Hardshell tactical shooting

Gunshop Owner Facing Charges After Shooting Two Brothers In Parking Lot — There’s A Lot More To This Story Than Meets The Eye


LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY — A gun shop owner appeared in court recently to hear when the trial date would be for his indictment on one count of murder and another count of assault with a deadly weapon.

This follows a tragic day on the 8th of July when two brothers stood outside of Hardshell Tactical and got into an altercation with a firearm in the mix.  According to the original WAVE 3 article, one of the brothers reportedly had a gun pressed against his brother’s neck.  The brother tried to wrestle control away when the store owner came out and shot both of them.  One of the brothers died at the scene and the other was critically injured but recovered.

Collin Pearson, cousin to the two brothers, said Kyle Pearson had previously suffered from drug addiction in the past and he believed Cameron was trying to retrieve the gun from Kyle’s possession.  According to the cousin, whom was interviewed by WAVE 3, he believed Kyle’s brother attempted to retrieve his gun from Kyle.  The cousin believed Kyle may have been suicidal at the time.

via WAVE 3

Bryon Fenoglio, who works at a nearby business, witnessed the moments leading up to the shooting.

“[Kyle] took the gun, shot two times in the ground. Next thing I know, he walked back, and held the gun to [Cameron’s] neck,” he said.

The storeowner, William Albright, saw the altercation take place outside his store and responded by aiming his firearm at the two brothers and ordering them to cease and desist.  Neither brother did and Albright allegedly shot both of them.

Cameron Pearson was pronounced dead on the scene and Kyle suffered grievous wounds but made a full recovery.


According to WDRB 41, Albright appeared at the court date to hear when the trial would take place.  There, Kyle and his mother and father all voiced their concerns that Albright didn’t do enough before opening fire.

via WDRB 41

“My question is, he’s been trained in the military. I was in the military,” said Stephanie Pearson [mother], “and we’re trained in first aid, and he did nothing to help my sons. My sons were bleeding out. My son died right there. He did nothing.”

Albright appeared relatively unemotional throughout the trial proceedings and has given full cooperation to investigators throughout this process.  His attorney believes Albright acted in good faith of Kentucky’s Castle Doctrine, which allows a business owner in his place of business to use deadly force in certain situations.

The trial date is set for November 7th, at which time jurors will determine if Albright’s actions constituted self-defense.

One of the details that needs to be pointed out is that Albright saw two men fighting with a loaded gun — one of whom has already been shown to have suffered from drug addiction and mental health issues.  Rounds had already been discharged.  These brothers, knowingly or unknowingly, endangered the lives of everyone around them by getting into a physical altercation with a loaded firearm present in the mix.

Was Albright right to put an end to a potentially fatal encounter?  What if a bystander or himself had been errantly shot, injured, or killed because these brothers couldn’t fix themselves without resorting to gunfire and fists?

What’s your take?  Tell us in the comments section below.

Categories: General, News
About James England | View all posts by James England

James England is a Marine Corps veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and has served as a defense contractor in Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. His daily concealed carry…

James England is a Marine Corps veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom and has served as a defense contractor in Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. His daily concealed carry handgun is a Glock 36 in a Lenwood Holsters Specter IWB or his CZ-75D PCR in an Alien Gear MOD holster.

Posts – Below Author – Small Square 1 (150×150)Advertisement
Posts – Below Author – Small Square 2 (150×150)Advertisement
Posts – Below Author – Small Square 3 (150×150)Advertisement
Posts – Below Author – Small Square 4 (150×150)Advertisement
  • Sandydog

    Mr. Albright erred seriously in acting as he did; If he claims to have acted to remove a possible threat to non-proximate persons, hypothetical 3rd-party individuals not IMMEDIATELY threatened, by shooting BOTH men, he was wrong–hypotheticals don’t count in self-defense or in acting to save a 3rd party. If he had only shot the drug-addled brother Kyle to prevent the death of the 3rd-party OTHER brother, Cameron, then he might have been justified in stopping an IMMEDIATE and obvious threat to that 3rd party. Shooting Cameron on the off-chance that THAT brother might at some later point pose a threat, which could only be subjective on his part, was again acting on the hypothetical, not factual and proximate, threat.
    I think that he should be held accountable for the Manslaughter of Cameron, who should be considered the ‘victim’ of the assault by Kyle and was not an obvious aggressor or proximate threat; He should be exonerated for the assault on Kyle, who substantively was the aggressor, on the factual basis that Kyle was holding a firearm to the neck of Cameron and posed an immediate threat.

  • Justin Richardson

    Also I would have liked to see him attempt to give first aid to maybe save the targets after shooting them. Shoot to stop the threat not to kill. I can see why he felt threatened but I wouldn’t have handled it like this.

  • Brian

    It wasn’t Albrights place to stop this problem. However, if the police had asked the two men to stop and they did not the results would likely have been the same. Personally I think Albright should be charged for a crime, but I’m not sure murder is the correct charge.

  • Kyle Guthrie

    Not guilty, however the civil may be a killer.