Well, he didn't (and I don't) know that he wasn't armed. I do know that he never brandished a weapon in the camera's view (but again, this doesn't mean he wasn't armed).How does he know what's going to happen? How does he know the guy isn't armed? I say you rob a store at gun point YOU GET SHOT!
I thought about that, also. I concluded that turning your back on an armed victim does not give you some sort of magical immunity. The first round doesn't matter. All that mattered was that the victim lived.while I support the man's right to defend himself against an armed attacker, I must say watching that video makes me wonder about a few things...
The accomplice (the one without a gun) was shot in the back, while attempting to flee. IMO, he is no longer a threat (not to mention that he was never armed, or if he was, never drew a weapon on the viewing area of the tape).
Is shooting someone in the back legal? I can't imagine that it is.
Also, I have to wonder where the first round ended up that the jeweler fired (the one that shattered the glass door).