Survivalist Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

maybe you heard?

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
W

whiskyrebellion

· Registered
Joined
·
2,665 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
the pharmacist that shot the guy robbing him and then went and reloaded and unloaded again, he just got life in prison. this is not in some liberal bastian of america this is smack dab in the middle of the country and you cannot "kill" someone who might kill you. casey anthony walks and this guy gets life AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! anyway brush up on local laws and know your weapon. it does no good to save your life if you spend it jail.
 
#3 ·
Okay, I've found some news articles on what I think this is about. Thanks for the links, by the way.

From what I understand, Ersland was working in his pharmacy with other staff when two males entered the store with the intent of robbing it.

Ersland shot one unarmed male in the head and chased the other (armed) would-be robber off. The male who was shot was still moving. Ersland got another firearm and shot him a further five times.

That doesn't sound like self defence to me. For anyone get on Youtube and search for Ersland shooting, the surveillance camera footage will be one of the first hits.
 
Discussion starter · #4 ·
so you seem to be saying that the old guy at work was in the wrong for shooting a couple of criminals who were committing armed robbery? think about this, if the pharmacist had been killed during the robbery and the 2 "men" had been caught they would likely not have faced life in prison. again just make sure you know your local laws. if he had not gone back to reload he would of been fine.
 
#5 ·
This is a good argument for shot placement. While the victim choose good locations and was effective at disabling the criminal, the shots were not immediately fatal.

Because the criminal was shot again once he was already disabled, it was murder.

In the Infantry, we can move in on an enemy stronghold, bound forward and through their position while a flanking fire team is laying down suppressive fire. The flanking team can then move through eliminating any remaining threats. At this point, the enemy would positively definitely be disabled. We then check the enemy casualties and secure the site. If we find one alive and on his last breaths, we must provide medical treatment and call for a medevac. If we just let him die, we end up in Leavenworth.

What would I have done at the pharmacy. I would have rolled him over and secured his hands and then rolled him back onto his back. I would then have found something to put under his head to provide aid and comfort. Then I would call 911 to report a robbery in progress and provided descriptions of the one that got away and was armed. I would then describe of the one that has been detained. If the operator asked if an ambulance was needed, I would have said certainly.
 
#7 ·
libertvalance said:
so you seem to be saying that the old guy at work was in the wrong for shooting a couple of criminals who were committing armed robbery? think about this, if the pharmacist had been killed during the robbery and the 2 "men" had been caught they would likely not have faced life in prison. again just make sure you know your local laws. if he had not gone back to reload he would of been fine.
Click to expand...
I'd say based on the facts of the shooting described above, yes the old guy was in the wrong and deserves to be convicted of murder. Armed robbery is not a crime worthy of a death sentence. Many drug addicts are strung out and have no intent to kill but only want their oxy. If the guy was threatened, he had every right to shoot. But to reload and shoot a guy who is laying on the floor with a bullet in his head? That is cold blooded murder.

I think life in prison is too harsh, but I don't know all the facts.
 
#8 ·
I knew an attorney (neighbor) who was waiting in line at a pharmacy for his cancer drugs. A guy with a knife grabbed him, put the knife to his throat, and demanded oxy from the pharmacist. My friend handled the situation like a pro. He told the pharmacist to give the guy what he wanted. The guy with the knife left without further incident.

Sadly, my friend died of cancer. :(
 
#9 ·
libertvalance said:
so you seem to be saying that the old guy at work was in the wrong for shooting a couple of criminals who were committing armed robbery? think about this, if the pharmacist had been killed during the robbery and the 2 "men" had been caught they would likely not have faced life in prison. again just make sure you know your local laws. if he had not gone back to reload he would of been fine.
Click to expand...
It really sucks when people ignore what you write and say, "so what you're saying is...". No, what the earlier poster said was quite different.
 
#10 ·
Bottom line was the guy went beyond self defense and committed MURDER!
I agree with him shooting someone trying to rob him in self defense and if that person dies as a result of the initial gunshots then the Pharmacist should go free as it was self defense. However, once the perp is on the ground and disabled, you should call the police and let them come pick him up. I would keep my gun aimed at him and inform him in a loud voice that if I even think he is reaching for a weapon that I will shoot him again but you are WRONG if you just pump 5 more shots into him after he is disabled.
At that point you went beyond self defense and you are now playing judge and jury and you sentenced him to death.

I do think however that the pharmacist should not get life in prison but should probably get like 5 years or something. He is not a threat to society like most criminals are and if you allow him to stay free he will remain a productive tax paying member of the population.
 
#11 ·
If you are in fear for your life or the life of someone else you can shoot an attacker.

Any armed robbery I consider a "fear for your life" situation. So shooting him the first time was proper.

Once the attacker is no longer a threat, you stop shooting. It appears that the pharmacist finished the robber off after he was no longer a threat.


Side question.....
Am I legally required to render first aid to the person who just tried to kill me?
 
#12 ·
lost the link but i am pretty sure its on youtube. I was with the guy till i saw the footage. 2 men enter armed, he pulls pistol and shoots one then chases the other out the door, then comes back in walks to the drawer where his other gun was, retrieves it and walks over and shoots the immobile man several more times. Although I was happy to see the robber catch one but shooting an someone who no longer poses a threat repeatedly is murder.
 
#19 ·
If this is the standard, The cops in Arizona who put 70+ rounds into a house out of fear should be in court tomorrow.
Click to expand...
Yep.

I find it difficult to pass judgment on a pharmacist (i.e. not professional LEO or Military) who was in fear for his life, given the likelihood that anyone who would rob a pharmacy is seeking drugs not $, and may in fact be under the influence at the time, and therefore their ability to respond reasonably to pain was compromised. Doesn't take very long to google a whole lot of cases where someone under the influence required multiple shots to the CNS before they ceased to be a threat to others. But I'm not a professional in the field of forensics or phobia, as perhaps some here are. Evidently the professionals, even in a situation where they had superior numbers, were so scared they felt 70 rounds were necessary.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
About this Discussion
27 Replies
21 Participants
Last post:
Mortimer
Survivalist Forum
posts
12M
members
169K
Since
2007
A forum community dedicated to survivalists and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, gear, DIY projects, hobbies, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Off Topic Lounge Disaster Preparedness General Discussion Firearms General Discussion New Member Introductions Financial Forum