|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,959
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,959 |
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.
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. That is interesting. I guess I'd best do some more research on Idaho's laws concerning same.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand."
James Elroy Flecker
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,449
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,449 |
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.
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. That is interesting. I guess I'd best do some more research on Idaho's laws concerning same. Start with the term felony murder.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,864
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,864 |
Where in the world a violent robery came from is beyond me....
Phil Wrong choice of words on my behalf. I should have stated more clearly that it was a violent BURGLARY. The violence was evident in the shambles the inside of his home was in as a result of the violence. I can absolutely see that shaking a lone, elderly person to the core and make them fear for their life, until they have had a look around.... I can't really argue with the rest of your above statement as I'd like to think that I would act accordingly. That said, I will stick to my point that you don't have a freaking clue what you would do, until you are in that moment!
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams
Turdlike, by default.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,449
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,449 |
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.
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. That is interesting. I guess I'd best do some more research on Idaho's laws concerning same. Here's a start on the concept I'm referring to: "[T]he doctrine of self-defense is available to insulate one from criminal responsibility where his act, justifiably in self-defense, inadvertently results in the injury of an innocent bystander." (People v. Mathews (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 1018, 1024 [154 Cal.Rptr. 628]; see also People v. Curtis (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 1337, 1357 [37 Cal.Rptr.2d 304].) " Source And California isn't known for being particularly self-defense friendly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,959
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,959 |
I will take a look at that link, Hawk.
Thanks.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand."
James Elroy Flecker
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,582
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,582 |
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. I think you have framed the issue correctly there. However, without knowing the law or the facts, it is not possible to know if the shot was legal or not under the circumstances.
"Don't believe everything you see on the Internet" - Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301 |
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. Exactly. I understand that in Texas it is legal to kill someone by shooting in the back if they steal and empty soda can from your place. In my mind that is NOT a shooting offense. If someone knocks my wife down, puncher her in the face, steals her purse and runs away that is not a shooting offense. He is leaving and no longer presents a threat. Besides we are broke and her purce would be empty.  Now if someone was crawling out a window and was threatening me with harm that could be a different thing.
The first time I shot myself in the head...
Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,582
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,582 |
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. Cole, under that logic the guy who fires a round at you intending to kill you, but he misses and the bullet lodges in a wall, would not be guilty of attempted murder or aggravated assault because it went in a safe direction and nobody was harmed. It's not as cut and dried as you suggest.
"Don't believe everything you see on the Internet" - Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760 |
Geeze do any of you bother to read. He wasn't being threatend, no one was in harms way, NO ONE WAS BEING RAPED, and it wasn't his property.
Phil Greyghost, I'm curious. Your neighbor is away from home and you see a small fire outside his home but right next to it. Do you go and put it out or call the fire department? Now keep in mind.... You are not being threatend, no one was in harms way, NO ONE WAS BEING RAPED, and it isn't your property. Your "fire scenario" is different from the one that is the basis of this thread. Your legal duties, and liabilities change drastically when you go from protecting you and yours with force or a weapon, to injecting yourself in something that doesn't involve you or yours. 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. I don't think it's safe to make such assumptions when the use of deadly force could result. The article doesn't tell me what other knowledge the man had. For instance, did he know the neighbor well enough to know this wasn't any family of theirs. Yes, it's pretty suspicious to find your home burglarized, then see someone crawling out of a neighbors window, but I personally am going to need more knowledge than that to pick up a gun and go inject myself in to that situation. Maybe he had enough knowledge, I don't know, and I don't have a problem with people protecting other's property. All I'm saying is, you better be sure. Tragic errors can result from assumptions. And, for the record, I don't think the guy should have been charged for firing a warning shot. I'll leave the debate over issue of warning shots to others.
War Damn Eagle!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284 |
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 I think you're making some assumptions. I'm not a violent or bloodthirsty person and most of the people I see defending this guy aren't ime, either. Granted I know none of them face-to-face but... The robber who breaks into your home may not be "violent" either. I saw no evidence that this guy acted like a mad dog and was out to do vigilante justice or anything. Have you ever been robbed? Your first reaction is to grab a gun, if you have one left. I don't think this is for the purpose of coercion in forcing the bad guys to give your stuff back. IMO it is an instinct from someplace deep in your conciousness telling you that the person may still be around and may be dangerous to you. That you have the gun for this purpose and the person presents themselves to you makes it easy for you to prevent the robbery. There aren't very many here who would not act in the exact way I'm describing including the guy we are talking about. This is instinctual. If circumstances dictated that you end up shooting the guy, you will feel bad about it if indeed it looks like it was all over property. In some places it is even against the law to shoot that way. It shouldn't be. That's because to most guys, the whole thing is instinctual. If you don't understand this or aren't like this I don't know what to say other than I'm guessing that 90% of men are-and I mean no offense by what I'm saying. This is separate...if somebody is stealing from you they are ultimately threatening the lives of your family. IMO the reason it is so ingrained to defend your property is that back in the ancient old timey type days of yore and suchlike, if you had raised some corn to feed your family and cows and somebody took it, your family had nothing to eat. We know the end result of that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 73,096
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 73,096 |
Warning shots are a waste of perfectly good ammunition IMHO.
George Orwell was a Prophet, not a novelist. Read 1984 and then look around you!
Old cat turd!
"Some men just need killing." ~ Clay Allison.
I am too old to fight but I can still pull a trigger. ~ Me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284 |
We're in agreement as to your last two paragraphs. I think you're just as guilty of speculation as I am in this particular case. I'm just coming down on the side of the good guy and also assuming him innocent in regards to the info presented thus far-which he is sans the law about shooting in town. My take is that he very well could have grabbed the gun up when he saw the house was gone through in case the burglar was yet on the premises. Following the trail, so to speak, he spies the burglar coming out of his neighbor's window. I think that this is not only reasonable but the most reasonable explanation and I'll hazard a guess that most of us here would do similarly to what he did in the same situation. I'll include you in that group.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 54,284 |
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. Cole, under that logic the guy who fires a round at you intending to kill you, but he misses and the bullet lodges in a wall, would not be guilty of attempted murder or aggravated assault because it went in a safe direction and nobody was harmed. It's not as cut and dried as you suggest. lol Cheyenne, dude, you're an attorney and know better than to foment such an argument. No offense intended, but... Guilt in such a case as the first one you mention, is predicated on the intent of the shooter. First, he is the bad guy because he's attempting to murder me because I caught him thieving-at least that's how I take your scenario. Second, his guilt is predicated on his intent, not where his bullet went. In the scenario in the OP, the guy is the good guy. He demonstrates his intent is not to kill the burglar and his bullet evidently did no harm. Therefore he is only guilty of breaking a law which the spirit of, is to prevent accidental injuries and property damage, of which ostensibly, none occurred.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,582
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,582 |
Just as intent can cause trouble notwithstanding poor execution of an act, sometimes, poor execution of an act can get you in trouble notwithstanding lack of intent. And, sometimes the law punishes an act even if no bad result occurs, because the legislature thinks people just shouldn't be doing that. Overlay on top of that the rules concerning justification notwithstanding the technical occurrence of a crime, and you have a very fact intensive inquiry.
Last edited by Cheyenne; 02/22/12.
"Don't believe everything you see on the Internet" - Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,786
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,786 |
In the scenario in the OP, the guy is the good guy. He demonstrates his intent is not to kill the burglar and his bullet evidently did no harm. Therefore he is only guilty of breaking a law which the spirit of, is to prevent accidental injuries and property damage, of which ostensibly, none occurred. I just got back from working out at the PD. Everybody is still up in arms about this. I just got done saying that the only thing that could change my mind on this case is the point of impact of that round. We "know" (strong word based on newspapers) that the round was fried into the ground. What I don't know is where that piece of real estate was (at a witnesses feet?) or where it went after. I know nobody was injured and I surmise (due to no mention) that there was no property damage. Still, I'd like to know where the round went. George
Last edited by NH K9; 02/22/12.
�Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.�
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,510
Campfire Tracker
|
|
OP
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,510 |
Everybody is still up in arms about this. That's encouraging and hopefully that will translate into something meaningful on behalf of the accused.
NRA Lifer
"It is curious that physical courage should be so common in the world and moral courage so rare." - Mark Twain
"Everybody has principles... until they are an inconvenience." - Me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,786
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,786 |
I'm thinking so......
If not, it's an election year.
George
FWIW, I not only respect CA Velardi as a professional but also feel he's a damn good person. You're not going to catch me saying that about a lot of lawyers.
Last edited by NH K9; 02/22/12. Reason: Addition
�Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.�
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760 |
We're in agreement as to your last two paragraphs. I think you're just as guilty of speculation as I am in this particular case. I'm just coming down on the side of the good guy and also assuming him innocent in regards to the info presented thus far-which he is sans the law about shooting in town. My take is that he very well could have grabbed the gun up when he saw the house was gone through in case the burglar was yet on the premises. Following the trail, so to speak, he spies the burglar coming out of his neighbor's window. I think that this is not only reasonable but the most reasonable explanation and I'll hazard a guess that most of us here would do similarly to what he did in the same situation. I'll include you in that group. We pretty well agree. And I said I agree the circumstances that we do know about, yes, it was a reasonable assumption. I'm simply saying in my mind, before I inject myself in to something that could end up resulting in the use of deadly force, I want it to be on more than a "reasonable assumption". That's just me. As to the charge against the old guy, I don't get it. Like someone else said, there may be more to this than has been reported.
War Damn Eagle!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,289
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,289 |
So, endless arguements and speculation aside, has anyone heard anything today on the status of this case?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,786
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,786 |
Per today's paper, the case has gone to the CA's office for review.
George
�Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.�
|
|
|
|
|
256 members (160user, 1beaver_shooter, 1OntarioJim, 12344mag, 300jimmy, 2UP, 26 invisible),
1,738
guests, and
903
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,600
Posts18,454,610
Members73,908
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/gallery/80/medium/45390.png)