Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man Faces Charges For Firing Warning Shots at Gang on His Lawn
fox ^ | Tuesday, 09.07.2010 | Jennifer Peltz

Posted on 09/07/2010 8:01:18 PM PDT by Coleus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-73 last
To: Coleus
What Happens When The Cops Show Up

It's all fun and games - till the cops show up.....

51 posted on 09/07/2010 9:29:25 PM PDT by ASOC (What will you do when Mexicio becomes OUR Chechnya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

What the guy did was dumb — but I’m not sure it should be considered illegal. Oh, it may be on the books up North, but it probably shouldn’t be.

If someone was on my lawn who shouldn’t be, I’d politely ask them to leave. If they refused, I’d call the police and remain inside — with my weapons loaded and ready — until they arrived. If the trouble-makers left after the police gave them notice, so be it.

If the trouble-makers returned later, I would notify the police again, and I would tell the police that there would not be a third call — this time they’d better STAY gone and not TRESPASS on my property again (trespassing is a CRIME and CAN be prosecuted). I would then expect the Police to come and either run off the trouble-makers with assurances they would never return, or otherwise arrest them if they got smart.

If they returned again, someone would be picking up trach from my lawn. It runs in the family though. My Grandpa had to shoot a man for trespassing in his front yard, and my Dad had to put a brick thru the truck door of a guy who was joy-riding in our front yard when I was a kid. The cops got him later — after a friend did a little detective work the cops wouldn’t have bothered to do.

Depending on the police to defend your property is foolish — but so is acting rashly and tossing bullets around without clear provocation and obvious danger to life and property. Use common sense — if you’re not stupid, you’ll likely be okay — or at least make correct decisions if you’re confronted with bad situations.


52 posted on 09/07/2010 9:30:10 PM PDT by patriot preacher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
As someone with a concealed carry license, the laws regarding the use of deadly force are not based on common sense. While truly regrettable, the laws of the land are based on “laws and rule” which have little to do with justice.

If one is going to have a deadly force weapon, one had better learn the stupid laws that apply to its use.

The sad thing is that the laws on one jurisdiction may be totally different in another, so you have to know the laws in the places you live, work and travel through or you are likely going to go to jail if you have to use a firearm. Sad, but true fact.

While some places have castle doctrines and no requirement to retreat from danger if you can, other places require you to do everything beyond what a normal human being would consider reasonable before you can “fire a weapon.”

In many jurisdictions that only time you can use deadly force is when your life is in danger or you or someone is in immanent danger of serious physical injury. Unfortunately, some punk yelling that he is going to kill you and your babies, may or may not (depending on the police and DA) be considered enough of a threat that deadly force will be allowed.

Similarly, if you “fire a warning shot” shot to wound or “wing” someone you have just by definition said that your life was NOT in immediate danger, because you just confessed to having time to avoiding shooting to kill (live).

As strange as that sounds, in many many parts of the US, “warning shots” or a statement that you didn't mean to shoot the person, but the gun just went off, will land you immediately in jail!

From the DA’s perspective, deadly force wasn't required (because even though it was a gang shouting they were going to kill him and his babies they were not brandishing weapons or “attacking him”) and the homeowner escalated the confrontation by brandishing a deadly force weapon. Based on the absurd language of the law, the homeowner created a deadly force confrontation, when there wasn't one yet.

OK, I know you are thinking that the above doesn't make sense or isn't a common sense approach. You are right, it isn't, but it is the LAW. The LAW is what it is and if you own a firearm, you better learn it if you want to stay out of jail.

Conversely, if you feel that your life is really in danger, but you will go to jail, then use your firearm and tell folks you were afraid for your life.

The homeowner, would have had a better chance of staying out of jail, if he yelled that he was afraid for his life, retreated a few steps and then shot a couple dozen of the gang member. While that many not seem sensible, it is the way the law works. There is “never” a “legal” reason to fire a warning shot, there maybe moral and ethical reasons, but never a legal one.

53 posted on 09/07/2010 9:44:59 PM PDT by Robert357 (D.Rather "Hoist with his own petard!" www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223916/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

You could be right, I am just thinking this out under the influence and even then it doesn’t seem like a good idea.

But I was thinking that when someone fires a warking shot in the air it is generally more close to 90 degrees than 45 and that the bullet will eventually lose the spin and start to tumble making it have more drag than a bullet that is rotating from the spin of the barrel.

I might have been confusing this with the drop a penny from a skyscraper mind game.


54 posted on 09/07/2010 9:48:58 PM PDT by BookaT (My cat's breath smells like cat food!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: patriot preacher
If the trouble-makers returned later, I would notify the police again, and I would tell the police that there would not be a third call — this time they’d better STAY gone

I'm unsure if the police can even technically fulfill this request, especially if the trespassers are playing a game with you. It takes time for the police to show up, and it's not a crime to be on a sidewalk. It takes one second to step from your lawn to the public sidewalk. The police may have no obvious reason to arrest these individuals. Also if you join "the game" with the gang, the gang has more skills and more interest in that game than you do.

Ultimately a "one man vs. a hundred" situation has no good solution. You may have two gang members arrested, and next week receive a Molotov cocktail in the window when you are at work - a gift from the rest of the gang. They'd love that. If you think it's surrender, it's not - it's simply the fact that your army is much smaller than the other army. Per Sun Tsu, you should avoid fight in such a situation because you can't win. And that's why gangs proliferate - because they are better armies than the police and the citizens (considering laws of self-defense etc.)

Another concern is that the police don't take ultimatums. They don't care how many times you are bothered - one or a thousand. If you attack someone outside your house it doesn't matter to them how often you were baited before. Maybe the judge will take that into account, but the police deals with cold facts.

55 posted on 09/07/2010 9:59:40 PM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: patriot preacher

I can understand sitting tight inside your house if there’s one man threatening to come in. But, with a large group of men swarming the property, I can understand a homeowner wanting to keep them away from the house, instead of waiting for them to try to get inside. It seems he was caught in a situation in which, no matter what he did, he was going to have trouble.


56 posted on 09/07/2010 9:59:51 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Greysard
the police don't take ultimatums. They don't care how many times you are bothered - one or a thousand.

Actually, it seems the more often you have to call the police, the less often the police respond. At least, that has been my experience/observation, after living in several different neighborhoods.

57 posted on 09/07/2010 10:04:07 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; All

Update on the story: The family is worried about retaliation now:

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/07/uniondale-family-afraid-after-weekend-dispute/


58 posted on 09/07/2010 10:05:29 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

You must allow illegal alien MS-13 gangbangers have their way with you and your family or 0bama will personally order the DoJ to prosecute you. Please donate generously to the DNC before the bangers rob you. Thank you.


59 posted on 09/07/2010 10:14:53 PM PDT by TigersEye (Greenhouse Theory is false. Totally debunked. "GH gases" is a non-sequitur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BookaT
Mythbusters has done a test of bullets shot into the air == and you are very seriously wrong.

Your premises are wrong — unless fired exactly 90* into the air, a falling bullet retains it's spiraling motion (i.e. it will not “tumble”). Also, lead is denser than copper, and a bullet is more aerodynamic (i.e. pointy-ended) than a penny.

60 posted on 09/07/2010 10:16:39 PM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

“He starts threatening my family, my life. ‘Oh you’re dead. I’m gonna kill your family and your babies. You’re dead.’ So when he says that, 20 others guys come rushing around the corner. And so I fired four warning shots into the grass,”

Article also says that his gun was legally owned. It’s insane that this guy is getting hassled by the cops. Hope he finds peace and respect from the thugs and court system. Seems like a good guy.


61 posted on 09/07/2010 10:20:43 PM PDT by purplelobster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Tired of Taxes
But, with a large group of men swarming the property, I can understand a homeowner wanting to keep them away from the house, instead of waiting for them to try to get inside.

Why would he want to increase the defended perimeter? Quite the opposite, the defender(s) want to use natural obstacles (such as walls) to help them out.

Another view of the same: if you defend a larger area then all 20 attackers can spread out, pick their own positions and do unto you whatever they want. But if you defend a smaller area, like a house with two doors on the ground floor, those 20 attackers will have to stand in line to get inside, blocking each other from any efficient action against you, and presenting themselves to you one by one, allowing your AR-15 to cycle.

Besides, as the guy in the story is now hearing from his lawyer, shooting at a gang member within your house is very much different from the same shooting at the same guy just outside of the house. The difference is measurable in years.

62 posted on 09/07/2010 10:24:57 PM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: purplelobster

Sadly, he may have a better chance of settling things reasonably with the gangbangers. The DA will probably be looking to make an example of him to build his/her political creds.


63 posted on 09/07/2010 10:27:09 PM PDT by TigersEye (Greenhouse Theory is false. Totally debunked. "GH gases" is a non-sequitur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Greysard

I see what you mean. But, I can understand his decision made quickly in the heat of the moment, too.


64 posted on 09/07/2010 10:46:10 PM PDT by Tired of Taxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

Exactly.

One of those nice Front Sight yard signs of the torso target with a double tap to the chest and one to the cranial vault, saying, “Nothing Inside Worth Dying For” might be considered warning enough.


65 posted on 09/07/2010 11:05:06 PM PDT by dagogo redux (A whiff of primitive spirits in the air, harbingers of an impending descent into the feral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Greysard

That guy would have been much better off firing from cover.

The flank is always best,,,

The laws in Louisiana are very clear on this,,,

“Fear of loss of life.” rules all,,,

In the house/yard/car/street,,,no retreat,,,

One store owner shot a robber twice in the store and

put another round in his back outside,,,

Fell dead in front of a cop,,,

Another shot two robbers in the back while they were trying

to get away with his money...


66 posted on 09/07/2010 11:07:53 PM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: BookaT
I am sure myth busters may have to do this but I think a 7.62 round shot “in the air” would not do much more harm that taking that same bullet and throwing it as hard as you can at someone.

Must be pretty safe. Muslims do it all the time at weddings.

67 posted on 09/07/2010 11:20:12 PM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: behzinlea
“No one died. No one was hurt. They left him alone. Seems like an effective negotiation strategy to me.”

Pointless antagonizing that gets HIM arrested and has evil bastards sneering at him and threatening his family with death at a future date to be announced. As well as firing a gun in a manner that could get an innocent person three blocks away killed. Stupid covers it.

68 posted on 09/08/2010 3:05:02 AM PDT by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Google "Brittany Zimmerman"
69 posted on 09/08/2010 7:48:26 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don W

“A 12 gauge with 00 buck would be a far more effective tool.”

Not against 20 plus people.


70 posted on 09/08/2010 12:42:38 PM PDT by Bizhvywt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bizhvywt
Not against 20 plus people.

If you take out 2 or more, you've won the battle with a superior kill ratio.

71 posted on 09/08/2010 12:52:23 PM PDT by meyer (Our own government has become our enemy,...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Bizhvywt

My Mossberg holds 5 shells. The first shell goes into the ground. The next one is aimed at the guys coming towards me. If that doesn’t discourage the rest of the group, the remaining 3 shots will ensure that their number is much diminished before they get to me.

That said, gang members are by definition COWARDS, and will always scatter and run away when they are faced with a determined defense.


72 posted on 09/08/2010 8:34:54 PM PDT by Don W (I keep some folks' numbers in my 'phone just so I know NOT to answer when they call...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA
Google "Brittany Zimmerman"

 

Brittany Zimmerman

thanks for the heads up

73 posted on 09/09/2010 9:37:16 AM PDT by Coleus (Abortion, Euthanasia & FOCA - - don't Obama and the Democrats just kill ya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-73 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson