Austin Police Department officers arrested three suspects, all under the age of 18, in connection with a series of shootings, stolen vehicles, and other violent crimes that unfolded across Austin, Texas, and nearby Manor on May 16 and May 17. According to court records obtained by CBS Austin, the suspects allegedly stole a 9mm Glock pistol from Central Texas Gun Works, a high-profile gun store in Austin, hours before carrying out the 12 shootings, which injured four people, struck homes and vehicles, and damaged fire department property.

The store’s owner, Michael Cargill — a well-known gun rights advocate and the plaintiff behind the Supreme Court’s landmark Garland v. Cargill decision that struck down the federal bump stock ban — denies that the pistol stolen from his store was used in the shootings, though police say they recovered 9mm casings from the crime scenes.

Regardless, the theft draws attention to Central Texas Gun Works’ security measures, as Cargill himself admitted that one of the shooting spree suspects had attempted to rob the store multiple times in recent months, as discussed below.

Thefts from Central Texas Gun Works

In public statements following the shootings, Cargill repeatedly blamed local prosecutors for releasing the juvenile suspects after an earlier gun theft from his store in January. But his own comments also reveal security failures that allowed the same suspects who had tried to steal firearms at Central Texas Gun Works multiple times before escaping with one.

According to Cargill, one of the shooting spree suspects had attempted to steal guns from Central Texas Gun Works on four previous occasions, including most recently in January, when he asked to examine a gun and then ran out of the store with it. Cargill said he personally chased the suspect onto a city bus, stopped the bus from leaving, and had the driver lock the doors until police arrived. After cornering the suspect on the crowded bus, Cargill alleges that he told the teen, “If you pull out this gun on the back of this bus, you better think twice about what you’re doing. Because if you do, we will both die on this bus before I let you off this bus.”

Cargill lamented that Texas state law only allows a person to use deadly force against a person stealing a firearm at night, but not during the day.

Despite prior theft attempts, Cargill also acknowledged to reporters that customers are not required to show identification before handling firearms inside the store. Cargill stated that he and his employees only check a person’s ID “once they’re purchasing a firearm.” When answering questions from reporters, Cargill said that if someone asked to look at a gun, they wouldn’t have to show ID — at least “not initially.” In other words, according to Cargill, individuals could walk into the store, request a firearm, and physically handle it before any identity verification occurred.

Even after the same suspect had allegedly targeted the store multiple times, no additional safeguards appeared to be in place to prevent someone from simply grabbing a firearm and fleeing the building. During another interview, Cargill said the suspect walked in “at the perfect time” when Cargill was teaching a class and another employee was “doing something” and “ask[ed] to look at a firearm,” then “boom, dart[ed] out the front door.”

minimal security requirements

The incident highlights broader concerns about gun dealer security practices and the lack of meaningful federal requirements governing how guns are displayed, handled, or secured inside retail gun stores, despite thousands of firearms being lost or stolen from dealers every year. Unlike pharmacies, jewelry stores, dispensaries, or even some electronics retailers — businesses that often employ controlled-entry systems, tethered merchandise, locked displays, or mandatory identification procedures for potential customers — gun dealers face relatively limited federal security requirements despite selling lethal weapons.

For its part, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the gun industry’s trade association, lobbies against store security requirements, arguing that they are too “costly” and “burdensome” for dealers.

Cargill’s own statements suggest his store relied heavily on reactive measures, such as surveillance cameras and armed pursuit after thefts occurred, rather than preventative barriers designed to stop unauthorized individuals from physically obtaining firearms in the first place. Instead of addressing the security failures that made his gun store an easy target, Cargill argued that the Texas legislature needs to loosen gun laws to allow gun store owners “to use deadly force for theft of a firearm during the daytime. We would have no problem putting them on the escalator and sending them to Jesus.”

Following media reports linking the stolen firearm to Central Texas Gun Works, Cargill also threatened legal action against journalists and local news outlets that reported the gun allegedly used in the shootings came from his store. In a post on X, Cargill wrote that his attorneys were “preparing paperwork to go after every single person and media outlet” that reported the connection, calling the coverage “#Defamation.” The post included an image styled after a movie poster with Cargill standing near his store and the words “OWNER. LEADER. PROTECTOR.”

Cargill’s comments reflect a broader pattern within the firearms industry: When guns are stolen and later used in crimes, responsibility is often placed on prosecutors, courts, or the individuals who pulled the trigger, but far less attention is paid to the security failures that allowed firearms to leave retail stores in the first place.