PDA

View Full Version : Marine arrested for shooting empty car


SteveH
02-14-2010, 10:28 AM
Marine arrested in Dana Point car shoot-up


DANA POINT Police have arrested a Camp Pendleton Marine suspected of shooting up a car in a parking lot early this morning, officials said.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/car-234196-england-four.html

domeshotjuan2
02-14-2010, 10:34 AM
wow. i dont know what to say other then thankfully no one was hurt. and also this isnt going to be good for the 2a.

RRangel
02-14-2010, 10:35 AM
What does this have to do with gun rights in the Second Amendment forum? I know some people get excited over every gun related news story, but come on.

domeshotjuan2
02-14-2010, 10:40 AM
in my opinion every time someone does something negative with a fire arm it can only lead to just another reason why fire arms should be illegal in the minds of the people who dont like them to begin with.

SteveH
02-14-2010, 10:41 AM
What does this have to do with gun rights in the Second Amendment forum? I know some people get excited over every gun related news story, but come on.

It was interesting to me that he wasnt charged with 626.9 in spite of being about 200' from a school or with 12031. Those both trigger a 10-year firearms prohibition.

Yet the article says they only charged him with vandalism and a county no shooting ord. So as long as he pleads the 594 down to a misdemeanor he could retain his gun rights.

B Strong
02-14-2010, 10:43 AM
It was interesting to me that he wasnt charged with 626.9 in spite of being about 200' from a school or with 12031. Those both trigger a 10-year firearms prohibition.

Yet the article says they only charged him with vandalism and a county no shooting ord. So as long as he pleads the 594 down to a misdemeanor he could retain his gun rights.


Yep - on the civilian charges.

What the Corps decides to do with him under the UCMJ might be a whole other deal - anything from an article 15 and a slap to a BCD.

maxwellca21
02-14-2010, 10:46 AM
What does this have to do with gun rights in the Second Amendment forum? I know some people get excited over every gun related news story, but come on.

ok so he should have put this in the off topic session...but chill out.

SteveH
02-14-2010, 10:47 AM
ok so he should have put this in the off topic session...but chill out.

Actually it should be in current legal cases but they eliminated that forum.

RRangel
02-14-2010, 10:54 AM
in my opinion every time someone does something negative with a fire arm it can only lead to just another reason why fire arms should be illegal in the minds of the people who dont like them to begin with.

People who don't like them to begin with certainly don't need a reason to be pro victim disarmament. How many people were robbed this year in that same county? That's what I want to know.

I can guarantee you that each big county has hundreds of murders every year yet someone is fixated on a story of someone allegedly shooting an empty vehicle. The anti-self defense city of Los Angeles accounts for a few hundred murders in LA County. There's plenty of crime to go around and it's getting very silly having to wade through unrelated posts.

Draankol
02-14-2010, 11:06 AM
Yet the article says they only charged him with vandalism and a county no shooting ord. So as long as he pleads the 594 down to a misdemeanor he could retain his gun rights.

Delta bravos like this shouldn't have gun rights.

These are the kinds of people that hurt the cause of law abiding gun owners, even though this guy is clearly does not care about, nor obey the law.

Actions speak much louder than words.

Looks like he'll be getting either the Big Chicken Dinner or a Dishonorable, and so he ought to.

SteveH
02-14-2010, 11:15 AM
Delta bravos like this shouldn't have gun rights.

These are the kinds of people that hurt the cause of law abiding gun owners, even though this guy is clearly does not care about, nor obey the law.

Actions speak much louder than words.

He hasnt been convicted of any crime. The media often gets things wrong.

six10
02-14-2010, 11:19 AM
When Richard Pryor rammed and then shot a car in 1978, he was fined $500, placed on probation, ordered to seek psychiatric care and make restitution.
And he made a lot of money 'joking' about the incident later in stand-up routines.

Just thought I'd mention an earlier, somewhat similar crime and the punishment it earned.

Draankol
02-14-2010, 11:21 AM
He hasnt been convicted of any crime. The media often gets things wrong.

You are correct, the media does often get things wrong. But, as a Marine, I know what they can be like sometimes, and this sounds par for the course for some of the morons I served with. Among the Marines I served with, I met the finest people I have ever met, and the dumbest.

But you are right, I should have prefaced with, "If it turns out this guy did it..." and not just assumed the media got it right. I just hate it when Jarheads do stupid stuff and it gets in the press, makes the Marines look bad. I remember when a bunch of Pendleton Marines got busted making pornos, I think they all got BCD's, which was the right choice, but that gave a bad view of the Corps.

bwiese
02-14-2010, 11:58 AM
It was interesting to me that he wasnt charged with 626.9 in spite of being about 200' from a school or with 12031. Those both trigger a 10-year firearms prohibition.

Yet the article says they only charged him with vandalism and a county no shooting ord. So as long as he pleads the 594 down to a misdemeanor he could retain his gun rights.

I don't have the PC handy, but IIRC shooting into an unoccupied vehicle may be prohibiting misdemeanor for some extended period.

SteveH
02-14-2010, 12:05 PM
I don't have the PC handy, but IIRC shooting into an unoccupied vehicle may be prohibiting misdemeanor for some extended period.

Bill, shooting an unoccupied vehicle probably is a prohibiting charge. However the article doesnt indicate they charged him with that. It seems to say they went straight CPC 594.

Maybe the DA will catch the cops mistake and file the appropriate charges. Assuming a car was really shot and this Marine is the person who shot it of course.

tyrist
02-14-2010, 1:08 PM
I don't have the PC handy, but IIRC shooting into an unoccupied vehicle may be prohibiting misdemeanor for some extended period.

They are charging him with FELONY vandalism which is lifelong ban.

SteveH
02-14-2010, 1:26 PM
They are charging him with FELONY vandalism which is lifelong ban.

Hahhahaha

Lots of people get charged with felony vandalism. Then plead down to a misdemeanor vandalisn or disturbing the peace. I think there has to be $4,000.00 in damage to even meet the elements of the crime for felony vandalism. Be pretty easy for the defense team to come up with a repair estimate of $3,999.99 or less. Bam, no more felony.

Thety arrested him for the wrong charge. Assuming of course he really shot a car, it was in an area that shooting wasnt allowed and the car does not belong to him..inncoent until proven guilty and all that.

tyrist
02-14-2010, 2:05 PM
Hahhahaha

Lots of people get charged with felony vandalism. Then plead down to a misdemeanor vandalisn or disturbing the peace. I think there has to be $4,000.00 in damage to even meet the elements of the crime for felony vandalism. Be pretty easy for the defense team to come up with a repair estimate of $3,999.99 or less. Bam, no more felony.

Thety arrested him for the wrong charge. Assuming of course he really shot a car, it was in an area that shooting wasnt allowed and the car does not belong to him..inncoent until proven guilty and all that.

You think wrong it's only 400 dollars and the paint damage alone will exceed that. If he shot out a window which is likely you are way over the amount. Since he was in a possession of a firearm while committing a felony he also gets a sentence enhancement.

ChuckBooty
02-14-2010, 2:20 PM
crazy idiot!

pullnshoot25
02-14-2010, 2:34 PM
Criminey...

pitchbaby
02-14-2010, 3:10 PM
So as long as he pleads the 594 down to a misdemeanor he could retain his gun rights.

Honestly, if he is truly guilty and did this out of some sort of spite or for revenge, do you really want him to keep his gun rights? It's not about my wanting to take his rights away.... it's about keeping a gun out of his hands so he doesn't do more to ruin the 2A fight for freedom for the rest of us!

6172crew
02-14-2010, 4:13 PM
Yep - on the civilian charges.

What the Corps decides to do with him under the UCMJ might be a whole other deal - anything from an article 15 and a slap to a BCD.

I know the Marine Corps can not charge if the civilians charge him, its double jeopardy.

They can admin sep him after he is charged out in town, being close to Camp Pend. I would think his command is working close with local LE to make sure he is taken care of.

I worked in the legal section the last 2 years on active duty and have seen a few cases like this one. Those had the civilians in charge followed by a OTH and some restrictions while the paperwork flows.

haodoken
02-14-2010, 6:40 PM
Oorah! :D

6172crew
02-14-2010, 7:18 PM
Oorah! :D

Ok, so one of us mess up.:chris: Or may be not, we will see.:)

ChuckBooty
02-14-2010, 9:07 PM
I know the Marine Corps can not charge if the civilians charge him, its double jeopardy.

They can admin sep him after he is charged out in town, being close to Camp Pend. I would think his command is working close with local LE to make sure he is taken care of.

I worked in the legal section the last 2 years on active duty and have seen a few cases like this one. Those had the civilians in charge followed by a OTH and some restrictions while the paperwork flows.

Oh believe me...they'll charge him with SOMETHING. Whether it has to do with having his gun without permission, or simply conduct unbecoming. It'll be someting.

SteveH
02-15-2010, 10:16 AM
Honestly, if he is truly guilty and did this out of some sort of spite or for revenge, do you really want him to keep his gun rights? It's not about my wanting to take his rights away.... it's about keeping a gun out of his hands so he doesn't do more to ruin the 2A fight for freedom for the rest of us!

Is the fact that he used a gun somehow more serious than if he had slashed the tires, etched the paint or spray painted the car? Isnt a vandalism a vandalism and a gun just a tool.

Should ayouthful indescetion like vandalism result in a lifetime, or even ten years prohibition, on firearms ownership for a young man who makes his living with a M16A4?

SteveH
02-15-2010, 10:18 AM
You think wrong it's only 400 dollars and the paint damage alone will exceed that. If he shot out a window which is likely you are way over the amount. Since he was in a possession of a firearm while committing a felony he also gets a sentence enhancement.

I though i reasd that the penal code books that say $400 are outdated and havent kept up with case law. That the limit has been raised to $4000? I could certainly be wrong though.

Merle
02-15-2010, 10:24 AM
Since when is illegal to shoot an empty car?

Shooting in XXX locations, sure. Damaging YYY property such as a car, sure. But is there a specific law against shooting empty cars?

CA is weird.

6172crew
02-15-2010, 11:20 AM
Oh believe me...they'll charge him with SOMETHING. Whether it has to do with having his gun without permission, or simply conduct unbecoming. It'll be someting.

They may want to but when he goes to see the BLT Legal guys they will tell him that if he was punished by civilians then the .gov guys have to be happy with that.

Like I said, they can sep him out with an OTH. They might be able to get him on being UA though.

UA is AWOL for you Army/Air Force guys.

The 2 guys I saw across my desk had to do with firing a handgun into a club. Both were separated on a OTH (other than honorable) but sitting in a city or county jail. No extra charges from the military, unless you want to count the fact they will have the OTH on record.

1923mack
02-15-2010, 11:58 AM
This sounds like another incident where booze and guns do not mix. After a few drinks and a few "buddies" spurring you on, you do what you would not do sober and by yourself.

Draankol
02-15-2010, 12:10 PM
Is the fact that he used a gun somehow more serious than if he had slashed the tires, etched the paint or spray painted the car? Isnt a vandalism a vandalism and a gun just a tool.

Should ayouthful indescetion like vandalism result in a lifetime, or even ten years prohibition, on firearms ownership for a young man who makes his living with a M16A4?

I get your points, but it's not the fact that he vandalized a car; it's that he discharged a weapon in public, probably with little or no regard to what was behind it or who was in the background.

Would you be defending him if a stray round had splattered some infant's brains all over the bars of its crib? Of course you wouldn't.

But this guy allegedly shot a bunch of holes in a car, and it sounds like he may have been intoxicated while doing it. If not, then it really shows bad judgment to do it while completely sober. Being drunk is no excuse, but it does impair ones judgment, this much has been proven.

So he makes a living with an M16A4? Hes a Marine, held to a higher standard. He took an oath not only to defend the country, but to abide by a higher code of conduct. That oath was not only broken, but broken with reckless abandon and flagrant disregard for the safety of the very people he swore to defend.

Should his life be ruined over it? No, but he needs to be dealt with as harshly as the implications of what he did could have been for someone in the wrong place at the wrong time getting nailed by a stray bullet so he could make a point about what? Getting kicked out of a club? This was a dumb *** maneuver, executed by a dumb *** and he should pay the price for being an armed, trained and dangerous dumb ***.

Wild Bill
02-15-2010, 12:49 PM
What does this have to do with gun rights in the Second Amendment forum? I know some people get excited over every gun related news story, but come on.

What do you mean "What does this have to do with gun rights ". Every time one of these brainless wonders goes and does something stupid like this. It gives the Anti's more fuel for the fire.:eek: These types of headines we do not need.

RRangel
02-15-2010, 1:19 PM
What do you mean "What does this have to do with gun rights ". Every time one of these brainless wonders goes and does something stupid like this. It gives the Anti's more fuel for the fire.:eek: These types of headines we do not need.

You do realize that crime is rampant don't you? This one is a drop in the statistical bucket. I'm of the opinion that it doesn't make sense to post the latest local crime allegation simply because it's fun for people to know your thought process. The Second Amendment forum is not the everything goes just because you feel like it forum.

Theseus
02-15-2010, 2:49 PM
It was interesting to me that he wasnt charged with 626.9 in spite of being about 200' from a school or with 12031. Those both trigger a 10-year firearms prohibition.

Yet the article says they only charged him with vandalism and a county no shooting ord. So as long as he pleads the 594 down to a misdemeanor he could retain his gun rights.

12031 is not a prohibitive misdemeanor.

SteveH
02-16-2010, 1:18 PM
T,
Thanks. strange that a fist fight can be but some gun violations are not.




But is there a specific law against shooting empty cars?

CA is weird.

CPC 247b maybe?

SteveH
02-20-2010, 8:46 AM
Update:

per court website DA filed CPC 247 charges and suspect has made bail.

Dooly
04-17-2010, 9:56 PM
Oh man, this guy is sure in for trouble and working party before getting dishonorable discharge or so

M198
04-17-2010, 11:28 PM
Big chicken dinner. See you later sh** bird. How dare you disgrace my beloved corps. If he receives a dishonorable discharge, that's a federal prohibition on firearm ownership. More likely to get a BCD or a really harsh NJP.