Following a trip to the bank, a Texas man stopped at a gas station. He pulled his white van up to a pump and began walking towards the store to pre-pay. Before the man even makes it to the door, a black SUV is seen pulling up next to his van.
The driver of the SUV jumps out and smashes the passenger window of the van.
Hearing the noise, the owner of the van runs back to the vehicle, opens the driver's side door and grabs his gun.
The robbery suspect quickly reverses course and jumps back into his SUV as the victim attempts to confront him. The victim approaches the SUV with the handgun pointed at the driver. Rather than surrender, the driver floors it and tries to run him over.
The victim calmly takes a step to the side and opens fire onto the suspect hitting him at least twice. The gunshot wounds cause the buglar to loose control of his SUV, slamming into the Citgo sign and getting wedged between the polls. The suspect was taken to Conroe Regional Medical Center in critical condition.
The driver of the white van was interviewed and then released by police with no criminal charges as of now.
What would you do in this situation? Would you go after your robber and put your life in danger over material items? Realize that deadly force is justified to protect property in Texas.
§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that: (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
In Texas, I know I would defend my property with my firearm. However, being from Florida, our laws are much different than Texas, I likely would not have even advanced on the robber. It would have been a 911 call and at least nobody is injured.
However, when the suspect tried to hit the driver of the white van with his SUV, there's clearly justification to shoot and all bets are off. He turned his vehicle into a weapon to get away (just like Trayvon turned the sidewalk into a weapon) therefore justifying the victim's decision to defend himself and open fire.
One woman said,
"Thats the last place I would think that you can't be safe anymore".
Her comment made me think about the article I wrote last week, "Are Gun Owners Paranoid?". Obviously people fail to see these things can happen in broad daylight to anyone anywhere and the driver of the white van was prepared and ready for an incident to occur.
Another witness told reporters,
"They should have more security around here."
Do you really think a security guard or more police presents would have prevented this robbery from happening? Do you think more security would have prevented the robber from almost running over the victim in his SUV?
We need more responsible gun owners and carry holders to help prevent these things from happening or allowing these things to escalate to more serious outcomes.
Lil Red Danger is a firearms enthusiast, firearms instructor, and spokeswoman for the firearms industry.
Raised in an anti-gun household, she first fired a gun 3 years ago and it was love at first shot.
Follow Little Red Danger on Facebook.