any confrontation had the potential to become deadly.

My point is that, like paratrooper said, having to pull out a gun is your last line of defense, because it is going to change your life and not for the better, unless the alternative is dying, for you or some other 'innocent' person.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Bisley said:


> My point is that, like paratrooper said, having to pull out a gun is your last line of defense, because it is going to change your life and not for the better, unless the alternative is dying, for you or some other 'innocent' person.


As I said, money is not worth it, someone's life is.


----------



## packrat (Jul 30, 2015)

desertman said:


> Well no kidding? Where did I say that I would shoot the first open carry person I see walking into a store? If you can read properly I said "brandishing". Here in Arizona there are plenty of people who open carry. There is a big difference between that and brandishing a weapon. Again the meaning of brandishing: *To wave or flourish (something, often a weapon) in a menacing, defiant, or excited way. * What would you do, wait to get shot?


 I was phrasing that more as a question ?? Because i don't know exactly what i would do if someone came in carrying a gun. (and I would prefer not to be shot thank you.)
.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

packrat said:


> I was phrasing that more as a question ?? Because i don't know exactly what i would do if someone came in carrying a gun. (and I would prefer not to be shot thank you.)
> .


Again, you fail to see the difference between carrying a weapon either openly or concealed on your person and brandishing a weapon. I give up.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

packrat said:


> I was phrasing that more as a question ?? Because i don't know exactly what i would do if someone came in carrying a gun. (and I would prefer not to be shot thank you.)
> .


If you carry open or concealed, you better get a clue as to what you might or would do, if someone entered and robbed the place. Some are happy enough just to rob, get some cash and leave. Others tend to *NOT *want to leave any witnesses behind.

A robbery can go either way. It's anybody's guess as to how it will end up.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

In some areas, having the outline of your weapon show through your shirt or coat is classified as "brandishing"


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

BackyardCowboy said:


> In some areas, having the outline of your weapon show through your shirt or coat is classified as "brandishing"


The true meaning of brandishing at least according to the dictionary:


> bran·dish (brăn′dĭsh)
> tr.v. bran·dished, bran·dish·ing, bran·dish·es
> *To wave or flourish (something, often a weapon) in a menacing, defiant, or excited way.*





> For example, California Penal Code section 417, subdivision (a)(2), defines "brandishing" a firearm as follows:
> 
> (2) Every person who, except in self-defense, in the presence of
> any other person, draws or exhibits any firearm, whether loaded or
> ...





> BRANDISH-
> TRANSITIVE VERB:
> To wave or flourish (a weapon, for example) *menacingly*.
> To display ostentatiously.
> ...


When I use that term that's how I define it. I don't know about you but if someone was exhibiting that type of behavior while they were out in public. I think I would find that a bit unusual, definitely out of the ordinary, threatening, and would certainly wonder what that individual was up to. What say you? Quite a bit different than accidentally "printing". Or merely carrying a holstered firearm. I''m not an expert on every state's laws and you may be correct. At least where I live both open and concealed carry are legal without a permit. I don't consider the holstered display of a weapon either open or concealed or accidentally printing "brandishing". Nether does the state in which I live. The key word here is *"menacingly"*.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

RK3369 said:


> As I said, money is not worth it, someone's life is.


I understood what you meant to say, and I'm in general agreement. I just don't think any situation is always going to be that clear-cut. If you're in a convenience store and an armed robber comes in and pulls a gun and demands money, you don't know if he intends to kill, or not. He may be shouting and acting crazy because he wants to intimidate, rather than actually harm anyone...or he may actually be crazy enough to want to kill someone. How are you going to know?

If you sneak up and shoot him in the back, before he fires a shot, it will be impossible to know what he might have done. Yet, if you hesitate because of that, he may kill someone while you're trying to figure it out. No pat rules exist that can tell you what you should do. It comes down to your judgment, and if you decide that you have to assume he intends to kill because he is committing a crime and acting crazy, you can bet that there will be those who will say you shouldn't have shot him over a few dollars, when he hadn't actually harmed anyone, yet. Someone will say that you should have warned him to drop his weapon, yet if you had done that, he might have been able to 'turn the tables' on you, involving you in a gunfight that might have resulted in other deaths or injuries, including your own.

Any way it goes is bad. You will have a few short adrenaline-fed seconds to decide what to do, and the fact that you have a gun forces you to make that decision.


----------



## papersniper (Oct 14, 2015)

paratrooper said:


> Yes, it will be interesting to know of the outcome once it has been established. It's one thing to draw your weapon in defense of your life or that of another.
> 
> *It's quite another thing to draw your weapon to stop a robbery in progress w/o any indication that someone is going to be shot*. Things could have gone terribly wrong if the suspect hadn't been hit and the shots began flying around.


Wasn't the robber armed? That in itself is a clear indication that he plans harm to others. I'm not defending the customers actions, but I thought it's prudent to mention that the robber was armed and therefor was (technically) using deadly force or the threat of deadly force. I don't know from the OP's post whether the robber was waving the gun around, etc, but I can easily imagine a situation where I might feel inclined to intervene. Hope it never comes to that. I am no hero.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

papersniper said:


> Wasn't the robber armed? That in itself is a clear indication that he plans harm to others. I'm not defending the customers actions, but I thought it's prudent to mention that the robber was armed and therefor was (technically) using deadly force or the threat of deadly force. I don't know from the OP's post whether the robber was waving the gun around, etc, but I can easily imagine a situation where I might feel inclined to intervene. Hope it never comes to that. I am no hero.


Just because someone is armed and committing a crime, isn't not enough of an indication that he/she will shoot someone. It does raise the stakes compared to someone that says or implies they have a gun.

It's all going to be a very fluid situation. It can flow any direction at any time. That's why it's so important to know your abilities and level of training. If you are shot in a non-vital part of your body, do you feel you'll be able to continue, or will you drop like a box of rocks? Will you freeze if you draw your firearm? Will you freeze before you even get to it? Some get tunnel vision and are so focused on what they are looking at, that there might be others involved in the criminal activity and you are not aware of it. The scenarios go on and on.


----------



## papersniper (Oct 14, 2015)

paratrooper said:


> Just because someone is armed and committing a crime, isn't not enough of an indication that he/she will shoot someone. It does raise the stakes compared to someone that says or implies they have a gun.
> 
> It's all going to be a very fluid situation. It can flow any direction at any time. That's why it's so important to know your abilities and level of training. If you are shot in a non-vital part of your body, do you feel you'll be able to continue, or will you drop like a box of rocks? Will you freeze if you draw your firearm? Will you freeze before you even get to it? Some get tunnel vision and are so focused on what they are looking at, that there might be others involved in the criminal activity and you are not aware of it. The scenarios go on and on.


You raise good points in your second paragraph. Sometimes just being a good eye witness is the smartest thing we can do.

But we will have to disagree on your first paragraph. I stand by my statement that someone with a gun committing a crime (as in the Waffle House scenario) has demonstrated a willingness to kill or create bodily harm. And it makes no difference if the handgun is loaded or not. How would we react in such a situation? Depends, like you said before.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

papersniper said:


> You raise good points in your second paragraph. Sometimes just being a good eye witness is the smartest thing we can do.
> 
> But we will have to disagree on your first paragraph. I stand by my statement that someone with a gun committing a crime (as in the Waffle House scenario) has demonstrated a willingness to kill or create bodily harm. And it makes no difference if the handgun is loaded or not. How would we react in such a situation? Depends, like you said before.


My only comment would be that if you are in that situation, and choose to draw and fire, the perp dies, the DA chooses to take you to trial; will the jury (of your peers) share your view that the perp was going to shoot.
Not faulting your viewpoint/opinion, but it's never as clean as it looks in the news While he was hailed as a 'Good Guy", want to know what went down when LEO's arrived on scene and the opinion of the DA.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

BackyardCowboy said:


> My only comment would be that if you are in that situation, and choose to draw and fire, the perp dies, the DA chooses to take you to trial; will the jury (of your peers) share your view that the perp was going to shoot.
> Not faulting your viewpoint/opinion, but it's never as clean as it looks in the news While he was hailed as a 'Good Guy", want to know what went down when LEO's arrived on scene and the opinion of the DA.


As you stated, it's never as clear as it may seem to be as thought or reported. The facts and individuals involved, are often wrong or misquoted, and then it takes a while for the actual facts to be found out.


----------



## papersniper (Oct 14, 2015)

BackyardCowboy said:


> My only comment would be that if you are in that situation, and choose to draw and fire, the perp dies, the DA chooses to take you to trial; will the jury (of your peers) share your view that the perp was going to shoot.
> Not faulting your viewpoint/opinion, but it's never as clean as it looks in the news While he was hailed as a 'Good Guy", want to know what went down when LEO's arrived on scene and the opinion of the DA.


Yes, I would like to know about the LEO's and DA's opinion also. I suspect the DA didn't pursue it because he doubted he'd get any sort of conviction anyway. I do wonder about the relatives of the robber who was shot. He was killed, right? Sometimes those relatives can be worse than the "establishment" when it comes to harassing lawsuits, etc.

It'd be a tough decision to make in the "good guys" shoes, that's for sure. Just watch a robber shoot someone, or take the chance and stop his action before it's completed? As someone pointed out earlier; just drawing on the robber and yelling "STOP!" doesn't always end with the bad guy meekly surrendering. A tough call I hope I _never_ had to make. I was fortunate that while a police officer I never was in that sort of situation. However, I would have been much more inclined to "do something" while in uniform than now I'm retired, or even if I were out of uniform back then.


----------

