What NOT to do....

Obviously he has seen Beverly Hills Cop one too many times.

Criminy. Please God, tell me this was *not* a CWP holder...

I can't stand theives either, but I sure wouldn't shoot at one who was not a danger to me. At least not with a gun. In this case, shooting with a cell phone camera would have got him good samaritan status instead of soon-to-be-felon.

We had a stupid one here too. CCW holder saw purse snatch and followed BG in car shooting at him the whole time. It's the idiots which endanger our gun rights more than the famous accidents and suicides. There are 2 or 3 CCW's walking around here who make me nervious just being around them. SCARY

Oh .... bad, bad, bad ...

sidheshooter said:

Criminy. Please God, tell me this was *not* a CWP holder...

Click to expand...

Not any more...

It should be generously evident that this is indeed 'what not to do.'

Do we really need to run threads on something this elementary here? Is there anyone here who does think shooting at an otherwise nonthreatening, fleeing cell phone thief on a public street is a good idea??

I'm asking seriously...

lpl

ETA: There's a thread on this running in General also. Or at least there was...
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=525121

I think it's good to be aware of cases like this, if only to be in a position to be the vocal opposition.

I don't think that the S&T set needs any lessons here, but more information is always better than less in the culture wars; we should therefore stay appraised whenever a CCWer screws the pooch royally. Forewarned and forearmed and all that.

JMO.

Don't rush to judgement...



It might have been his ex-wife!

A women about two streets over was followed home at night. She pushed the button on her garage door closer and went into the house, but did not lock the door from the garage to the kitchen. She set her purse on the kitchen counter and went to another part of the house.

The thieves went under the closing garage door and entered the home. The women returned to see men in her house. She screamed for her husband and he ran with his pistol, following them out of the house on to the street where he began firing his pistol at two shadowy figures running down the street far away.

When the police arrived, the husband and wife explained what had happened. The police said "don't tell me that" when he got to the part about shooting at the fleeing thieves down the street. So he repeated the story for the officers leaving out the part where he shot his gun multiple times. We do not know where the bullets ended up, but we assume they ended up in the side of someones house.

In Texas you are permitted to use lethal force at night to prevent a crime. But it is also illegal to discharge a firearm inside the City limits.

Many in the neighborhood were and are not very happy with him and his gun happy ways. He violated two rules, know your target and know what is beyond your target. He really did not 100% for sure know the two running figures were the thieves and he didnt have a clue what was beyond where he was aiming his pistol.

I just viewed a television interview with this person. Not only is he wrong, but arrogantly so, he is even flying the flag upside-down in protest.

Do we really need to run threads on something this elementary here? Is there anyone here who does think shooting at an otherwise nonthreatening, fleeing cell phone thief on a public street is a good idea??

Click to expand...

Since the media will cover his mis-deeds while generally ignoring legal CHL usage I would say yes (not to shooting, but recognizing what is going on here).

Many people, anti and undecided come to this site for information. If we can't show that this character isn't representative of CHL's, then they have only the media's view to go on.

(BTW S&T isn't the best forum for this issue, but the Gen Discussion thread is already shut down).

SpamHandler,

It was an honest question.

I have long held that S&T was essentially a one-room schoolhouse for education in self defense topics, attempting to offer something of value to beginners in the subject as well as nationally known trainers (what few of them still frequent open fora like this one).

Apparently we need to add kindergarten as well... if that's where some fraction of the membership is in their learning process, then that's where we need to begin. People don't know what they don't know, and if they genuinely wish to learn, we will help them as best we can. Simple enough...

And understand- I AM NOT making fun of anyone here. I had assumed that the legal and moral prohibitions about shooting at a fleeing nonviolent unarmed property thief in a public street were generally understood sufficiently that treatment of such issues was not necessary here in S&T. I see that I erred in that assumption. You know the Army definition of 'assume,' right? OK, I was wrong.

Beginners are welcome here, no matter what level they have attained in our art. I hadn't thought we would have people here who were unaware of such basic principles, but if we do, we need to offer them what help we can. And we will, so long as they are willing to receive it in the spirit in which it is offered.

lpl

Sounds good, Lee. From a discussion with co-workers today, two believed that the shooter was completely justified and another felt that shooting someone below the waist would carry some lesser penalty (!?!) Neither are THR members (I'm working on them), so kindergarten may well be the place to begin. It seems that Mr. Witter would have benefitted from it, and he was licensed by the state.

I think that General or Legal would have been much better locations for this topic, for no other reason that it would be accessable to non-registered viewers.

Just look at it as a reminder or refresher for newbies.

From a discussion with co-workers today, two believed that the shooter was completely justified and another felt that shooting someone below the waist would carry some lesser penalty (!?!)

Click to expand...

Are these "man on the street" opinions, or are these CCW holders who presumably have been though a class?

Are these "man on the street" opinions, or are these CCW holders who presumably have been though a class?

Click to expand...

Man on the street (fortunately). Still, anyone who may use a weapon to defend themselves, CHL or not, should have the basic legal knowledge.

I think that General or Legal would have been much better locations for this topic, for no other reason that it would be accessable to non-registered viewers.

A thread on this was running in General, until it was closed. It's linked in Post #8 above.

lpl (I didn't close it)

No one was in life threatening or serious injury. Also, he was not protecting his own property. If it was his own store, maybe there's a penal code for that.

Idiots like this are going to get our CCW's taken away.