Washington Store Owner Sentenced To 8 Years For Killing Robber

[Ptarmigan]

Washington Store Owner Sentenced To 8 Years For Killing Robber
https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2017/06/washington-store-owner-8-years/

A convenience store owner from Spanaway, Washington has been sentenced to 8 years in prison after shooting a thug who stole from his establishment.

According to Q13 Fox, surveillance footage from the March 25, 2016 incident shows 31-year-old Min Sik Kim asking a group of men loitering outside his store to leave.

While he was outside, 21-year-old Jakeel Rashon Mason can be seen attempting to steal cigarettes from behind the counter of Kim’s store.

No surprise from leftist Washington.

[HAPPY2BME]

What does anyone expect for a communist state.

Ditto Kalifornya.

Here's the way things are done in a state not controlled by communists ..

======

Last month, Cash Freeman rushed to a neighbor’s home in Ada after a 12-year-old girl ran to his house for help.

When he arrived at the girl’s home, he reportedly found Leland Foster attempting to drown 3-month-old twins in a bathtub. That’s when Freeman shot and killed Foster.

Freeman told NewsChannel 4 that when he saw what was happening in the bathroom, he did what he had to do to save the babies. However, he told us he was concerned that he could be in trouble.

“A reasonable person has the right to use deadly force in the defense of others, if that person’s belief is reasonable that that person is in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death,” said Jacqui Ford, a defense attorney with experience in self-defense law. “Sometimes, people must be stopped and, sometimes, homicide is the only way to stop them.”

Police questioned and released Freeman, but the district attorney was tasked with determining if the shooting was a criminal act.

While the case was being investigated, the court of public opinion supported Freeman.

“They better not file charges on that guy,” said Kathy Hart, who was dining in downtown Ada. “Because, he protected two innocent babies that couldn’t protect themselves. How can he be guilty of anything? He’s a hero. He should not be in trouble.”

“Even though a life was lost and that’s tragic in any case, in this case, two lives were saved that were innocent,” James Williams said. “He would be a hero in my book.”

A little more than a month after the shooting, officials say the case is closed.

On Thursday, the Pontotoc County District Attorney announced that the shooting was a ‘justifiable use of deadly force under Oklahoma Law.’

http://kfor.com/2017/07/06/no-charges-filed-against-oklahoma-man-who-shot-killed-neighbor-trying-to-drown-twins/

[BlueStateSaint]

Being in the PRNY, I can understand why the State of Washington went after the shooter.  If the State of Wahington is a 'duty to retreat' state, then the shop owner was obliged to 'be a good witness' and not escalate it to a deadly force encounter.  He could (well, should) have pulled out his cell phone and shot pictures of the perp and that would be about all he could legally do.  If the perp didn't escalate the encounter to a deadly force encounter, then the shop owner was in the wrong for escalating it.  If the perp had either brandished a deadly weapon (and threatened to use it) or carried a lit Molotov cocktail into the store (thus establishing that he was about to commit arson), then it would probably be legal to use deadly force against the perp.

It sucks.  But if the State of Washington was a 'stand your ground' state, the store owner might have a way out.  It would still open him up to all sorts of legal liability, though.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Actually the result could be similar most places, if I read the story correctly.  The crime was just theft, not robbery, so the crime had no element of deadly force or personal danger to it.  A lot would depend on circumstances, but if the store owner shot him in the act or fleeing, it wouldn't be a good shooting almost anywhere.
 If the owner pulled a gun and confronted him, and then there was a physical struggle, that's where the difference between retarded and reasonable states comes in.  In a retarded state, the owner would be in the wrong for raising the stakes to deadly force, in a reasonable state not...but he would still be in trouble if he shot the perp while he was trying to run away or just while he had the drop on him.