There are 4 things going on in this case.
The perpetrator knew that you should not commit robbery but did it anyway.
He did not have a permit to carry a weapon and therefore used a knife.
His body is shot to pieces.
A judge would never give such a punishment for a robbery.
The ethical question that arises is:
Is it ethical to carry beer while shooting (should it have been soda)?
This indicates that a robber in America is basically a walking target that you can shoot to your heart's content as long as there is no beverage involved.
Is the shooter is really a hero?
Or someone who has wanted to shoot a person for a long time and saw his chance?
Maby it is good to review the law.
And also knit a bravery clause into it.
Becource now the shooter is someone who finds his baverage more important, than shooting the robber efficiently (with two hands)
The leg would have been enough, and if you wanted to live it up you would have shot him in the knee.
Seven shots where including 1 in the back and 1 in the face, you don't want to take someone out but kill and then have a nice beer?
As a judge, I wouldn't think so.