Police say Pizza Hut employee shoots, kills would-be robber
CHARLOTTE, N.C. » Police in North Carolina say a Pizza Hut employee used his own handgun to shoot and kill one of three armed robbers holding up the store.
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department said it happened early Sunday at a Pizza Hut restaurant near Interstate 85 in west Charlotte. Detectives say the restaurant was closed and there were no customers inside.
Police say their initial investigation indicates three people entered the restaurant around 1:40 a.m. Sunday and were in the process of robbing it when one of the employees used his personal handgun to shoot one male thief. Police say a handgun carried by the slain robber was recovered at the scene.
The two other suspects ran away and haven’t been captured.
44 responses to “Police say Pizza Hut employee shoots, kills would-be robber”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Bravo! We need more killings like this.
Great killing of a criminal. But in Hawaii the liberals would scream bloody murder.
Now that’s what Trump is talking about. Do justice.
2nd Amendment!
Yes. It’s high time time that victims of crime protect themselves instead of the dam-liberal-lunatic-fringe bemoaning how the perpetrators are to be pitied. But what will probably happen in this case is the employee will be brought up on some type of charge that ruins his life.
Or may be a victim of a revenge/vendetta?
At least he can protect himself.
Unless you elect Hellary and they take away our right to protect ourselves.
I highly doubt the employee will be brought up on any kind of charges, assuming he was legally allowed to carry. They recovered a gun from one robber at the scene so that’s a huge piece of evidence right there. Most people, from liberals to conservatives and everywhere in between will be fine with this killing. It’s the fringe element that will have a problem with it. But then again there are fringe elements everywhere. People like you just try to stir the pot when there really is no issue at all.
Not so fast. Democrats go furious over such things. Just in another article in the SA 2 days ago. Klastri and many other devout Democrats went nuts criticizing everyone making fun of a criminals death when a criminal fell from a high rise to his death after the 76 year old woman he was going to rob and possibly hurt at night woke up.
Here, read the comments section of Democrats outraged of a criminal falling to his death!
http://www.staradvertiser.com/2016/10/28/hawaii-news/alleged-burglar-dies-in-fall-from-window/
I like your word creation “dam-liberal-lunatic-fringe” and I like to add dumbgooddoers to that.
One down 2 to go.
Too bad he didn’t get 2 more shots out.
Don’t worry, something like this will never happen in Hawaii… because our police chief does not believe that citizens have the right to protect themselves and their families. 🙁
hawaii law allows carrying a firearm at one’s home or place of work. and, it already has happened in hawaii.
You are correct. In the cases I’ve seen, (and there haven’t been too many) the victim (shooter) is also arrested and released RPI, an investigation ensues and the Office of the Prosecutor declines Prosecution if self-defense elements are satisfied. The victim then has to petition for expungement of the arrest.
Even if “self-defense elements are satisfied” that does not always prevent a lawsuit filed by a wounded assailant or the deceased assailant’s next of kin. Depending on jurisdiction, the castle doctrine (applied to one’s dwelling, a personal motor vehicle or place of business) can deter frivolous lawsuits. If you happen to reside in a less evolved place (London, England comes immediately to mind) you may be obligated to do everything possible to flee your home or place of business if confronted by violent criminals. Be that as it may, I would venture to guess that the old adage “better to be judged by twelve than carried by six” will see you through any legal trouble if you were indeed in reasonable fear for the safety of you and yours.
DD: No, I was speaking of Criminal charges only. Civil actions are an entirely different matter. For the definition of Self-Defense in Hawaii, see the Hawaii Revised Statutes, readily available online.
Cellodad,
My point was to raise the issue that criminal charges are only part of what a person who defends himself is likely to face, not to imply you didn’t know what you were talking about. If you feel slighted, then I apologize.
Our chief can’t even protect his own mailbox!
LMAO! So true.
Besides, the whole police force is working on that mailbox case, so any critical calls for police enforcement to 911 get put on the back burner as they still try to unravel the chain of events and provide evidence to the defense attorney.
If he did that here he would be in jail.
He should have use the money on college instead of buying guns and bullets. That way he wouldn’t be working the closing shift at Pizza Hut.
Lol! Exactly.
Are you making fun of people who work at Pizza Hut?
He may have been working there to pay for college!
If he wasn’t there we would have one more criminal running around the streets. To bad he couldn’t have gotten the other two guys as well.
You making fun of our dear friend Allie? You do realize Allie works at a pizza joint. I would prefer HI had a concealed carry law so Allie could stop a criminal dead than have Allie get shot dead over a $20 pizza.
Allie carries a loaded Tongan doorman. She said it.
Great that he got the bad guy, but Pizza Hut will probably fire him for bringing a gun to work. No good deed goes unpunished.
Sadly, you could be right. They might have a corporate policy against guns in the workplace even if someone has a CWP or unless explicitly permitted. I hope Good Samaritan laws in that jurisdiction will not allow the employer to terminate this employee in the event he was not permitted to have the weapon in the workplace.
No one out-pizzas the hut.
Stuffed his crust!
Poor judgement, what would have happened if he had missed and hit an innocent bystander?
Not poor judgement but slow shooter. John Wayne would have taken all three to their well deserved ending.
LKK56,
You do realize, of course, that a decision to resort to deadly force is only appropriate to protect oneself or another innocent party from severe bodily harm. The situation has to be extremely grave. Accidental injury to bystanders can happen it’s certainly true, however, such injuries are not intentional acts committed by a victim with a lot of time to ponder over the situation. A number of inadvertent shootings and even deaths are committed each year by uniformed law enforcement officers. Such incidents are sad for all concerned but seldom are serious proposals made to remove deadly force as an option for lawmen in the U.S.
emmm, that’s the law, using deadly force is ONLY justifiable in the event of imminent danger and loss of life, no other way around it. Not sure what you’re rambling about. Sure, there’s always the possibility of stray bullets hitting innocent by-standards. Still a better outcome than the possibility of the criminal of shooting multiple people dead.
Dragon,
Not sure what the point of your reply is, unless you think LKK56’s opinion is valid? What is it about what I wrote that confuses you?
Lucky an innocent bystander wasn’t killed in a shootout.
You read the article, the store was closed.
Chalk one up for the good guys…..another bad guy bites the dust……
Great job on the part of Pizza Hut employee. Conceal carry can save lives, in a situation such as this.
No anchovies.
Unfortunately the Pizza Hut employee was charged with manslaughter and is currently in jail unable to post 25k in bail.