PDA

View Full Version : Oakland store manager shoots a would-be robber


paradox
03-08-2006, 5:50 AM
http://www.insidebayarea.com/localnews/ci_3571911

Suspect arrested at hospital after heist attempt on Telegraph Avenue
By William Brand and Harry Harris, STAFF WRITERS

OAKLAND ó The manager of a Telegraph Avenue cell phone store shot an armed gunman who attempted to rob his store, then identified the man when he showed up at Alta Bates Summit Medical Center for treatment.
The manager, whom police did not identify, was in the store, Digicom Wireless, in the 5100 block of Telegraph Avenue about 6:15 p.m. Friday, when two robbers, each with a pistol, came into the store. The store owner said one robber jumped over the counter, gun in hand, and slammed the manager to the ground.

A second employee tried to run, but she fell, the owner said.

"The guy behind the counter grabbed her arm and put a gun to her head," he said.

At that point, the manager grabbed his own handgun and shot the robber in the stomach, then shot at the second robber as well.

The manager was not injured.

Both suspects fled the store. Police later were notified that a wounded man matching one of the suspects' descriptions had been dropped off at Summit Medical Center.

The manager was taken to the hospital, where he identified the wounded man as one of the robbers. The man was arrested on suspicion of robbery.
The store owner, who asked that his name not be used, said they keep a gun on the premises at all times.

"Yes, we're armed at this store," he said. "This is Oakland."

Wumpscut223
03-08-2006, 8:54 AM
Right on! That should go into the front of American Rifleman.

GlockComa
03-08-2006, 8:58 AM
Robber got what he deserves but at the same time I think the store owner made a stupid choice.
Which robber did he shoot at first?
If I'm reading correctly he shot at the robber who had the gun pointed to his employees head then at the 2nd robber?
Wow! Either way I think he used poor judgement there. Sounds like he was playing with his employees life there.

sv_sniper
03-08-2006, 9:37 AM
What a brave citizen! We law-abidding people should not hesitate to use firearms to protect our own lives and property.

I like what the store manager said " Yes, we're armed at this store. This is Oakland."

slo5oh
03-08-2006, 1:24 PM
Robber got what he deserves but at the same time I think the store owner made a stupid choice.
Which robber did he shoot at first?
If I'm reading correctly he shot at the robber who had the gun pointed to his employees head then at the 2nd robber?
Wow! Either way I think he used poor judgement there. Sounds like he was playing with his employees life there.


It's way to easy to sit back and judge. That said...
I think the only mistake was that he let the robbers flee the store. Sounds like he only fired 2 shots.... He probably had 8 shots left. Shoot til they don't move NO MO!

gmcem50
03-08-2006, 2:32 PM
Robber got what he deserves but at the same time I think the store owner made a stupid choice.
Which robber did he shoot at first?
If I'm reading correctly he shot at the robber who had the gun pointed to his employees head then at the 2nd robber?
Wow! Either way I think he used poor judgement there. Sounds like he was playing with his employees life there.

Yeah, I guess he should have just capitulated and let the BGs have whatever they wanted and hoped that they wouldn't do anyone any harm. :rolleyes: That's what Lee Baca says.

BTW, are you British or French?

vrylak
03-08-2006, 2:48 PM
[QUOTE=gmcem50]Yeah, I guess he should have just capitulated and let the BGs have whatever they wanted and hoped that they wouldn't do anyone any harm. :rolleyes: That's what Lee Baca says.QUOTE]


You forgot to mention that the anti-gun crowd also have a miracle weapon they believe works wonders during these situations, I think they call it, what was that, oh yeah, "Reasoning". They believe you could reason with these scumbags. Now if only the French had reasoned with Hitler.......

rips31
03-08-2006, 3:00 PM
hope it's found to be justified. if he was in sf, he'd be arrested for having a handgun.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 3:02 PM
Good job!

Too bad it wasn't a fatal shot. I'm a taxpayer, you know.

Jicko
03-08-2006, 3:29 PM
Would be nice if he shoot them with an "offlist" CA-legal .223 ...... :D

grammaton76
03-08-2006, 4:08 PM
Never mind, looks like I read the article incorrectly.

Hey, one bad guy shot, the other one scared. Good outcome anyway, right?

kantstudien
03-08-2006, 4:18 PM
It would have been better if both scumbags were in body bags. But good job nonetheless.

paradox
03-08-2006, 5:07 PM
This article shows how stupid prop H is and how dangerous it will be for San Franciscians. Pistols are perfect defensive weapons because of their concealability. They are effective enough at defensive range and can be used in tight quarters far eaiser than a long gun.

San Francisco is a quick bart ride from Oakland. These punks will be crossing to greener pastures as soon and H goes into effect.

GW
03-08-2006, 5:33 PM
San Francisco is a quick bart ride from Oakland. These punks will be crossing to greener pastures as soon and H goes into effect.
That is the truth!

bdcc11
03-08-2006, 5:36 PM
You can't reason with some scumbags. In El Cajon down here east of San Diego there was a small Mom and Pop store that was robbed and the two employees were killed execution style. That was just last week.

QuickOnTheDraw
03-08-2006, 5:46 PM
Hey, not sure if you noticed, but these things happen throughout S.f. too! It's not just Oakland scumbags, they're everywhere... 51st and telegraph is well known for robberies whether they are by gun point or not. The check cashing store next to the cellular store is robbed a few times a month, plus you have easy access to the freeway on ramp to get away. You'd be stupid if you were an unarmed store owner, and this store manager knew his surroundings and people he would have to deal with!

grammaton76
03-08-2006, 6:25 PM
You can't reason with some scumbags. In El Cajon down here east of San Diego there was a small Mom and Pop store that was robbed and the two employees were killed execution style. That was just last week.

Wow. I don't watch the local news - what store was that?

1911_sfca
03-08-2006, 8:24 PM
Jeez, I sure am glad we're not going to have any of these sorts of violent incidents over here in San Francisco. You see, we voted out crime with Prop H, so no bad guys are allowed to carry handguns any more. I sure do feel much safer now!!
:rolleyes:

GlockComa
03-09-2006, 7:47 AM
Wow hey all I'm all for store owners shooting bad guys.
Hell if it was me, I would've had a shotgun in the store that way I know they wouldn't get away.

I'm just saying I know all of us aren't marksmans so to shoot a BG while he has your employee, customer, friend, relative, etc. at gun point is kind of risking it no?

Jicko
03-09-2006, 7:55 AM
Wow hey all I'm all for store owners shooting bad guys.
Hell if it was me, I would've had a shotgun in the store that way I know they wouldn't get away.

Shooting @ their backs while badguys are trying to get away DO NOT justify for "self defence".... so... beware....

Bling Bling 2.0
03-09-2006, 8:51 AM
if he was in sf, he'd be arrested for having a handgun.

But this wouldn't happen in SF. Everything is sunshine and lollypops. Everyone would always be holding hands and singing...

IPSICK
03-09-2006, 8:52 AM
Shooting @ their backs while badguys are trying to get away DO NOT justify for "self defence".... so... beware....

SUPER +1. Shots in the back are a big time no no. Was told the same thing by OPD when I was held up. Unfortunately, I was walking gunless, but fortunately left alone with no extra holes.

GlockComa
03-09-2006, 10:19 AM
I know shooting BG in the back is a big no no.

I was just stating if I were the only person in the store and they came in to rob me, Yes I would have shot them face to face.

But if a BG had someone at gunpoint I would definitely not shoot for fear that the BG would kill the innocent person he has at gun point.

jtyoshi
03-09-2006, 10:27 AM
But if a BG had someone at gunpoint I would definitely not shoot for fear that the BG would kill the innocent person he has at gun point.
Then risk having them execute both of you once they get what they want. Leave no witnesses mentality. Is it a risk ur willing to take?

filefish
03-09-2006, 10:31 AM
San Francisco is a quick bart ride from Oakland. These punks will be crossing to greener pastures as soon and H goes into effect.


You just donít understand the full stupidity of liberals. What you do not understand is that they are safe because it is illegal to take a gun on bart....DUH!!!..and in a year when the new stats come out it will be because of all the off list lowers that were loopholed in the state..what we realy need is more gun laws

on a side note if the guy spent more time at the range they probably would both be in body bags

also it is perfactly legal to conceal a handgun on your person in your home, place of business or campsite

filefish
03-09-2006, 10:34 AM
But if a BG had someone at gunpoint I would definitely not shoot for fear that the BG would kill the innocent person he has at gun point.


head shot! "one shot one kill" spend more time at the range. my biggest fear would be scull fragments injuring the hostage

ldivinag
03-09-2006, 10:41 AM
also it is perfactly legal to conceal a handgun on your person in your home, place of business or campsite

IIRC, you DONT have to conceal while at home, work or campsite.

at work, if the owners allow it, go for it.

chunger
03-09-2006, 1:13 PM
I saw this story on the evening news. . . when the big pictures of "dangerous-looking" guns logo came up, and the reporter started talking about gun violence, I thought, "oh no. . . not another one of these stories." But, they reported the story accurately. ironically, this happened on the same day Oakland police was launching an effort to curb gun violence with added patrols.

The patrols appearantly did not work as well as an armed store owner. I'm glad the story read as such on the news.

spunk2
03-14-2006, 10:40 AM
Robber got what he deserves but at the same time I think the store owner made a stupid choice.
Which robber did he shoot at first?
If I'm reading correctly he shot at the robber who had the gun pointed to his employees head then at the 2nd robber?
Wow! Either way I think he used poor judgement there. Sounds like he was playing with his employees life there.


Sounds like he saved his employees life there.

adamsreeftank
03-14-2006, 2:11 PM
I know shooting BG in the back is a big no no.

I was just stating if I were the only person in the store and they came in to rob me, Yes I would have shot them face to face.

But if a BG had someone at gunpoint I would definitely not shoot for fear that the BG would kill the innocent person he has at gun point.

It's all 20/20 hindsite, but I would think most armed robbers don't expect their victims to shoot back. When the bullets start flying AT them, most likely they'll forget about their hostage and either shoot back or run.

We've been told over and over to just give an armed robber what they want and HOPE they leave you alone, which probably works MOST of the time. But every once in a while, they will kill the victims for no apparent reason, as the previous post shows.

centermass
03-14-2006, 9:15 PM
It's all 20/20 hindsite, but I would think most armed robbers don't expect their victims to shoot back. When the bullets start flying AT them, most likely they'll forget about their hostage and either shoot back or run.

We've been told over and over to just give an armed robber what they want and HOPE they leave you alone, which probably works MOST of the time. But every once in a while, they will kill the victims for no apparent reason, as the previous post shows.

Yeah, well we all know how well that mentality works. Look what happened on 9/11. When someone hijacks an airplane, the flight crews were trained to give them what they want, etc. I don't think people will be doing that if it ever happens again.