Three armed robbers (above) stormed into a store in the 7400 block of North Western Street in Chicago Sunday. One employee, with a valid Illinois concealed carry license, drew his equalizer and dispensed some ballistic deterrence toward the offending trio. Two of the three bad guys sprung leaks. All of the offenders made a hasty retreat, leaving a trail of blood that came in handy for police to follow.
Chicago PD nabbed all three. Two of the three perps have been charged with armed robbery with bail set at $900,000. Bail for the third, Simpkin-McDonald, is $250,000. Not only did the three pick the wrong shop, they picked the wrong judge for arraignment. No electronic home monitoring for them…they’ll be cooling their heals in the Cook County lockup. Talk about bad luck for the bad guys.
The Chicago Sun-Times has more:
Three men have been charged after two of them were shot by the employee of the store they tried to rob Sunday night in West Rogers Park, according to Chicago Police.
Stephon Kinchen, 18; Anthony Simpkins-McDonald, 21; and Neil Thomas, 24, each face two felony counts of attempted robbery armed with a firearm, police said.
About 9:45 p.m., they tried to hold up the store in the 7400 block of North Western when a male employee with a valid concealed carry license opened fire, hitting two of them before they ran away, police said. They were arrested nearby.
Not bad shooting against three bad guys.
Thomas shot in the shoulder and treated at Illinois Masonic Medical Center, and Kinchen was taken to Swedish Covenant Hospital with a graze wound to the forearm. Their conditions were stabilized, police said. Simpkins-McDonald was not injured.
No mention of the bad guys firing shots. Could it be they thought they’d pull an armed robbery with airsoft guns? It’s still valid self-defense on the part of the store owner, even if the three were carrying toy guns. Either way, hats off to the employee with the concealed carry license. Bravo, sir. You’ve earned our Defensive Gun Use of the Day!
Multiply that by 50,000 CCW’s and Chicago will drain the swamp within a year.
50,000 licenses in Crook County (which seems about right, according to stats I have seen) represents approximately 0.9% of the population. I think it’ll take quite a few more to drain the swamp.
However, that 0.9% figure is a dramatic rise from three years ago, when it was 0.0%. And thankfully, it’s about 0.9% higher than Los Angeles, New York or pretty much any major city on the northeast or west coast.
Perhaps a few more stories like this will inspire others to bend over backwards, fork over hundreds of dollars and kiss the government’s ass for the “privilege” of carrying a defensive handgun.
Read somewhere 85% of murders in Chicago can be traced to a population of 185K. Place 50K ccw’s in these areas, percentage jump is 27% which is the standard for controlling the population. Exception being citizen doing the controlling not the government. The idea a criminal would have a 30% chance of getting shot by his victim would be a deterrent.
Since Cook County could not issue that many ccw’s, switching to consitutional carry would be the single most effective crime prevention program and practically cost the city nothing.
I only wonder what the % growth rate of the REAL deplorables, is it enough “drain the swamp” or just “one finger in a leaky dike?” but it certainly would help, if it weren’t CHI, or NYC, or LA, or (insert any progressive locale here).
It will only have an effect if a) people actually kill the offenders or b) the offenders get caught and do real time.
So… they tried to knock off a laundry/dry cleaner? Where did that picture come from? It’s not in the Sun-Times story.
Is that laundry on their route between the library and the church where they were headed to choir rehearsal?
that cleaners is the north east corner @ jarvis st., across western (east), and about a half block south from basil liquors, where the attempt occurred.
the owners are iraqi’s and their clientele is of the mad dog, gin and squirt, hennesy or st. ides variety. there is a “phat phades” community center and barber shop across the street from the liquor store, and lots of condo quality section eight housing new to the area as the projects are being razed.
i don’t think the shopkeeper needed a ccw to defend his store, but either way, i’ve been over to shake his hand. he lives a fairly dangerous existence at work.
a few of us are privy to the fact that he keeps half pints in a small freezer near the counter.
I’m not familiar with the lingo, what’s the “phat phades” community center?
chicago public school clever for phat (acronym for “pretty hot and tempting”) fades (a fade being a glorified crew cut with flames and shit). many of these barber shops serve as neighborhood jump off points for pre evening party festivities. often times the activities go on well past closing. they’ve been shuttered on a number of occassions.
some of my friends can be found at their local “barber” every friday night before clubbing. and in church every sunday morning. which is undoubtedly where these three were heading, after picking up some supplies…
BTW it’s Western AVENUE. I do business at Direct Auction a scant 2 blocks away. But other than that bravo. Yes- vastly increasing CC in Chiraq would go a long way in impacting the horrific violence of the city. It’s pricey and there’s so many places you can’t carry but in Illinois it’s the cost you pay. And I’ve noticed the lamestream media is mostly positive about DGU(even if they get fundamental facts wrong)…
my pbr and chicken wings offer still stands.
FYI it’s Western Avenue not Street. I grew up in the area when it was a good neighborhood.
And Western AVENUE goes many miles south…
and north, as asbury… 27.38 miles uninterrupted. and we’ll ride most of it sunday for the toy parade. in the snow?
I lived at 1412 W. JArvin when I was a kid. A book called “Hunger and Thirst” written by a high school classmate ends on Jarvis beach in the winter.
i admired our latest super moon from jarvis beach. i go down there often.
The value of CCW in a “shall issue” State* [or Open Carry in a State that allows people to actually “bear” Arms, as per the Second Amendment] is clearly illustrated in this story. It would be interesting to know what these would-be robbers were using, a real firearm or facsimile thereof, when they entered the Store counting on no effective resistance. It would be priceless to know what went through their minds when the CCW holder drew and fired upon them.
*Illinois is now a “shall issue” State:
https://www.isba.org/ibj/2013/12/thenewillinoisconcealedcarrylaw
LEO objections and the Concealed Carry Licensing Review Board make it subjective “shall-issue.”
Bummer!!
While your point is well taken, you won’t run into an LEO objection if you haven’t had prior contact with your local police. The opportunity for abuse by LEO objectors exists, but for the vast majority of us it’s “shall issue,” plain and simple.
Does Kinchen now enter the “child shot by handgun” category? Or at least “teenager?”
Taxpayers will provide medical care for these two, and room and board for their 2 year jail stints.
Yep-“a child impacted by gun violence”LOL
Yes Yes and Yes, ALL are under 26 which Barry has defined as children.
“It’s still valid self-defense on the part of the store owner, even if the three were carrying toy guns.”
It still might have been valid self-defense on the part of the store owner, even if the three were not carrying real or toy guns.” There, FIFY.
Legal/moral use of deadly force to defend oneself is justified by a totality comprised of many factors concerning the threat: Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy, and Preclusion. A threat does not have to be “armed” to be deadly. The failure to understand this is one of the most serious misconceptions endlessly repeated by our dumbass media. To wit, “the po-po shot an unarmed suspect.” Major, deep-voiced emphasis on the “unarmed.”
“It’s still valid self-defense on the part of the store owner, even if the three were carrying toy guns.”
It still might have been valid self-defense on the part of the store owner, even if the three were not carrying real or toy guns.” There, FIFY.
Legal/moral use of deadly force to defend oneself is justified by a totality comprised of many factors concerning the threat: Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy, and Preclusion. A threat does not have to be “armed” to be deadly. The failure to understand this is one of the most serious misconceptions endlessly repeated by our dumbass media. To wit, “the po-po shot an unarmed suspect.” Major, deep-voiced emphasis on the “unarmed.”
Now let’s hope that the prosecutors, judge & jury do their job by convicting the three crims and sentencing them to something meaningful. From what I’ve seen from the Chicago justice system, they’ll plead armed robbery down to some sort of misdemeanor and will be back on the streets in no time.
Looks like that one in the middle is already dead,.. Oh Well.
Stephon, Anthony and Neil? Their mothers showed very little originality in the naming of the three vermin.
So you want Dajuan,Marquise and Buckwheat? LOL
Comments are closed.