Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Homeowner apprehends burglar with fiream and then HE gets arrested

A bystander that intervenes in a purse snatching is one thing! A by stander that intervenes in a purse snatching by pulling a weapon and starts popping off rounds to apprehend that purse snatcher is out of his mind!

Phil

Amen.

Yours is the mindset of a slave, not that of a responsible citizen of a free nation.

So it's really JUST about him firing his weapon? If he had tackled the guy coming out of window and beat him to a bloody pulp (or maybe just a 'chop to the solar plexus preceeded by a figure 4 leg lock whilst waiting for someone to summon the gendarme) you'd be fine with that?

The way I understand it anyone who does anything at all to avoid being robbed, beaten or murdered in your part of the world is wrong.

That said, a purse snatching is not a shooting offense and thus the brandishing of a weapon in such a case is a felony. However, the little old lady or the sweet young thing who is under attack could in some cases use a firearm for defense if they thought they were in serious danger. It is a case by case thing and one answer does not fit all cases.

The advisability of a warning shot is not in discussion here. What is in discussion is its status as a crime in the present context. Context is everything. While it might be a crime to step out your front door on the Fourth of July and fire rounds from your AR-15 willy nilly, it's not a crime if the purpose is reasonably directed at stopping a felon in the act, and reasonable care (considering the circumstances) was taken not to endanger innocent third parties in the process, and this regardless of whether you agree with the advisability of warning shots under any circumstances. Crime and advisability are two separate questions.

Maybe my reading comprehension sucks, but I didn't take that from the article.

In my mind, the dude just got home, saw his house in shambles as a result of a violent robbery. At that point, he is old, scared, and alone. So, he justly reaches for his gun. At that point he starts investigating his property to make sure he was safe and to see what damage may have been done outside. I don't think he went looking for trouble, but quite the opposite....

I do have my "Monday morning quaterback" issues with how he played out the whole thing, but I wasn't there, I don't know his mind, and I can't speak to his behavior as a result.

Everyone likes to wax philosophic about what they, in their superior mind, would do in a given situation. The fact is, nobody does.

Interesting how the incident has been transposed from a property crime to an extremely PERSONAL assault. Coming to the aid of a PERSON in danger is one thing. Even then the morally acceptable level of force is dependant on the nature of the assault. Property crimes by themselves do not have the standing to allow the use of what could be deadly force. You ARE fully accountable for where any projectile goes. You fire five to stop a kidnapper(quite legally and morally acceptable). Four hit him. Number 5 scores a 10 ring on Grandma a block away. Manslaughter. Recklessly causes etc,etc,etc, No friggin' warning shots!

Seems like I remember a story years ago about a CCW holder in Texas that popped a would be murderer with a 357 Mag. One of his shots went wild and killed an innocent bystander-the guy went to prison for that, IIRC.

Exactly!


Although, I have to admit that I don't like that purse snatching isn't a shooting offense. In my mind, it's protection of personal property. Though, personally, I'd let the guy go, because I'd hate to live with that shoot on my mind.

Whenever away, my neighbors and I always ask and agree to keep an eye on each others place. That given, we are not just blindly running down some unknown individual seen exiting a window, but following through on an agreement with the neighbor. I'd be tickled pink to have that gentleman across the street.

On the reckless firing. Yes, bullets can bounce (especially when fired across near level plains) and even come back in the opposite direction in some extremely rare instances. I'd lay odds though that a slug fired into soil, at anything greater than a 45 degree angle, is going to stick right there. If it did indeed stay put, endangerment should absolutely not be a issue. Any of us with just a little bit of thought, could probably stand in a crowd and figure out some way to safely discharge a firearm. Do we arrest our officers when they engage in an urban environment? The laws should read the same for everyone.


If anyone is in that vicinity, could you please keep us up on the happenings in this instance. I'd gladly donate to a defense fund if it's needed.

A few comments here lead me to believe that some would simply watch the rape of a 12 year old go down in the middle of the street and not step in. What is the legal definition of "looking for trouble" versus "coming to someones assistance?"

Sounds like maybe the perp in the original post was apprehended under illegal circumstances, perhaps we should apologize and turn him loose. Some stupid enforcers there.

I think you missed that part where the shooter's house had been burglarized. When you discover your house has been burglarized and you see a burglar coming out of your neighbor's window, it's a fairly safe assumption that it's the same guy...so it does involve you.

In Texas you can shoot in defense of property.

As far as the warning shot goes, it doesn't negate NH law on the subject but, by it's very definition it went in a safe direction because it harmed nobody and nothing.

Exactly.

Well said. Agreed.

Most likely an urban legend. According to the laws of most, if not all, states, so long as the shooting was justified, any third parties injured or killed are considered the fault of the criminal, not the justified shooter, regardless of who fired the bullet.

And that, unfortunately, is where we, as country, & the "laws" have evolved to.

Sad state of affairs to see such a devaluation of our ethics & views.............pure political correctness at its worst.

MM

Legend?
Could be, Hawk. As to the rest, I don't know, to be honest.
The point I was trying to make is that a CCW holder or whoever ought to be darn careful about where they put those bullets!

In this state the LE agencies that i've seen their SOP's, do not even allow warning shots to be fired, it's pretty standard not to. If you check those in OR. they probably don't either.

That's needless to say, but a justified shooter is held innocent regarding injuries to third parties. I believe that's the law in every state. Some states even charge the criminal who was the target of the shooting with murder if third parties are killed by the bullets fired from the justified shooter's weapon.

Where in the world a violent robery came from is beyond me....

Done with thread, and will leave it at this, I keep a loaded 44 mag handy when home, some one comes onto my property and breaks into my home. There won't be any talking, won't be any questions or trying to persuade the guy to leave... first step he takes towards me, my wife or one of my dogs the guy gets one between the eye's and their won't be any regrets...

But there is no property, not mine or not yours that is worth anyones life... you all can talk all you like!

But once the guy decides to leave and is no longer a threat to mine, my family's, or anyones life, it's done, I'm not going to chase down a crook gun in hand like some madman.

Twist the facts any way you like...

We're not in the day's of vigilantism and the hangman's noose...
You want to play cowboy and indians, have at it. Just be prepared to pay the consequences!


Phil