PDA

View Full Version : How not to Handle a situation.


Crazed_SS
08-05-2007, 10:37 PM
Just saw this on the news..
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/newsarchive/13813970/detail.html
http://www.10news.com/newsarchive/13813041/detail.html

Girl is fighting with ex-bf. Girl leaves her unit and goes to a neighbor's unit for help. Neighbor grabs gun, goes to girl's unit, gets in fight with ex-bf and ends up shooting him dead.

Probably should have just called the cops and let them sort it out instead of trying to be a hero.. Maybe there's more to the story like a love triangle or something, but it seems really dumb of the neighbor to grab his gun and confront the angry ex-bf.

socalguns
08-06-2007, 12:38 AM
without reading the story I "know" some DA is going to say "well, he could've locked the door and called the cops, now he's going to be charged with murder" ... stupid situation all the way around

jumbopanda
08-06-2007, 12:45 AM
What a fool, you don't go confront someone with a weapon no matter what they do. You use a weapon to defend yourself if your life is in immediate danger, otherwise you call the cops.

tgriffin
08-06-2007, 6:55 AM
What a fool, you don't go confront someone with a weapon no matter what they do. You use a weapon to defend yourself if your life is in immediate danger, otherwise you call the cops.

I respectfully disagree. While I in no way endorse or approve of the actions of this individual in question, I do whole-heartedly believe that it is our duty as responsible citizens and gun owners to come to the aid of others and defend their lives with deadly force if necessary from an agressor. The mentality that calling the cops will solve everything is short sighted and has been proven near futile: the police are under no obligation to respond and protect us.

simonov
08-06-2007, 6:59 AM
I respectfully disagree. While I in no way endorse or approve of the actions of this individual in question, I do whole-heartedly believe that it is our duty as responsible citizens and gun owners to come to the aid of others and defend their lives with deadly force if necessary from an agressor. The mentality that calling the cops will solve everything is short sighted and has been proven near futile: the police are under no obligation to respond and protect us.

In this situation, the woman was no longer in any danger once she was wit the neighbor, so up until the moment he made the boneheaded move of confronting the guy next door, he was doing exactly as you suggest, protecting a neighbor from harm.

Paratus et Vigilans
08-06-2007, 7:07 AM
Smart thing to do: Neighbor keeps fleeing gf under protection at his unit, with firearm for defense, and calls police to report "domestic violence." Neighbor and fleeing gf wait IN NEIGHBOR'S UNIT for police to arrive. Neighbor uses firearm for defense against angry bf, but only if he comes knocking, and calls 911 to report angry bf's assault on neighbor's unit while neighbor and fleeing gf are waiting for police to arrive. Shoot the SOB if he kicks in neighbor's door. Very few DA's would charge that neighbor and no jury would convict.

Dumb thing to do: What neighbor actually did. Duh. Like going next door armed is going to calm things down? What's the end game there? Tell bf to get his **** and get out of town? Yeah, that's going to work. Bf's adrenaline is already pumping from the argument, not like cooler heads are going to prevail.

No, the police aren't there to protect us, but they ARE there to haul away the lawbreakers. Go defensive and call in the police to take out the trash. Any other course of action is foolish. IMHO, of course! :)

Crazed_SS
08-06-2007, 7:10 AM
I respectfully disagree. While I in no way endorse or approve of the actions of this individual in question, I do whole-heartedly believe that it is our duty as responsible citizens and gun owners to come to the aid of others and defend their lives with deadly force if necessary from an agressor. The mentality that calling the cops will solve everything is short sighted and has been proven near futile: the police are under no obligation to respond and protect us.

True, the police do not have to respond or protect you, BUT I think it's prudent to at least attempt to use their services in a situation like this. Our tax dollars pay for police.. if possible, we should make them earn their pay.

I guarantee if they had called the cops the SDPD would have showed up. A neighbor called the cops on me once because I was playing Madden with friends and we were too noisy. Cops showed us and told us to to keep it down. We had only been playing for 15 minutes! I was impressed with the response time on a stupid noise complaint.

tiki
08-06-2007, 7:59 AM
I respectfully disagree. While I in no way endorse or approve of the actions of this individual in question, I do whole-heartedly believe that it is our duty as responsible citizens and gun owners to come to the aid of others and defend their lives with deadly force if necessary from an agressor. The mentality that calling the cops will solve everything is short sighted and has been proven near futile: the police are under no obligation to respond and protect us.


The way it should have been handled is the girl should have been given refuge in the neighbors apt until police showed up. If the attacker came over to the apt, then the neighbor could have resisted with force, but, running next door with a gun to confront the guy is not self defense and it is not defense of another. It is an attack.

Fjold
08-06-2007, 9:06 AM
In this situation, the woman was no longer in any danger once she was wit the neighbor, so up until the moment he made the boneheaded move of confronting the guy next door, he was doing exactly as you suggest, protecting a neighbor from harm.

+1

The ex-gunowner just earned himself a prison sentence for playing the "Macho hero".

5968
08-06-2007, 9:25 AM
The woman should have owned a gun herself instead of relying on her neighbor to protect her.

metalhead357
08-06-2007, 9:57 AM
The woman should have owned a gun herself instead of relying on her neighbor to protect her.


+10000, best one I've read- short of the EX bf just getting overhimself & her, going to strip club and forgetting about the whole mess & movin' on.......

1911su16b870
08-06-2007, 10:22 AM
According to the news clip...man armed himself and went to confront the boy friend...this was his mental mistake, in that he escalated the situation by bringing a firearm to the mix.

Hindsight being 20/20, hole up in your domicile, call the PD/911 with the facts, domestic dispute, boyfriend is lurking about the complex, girl friend is with you in your domicle, I am armed behind my locked door, send units fast...

Richard
08-06-2007, 12:19 PM
Sorry guys.....this one is going to trial ( bet you $ to dough nuts).....Bad Move on Neighbor. They will look at imminent danger or death.

JMO

Carbide
08-06-2007, 12:29 PM
Very bad move, he went LOOKING for trouble.

Youre supposed to let them come to YOUR door, after that it's fair game.

:43:

ghettoshecky
08-06-2007, 12:59 PM
so a hypothetical guess is that the screaming girl told him that the guy was trashing her place and that possibly she had a pet that was in trouble. To me this screaming and crying girl got the best of him to go out and protect whatever was in her place. He really should've taken control of the situation.

triggerhappy
08-06-2007, 1:17 PM
What a fool, you don't go confront someone with a weapon no matter what they do. You use a weapon to defend yourself if your life is in immediate danger, otherwise you call the cops.

+1 That's exactly how it's gonna be played in court, I bet.

Yankee Clipper
08-06-2007, 1:34 PM
Looks like we're all in agreement re the neighbors foolish moves. Beyond that he making us gun owners fodder for the anti-gunners.

Surveyor
08-06-2007, 5:58 PM
He crossed the line between defending others and vigilantism.The article says that she left an argument, not a beating. Here's my take on what happened (pure speculation :rolleyes:):

She was pissed and wanted him to leave.
He said no.
She said, "Fine, I'll get someone to make you leave"!
She leaves and finds Captain Sav-a-Hoe.
Captain Sav-a-Hoe gets his gun and goes off to serve justice :rolleyes:.
Boyfriend gets in fatal confrontation with armed intruder/neighbor.

The rest is history...

In reality, the boyfriend probably would've calmed down and left if the cops had come.

triggerhappy
08-06-2007, 7:29 PM
He crossed the line between defending others and vigilantism.The article says that she left an argument, not a beating. Here's my take on what happened (pure speculation :rolleyes:):

She was pissed and wanted him to leave.
He said no.
She said, "Fine, I'll get someone to make you leave"!
She leaves and finds Captain Sav-a-Hoe.
Captain Sav-a-Hoe gets his gun and goes off to serve justice :rolleyes:.
Boyfriend gets in fatal confrontation with armed intruder/neighbor.

The rest is history...

In reality, the boyfriend probably would've calmed down and left if the cops had come.

It's gonna be real hard to work out their problems now. I wonder if the gun guy and the chick are gonna get together after he gets outta prison...

Bizcuits
08-06-2007, 7:35 PM
I love my g/f, but I run into more women who cry wolve in my job then anything. "My boyfriends beating me or hitting him," Through a few hours of interview, you come to find out hes a good guy and shes playing the incident up.

Just recently, I dealt with a gal who had a newborn, she was screaming about her sisters boyfriend being an abusive aggressive monster. She was in fear of her life and totally helpess.

My co-worker had already jumped to conclusions, figuren the guy was a dirt bag. We actually did some background first, found out the guy had no record. "Which she said he had been previously arrested."

"Found out the guy was just a regular joe, like the rest of us, expect he was unemployed."

During the process of the interview, she was found beating herself and cutting on herself to look like she'd be victimized by him. If she hadn't been caught by others while in the act, the guy would of been in serious sh*t.

I see domestics and I personally stay away from them unless I have no other choice. The neighbor with the gun, was obviously emotional.

Sad part is the boyfriends dead, so he can't defend himself or the incident.

M. Sage
08-06-2007, 7:46 PM
True, the police do not have to respond or protect you, BUT I think it's prudent to at least attempt to use their services in a situation like this. Our tax dollars pay for police.. if possible, we should make them earn their pay.

+1. The law-enforcement is just another tool in the things you can use.

The guy should have locked the door, armed himself and called 911. This one's a no-brainer.

socalguns
08-07-2007, 12:34 AM
No no no no no no.
He escalated the situation by bringing his
ROOSTER into that other ROOSTERs henhouse,
the firearm had nothing to do with escalation,
just the end result.

bones138
08-07-2007, 1:37 PM
This is a much better article on the situation.http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070803-1749-bn04slain3.html

Fjold
08-07-2007, 2:24 PM
This is a much better article on the situation.http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070803-1749-bn04slain3.html


They're trying to give the shooters the benefit of the doubt to try to gain some sympathy for them but it's still going to go down as a "bad shoot"

Surveyor
08-07-2007, 3:19 PM
In light of the latest article;

-Still a bad shoot. Shouldn't have left the apt. Hole up inside, and if/when he comes in then shoot.

Liberty1
08-07-2007, 3:29 PM
The government should encourage and train private persons to make lawful arrests for misdemeanors and felonies! The armed private person should be part of the solution to the nations crime situation. I commend these individuals and hope they get off. I think they will as it's three (living) against one (dead) with a restraining order against him.

From: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070803-1749-bn04slain3.html

“He was yelling for them to 'Come on out. I'm going to kill you,' ” Cornicelli said.

Then, Cornicelli said, William and Nicole Porter each armed themselves with a handgun.

“And then Mr. Porter, obviously feeling threatened for himself, his wife and the other woman, decides to go outside and attempt to hold the suspect for police,” Cornicelli said.



PENAL CODE

837. A private person may arrest another:
1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.
2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not
in his presence.
3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable
cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

835. An arrest is made by an actual restraint of the person, or by
submission to the custody of an officer. The person arrested may be
subjected to such restraint as is reasonable for his arrest and
detention.

692. Lawful resistance to the commission of a public offense may be
made:
1. By the party about to be injured;
2. By other parties.

693. Resistance sufficient to prevent the offense may be made by
the party about to be injured:
1. To prevent an offense against his person, or his family, or
some member thereof.
2. To prevent an illegal attempt by force to take or injure
property in his lawful possession.

694. Any other person, in aid or defense of the person about to be
injured, may make resistance sufficient to prevent the offense.

Not to mention all the statutes that allow you bear arms while making arrests and acting in self defense.

The couples actions may not have been wise but I hope are found legal. If the armed citizen was in H2H while trying to detain the suspect I would consider that a deadly threat justifying homicide in self defense. It was lawful to be armed and lawful to detain/arrest the suspect.

If the suspect was allowed to flee (as happens at some of the calls I go to) he would have been free to visit violence and perhaps death on others in the future. These offenders need to be caught and stopped. The police can't do it alone as demonstraited by governments repeated failure and inability to do so in a timely manner.

I know of one case personally where the offender repeatedly fled before my department arrived only to later kill the victim. He was eventually caught (but too late). I get concerned when private persons are told not to take the law into their own hands. If they were trained on how to do it and use all reasonably force to stop offenders crime would be greatly deterred and hopefully a watchful society could then deter and avoid deadly situation like this where the offender shows no fear (even in the face of an armed citizen) as the police were not present.

socalguns
08-08-2007, 6:11 AM
and he(they) should be let off the hook by a jury, given they get experienced lawyers (i pray for them)

tenpercentfirearms
08-08-2007, 7:12 AM
This is a tough one. I would say stay in your house and let the police handle it. However, the man did supposedly say, "I am going to kill you!" The girlfriend might have told the neighbors, "He has access to guns."

If they wait at the house, the man leaves, the police show up, they investigate, they say they will try to catch him, they leave. The man shows back up, kills the girlfriend.

Mr. Porter, hearing a credible threat from a man with a restraining order believes he has no choice but to detain the man for the safety of others. If Mr. & Mrs. Porter kept their mouth shut and got a good lawyer, they might make it.

The added restraining order and threat of great bodily injury makes this one a tough call. Do you wait for the guy to return and harm others or do you step in and do something to stop it right there and then?

One thing is for sure, the ex will never threaten the woman again. That fact kind of makes me think that they might have made the right move and despite their legal bills and hassle, they might be able to know they did the right thing.

As has been noted, a jury might have a hard time convicting either of these two. Hopefully they don't plea.

AYEAREFIFTEEN
08-08-2007, 3:23 PM
If the suspect was allowed to flee (as happens at some of the calls I go to) he would have been free to visit violence and perhaps death on others in the future. These offenders need to be caught and stopped. The police can't do it alone as demonstraited by governments repeated failure and inability to do so in a timely manner.

Liberty1 makes a very good point. These people must be stopped the first time around or they will be free to hurt the same person or others over and over. This problem goes much further than violent crime. Vandals and theives that are not caught are free to steal or destroy the property of many others.

In a perfect world we wouldn't need law enforcement but unfortunately its easy to see why most people would prefer not to be involved. The cost to do the "right thing" is far more than most people can afford or even want to afford. Our current legal system makes doing the "right thing" so costly and so time consuming it's not worth it to the average person. Its hard to weigh that warm, fuzzy feeling you get deep down inside when you help someone against the thousands of dollars its could cost you, the jail/prison time you could serve, or even your own life.

Would you shoot a criminal in the act of an armed robbery, or allow the crime to proceed and watch the clerk give him the money in the cash register? Thousands in legal fees out of your own pocket, or $105.32 out of the register.

The company I work for lost over $10,000.00 doing the "right thing" helping to apprehend suspects wanted for felony forgery/fraud. (We had to stall them for 40 minutes to wait for a police response.) Only one suspect was charged and will most likely will be deported. No further effort is being made to recover our stolen product or recover our losses or the losses of the people who's identity was stolen.

The only way it seems to do the "right thing" with minimal consequence is to wear a badge.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Liberty1
08-08-2007, 9:28 PM
The only way it seems to do the "right thing" with minimal consequence is to wear a badge.

No good deed goes unpunished.

There are plenty of consequences for wearing the badge. Far more then I knew about when I signed up. However, it also comes with some protections; belonging to defense funds and cities paying for personal damages levied against individual officers.

The good Samaritan laws should be extended to protect individuals acting lawfully and with good intentions when dealing with situations initially caused by the illegal actions of criminals.

People have been conditioned to be passive and dependent so when action is demanded to even save their own lives, New Orleans, fighting against the 911 highjackers (Flt. 93 exempted) or the Virginia Tech shooter for example, they wait for someone else to act. Society needs to get away from the "leave everything to the government expert" mentality or we will continue to spiral downward into more and more lawlessness.

I would love to leave briefing one day and then proceed to visit with active neighborhood watch patrols (armed) to see how their block is doing. If that was the case on every block or every other block almost all property and many violent crimes would plummet. But this would be too successful and would threaten the political powers that be as they are dependent on people needing them to "solve" problems that are never solved and always require more and more expensive budgets and expensive personnel.

To me this is how and why the people can and should contribute to the security of a free state.

Crazed_SS
11-07-2007, 6:41 PM
Interesting.. looks like charges were dropped in this case.. DA says it was self-defense.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20071107-1614-chargesdropped.html

I really like the Union Tribune as they always follow up on stories.

Original Story: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070803-1749-bn04slain3.html

Mssr. Eleganté
11-07-2007, 6:53 PM
Great news.

Does anybody know if there is a fund set up where one could send that Marine and his wife a couple of bucks to defray their legal costs?

dondo
11-07-2007, 7:09 PM
Hows the woman laying down suppressing fire from the balcony while the town hero puts one between the eyes. a regular Mr. and Mrs. Smith sequel.

Crazed_SS
11-07-2007, 7:29 PM
Yea, the woman shooting for the balcony is kinda odd... she must've been pretty confident in her abilities as a pistol fighter :)

dondo
11-07-2007, 7:32 PM
I hope she is smoking hot.

Richard
11-07-2007, 7:34 PM
I'm ok with the way it turned out.....the Dead guy sounded like a real dirt bag.
But I think the DA didn't want to take on a Marine hero in a military town.

It seems that shooting could have been avoided.....

wasn't there a case of a neighborhood bully getting killed and the Older guy (shooter) going to prison? It was in San Diego some years ago? The shooter was a family man and the bully was terrorizing the neighborhood?

Ring a bell down there? IN FACT IT WAS A DATELINE EPISODE, or one of those shows.

Crazed_SS
11-07-2007, 7:41 PM
I dont remember that one.. I do remember a bum downtown threatned a guy with a knife after being refused a cigarrette. The guy shot and killed the bum. He was initially going to be charged with murder, but the DA dropped those charges and charged with simply with carrying without a permit.

Shotgun Man
11-07-2007, 7:53 PM
I'm ok with the way it turned out.....the Dead guy sounded like a real dirt bag.
But I think the DA didn't want to take on a Marine hero in a military town.

It seems that shooting could have been avoided.....

wasn't there a case of a neighborhood bully getting killed and the Older guy (shooter) going to prison? It was in San Diego some years ago? The shooter was a family man and the bully was terrorizing the neighborhood?

Ring a bell down there? IN FACT IT WAS A DATELINE EPISODE, or one of those shows.

Yeah, I remember that one. It was on Court-TV. I watched portions of the trial. I was disappointed that verdict came back guilty. As I recall, the old man had to go to prison, basically convicted of murder-- a life sentence.

He was a normal man too.

I can't remember his name, otherwise I would research his case and post a link.

Richard
11-07-2007, 8:09 PM
Yeah, I remember that one. It was on Court-TV. I watched portions of the trial. I was disappointed that verdict came back guilty. As I recall, the old man had to go to prison, basically convicted of murder-- a life sentence.

He was a normal man too.

I can't remember his name, otherwise I would research his case and post a link.

Yes that one...He basically was the only one to step up in the neighborhood because the cops were not able to help. I really felt bad for the old guy.

JALLEN
11-07-2007, 8:54 PM
I remember that one well.

Read about it http://www.10news.com/news/3948807/detail.html

Pvt. Cowboy
11-07-2007, 9:25 PM
His 22-year-old wife, who works as sales representative for a laboratory supply company, was charged with assault with a semiautomatic weapon.

Um, what?

Is there such a thing, or is this sensationalist reporting?

Blue
11-07-2007, 9:34 PM
What a fool, you don't go confront someone with a weapon no matter what they do. You use a weapon to defend yourself if your life is in immediate danger, otherwise you call the cops.

+1 I had two people rolling round in my front yard fighting and I grabbed my gun and stuck it in my pocket as a last resort before I went out there and broke it all up. Cops were there within minutes. Guns are by far a last resort in ANY situation.

dondo
11-08-2007, 2:19 PM
+1 I had two people rolling round in my front yard fighting and I grabbed my gun and stuck it in my pocket as a last resort before I went out there and broke it all up. Cops were there within minutes. Guns are by far a last resort in ANY situation.

I'm not knocking your decision here just asking, wouldnt arming yourself and then going out to break it up be a bit questionable if the outcome was you using your firearm? I would think in the eyes of the law (not my own piercing green eyes married to an extremely handsome and chiseled face) would want you to call the cops from behind that fornt door of yours. Just a thought in the vein of the topic.

Smokeybehr
11-08-2007, 4:52 PM
+1 I had two people rolling round in my front yard fighting and I grabbed my gun and stuck it in my pocket as a last resort before I went out there and broke it all up. Cops were there within minutes. Guns are by far a last resort in ANY situation.

If anyone was rolling around in my front yard, I'd be breaking them up with a good soaking with pepper spray. Then they'd stand up to find me arresting them with the help of at least a Remington 870. I wouldn't have to wait too long, since our local PD is pretty good about response times.

bwiese
11-08-2007, 4:59 PM
Um, what?

Is there such a thing, or is this sensationalist reporting?

There are escalators in CA for using an AW in a crime.

The typical female junior DAs usu involved handling such charges have no idea what the difference is and probably think anything semiauto is bad.

Shotgun Man
11-08-2007, 5:23 PM
Um, what?

Is there such a thing, or is this sensationalist reporting?

See PC 245(b):


"(b) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a semiautomatic firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or nine years."

as opposed to PC 245(a)(2):

"(2) Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not less than six months and not exceeding one year, or by both a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and imprisonment."

Use a semi, and it's an automatic felony carrying a max of nine. Use a revolver and it's a "wobbler" (i.e., can be charged as a misdemeanor) and carries a max of four years.

Shotgun Man
11-10-2007, 10:37 AM
I remember that one well.

Read about it http://www.10news.com/news/3948807/detail.html

Thanks for reminding me of it. I'm glad he survived prison. I hope he is enjoying life today.

N6ATF
11-10-2007, 11:20 PM
Thanks for reminding me of it. I'm glad he survived prison. I hope he is enjoying life today.

I wonder what sentence he would have gotten if he simply blew up or torched the bully's car. The worst method of assault, gone.