Should he be charged?

[vigil617]

You don't expect citizens to confront criminals unarmed. Of course he introduced a firearm. Had he not had a gun he would probably be dead. Instead he let loose some lead and the perps hightailed it out of there. 'Merica

Hatt, North Carolina statute (Chapter 14, Sect.51.4)says justification for using deadly force is not available when the person using defensive force is "attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after commission of a felony."

I presume that misdemeanors would be a different situation. Of course, this case involved the felony of burglary. No, the perp was not justified in using defensive force. It also appears that the burglar did not actually use defensive force; Bobby says the perp pointed a gun at him as the car was leaving, and that's when Bobby emptied his pistol at the car.

I don't take issue with your statement that "you don't expect civilians to confront criminals unarmed." What Bobby did, though, was -- as a non-LEO -- threaten deadly force on two individuals that he suspected were carrying out a non-violent felony. He should not have approached them with a weapon pointed at them in that situation, even as wrong as they were to be burglarizing a home.

 

[hatt]

It also appears that the burglar did not actually use defensive force

Presenting a gun and using the gun shouldn't have any bearing in this case.

 

[M29since14]

...Since no one was actually killed, this is clearly a case of attempted homicide on Bobby's part. He fired his gun in attempt to kill two guys. His shooting was not justified because he started it and they were fleeing when he started to shoot. Therefore, he was not in jeopardy of life or great bodily harm.

Should be he charged? Absolutely! He is guilty, by his own admission, of attempted homicide or at least attempted manslaughter. His carry license, if he has one, should be revoked at the very least.

Should he be put in prison? Absolutely not! That would serve no purpose in this case. A large fine and maybe some mandatory training should suffice in this situation.

I agree with that, at least more or less, but there is one nasty little reality judges have to live with called sentencing "guidelines." For any kind of conviction of battery involving a firearm, Bobby almost certainly would be doing some serious time - and he will come out of prison with a felony conviction that will trail him the rest of his life. Judges seem to have little ability, or maybe desire, to deviate from those guidelines. I doubt seriously that the types of remedies recommended would be found within the guidelines, unless he is charged with disturbing the peace.

I will remain with the view that charging the man is a very poor use of the taxpayer's money, but that he should receive a severe tongue-lashing from someone (preferably the prosecutor or the sheriff). Sending this man to court is not "justice."

 

[poorjohnny]

i would thank him for getting involved. as i have seen many times law enforcment in my town is a joke franklin nh.

 

[vigil617]

i would thank him for getting involved. as i have seen many times law enforcment in my town is a joke franklin nh.

IT's a question of "how involved," the way I see it, Johnny.

Also, we are fortunate here to have a very professional local sheriff's office in this county, which had the jurisdiction in this instance.

 

[ColbyBruce]

"but also as a realistic matter that, again, nothing material is worth the life of a human being, no matter what a scumbag that human being is."

I disagree, what is mine is mine, I earned it. I did not work for it, buy it, and bring it home for some lazy son of a female dog to steal from me. If a person chooses to steal for a living, then he must face the consequences and repercussions that his career choice will bring him. A criminal SHOULD worry that he/she might get caught, might get hurt, locked up, or die. There might be fewer of them.

Once someone gains entry to your dwelling your life is in danger, as you do not know them or what they are capable of. Bear that in mind when you think the neighbor in the OP's story should be charged.

Perhaps some of the GA residents will remember the south GA farm family that was murdered years ago by three men who initially broke into their mobile home. The Alday family of Donalsonville, GA.

 

[Riccur]

In Maine, he would not be justified in discharging his weapon and probably would and should be charged with reckless discharge of a firearm. He should have been a good witness and that is it.

I would have been calling for his head if I was one of his neighbors. the chances of him killing me or my family was completely uncalled for.

 

[ken158]

He had a window of legal opportunity when the bad guy pulled a gun and pointed it at him... shooting at a fleeing bad guy who had only committed a property crime (to the knowledge of the shooter) was a bad idea... and most likely illegal in NC as most other states. Good intentions sometimes do not follow through with good results.... A good prosecutor may run the situation past a grand jury and see if they indict. If indicted, go with a jury trial and let your peers decide your fate.

 

[SMSgt]

I'm curious, is it the consensus of those here that a person should just shoot a suspected criminal?

Another thing. Bobby said he hit the car 8 times. Does anyone here belive that?

A "suspected criminal" is far different that a criminal "caught in the act." And, yes, I believe he could hit the car eight times. Or maybe not. Bullet holes in a car aren't too difficult to count though.

 

[SMSgt]

These arguments about which direction the BG was going are senseless. It doesn't matter which way the BG was going, it only matters which way his gun was pointing.

 

[jpeschken]

Minnesota

Here in Minnesota, you need to have three things going for you to pull a gun.

1. You must have legitimate fear of death or serious harm. (Fail)

2. You must have no other option. You have a duty to retreat if you can. (Fail)

3. A carry permit (Unknown)

In Minnesota, this guy would probably find himself charged with assault for pulling the gun first. He purposefully walked into the situation when he should have been taking down the license number of the car he later shot at and calling the cops. He was not in danger until he put himself in danger.

State laws vary, but it seems to me that this guy was a bonehead in any state of the Union.

 

[shouldazagged]

I do not think of it as vigilantism, it is simply garbage disposal.

For me that edges right up to "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out."

I don't want to live around people who take that position. I'll defend me and mine absolutely, but describing killing people just to reduce the number of criminals as "garbage disposal" gives me a chill. There is, to be sure, human garbage out there, people the world would be better off without. If someone is in imminent peril and I'm sure of the facts of the situation, I can easily see a shooting being fully justified. But I'm going to remember my CCW training about legitimate use of deadly force, and abide by the law.

Want to see more efforts to deprive us of our treasured Second Amendment rights? Want to hear the antis scream more unconstitutional idiocy? Just promote that philosophy publicly and watch what happens. Want to lose forever your legal right to carry a firearm? Act on it at the wrong time or in the wrong place.

Guess I'm just too old-fashioned for this discussion. I was raised to obey the law, a great many years ago. So I'd better bow out of this discussion.

 

[Riccur]

I would suspect if you changed this case to a law enforcement officer instead of Bubba the "good Samaritan" there would be repercussions even on the officer for discharging his firearm under these circumstances. Food for thought there.

 

[ColbyBruce]

"For me that edges right up to "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out."

This is your interpretation, so be it. You made it pretty clear you feel a need for "the gravest extreme" situation and a printed invitation before you would act, period. I hope you (or anyone) are never put into such a situation. Chances are, someone, somewhere is a victim of a crime as I type this reply and the likely hood of the victim prevailing is slim to none.

I have not sat on a jury for a criminal case in nearly twenty years. I was excused from that due to the victim (armed robbery/carjacking) lived on my mail route.

I do my civic duty and go whenever I am called. If I were on a jury for the shooter in the OP's post, I would cut him some slack. If I were on a jury for the burglars, I would try to convict them for burglary, possession of a firearm during a crime, double parking, not using turn signals, and any overdue library books found in their vehicle. I do not believe in being PC, this is just how I am wired. To quote Robert Blake, "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time". Or don't want to get shot.

We have a man named Brian Nichols in prison here in GA. While being transferred to a courtroom, he overpowered a guard in a stairwell and beat her severely, causing permanent damage. He did this on camera. Then he burst into a courtroom with the guards firearm and killed a judge, stenographer, and two other people, in front of eye witnesses, before he escaped. Hours later, he killed a federal LEO in a random incident.

Well over $1,000,000.00 was spent on his trial. Total waste of time and money for a low life piece of poop. Is this justice?

 

[Rastoff]

I doubt all eight struck the car, myself.

This is exactly my point. I believe he could have hit the car 8 times, but my experience tells me that it is unlikely that he did. So, where did all the misses go?

All you guys praising this shooter for spraying bullets around the neighborhood would change your time if it were your kids or loved ones nearby.

I will remain with the view that charging the man is a very poor use of the taxpayer's money, but that he should receive a severe tongue-lashing from someone (preferably the prosecutor or the sheriff). Sending this man to court is not "justice."

The value in sending him to court is in how his actions are perceived.

Had he not discharged his firearm, I would be on the side of no charge whatsoever. But, I don't want to send the message that it's OK to go shooting at people just because you don't know them. Remember, Bobby had no idea they were criminals. He just assumed that. What if they were hired to go move some stuff and Bobby killed one of them? Would it be OK to put Bobby in prison then?

 

[vigil617]

Thanks again to everyone who posted.

As the OP, I invited a discussion, and this has been an interesting one -- for a number of reasons, not all of them expected.

I think we've covered this pretty well by now. I will post any updated information about the incident that I find; otherwise, feel free to continue to discuss among yourselves. I feel like my part here is complete.

Thanks again.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Grandma of BG says " He was just turning his life around(20 chargers of burglary and car theft in his past) and going for a new job the next day"

Actually true in this case. That's why he needed to steal the equipment, and the truck to get him to work.

 

[TurboDieselTorque]

I don't think he should be charged.

In New Mexico you have the right to defend possessions and property that belongs to you, not your neighbor. You do have the right to defend your neighbor or anyone who's life is being threatened. There was no life in danger until he approached them. He should have grabbed a camera and kept a distance or write down descriptions, plates, etc. Not confront them.

That being said, I think he should be sat down and talked to about how he endangered his life for a few store bought items.

 

[Buford57]

Somebody mentioned lack of input from LEOs, so here's some:

Taking the actions as a officer that Bobby is reported to have taken (firing 8 shots AT a fleeing vehicle) would have gotten me suspended, minimum.

There are several good reasons why it isn't prudent as a citizen to confront (as distinguished from resisting) 2 felony suspects anywhere other than your own property unless another human life is in immanent danger:

1) You are outnumbered (poor tactics)
2) LE may not be able to distinguish you from them when they arrive (why confuse your own side?)
3) You may escalate the situation to one requiring deadly force from one that did not - and then live with it. (To all those in the "blow 'em away" camp - I have yet to meet a sane person who still made statements like that after having to do it.)

But using ONLY the information presented I would answer the question, as asked ("SHOULD he be charged?") I would vote no.

I consider his actions ill-advised at minimum and reckless at worst, but even if technically criminal formal charges are not always the best response to unlawful acts.

 

[hangnoose]

IT SHOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THIS PLAYS OUT.

SO MUCH could have gone sideways here. I'll bet GOOD SAM will live to regret taking those shots. And YOU MAY respond anyway you want to. NOT, I want to hear your opinion, but let me tell it to you first. LOL. Sorry about the spelling, my spellcheck is lost in cyberspace.