Attempted Apple Store Holdup Goes Bad: Suspect Killed

[Eddyisgreat]

I still think it's a sad state of affairs when Apple hires guards armed with guns to protect insured merchandise during closed hours.

I think it's a sad state of affairs when people punk out and let thugs run them over whenever they like. If you get a new car after I steal yours how many times will it take before no insurance company in the world will ensure you-then what? You'll get mad then? You gonna try to reason with them?

You know what, you're right. Apple really should not have had an armed guard there. That guy made it really difficult for the robbers who were just trying to do their job. Who knows how many times they would've hit that particular store if that darn security guard wasn't there to play sharpshooter with peoples lives grrrrr!11!

 

[JayLenochiniMac]

Since one male suspect possessing two handguns was shot in the buttocks, the Security Guard fired at them first as they fled on foot initially (heading for their car).

Incorrect and bad assumption. You can't assume the security guard fired on them first just because the suspect got shot and the guard didn't. We still do not know who fired first.

 

[tkingart]

Incorrect and bad assumption. You can't assume the security guard fired on them first just because the suspect got shot and the guard didn't. We still do not know who fired first.

The article states that one of the male suspects "produced a gun" and the Security Guard opened fire on them. Please read the articles I'm referring to.

 

[diazj3]

Armed guards inside Apple stores now????

Doesn't anybody else see the bigger picture? an armed guard inside the store is a security risk for everybody in the store!!!

1. Don't these stores have a steel curtain to prevent such robberies while closed? I mean, if there have been so many "smash and grabs", wouldn't it be better in every sense to deter such actions, instead of putting an armed guard to protect some iCrap, a bunch of computers and some cash?...

2. Sooooo.... if there's a robbery while the store is open, and there are customers inside, is it now Apple's policy to protect their ***** at gunpoint - that's why an armed guard is inside - even at the risk of one customer getting shot in the gunfight?

3. And aren't these stores insured in case of robbery? And isn't this why we have police and cameras??? a gunfight for a bunch of Apple cr*p is just stupid. AND they would've caught the burglers anyway. And if they don't... not a big deal!

4. I really think the outcome was excessive - I mean, a guy shot in the head.... and he was shot inside the car, which means the security guard chased them outside the store and kept shooting. Same question - is it Apple policy to chase the robbers with bullets, jeopardizing the life of others? And again - isn't this why we have police with all the chasing gear?

5. The way I see it, after reading the whole story, the kids took their guns out when the guard took out his first and aimed at them. Who's to say that if there were customers inside the store the guard would not do the same putting everybody's life at risk? Who know's....

I think the best thing to do for Apple is to get better passive security - stop worrying that a steel curtain will make your store look ugly... A simple glass is a hell of a temptation for most kids. There will always be kids that'll do anything for one of these stupid gadgets, specially when in this society a person's self worth is ignorantly meassured by their iPossesions.... and somehow Apple advertises that way.... "if you don't have an iPhone.... bla bla bla".

And let me be clear: I don't defend the robbers... at all!.... but this is absurd. It's not like they were entering someones house. If they were professional criminals, they wouldn't be stealing iPads!!! Doesn't APPL make enough money already? do they have to put our lives at risk by placing armed guards inside, with what I see as a "rambo" attitude and a happy trigger to kill a bunch of stupid kids trying to steal some cheap gadgets?

REALLY STEVE/APPLE: TAKE THE ARMED GUARDS OUT OF THE STORE. AN IPAD IS NOT WORTH A LIFE. NOT EVEN A CRIMINAL ONE... LET ALONE A CUSTOMER'S LIFE IN CASE ANY OF US GET HIT IN THE FIRE EXCHANGE.

Cheers!

 

[Flynnhawaiiann]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

If they got any iPhones for evadents it's jailbroken ;~>

 

[teguh123]

I am happy the vermin died. I hope more like it happen.

Their life ain't worth no ****. They would have been aborted if not because of those stupid pro life argument.

Guard + 5
Saving tax payer
Helping Mac (though I prefer PC) but hei competition is awesome.

Now we need only to ensure that the other 2 scumbags also get death penalty for robbing that leads to death. That'll be sweet sweet green grass of home.

Heil guard. My only regret is it's too the robbers die too quickly.

Doesn't anybody else see the bigger picture? an armed guard inside the store is a security risk for everybody in the store!!!

1. Don't these stores have a steel curtain to prevent such robberies while closed? I mean, if there have been so many "smash and grabs", wouldn't it be better in every sense to deter such actions, instead of putting an armed guard to protect some iCrap, a bunch of computers and some cash?...

2. Sooooo.... if there's a robbery while the store is open, and there are customers inside, is it now Apple's policy to protect their ***** at gunpoint - that's why an armed guard is inside - even at the risk of one customer getting shot in the gunfight?

3. And aren't these stores insured in case of robbery? And isn't this why we have police and cameras??? a gunfight for a bunch of Apple cr*p is just stupid. AND they would've caught the burglers anyway. And if they don't... not a big deal!

4. I really think the outcome was excessive - I mean, a guy shot in the head.... and he was shot inside the car, which means the security guard chased them outside the store and kept shooting. Same question - is it Apple policy to chase the robbers with bullets, jeopardizing the life of others? And again - isn't this why we have police with all the chasing gear?

I think the best thing to do for Apple is to get better passive security - stop worrying that a steel curtain will make your store look ugly... A simple glass is a hell of a temptation for most kids. There will always be kids that'll do anything for one of these stupid gadgets, specially when in this society a person's self worth is ignorantly meassured by their iPossesions.... and somehow Apple advertises that way.... "if you don't have an iPhone.... bla bla bla".

And let me be clear: I don't defent the robbers.... but this is absurd. It's not like they were entering someones house. If they were professional criminals, they wouldn't be stealing iPads!!! Doesn't APPL make enough money already? do they have to put our lives at risk by placing armed guards inside, and/or kill a bunch of stupid kids trying to steal one?

REALLY STEVE/APPLE: TAKE THE ARMED GUARDS OUT OF THE STORE. AN IPAD IS NOT WORTH A LIFE. NOT EVEN A CRIMINAL ONE... LET ALONE A CUSTOMER'S LIFE IN CASE ANY OF US GET HIT IN THE FIRE EXCHANGE.

Cheers!

 

[Wehrwolf]

But on the other, it's a good thing he wasn't some crazed methhead who happened to be packing. Know what I mean?

That's a concern, true, but if I or someone I care about ever had the misfortune to be in a potentially life-threatening situation with no easy means of retreat or defense at hand, I sincerely hope a civilian "sheepdog" like Mattie would be willing to risk their freedom and perhaps life to come to my aid by personally intervening, not just calling 911 and leaving it at that.

 

[josh2007]

Death is certainly one of the possible outcomes of committing armed robbery. I'm sure these Einsteins went into this with their eyes wide open.

 

[iscott73]

To bad so sad

I cant believe all the saps in here. The robbers brought a gun. If you wanna do crime in this country with a gun then you deserve to die. I commend the security office for protecting his community. You cant turn and run from the crooks if they flash a gun, then they will just come back and do it again. We should have no tolerance for fools with guns.

 

[tkingart]

I think it's a sad state of affairs when people punk out and let thugs run them over whenever they like. If you get a new car after I steal yours how many times will it take before no insurance company in the world will ensure you-then what? You'll get mad then? You gonna try to reason with them?

You know what, you're right. Apple really should not have had an armed guard there. That guy made it really difficult for the robbers who were just trying to do their job. Who knows how many times they would've hit that particular store if that darn security guard wasn't there to play sharpshooter with peoples lives grrrrr!11!

So nobody can try and piece together hypothetical scenarios taken from what has been stated thus far? it's just simply you're right and I'm wrong. it's a closed and shut case, try to steal gadgets and you deserve to die. Forget due process. What I wrote is based on the articles themselves. I'm trying to figure out what happened because the bottom line is, I think it's ridiculous when people die stealing gadgets.

I defend the Security Guard's actions 100%, as long as they were appropriate. By that I mean he didn't run and gun it. Without more details who knows? Whatever the case it is good that no pedestrians were hurt in the exchange.

But since you know the Security Guard is a sharp shooter, with 40 rounds exchanged, then that butt shot was amazing, all that target practice on the buttocks sheets paid off! don't forget the shot through the rear passenger window that hit the driver on the side of the head, I'm sure the driver was blindly firing backwards and to the side while looking forwards and driving because he has eyes in the back of his head, and has double-jointed shoulders and arms.

The bottom line in my mind is that it's just pathetic no matter how hard you try to pacify or contrive things when people die over gadgets.

 

[tkingart]

I cant believe all the saps in here. The robbers brought a gun. If you wanna do crime in this country with a gun then you deserve to die. I commend the security office for protecting his community. You cant turn and run from the crooks if they flash a gun, then they will just come back and do it again. We should have no tolerance for fools with guns.

I agree with you 100% and I wish others would understand that. I'm trying to piece together what happened. For instance, the articles only state that one of the suspects carried a gun (two of them), however, the one that died- well it wasn't said whether or not he had any, just that the driver was shot in the head and killed.

My perspective still stands that it's pathetic when people start dying (using guns, knives or whatever else) over gadgets.

 

[StoneyG]

It's terrifying how many people in this thread are actually happy and excited to hear about someing being shot and killed, and all the shocking comments about how more criminals should be shot and killed. There is a serious disconnect between reality and fantasy here.

Indeed, thank-you! Glad a few folks on here posses humanity. Nobody here has f'ed up in their lives? Yes, when you attempt what was attempted, one has to assume a great deal of risk. But none of that warrants feeling good about somebody dying needlessly, and voting "positive" on this story.

 

[Drew n macs]

I Believe that the security guard was a 58 year old male and was a retire police officer.

 

[StoneyG]

This is SUCH an american debate here... interesting from a sociological point of view almost.
Anyhow there is NO proportionality given between robbing material goods and the elimination of life. No matter how one stands to questions like gun control, police regulations or even death sentence.

Proportionality is the key word here.

Woot, another one with a higher level of understanding and compassion.

Nobody's kids or houses or whatever were under some threat of being taken away from them. An attempt to rob a company that has, well, plenty of money. Doesn't make it right, at all, no. We're all made of the same bits, and so with with that in mind, all you have to do is look at the numbers of number of people that own whatever number of guns in Canada, the UK, and Japan (for instance), versus the states, and you'll find out pretty quick that there IS a correlation between number of guns and the number of people killed by said guns. What more do you need to know?

Let me clarify that there's a difference between having the freedom to own firearms, and feeling this NEED that everyone should have one... because everyone else has them... begets, begets, begets, and on and on and on....

 

[diazj3]

So nobody can try and piece together hypothetical scenarios taken from what has been stated thus far? it's just simply you're right and I'm wrong. it's a closed and shut case, try to steal gadgets and you deserve to die. Forget due process. What I wrote is based on the articles themselves. I'm trying to figure out what happened because the bottom line is, I think it's ridiculous when people die stealing gadgets.

I defend the Security Guard's actions 100%, as long as they were appropriate. By that I mean he didn't run and gun it. Without more details who knows? Whatever the case it is good that no pedestrians were hurt in the exchange.

But since you know the Security Guard is a sharp shooter, with 40 rounds exchanged, then that butt shot was amazing, all that target practice on the buttocks sheets paid off! don't forget the shot through the rear passenger window that hit the driver on the side of the head, I'm sure the driver was blindly firing backwards and to the side while looking forwards and driving because he has eyes in the back of his head, and has double-jointed shoulders and arms.

The bottom line in my mind is that it's just pathetic no matter how hard you try to pacify or contrive things when people die over gadgets.

I totally agree. I also wonder why the guard went on shooting after the robbers left the scene, chased and shoot at them while they were on the moving car. Proof of this is the fact that the driver was shot and the car crashed when he died.

As I said, having these rambo-style armed guards inside the store is a risk for customers as well. They send a double message: a) Apple will protect their stores at gunpoint, so don't try stealing an iPad.... and b) if you really want to steal it, come armed and face death. Next time, some bigger criminals will do it while the store is open, take some hostages and shoot at anyone that moves.

Just my 2c.

 

[sillypooh]

Seriously, 900 posts for this? Another day in America...

 

[ProwlingTiger]

Woot, another one with a higher level of understanding and compassion.

Nobody's kids or houses or whatever were under some threat of being taken away from them. An attempt to rob a company that has, well, plenty of money. Doesn't make it right, at all, no. We're all made of the same bits, and so with with that in mind, all you have to do is look at the numbers of number of people that own whatever number of guns in Canada, the UK, and Japan (for instance), versus the states, and you'll find out pretty quick that there IS a correlation between number of guns and the number of people killed by said guns. What more do you need to know?

Let me clarify that there's a difference between having the freedom to own firearms, and feeling this NEED that everyone should have one... because everyone else has them... begets, begets, begets, and on and on and on....

I think some of you are forgetting that he was shooting at the security officer. I wager the security officer didn't start out shooting, but rather the crooks were the ones who escalated the matter. When they began shooting, it was no longer about Apple or Apple's products. It was about someone's life. I'm not saying the crook deserved to die or his accomplices deserve the death sentence. No, the deserve a trial by jury and due process. That said, it was acceptable for the security officer to return fire, and while it's unfortunate that a crook lost his life, that is simply a consequence of his actions and no one else.

 

[smithrh]

So much is still unknown...

I've done some checking on news sources, and:

* The guard was in the store
* The guard was outside
* There were shots fired inside the store
* There were no shots fired inside the store
* The guard shot first
* The guard was shot at first

....


and so on and so forth.

Given the fact that a LEO was involved, I will tend to give more credence that this was a justified act, but we've all seen rogue LEOs too.

While I'm sure a lot of people won't want to hear this, Apple may become a target (sorry, can't think of better word at the moment) for a wrongful death civil suit by the estate if there's even a whiff of something amiss here.

 

[ProwlingTiger]

So much is still unknown...

While I'm sure a lot of people won't want to hear this, Apple may become a target (sorry, can't think of better word at the moment) for a wrongful death civil suit by the estate if there's even a whiff of something amiss here.

Defendant would be the legal term.

Yes, it's unfortunate that legal action may be pursued against Apple, hopefully the law will come down on their side in the event of any legal action.

 

[mdlooker]

So a smash n grab will get you how many pieces of equipment in a rushed situation? Then as they're heading for their get-a-way vehicle there now comes gun fire exchange?

lol..I'm having the hardest time trying to picture how this unfolded.

I think about cops in high speed pursuit with weapons involved and once the car is stopped, at what point does fire begin? I mean really I'm glad the ex cop took action but because he saw a weapon? Did he have an expectation of the robbers to go and shoot someone once they left; what imminent threat of life existed??

Maybe he just shot at the vehicle and hit the guy in the head but why open fire on the car unless they pointed a weapon at him?

idk..I'm sure the investigation will get to the bottom of it.

 

[tkingart]

Doesn't anybody else see the bigger picture? an armed guard inside the store is a security risk for everybody in the store!!!

1. Don't these stores have a steel curtain to prevent such robberies while closed? I mean, if there have been so many "smash and grabs", wouldn't it be better in every sense to deter such actions, instead of putting an armed guard to protect some iCrap, a bunch of computers and some cash?...

2. Sooooo.... if there's a robbery while the store is open, and there are customers inside, is it now Apple's policy to protect their ***** at gunpoint - that's why an armed guard is inside - even at the risk of one customer getting shot in the gunfight?

3. And aren't these stores insured in case of robbery? And isn't this why we have police and cameras??? a gunfight for a bunch of Apple cr*p is just stupid. AND they would've caught the burglers anyway. And if they don't... not a big deal!

4. I really think the outcome was excessive - I mean, a guy shot in the head.... and he was shot inside the car, which means the security guard chased them outside the store and kept shooting. Same question - is it Apple policy to chase the robbers with bullets, jeopardizing the life of others? And again - isn't this why we have police with all the chasing gear?

5. The way I see it, after reading the whole story, the kids took their guns out when the guard took out his first and aimed at them. Who's to say that if there were customers inside the store the guard would not do the same putting everybody's life at risk? Who know's....

I think the best thing to do for Apple is to get better passive security - stop worrying that a steel curtain will make your store look ugly... A simple glass is a hell of a temptation for most kids. There will always be kids that'll do anything for one of these stupid gadgets, specially when in this society a person's self worth is ignorantly meassured by their iPossesions.... and somehow Apple advertises that way.... "if you don't have an iPhone.... bla bla bla".

And let me be clear: I don't defend the robbers... at all!.... but this is absurd. It's not like they were entering someones house. If they were professional criminals, they wouldn't be stealing iPads!!! Doesn't APPL make enough money already? do they have to put our lives at risk by placing armed guards inside, with what I see as a "rambo" attitude and a happy trigger to kill a bunch of stupid kids trying to steal some cheap gadgets?

REALLY STEVE/APPLE: TAKE THE ARMED GUARDS OUT OF THE STORE. AN IPAD IS NOT WORTH A LIFE. NOT EVEN A CRIMINAL ONE... LET ALONE A CUSTOMER'S LIFE IN CASE ANY OF US GET HIT IN THE FIRE EXCHANGE.

Cheers!

Exactly!

I just think it's pathetic when people die over gadgets. It's even more disgusting when people cheer on the death of some dumb kids in their 20's. The kids did shoot back at the Security Guard, and the moment they brandished a weapon they put their lives on the line.

Since there are no frontal wounds, 1 fatal side of head (through the rear passenger window) and one in the others backside, and no mention of bullet holes in the store, it "seems" like the exchange took place in the parking lot where the Security Guard gave chase firing at them, and just kept on shooting.

Where do we draw the line of defending, protecting, and intent to run and gun down others? What if the female in the car who had no weapons, and wasn't involved in any of the gunfire exchanges, while sitting in the back seat of the car was shot in the head? Sure she was an accomplice by simply being there, but it doesn't sound like she put the Security Guard in mortal danger, yet she could have easily be shot to death when the Security Guard gave chase firing at the vehicle. That seems reckless to me.

 

[Wehrwolf]

It's troubling that people still fail to understand that these suspects were not shot for stealing. They were shot because they threatened another human being with a deadly weapon. When they were confronted by the security guard they had several choices. Instead of simply fleeing or giving up, they chose to escalate the situation by threatening the guard with a deadly weapon. That decision dictated the outcome of the events that then unfolded. Unfortunately, someone lost their life, but the burden of that responsibility lies squarely on the suspect(s) that pointed a gun at the guard.

*edit*
Damn, ProwlingTiger beat me to it

 

[diazj3]

Defendant would be the legal term.

Yes, it's unfortunate that legal action may be pursued against Apple, hopefully the law will come down on their side in the event of any legal action.

If the guard shot them outside the store, while they were in a moving car leaving the scene as the evidence suggests, then certainly there will be charges against the guard. Once the criminals are out the crime scene and running, it becomes a police matter. No private individual is to chase and shoot them. If this guard is a former cop, he should've known this... unless, he thinks the's got special powers due to his former job, and thinks of himself as a private avenger or rouge cop.

 

[StoneyG]

What's not to celebrate? The good guys won and there is one less evil person in the world.

Wow, the 'e' word has been dropped. This guy wasn't Pol Pot, he was just some loser. SO odd to me that this kind of crap brings joy to some.

 

[mdlooker]

It's troubling that people still fail to understand that these suspects were not shot for stealing. They were shot because they threatened another human being with a deadly weapon. When they were confronted by the security guard they had several choices. Instead of simply fleeing or giving up, they chose to escalate the situation by threatening the guard with a deadly weapon. That decision dictated the outcome of the events that then unfolded. Unfortunately, someone lost their life, but the burden of that responsibility lies squarely on the suspect(s) that pointed a gun at the guard.

Is that what happened... They pointed a gun at the guard? I don't remember reading that. Maybe they did that running one direction while pointing the guns behind them.