Should he be charged?

vigil617

vigil617

US Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
6,501
Reaction score
14,222
Location
Greenville, NC
Here's a link to a local media account of an incident yesterday near where I live, in which a neighbor in a semi-rural area discovered a burglary in progress at his neighbor's house. He drew and fired his handgun during the encounter.

I don't have any other details right now, but you can get the gist of the situation from this article. If other information comes to light, I will post it in an update; in the meantime, I am interested to know the opinions of you who are CHL holders or just interested in a real-life scenario that bears directly on the rules we should and, in most cases, are required to follow.

Please, no "well, I wasn't there, so I don't know" responses, or any pointing out of "we don't know all the facts." This post is here because it illustrates a situation, and I am inviting you to comment on the situation.

I want to know, especially, if you think the neighbor who fired his weapon should be charged with anything. If you want to base your response on whatever your own jurisdiction would dictate, that's fine. Thanks.

Neighbor opens fire on burglary suspects in Hope Mills | abc11.com
 
Register to hide this ad
I suppose is depends on laws regarding firearms use in NC.

As I understand the law (and I'm not a lawyer) in California, you can use a firearm if you (or your neighbor) are threatened with serious injury or loss of life. But I don't believe you can use a firearm to prevent a burglary or detain the burglars at someone else's house when no one was in danger.

Also, in CA, you can't shoot at a fleeing suspect after he is no longer a threat.

So shooting at a car speeding away sounds like a violation to me. It's also irresponsible unless you are way out in the country and there aren't any people around as you may hit an innocent bystander.

I sympathize with the guy, however.

So my guess is he should be charged with something.
 
Here is our law:

"609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE.
The intentional taking of the life of another is not authorized by section 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or death, or preventing the commission of a felony in the actor's place of abode."

Shooting at someone who is fleeing isn't self-defense. The shooter wasn't preventing a crime on his own property.
 
Everything looked good until he shot at the fleeing suspects. Unless the suspects just committed a particularly heinous act, such as murder or rape (just to name a couple), as a police officer, its unlawful for us to fire at fleeing suspects either (in Michigan), and even then, may not be the best option.
 
plattincreek said:
Should not be charged but probably should not have fired.
Click to expand...

Sums up my thoughts. I think it would be service to the individual if the officers, or the prosecutor, had a friendly discussion with him pointing out the lack of wisdom and judgment in firing in that situation so he could avoid possible problems in the future, but since it appears no one was injured I would not want to see the man charged. "No harm done." JMHO.
 
Cal44 said:
So shooting at a car speeding away sounds like a violation to me. It's also irresponsible unless you are way out in the country and there aren't any people around as you may hit an innocent bystander.
Click to expand...

Here, anyone who:

"(2) intentionally discharges a firearm under circumstances that endanger the safety of another; or

(3) recklessly discharges a firearm within a municipality."

is guilty of a felony.
 
DON'T ASK FOR OPINIONS WITH CONDITIONS ATTATCHED.

Or at least have more complete details. I'll leave the yes or no until we hear more info (were the robbers hit?) and/or let the local DA decide. I think running towards a simple burglary armed was a bad decision. He DID phone police, not sure about a description or plate #'s. It's gonna be hard to claim self defense when the pair were driving away. What if an infant had been in the car? There is a slight possibility they "COULD HAVE" been there with permission, again we don't have THE FULL STORY. Pointing a gun at someone & cocking the hammer kind of gives them the right of self defense. YES I realize his intentions were good. I imagine he WILL BE charged with a lesser misdemeanor brandishing/ unlawful discharge if neither were hit & his record is clean. Hopefully no jail time but I'm sure he is gonna be out a hell of a lot more $ than WHATEVER the 2 could have possibly stolen. YOU ASKED, so don't complain about the answer.
 
hangnoose said:
Or at least have more complete details. I'll leave the yes or no until we hear more info (were the robbers hit?) and/or let the local DA decide. I think running towards a simple burglary armed was a bad decision. He DID phone police, not sure about a description or plate #'s. It's gonna be hard to claim self defense when the pair were driving away. What if an infant had been in the car? There is a slight possibility they "COULD HAVE" been there with permission, again we don't have THE FULL STORY. Pointing a gun at someone & cocking the hammer kind of gives them the right of self defense. YES I realize his intentions were good. I imagine he WILL BE charged with a lesser misdemeanor brandishing/ unlawful discharge if neither were hit & his record is clean. Hopefully no jail time but I'm sure he is gonna be out a hell of a lot more $ than WHATEVER the 2 could have possibly stolen. YOU ASKED, so don't complain about the answer.
Click to expand...

Noose,

My thread, my "conditions." :)

Thanks for your reply, which I happen to agree with completely except for the above.

I knew that I would get at least a few responses objecting to the fact that I had asked not to point out the obvious. That's OK.

If you had simply posted some snipping at me, and not included your well thought out response, I would have disregarded it and moved on. As it is, I think you're right in your assessment, based on what we know right now.

Again, thanks.:)
 
I hope more of you will reply. In the meantime, here are my thoughts on what happened here, practically in my neighborhood:

1. He was wrong, as a civilian, to approach a burglary in progress. Instead, he should have done whatever he could to be a good witness, and should have stayed out of it otherwise.

2. Drawing on the perps, as a civilian, was wrong wrong wrong. They presented no threat to his safety or anyone else's.

3. Ordering the perps to lie down, and cocking his handgun, was wrong wrong wrong too. He is not a law enforcement officer, and he was not within his rights to do that and expect them to comply. Cocking his pistol was a serious error.

4. When one of the perps pulled a gun, the situation that he had started by threat of deadly force, escalated. Never should have happened. By then, though, he has little choice but to play the hand he had dealt himself.

5. Shooting eight times at a fleeing vehicle was wrong wrong wrong.

6. If the armed perp was pointing the gun at him while the vehicle was pulling away, depending on how close it was to him and whether this presented a legitimate threat to him, then there might be a brief window of time in which he was within his rights to fire on the perp (NOT the vehicle).

7. The burglary suspects were wrong, all the way around.

8. The neighbor should be charged, if for no other reason than as an example to the community that what he did should not happen and should not be tolerated. As others have posted, though, it's unlikely the district attorney will choose to do so in our community, for political reasons.

9. The news reporter should not have glorified the neighbor's actions when he remarked that the neighbor had "stood up to help" or whatever the phrase was.

10. The neighbor, in citing his dad's admonition never to point a gun at someone unless you intend to use it, and saying that he did intend to use it, proves that he does not understand the concept of self-defense vs. defense of property that was not even his.

This situation really rankles me, as it confers hero status on a guy who -- though well-intentioned -- was a moron about the situation. JMHO.
 
My opinion, as I understand the law in TN, is that the shooting was probably not justified. The only qualification would be if the guy in the car actually had a gun pointed at the man. That would change things I suspect. Alot would depend on the DA but I seriously doubt he would be charged in TN and, if so, he would never be convicted.

Personally, I'd let the guy go but explain to him the law as it pertains to self-defense. After he called the sheriff he should have gotten good descriptions and license plates if possible and let law enforcement handle it from there.
 
shooting

I would not have charged him as I have worked similar cases, but when the suspect pulled a gun he should have shot him then, and I would have advised him he should not have unloaded on the car as I have seen criminals who would take small children along on their crime sprees.
 
Calling LE: good.

Going over to stop the robbery: not so good.

Pulling and holding robbers at gun point without them displaying any weapons: not good. (you might could argue disparity of force here.)

Shooting at fleeing car with suspects inside: really bad. (If he had fired when the one drew his handgun, then it would have been fine.)

I know when you see something like this happening you want to do something to stop them, but it's so much better to be the best witness you can be.

As for him being charged... I don't know, probably yes.
 
I believe crime should be dangerous for the criminal. More criminals should have to pay for their actions, not get into the system where they are actually protected and their rights given priority over those of the victim.

So, I would opt to dial "911" and stand on the sidewalk in front of the home as it is burglarized and film the event with my phone in one hand, handgun in the other behind my back. If the "suspects" chose to attack, then I would be justified in protecting myself.

I should mention, I have been burglarized and have nothing but contempt for a thief.
 
1. How did he know or not know it may be relatives or friends of the neighbor?
2. Could they have been there legitimately?
3. Legally, he probley is wrong and will be charged.
I aint, but if I had the power of the DA, I would let this guy slide.
Now if it turns out the neighbor shows up and says something like that was my nephew and his buddy getting something I told them to come for but I wasnt home, all bets are off.
 
ronnie gore said:
I have seen criminals who would take small children along on their crime sprees.
Click to expand...

Why would someone do this?

A) Crime has an intern program

B) Quality time with mom and dad

C) Baby-sitters are too costly

D) Driving the baby around makes him/her fall asleep

E) We stay in a bad neighborhood, can't leave the kids at home
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Heymatt
That one neighbor
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
wproct
wproct
olfart
MORE Tales from the East Texas Outback
Replies
12
Views
746
Major 2
Major 2
woodsltc
Never Forget What She Did.......
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Mister Coffee
M
Dump1567
  • Locked
The unavoidable gun fight. Are you confident with your handgun choice?
12 13 14
Replies
262
Views
11K
Tom S.
Tom S.
Kinman
Big Brother?
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
3K
Doug M.
Doug M.

Latest posts

Back
Top