comment: >
  
  The execution after he disarmed the perpetrator might result in just a few legal complications.
context: WARNING: Uncensored video of the shooting >
  
  Having watched the full unedited video the good samaritan is going to be in legal trouble.
  The initial shots until the suspect went down we completely justified. The follow up shots on the downed gunman I'm less sure about but the could probably still be justifiable. The shot to the head after the gunman was disarmed is completely unjustified and what will get the good samaritan in legal trouble. >
  
  Wait so the shooter didn’t even stick around after shooting the robber? That’s not a good look. >
  
  He might not be a citizen or he might not be legally allowed to own/carry that gun. In the latter case the justifiable use of deadly force goes out the window and they throw the book at him. >
  
  Not true in all states. In Wisconsin you can be in commission of a crime and still claim self defense >
  
  That is wild to me because the fact that you're the one committing the crime cause you to be in the position to need to defend yourself. >
  
  I think it entirely depends on what the crime you are committing is leading up to having to defend yourself. I highly doubt you can rob someones house and get off on killing the home owner by claiming self defense.
  If the shooter in this video was illegally carrying the firearm I don't think the self defense laws should suddenly disappear. Nor do i think the charges for illegally carrying a gun should either though. >
  
  guy robbing store kill clerk he was robbing >
  
  In Texas you can fire until the threat is no longer active, it'll be up to a grand jury to decide his fate. He probably made a mistake by leaving the scene, he should be in contact with his attorney and the Houston pd. >
  
  I feel like he’s lucky that this happened in Texas because they’d def let him off, but maybe not in a lot of other states 
  But also why tf did the robber not realize that this was Texas and everyone was carrying?! >
  
  I heard of similar robberies in Texas where the robbers got away without a scratch after robbing a group of people in a restaurant, which surprised me, to be honest given Texas politics.  Robber was unlucky and picked the wrong group to target. >
  
  The video was clipped off just after the customer points his gun. Anyone have the missing part? What happened to the robber’s body? >
  
  Shoots several rounds till the guy falls over, then walks over and mag dumps on him, then picked the robbers gun up and put one in the back of the guys head.
  Wasn’t pretty >
  
  I mean, on one hand, JFC, but on the other, I mean he made sure the threat was eliminated. >
  
  
  In fact, the “threat” would have walked out the door
  
  Your use of quotation marks implies you don't consider a masked man with a gun a threat.  That's just silly.
  And "in fact" you don't know he would have walked out... for all anyone in that room knew, he just as easily could have turned at the door and shot everyone before leaving. >
  
  
  
  by your logic, most people in America are a threat because they carry guns.
  
  
  Except we know for a fact this guy was a threat because he was in the act of using said gun during a robbery. He had people on the ground with the gun pointed at them. Should an armed bystander just wait to find out if he means them more harm? Great logic there. Save your bleeding heart >
  
  Even if he does get brought up on charges, no Texas jury will convict this man. I doubt DA wants to take this case. >
  
  They still need to find him. He left the scene after killing the robber and giving everyone their money back. This one's tough, as the robber was just asking for an armed citizen to light him up. However, it could be argued that the armed citizen used excessive force (headshot after target was no longer a threat). Leaving the scene without staying to provide your story to law enforcement, especially after literally killing another human, may be what gets this guy in trouble. It's Texas, though, so who knows? >
  
  It could be argued, sure. 
  90% of people see this as Mr. Criminal fucking around, and finding out. >
  
  I agree, overall, though I think him leaving is a bit sus. I think the robber deserved the first few shots, for sure. He's a fuckhead stealing from innocent people. That said, Jesus, the guy worked his ass over. I know adrenaline and such were amping up the situation, but I feel like he should have stopped after the target was neutralized and stayed to wrap things up with law enforcement. Him leaving could potentially open him up to legal action. Badass and all, but is this really want we want in America, people straight-up murdering people and taking off into the night, with no accountability? >
  
  Not talking (leaving) doesn't make it any more suspicious. If he committed a crime he committed one, not talking to the cops isn't making it any more likely for him to get charges brought up on him. In reality it could only hurt his case to talk to police, especially when he was probably still flooded with adrenaline, that can make you say pretty stupid shit.
  Leaving & lawyering up is probably your safest option in a situation like this from a "not getting charged" standpoint, its not like there weren't witnesses to tell the police what happened.