Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Platinum Bullet member
Joined
·
3,210 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
From our usually anti-gun daily paper. A trifecta for a gun owner-stopped home invasion, apprehended hit and run driver who seriously injured another driver and apprehended a theft/robbery/vandalism suspect.


A collision Friday at the intersection North Water Street and East Garfield Avenue left one person seriously injured. The vehicle in the roadway was reported stolen from the South End Auto Plex. Decatur police say the driver of that vehicle fled the scene and was apprehended after attempting to break into a home.
SCOTT PERRY, HERALD & REVIEW



Tony Reid
DECATUR — An armed Decatur homeowner held a burglary and hit-and-run suspect at gunpoint after he caught the fleeing man trying to break into his home, police report.
A sworn affidavit from Decatur police said the homeowner cornered the 30-year-old suspect around 7 a.m. Friday as the man was trying to force his way into the house in the 2200 block of North Main Street through a window.
“(The homeowner) advised he held (the man) at gunpoint until officers arrived,” said Officer Brian Allison.

Police said the man had earlier fled from committing a burglary at South End Auto Plex, 1215 E. Prairie Ave. He had stolen a pickup truck from the business and then been involved in a severe vehicle collision at North Water Street and East Garfield Avenue, the force of the crash causing a victim in another vehicle to sustain a broken neck, according to police.

The man ran away from the crash and that is when police said he tried to force his way into the armed homeowner’s house on North Main Street.

A second sworn affidavit dealt with the South End Auto Plex burglary and said the man had smashed his way into the premises by hurling old vehicle spark plugs through a window measuring 3 feet by eight feet, causing damage estimated at $2,300.

But Officer William Hill said the man had been detected quickly once inside. “South Side Auto Plex has a sophisticated surveillance system whereby motion sensors activate and alert,” explained Hill. He said an alarm message was automatically sent through to the cellular phone of the business owner.
“(The system) allows (the owner) to speak directly into his phone and broadcast his voice to the inside of the business,” added Hill. “(The owner) reported to this officer that he saw (the suspect) inside his business and he told him police were in route. The owner responded to the business and saw (the suspect) steal the truck.”


The man was booked on preliminary charges of burglary, possession of a stolen vehicle and aggravated reckless driving. A check of Macon County Jail records Monday showed he remained in custody with bail set at $110,000, meaning he must post a bond of $11,000 to be released.
All preliminary charges are subject to review by the state's attorney’s office.

Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
NY50/70,

Excellent post. Yes, I agree, many times a legally armed citizen stops a crime or holds a bad guy for the police. In states like the "Peoples" Republik of Massachusetts" , such citizen response to criminals makes criminals out of the citizen! Many DAs in MA routinely indicted citizens who shot home invaders when I resided in that state. MA lawrr requires a homeowner to RETREAT before they shoot! Happily, here in PA we have the Castle Doctrine which removes the Liberal criminal coddling need to retreat in gravest extreme.

Webley
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
69,460 Posts
Some years ago (now) one of my brother-in-laws was living in a mobile home. 5 men from an adjoining county, one morning around 1:30 AM came and started a fire at each of the doors and windows of the mobile home ( and also with respect to the mobile home). My brother-in-law had a bolt hole and was able to leave the mobile home. 2 of the 5 men that morning said they were sorry. The County Sheriff & Commonwealth Attorney had no objections or problems with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Some years ago (now) one of my brother-in-laws was living in a mobile home. 5 men from an adjoining county, one morning around 1:30 AM came and started a fire at each of the doors and windows of the mobile home ( and also with respect to the mobile home). My brother-in-law had a bolt hole and was able to leave the mobile home. 2 of the 5 men that morning said they were sorry. The County Sheriff & Commonwealth Attorney had no objections or problems with that.
cpw,

It all depends on your state law. In some states there is a "Duty to Retreat" before you shoot a home invader. In other states, a man's home is his castle. Happily, PA is the later. In MA, you could go to jail. KNOW your rights and be governed accordingly.

Webley
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
69,460 Posts
cpw,

It all depends on your state law. In some states there is a "Duty to Retreat" before you shoot a home invader. In other states, a man's home is his castle. Happily, PA is the later. In MA, you could go to jail. KNOW your rights and be governed accordingly.

Webley
I am well aware of the matters mentioned in your post, so there was no need to mention them.

Additionally, in Eastern Kentucky, they have their own laws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
I am well aware of the matters mentioned in your post, so there was no need to mention them.

Additionally, in Eastern Kentucky, they have their own laws.
cpw,

WELL Pardon Me. Perhaps not all readers are as well informed as you are. In many states there is the RULE: SSS, That is Shoot, Shovel and Shut Up.

Be Well.

Webley
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
69,460 Posts
cpw,

WELL Pardon Me. Perhaps not all readers are as well informed as you are. In many states there is the RULE: SSS, That is Shoot, Shovel and Shut Up.

Be Well.

Webley
For one thing, your post had absolutely no bearing on the matter I mentioned in my post.

For another thing, I have been around a lot longer that you have. You should stop talking down to people (which you continue to do).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,258 Posts
cpw,

WELL Pardon Me. Perhaps not all readers are as well informed as you are. In many states there is the RULE: SSS, That is Shoot, Shovel and Shut Up.

Be Well.

Webley
People who are "not aware" of The Rules in THEIR OWN STATE, are fools, and deserve what they get.

The only "other states" whose rules interest me, are ones I am about to travel to.

Taxachusetts,,,, doesn't interest me even slightly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
For one thing, your post had absolutely no bearing on the matter I mentioned in my post.

For another thing, I have been around a lot longer that you have. You should stop talking down to people (which you continue to do).
cpw,

Please elaborate how I "talk down to people." How did the Moderators miss your finding? What is your evidence? Be well.

Webley
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
98,333 Posts
People who are "not aware" of The Rules in THEIR OWN STATE, are fools, and deserve what they get.

The only "other states" whose rules interest me, are ones I am about to travel to.

Taxachusetts,,,, doesn't interest me even slightly.
Well, since I'd sort of like to visit USS Constitution and perhaps Battleship Cove (and maybe even Lexington and Concord) I feel i should know the local rules so as to be properly prepared. Just in case opportunity happened to arise...
 

·
Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet Member
Joined
·
69,460 Posts
cpw,

Please elaborate how I "talk down to people." How did the Moderators miss your finding? What is your evidence? Be well.

Webley
Read your own posts to me. It is self evident. If you do not see it, then I cannot do anything about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,213 Posts
Well, since I'd sort of like to visit USS Constitution and perhaps Battleship Cove (and maybe even Lexington and Concord) I feel i should know the local rules so as to be properly prepared. Just in case opportunity happened to arise...
The Salem is across the bay from Boston now, I'd like to see that too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
OOOOH BOY! C'mon, let's all play nice! Self defense is a very thorny issue up here in Canada. Without a clearly defined "castle" doctrine, different jurisdictions will treat use of force incidents with varying degrees of severity. Canadian law is very convoluted but a gentleman published a book, "No More Mr. Nice Guy" that has taken off like a rocket! He took the time to research all the laws and case law pertaining to defense of self and defense of property. Even law firms are snapping up his book since it codifies everything a lawyer (and a citizen) needs to know to use the existing laws effectively. Sadly, even if we're perfectly justified in using force, especially involving a firearm, we have have to be fully prepared to get run through the legal system, forced to hire a lawyer, and even if acquitted, left on the hook for the legal fees. This happened to an acquaintance of mine. All 27 charges were dropped or dismissed but he still owed $60,000.! Some justice, eh?
 

·
Platinum Bullet member
Joined
·
3,210 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
It is a problem. Here in Illinois we now have a good law since the courts forced the state to allow concealed carry BUT it also depends on where an incident occurs. The prosecutor sets the tone for prosecutions or persecutions as some are. Even if you prevail in court you can be out thousands of dollars.
Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
OOOOH BOY! C'mon, let's all play nice! Self defense is a very thorny issue up here in Canada. Without a clearly defined "castle" doctrine, different jurisdictions will treat use of force incidents with varying degrees of severity. Canadian law is very convoluted but a gentleman published a book, "No More Mr. Nice Guy" that has taken off like a rocket! He took the time to research all the laws and case law pertaining to defense of self and defense of property. Even law firms are snapping up his book since it codifies everything a lawyer (and a citizen) needs to know to use the existing laws effectively. Sadly, even if we're perfectly justified in using force, especially involving a firearm, we have have to be fully prepared to get run through the legal system, forced to hire a lawyer, and even if acquitted, left on the hook for the legal fees. This happened to an acquaintance of mine. All 27 charges were dropped or dismissed but he still owed $60,000.! Some justice, eh?
Lawrence.

Your Canadian Lawrrs seem like a carbon copy of the Peoples" Republik of Massachusetts Lawrrs for home invasion self defense.

WHY should an innocent homeowner suffering a home invasion NEED (?) to spend their life savings to defend their innocence? Where is the justice?

An alternative has been posted in the past that the homeowner should defend against criminal attack: wrap the perp in the shower curtain, dump the carcass on the interstate, and go get a new shower curtain for the next perp.

I am not advocating this procedure, but it is an alternative to spending one's life savings in court when the LAW did not PREVENT the first invasion.

Webley
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
98,333 Posts
OOOOH BOY! C'mon, let's all play nice! Self defense is a very thorny issue up here in Canada. Without a clearly defined "castle" doctrine, different jurisdictions will treat use of force incidents with varying degrees of severity. Canadian law is very convoluted but a gentleman published a book, "No More Mr. Nice Guy" that has taken off like a rocket! He took the time to research all the laws and case law pertaining to defense of self and defense of property. Even law firms are snapping up his book since it codifies everything a lawyer (and a citizen) needs to know to use the existing laws effectively. Sadly, even if we're perfectly justified in using force, especially involving a firearm, we have have to be fully prepared to get run through the legal system, forced to hire a lawyer, and even if acquitted, left on the hook for the legal fees. This happened to an acquaintance of mine. All 27 charges were dropped or dismissed but he still owed $60,000.! Some justice, eh?
Well, when one considers the impact of a felony conviction (and I do NOT know what they are in Canada, but will bet it ain't something a sane man would want to have happen), probably cheap at the price - certainly would be down here in Tejas.

Have long thought that there ought to be a provision that if a criminal prosecution failed, Defendant ought to be reimbursed for all costs expended in his defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,435 Posts
That used to be in The U.K. I don't know about Canada though.
That's where you see the settlement as "$XXX.xx & costs"!
All you had to do was ask for them.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
98,333 Posts
That used to be in The U.K. I don't know about Canada though.
That's where you see the settlement as "$XXX.xx & costs"!
All you had to do was ask for them.
I was taught UK was a "Loser pays" system in tort law, but never heard it worked that way in criminal law.

The way our (USA) tort law system has developed, I have thought that if it really needed reform (and I think it could use it), then simply going to "loser pays" would go a LONG way toward elimination of frivolous suits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,435 Posts
Yes. Criminal cases are "The Crown Vs (whoever)".
Civil its Joe blow Vs Harry Jones, so the looser pays, "The Crown" never pays.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
98,333 Posts
Yes. Criminal cases are "The Crown Vs (whoever)".
Civil its Joe blow Vs Harry Jones, so the looser pays, "The Crown" never pays.
That's what I thought. A barrister (and MP) named A.P. Herbert wrote a series of short pieces that mostly appeared in PUNCH (and then were collected into a book) that are utterly hilarious. Titled UNCOMMON LAW, and highly recommended by this former attorney. Many of the chapters are titled things like REX v. HADDOCK: Is a Golfer a Gentleman.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top