A Texas man shoots a robber in a Houston restaurant around January 5th. Here is what we know is going on over a week after.
Read more: Houston restaurant shooting | What We KnowSituation
On January 5th at around 11:30 pm, an armed robber was fatally shot by a man in Ranchito Taqueria, a local Mexican food restaurant in Houston, Texas. The robber can be seen on camera walking around the restaurant wielding a firearm, demanding peoples money and belongings.
The patron pulls out his concealed firearm and shoots the robber in the back. After the robber goes down, the customer then shoots him at point-blank range before leaving the restaurant.
What the video does not show, as YouTube policies will not allow the display of the full content, is the customer firing into the robber’s back before shooting him in the head at what reports say was point-blank range. After dispatching the robber, the patron then retrieved the stolen items and returned them to the other restaurant goers, then fled the scene.
Twitter has made the photo available here. It is flagged as sensitive. You have been warned.
The Aftermath
Police in Houston began searching for the man in the video who shot the robber. The customer was described as a White or Hispanic male that fired at least nine shots. The police in also released photos of the customer’s truck.
The Houston Police eventually made contact with the man, where he was asked questions by homicide detectives.
The man was of course found and questioned. He now faces a grand jury, where it will be decided whether he will face charges. It was found out that the robber was in fact carrying a plastic gun. The man with the fact gun in Texas, a constitutional carry state, that decided to try to rob people was identified as 30-year-old Eric Eugene Washington.
Washington was out on parole in January 2021 after being in prison for almost 6 years, according to Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Public Opinion (Or What Seems to Be)
After the event unfolded and the police began their probes to find the information they needed. According to legal experts like Emily Taylor, a 2nd Amendment attorney, it is a prime example of why constitutional carry is effective.
So to have those citizens around, it’s for your protection, not just their protection. You want as many as possible. And constitutional carry has done us a huge favor.
Emily Taylor, Attorney
Other experts like former prosecutor Joanne Musick said to KHOU television that she sees the man’s actions as self-defense, but ultimately isn’t surprised that the case is being presented to a grand jury. Houston police Detective Jeff Brieden told;
You’re accountable for each and every bullet that comes out of that gun,
Jeff Brieden
The public’s response to the situation on Twitter were largely in support of the customer.
Emily Taylor addressed the public outcry of Washington (Robber) using a toy gun.
What we have is, although we found out later that the robber was using a toy gun, you don’t know that at the moment. And Texas law doesn’t say that you have to know that, you get to defend yourself based on information you have from your eyes. Not perfect information. So you believe that you and others are being threatened with a deadly weapon,
Emily Taylor, Attorney
However, Washington’s mother spoke in an interview with FOX 26. “He’s not the monster that people picture him to be,”
What seems to be mostly questioned at the moment amongst the public is the efficacy of the last shot. Arguing that the man was no longer in danger since the gun was already taken and Washington already was on the ground.
Opinion
The 2nd amendment has shown itself time and time again to be the one thing that allows law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, their property, their families, and others time and time again. However, in recent times, the left has been exercising their overt preference and care for convicted criminals and felons over the wellbeing and personal safety of law-abiding citizens.
The usage of the term ‘suspected’ in this case is a product of America’s hallmark “Innocent until proven guilty”. Something that is often taken for granted. We could be like Canada or Japan, most notable, where it is the burden of the accused to prove their innocence. Even with video evidence as crystal clear as this, many people still want to use “suspected robber”. At any rate. The man is guilty.
The grand jury isn’t going to decide on the deceased. Instead, they will decide on whether the man acted within his rights of self-defense under Texas law. From what legal experts are saying is a clear case of self-defense, it would be easy to write this situation off as just that. However, there is the issue of the final couple shots which complicates the matter.
The last couples of shots could indeed spell charges for the man, who in my opinion was exercising his right to self-defense. If there are charges pressed, then it would drum up another period of questioning for the public and gun carrying community. Are you allowed to defend yourself or others in the United States? The principle issue of the man shooting the PRIOR convicted criminal in the head as he laid there apparently dead is what is driving me crazy. My first initial instinct is to make sure a threat is absolutely neutralized. With something as clear-cut as a case like this where Washington was indeed committing a crime, it is hard for me to see it any other way.
I largely think that the moment someone points a weapon or even attempts to take any property from anyone, they have forfeited their right to bodily safety (obviously). I would go as far as to say they gamble their life. Instead, we have a culture and a society where we must hold a criminal’s/prior criminal’s lives to the same standard of care and respect as we do their victims. Which at a quick glance is absolutely crazy.
People responsible for the pain and loss of other members of the community hold no inherent value to me. If someone were to argue they have inherent value to the local economy, then I guess that correct. For example, Washington would have increased the sale of wallets in the local area by some miniscule percentage.
Largely, this situation to me is a case of self-defense. While people are under no obligation in the state of Texas to remain at the location, it is still something that can prevent a lot of piercing and assumptive eyes. My initial thoughts of why someone would leave like that would be illegal possession of a firearm. Maybe it’s an illegal firearm, which I know is an odd term, but something I know the ATF has classified. At any rate, it is important to realize that any of these cases hold massive political weight with them. And the outcome of this situation will show whether Texas remains a bastion of 2nd amendment rights or is slowly decaying into the western states’ ways of thinking.
Consider this?
Consider commenting. Begin discussing and sharing with your friends outside of places where you aren’t able to have certain opinions, such as believing people have the right to self-defense and preservation.
