Owner shoots bad guys trying to steal 4Runner

[nevada]

The fact that a dirt bag is dead for doing what dirt bags do....well, my give-a-crap meter is pegged at zero.

Personally, I would not draw on someone who is stealing my car if I do not at any point feel threatened. For the record, I would never shoot to kill...I would shoot to stop the threat. If I draw my weapon, I intend to shoot. There will be no warning shots or threats of shooting or standoffs. I will do my best to stop the threat immediately and in a safe manner.

However, since the victim in this case felt threatened by these dirt bags, I give this shoot 2 thumbs up approval.

dont draw unless you mean to kill.

Eh, if you are using deadly force, it might as well be deadly. There will be no knee-cap popping here. If I truly felt threatened, I would not risk the injury not being enough to stop them, nor would I want the pleasure of the dirtbag suing me down the road...

this.

 

[phillyd2]

Is that a M1 Garand in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

Both. Plus its a pix of clips :drum:

 

[KCcarguy]

Well, that seems reasonable and from what I know of you, you're house wouldn't make it near my short list for places to enter without an invitation : )

Doc don't like getting perforated.

You're welcome any time Doc. We'll go to the gun range and I'll buy you a beer afterward.

:gun6: :cheers:

 

[-JD-]

So how much theft do you feel entitles you to end someones life? Your mail? A bicycle? a jet ski? Where do you draw the line on being judge, jury and executioner?

 

[KCcarguy]

So how much theft do you feel entitles you to end someones life? Your mail? A bicycle? a jet ski? Where do you draw the line on being judge, jury and executioner?

I think you're mis-interpreting. If someone is stealing your property, you have a right to intervene. If they threaten you with physical harm while confronting them, you have a right to defend yourself. And, as I said before, you are STILL subject to the justice system. If what you did is not rational, you'll probably end up in jail. Case in point:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4371093...ed-life-killing-would-be-robber/#.UPc7KY7ntUQ

 

[BlackWorksInc]

Like I said, I'd like to give the person a chance to make the right choice. But if they're gonna try and hurt me or kill me for $5, then I'm going to defend myself. In my eyes its matter of defending yourself in an evolving situation. If that person wants to continue down their course of action and endanger my life or others I care about, then the natural consequence of that is me making sure myself and those I care about are safe.

That and its my mail, go get your own mail! Mine is protected by Federal 00 Buckshot.

 

[theizzardking]

So how much theft do you feel entitles you to end someones life? Your mail? A bicycle? a jet ski? Where do you draw the line on being judge, jury and executioner?

if they enter our "domain" they are taking a known risk, thieves should know they could potentially get shot for trying to steal from ones property , if nothing else the mere threat should be a deterrent, we also have civil suit laws where if one cannot be legally held accountable due to the castle laws , can be sued by the surviving family members if the shooter over reacted but not enough to justify prison.....

also you act like every gun owner is going to blow the brains out of anyone trying to steal anything, you people also want to act like gun owners are in some sort of naked gun Leslie nelson movie where they just run down the street shooting wildly and randomly until the bad guys just happen to get hit, what's this crap? quit coming up with hypothetical scenarios in your little fantasy world about what could have potentially happened, every single time a gun owner defends himself,family or propriety, i hear this crap ,
well ya know what that hasn't happened, and doesn't happen a vast majority of the time, just like we have something like 300,000,000 guns in circulation but how many are actually used for violent crime? something like .01% yet these hypothetical make it sound as if every single one of these guns is owned by criminals or is going to be sold to criminals coming to get your families and you need the government to protect you...what B.S....:bash:

 

[SigSense]

Sometimes car thieves shoot the car owners, killing them. Hey, wait, that just happened LAST night in TX. This discussion sure is timely!

SAPD: Teen killed while fleeing car thief near UTSA campus | kens5.com San Antonio

SAPD: Teen killed while fleeing car thief near UTSA campus


SAN ANTONIO -- An 18-year-old was shot and killed on Tuesday night after trying to stop a man from stealing his car, police say.

The deceased has been identified as Christopher Hinjos.

The teen allegedly saw the man breaking into his silver Toyota in the 300 block of Allendale Oaks near the UTSA campus around 11 p.m.

Neighbors told officers that they saw the two men fighting in the yard before Hinjos was shot in the hand and the suspect drove away in the vehicle.

Hinjos then ran to a nearby house and banged on the door for help, police said, but the suspect returned and shot him again. He died on the doorstep.

Police said later on Wednesday that the suspect and victim had known each other.

Detectives said the suspect took off in a brown or tan 2001 Toyota Camry with Texas license plate BZ4G811.

 

[BlackWorksInc]

There's what happens when you try to do the right "non-gun toting" thing, you get shot. That's just sad, that kid tried to do the right thing, got shot not once but twice! I bet you when they catch that bastard, that gun he used? Not registered in his name, not aquired by legal means and guess what? Would still happen if we decided to strip guns from everyone.

The simple truth is, when you take guns away that leaves two very potentially dangerous groups (criminals and government) and one without (civilans.) I don't know about you, but if I'm looking to make money as a criminal I'm going to go for the easy unarmed people, because I KNOW they aren't going to be able to do much against even a handgun.

Also, I hope they hang that bastard when they catch him. I understand the whole "the gun went off when we struggled" thing (in the case of the guy not really meaning to shoot him be it victim or suspect,) but he came back after the fact to gun that kid down in cold blood. THOSE are the people who will get their guns no matter what laws you enact and they're the ones who need to be shot on sight.

 

[blackrifle01]

Eh, if you are using deadly force, it might as well be deadly. There will be no knee-cap popping here. If I truly felt threatened, I would not risk the injury not being enough to stop them, nor would I want the pleasure of the dirtbag suing me down the road...

I don't think I was clear....

I intend to shoot center mass until the threat is eliminated. Whether or not the guy/gal decides to die after several rounds of 45cal impact his chest is his/her decision. If they are still moving, they are still a threat. I've seen surveillance video where a law abiding citizen shot an armed robber who happened to fall and roll around a little. That robber got back up and shot the citizen to death. In my book, if you are still moving, then you are a threat. There's a reason I carry 2 reloads.

 

[SigSense]

Reality......

All of us obviously have our own views of what we'd each do in the scenarios discussed in this thread. I did want to pass on some legal opinions DIRECT from various Federal Courts and the United States Supreme Court. They have decided on numerous occasions that it is NOT the responsibility of ANY Police Department to protect you.


In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection... a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen.


In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled,[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.


Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the court ruled, 7-2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C.§1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murder of a woman's three children by her estranged husband.

Info for us all to ponder:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=2&

Police Have No Duty to Protect Individuals

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone - Democratic Underground

 

[BlackWorksInc]

Oh wow SigSense, that is something I was not even aware of.

I mean I understand to a degree the legal liability they're talking about, but that also basically shows that the courts agreed that the police are not responsible for your safety if they can't provide it...

 

[Rubberdown]

Some guy approached me at a gas station a month ago while my wife and I were christmas shopping. He pulled out a knife and said give me your keys. I locked my wife in the car via key fob while backing around the vehicle. The guy followed me which meant there was a field behind him instead of a parking lot. I pulled out my p30 and told the guy something to the effect of get outta here now. Thankfully he did. No one got hurt, my wife literally had no idea what was going on. But, had that guy once reached anywhere near the door handle, 13 rounds would have gone center mass, and 1 would have ended up in his forehead if I could have put it there. Would I sit in jail... Maybe. Would I be ok with sitting in jail, absolutely. The only thing I can say is, I was in fear for my life, and my wifes life. I would definitely loose sleep over it but a lot less than if the guy had driven off with my wife and raped her and killed her or something.

 

[harper7]

Here's another newscast of that first SA shooting telling a little different story then the first one. Charges unlikely for Stone Oak man in suspected burglar shooting | News - Home

The 37 year old guy that was in the victims car that was shot and lived after he made a threatening move at him and the 32 year old guy in getaway car was the one who was apparently killed.If you look at the plates on the getaway car, they do not appear to be Texas plates .The first guy must have been shot somewhere in the lower torso as his pants and boots were taken off by paramedics and still in the street as you can see in the video. Ya,I might watch too many CSI's and Dexters.

That was actually pretty reckless, shooting at a fleeing car as it appears he shot the back window out and hit the driver and it's a wonder he wasn't charged with something and still may.The man that broke in was already shot and down and the getaway car driver that was killed wasn't actually committing burglary and was fleeing.

 

[Stifler]

Ad hominem now? A sure sign you've handed a guy his ass is when he has to resort to personal attacks to try and save face.

Well done, cowboy. :bravo:

yawn... I think I hear your mom callin ya...scoot along you cant "hand ass" on the interwebz skippy

 

[bofa]

Some guy approached me at a gas station a month ago while my wife and I were christmas shopping. He pulled out a knife and said give me your keys. I locked my wife in the car via key fob while backing around the vehicle. The guy followed me which meant there was a field behind him instead of a parking lot. I pulled out my p30 and told the guy something to the effect of get outta here now. Thankfully he did. No one got hurt, my wife literally had no idea what was going on. But, had that guy once reached anywhere near the door handle, 13 rounds would have gone center mass, and 1 would have ended up in his forehead if I could have put it there. Would I sit in jail... Maybe. Would I be ok with sitting in jail, absolutely. The only thing I can say is, I was in fear for my life, and my wifes life. I would definitely loose sleep over it but a lot less than if the guy had driven off with my wife and raped her and killed her or something.

I wanted to like this, but you pulled a gun and threatened? And didn't use it? In Texas?

 

[Shogun]

The herd is thinning...about 20 minutes north of San Antonio..

Baseball bat vs Gun....


http://herald-zeitung.com/news/local_news/article_f4b8fd92-60f5-11e2-85b9-001a4bcf887a.html

 

[JohnnyT]

The herd is thinning...about 20 minutes north of San Antonio..

Baseball bat vs Gun....


Sheriff's Office: Canyon Lake homeowner shoots, kills alleged intruder - Herald-Zeitung Online: Local News

Not knowing what happened here, if it were you and you saw this guy entering your home, do you warn him (and then if essential, shoot) or do you just shoot?

 

[Gerdo]

The thieves took that risk upon themselves when they decided to break in to this guy's truck. Why are we making the victim of this whole thing the bad guy? I worked very hard for my 4Runner, years in fact. If I were to see someone breaking into my car and possibly trying to steal it, I'd confront them if I was armed. Depending on how they reacted I wouldn't have a problem defending myself/my property by shooting them.

The bad guys are not the victim here. Call the police and hope they come in time. If not, get the getaway car plate.

I do believe that it is excessive force when the owner comes out of the house to shoot someone that is in your parked vehicle.

Once again, it's just an object that no one should die over. This is why we have insurance. Yes, I have had cars broken into and have had thousands of dollars of damage and loss and Yes I was pissed. Still not worth killing over.

This is not something I would want to live with.

We can't become a society of vigilantes.

 

[SigSense]

We can't become a society of vigilantes.

Why not? Are you aware of this phenomena called criminal recidivism? Recidivism is measured by criminal acts that resulted in the rearrest, reconviction, or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-year period following the prisoner's release. That basically means that shitheads that are criminals GO to prison for a crime. There they are supposed to be punished for their crimes and be rehabilitated. Problem is that they do NOT always go along with the program.

Summary findings

During 2007, a total of 1,180,469 persons on parole were at-risk of reincarceration. This includes persons under parole supervision on January 1 or those entering parole during the year. Of these parolees, about 16% were returned to incarceration in 2007.

Among nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 states in 1994, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years. A study of prisoners released in 1983 estimated 62.5%.

Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 states in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.

These offenders had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.

Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).

Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Recidivism

So you're OK with the same people stealing your T4R over and over and over again? Seems like a well-placed, .50 cent, 9 MM, 124 grain, jacketed hollow point bullet would prevent this from occurring over and over and over again. Think of the cost savings to the community!