Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-22-2012, 07:59 PM
 
3,083 posts, read 3,999,983 times
Reputation: 2358

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee View Post

As I said before, the waring shot, I disagree with....he should not have done it....
So why are you still arguing the point? The individual had noble intent; detain the burglar and hold him until the police arrived. To his credit he got that done.

Sadly, he utterly failed to adhere to the laws regarding the use of a firearm. He foolishly fired an unneeded warning shot. Additionally there was no threat to anyone's life, no matter how liberally you attempt to argue the circumstances.

No matter how noble his intentions, the would be Good Samaritan acted in a manner that illustrated his total ignorance of local laws and showed disregard for the safety of bystanders and non-participants. He was arrested for his foolishness in firing a warning shot, not the nobility of his intentions.

Anyone with a modicum of training in the defensive use of firearms and the legal repercussions thereof should be able to see that despite his good intent the individual in question violated well established laws regarding the discharge of a firearm and in so doing made himself subject to arrest. At the bare minimum (depending on local laws) he negligently discharged a firearm, willfully endangered the public, and depending upon the disposition of the D.A. engaged in assault with a deadly weapon.

No one in this thread (aside from the trolling liberal idiots) is defending the actions of the burglar while condemning the actions of the would be defender. The fact remains he (the would be defender) screwed up. He's accountable for his failure to understand and interpret the law.

I started carrying a gun in 1979 and have been doing so ever since, both with and without a badge in my possession. At no time in all those years and despite having been involved in several shootings have I ever felt the need to fire a warning shot. If you're going to carry or employ a firearm it is incumbent upon you to know the laws regarding the use of the firearm.

I won't claim to have read every post in this thread but based upon what I have read there are a number of people that are in dire need of gaining a working understanding of laws regarding the employment of a firearm. Judging from a number of the posts no small amount of people have acquired their "knowledge" from TV and movies. They'd do well to save themselves a world of future grief and better educate themselves on the law while taking the time to get good training.

The level of ignorance displayed in this thread is both surprising and disturbing. A number of the more boisterous posters have done a fine job of playing right into the hands of the anti-gun crowd. Foolish remarks like "shoot to kill" do nothing to improve our image.

Here's a tip for the would be Rambo crowd that seems to have been drawn to this thread like flies to crap. You never "shoot to kill", you shoot to stop. Try using the "I shot to kill" line in court and get back to us on how that worked out for you. Use only the amount of force necessary to negate the threat to life or safety. Aim for the center of mass, it's the easiest target to hit and the most likely to stop the bullet (you're responsible for what the bullet does to innocent bystanders once you decide to fire it, even in a Castle Doctrine state like Texas).

Again, based on the posts in this thread, it's painfully obvious an awful lot of posters are in serious need of training and education on the laws regarding the use of deadly force. A couple hundred dollars spent on training will save thousands of dollars in legal expenses down the road.

Last edited by outbacknv; 02-22-2012 at 08:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-22-2012, 08:52 PM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,139 posts, read 22,734,953 times
Reputation: 14116
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
And has all his weapons seized by the police. I guess he should have just handed the burgler his gun so as not to upset him. Can't have any bullying at robbery scenes anymore as somebody might get upset. What kind of complete insanity has taken over this country???

"Dennis Fleming, 61, of Farmington, was arrested for reckless conduct after the Saturday incident at his 19th century farmhouse. The single grandfather had returned home to find that his home had been burglarized and spotted Joseph Hebert, 27, climbing out of a window at a neighbor's home. Fleming said he yelled "Freeze!" before firing his gun into the ground, then held Hebert at gunpoint until police arrived.

"I didn't think I could handle this guy physically, so I fired into the ground," Fleming told FoxNews.com. "He stopped. He knew I was serious. I was angry … and I was worried that this guy was going to come after me."
No one was injured in the incident, but when the police arrived, they made two arrests. Hebert was charged with two counts of burglary and drug possession. He faces up to seven years in prison if convicted. Fleming, meanwhile, is scheduled to be arraigned March 20 on a charge of reckless conduct, which could potentially land him a sentence similar to the one Hebert faces."

Read more: New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News
Let this be a lesson. If you pull the trigger, do it with intent to kill the crook. Cops don't fire "warning shots" either.

<edit> I guess I should add: "...or don't pull the trigger". That trigger should only be pulled to protect human life from imminent serious injury and/or death... NOT property.

Last edited by Chango; 02-22-2012 at 09:32 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 08:53 PM
 
11,531 posts, read 10,261,277 times
Reputation: 3580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Let this be a lesson. If you pull the trigger, do it with intent to kill the crook. Cops don't fire "warning shots" either.
some people don't respect guns or the law
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 08:54 PM
 
3,083 posts, read 3,999,983 times
Reputation: 2358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Let this be a lesson. If you pull the trigger, do it with intent to kill the crook. Cops don't fire "warning shots" either.
Nor do they fire with intent to kill. There are reasons the term shoot to stop is pounded into your head in the academy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 09:02 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 1,166,253 times
Reputation: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by outbacknv View Post
So why are you still arguing the point? The individual had noble intent; detain the burglar and hold him until the police arrived. To his credit he got that done.

Sadly, he utterly failed to adhere to the laws regarding the use of a firearm. He foolishly fired an unneeded warning shot. Additionally there was no threat to anyone's life, no matter how liberally you attempt to argue the circumstances.

No matter how noble his intentions, the would be Good Samaritan acted in a manner that illustrated his total ignorance of local laws and showed disregard for the safety of bystanders and non-participants. He was arrested for his foolishness in firing a warning shot, not the nobility of his intentions.

Anyone with a modicum of training in the defensive use of firearms and the legal repercussions thereof should be able to see that despite his good intent the individual in question violated well established laws regarding the discharge of a firearm and in so doing made himself subject to arrest. At the bare minimum (depending on local laws) he negligently discharged a firearm, willfully endangered the public, and depending upon the disposition of the D.A. engaged in assault with a deadly weapon.

No one in this thread (aside from the trolling liberal idiots) is defending the actions of the burglar while condemning the actions of the would be defender. The fact remains he (the would be defender) screwed up. He's accountable for his failure to understand and interpret the law.

I started carrying a gun in 1979 and have been doing so ever since, both with and without a badge in my possession. At no time in all those years and despite having been involved in several shootings have I ever felt the need to fire a warning shot. If you're going to carry or employ a firearm it is incumbent upon you to know the laws regarding the use of the firearm.

I won't claim to have read every post in this thread but based upon what I have read there are a number of people that are in dire need of gaining a working understanding of laws regarding the employment of a firearm. Judging from a number of the posts no small amount of people have acquired their "knowledge" from TV and movies. They'd do well to save themselves a world of future grief and better educate themselves on the law while taking the time to get good training.

The level of ignorance displayed in this thread is both surprising and disturbing. A number of the more boisterous posters have done a fine job of playing right into the hands of the anti-gun crowd. Foolish remarks like "shoot to kill" do nothing to improve our image.

Here's a tip for the would be Rambo crowd that seems to have been drawn to this thread like flies to crap. You never "shoot to kill", you shoot to stop. Try using the "I shot to kill" line in court and get back to us on how that worked out for you. Use only the amount of force necessary to negate the threat to life or safety. Aim for the center of mass, it's the easiest target to hit and the most likely to stop the bullet (you're responsible for what the bullet does to innocent bystanders once you decide to fire it, even in a Castle Doctrine state like Texas).

Again, based on the posts in this thread, it's painfully obvious an awful lot of posters are in serious need of training and education on the laws regarding the use of deadly force. A couple hundred dollars spent on training will save thousands of dollars in legal expenses down the road.
So what exactly do you call a large caliber handgun fired at center mass...errrrr the heart? You can shoot to wound and have the b*stard live to file a law suit if you wish! I want him "down" and dead if it comes to that. Otherwise I'll leave my weapon in my GD holster, thank you!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 09:07 PM
 
2,312 posts, read 3,653,365 times
Reputation: 1606
Always shoot to kill. Dead men dont talk. That way the police get your side of the story
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 09:08 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 1,166,253 times
Reputation: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chango View Post
Let this be a lesson. If you pull the trigger, do it with intent to kill the crook. Cops don't fire "warning shots" either.
Why? Because if you don't HAVE to kill him...there are Tasers and pepper spray to "stop" him! Right buddy!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 09:24 PM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,139 posts, read 22,734,953 times
Reputation: 14116
Quote:
Originally Posted by outbacknv View Post
Nor do they fire with intent to kill. There are reasons the term shoot to stop is pounded into your head in the academy.
B.S.

Look up the "Force Continuum" and you'll see firearms rank ONLY in the "Deadly Force" category. There is no such thing as "shoot to stop but not kill" LEO training.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 09:24 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 1,166,253 times
Reputation: 341
Advanced training and tactics, 200 rounds a week practice, and 100% positive...he won't make it! I use deadly force accordingly. YMMV
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2012, 09:25 PM
 
3,083 posts, read 3,999,983 times
Reputation: 2358
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamTM View Post
So what exactly do you call a large caliber handgun fired at center mass...errrrr the heart? You can shoot to wound and have the b*stard live to file a law suit if you wish! I want him "down" and dead if it comes to that. Otherwise I'll leave my weapon in my GD holster, thank you!
You obviously entirely missed my point. As an aside, check your A&P, the heart isn't center mass. Additionally, target practice does not equate to training. Had you availed yourself of training you would not be making the same argument.

I'd thank you for allowing your ego to give the anti-gun crowd more ammo to use against us but the thanks would not be genuine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top