First 48 - Unsecured Gun Leads to Murder

B

Bartholomew Roberts

Moderator
I was watching the "First 48" on A&E and they discussed an interesting robbery/home invasion:

3 boys (one young adult, two minors) were leaving their house in Houston when they were carjacked by 4 teens (15-17) with a single handgun. The teens forced them back into the house they had just exited and began stealing items from the house. The one adult ran to try and retrieve a pistol from his bedroom; but it had already been stolen so he locked himself in a room. The robbers used the stolen handgun to fire through the door and then threatened to kill one of the teens if the man did not unlock the door. As the robbers fled (the man dialed 911 instead), they did just that.

As it turns out, one of the robbers secured a handgun from his father who was a security guard. They only had a single round for it - which is why they used the stolen handgun that was left in a dresser to kill the boy.

Given that this is an actual home invasion that took place in Houston, I thought it highlighted a few important points we discuss here frequently:

1. The importance of securing firearms not in your immediate control
2. The vulnerability you have to robbery or assault when moving from vehicle to residence or vice versa and the increased need for awareness.
 
Many years ago (before the Internet!), there was an incident where a fellow broke out of prison and broke into a nearby home, tied up the couple living there, searched the home, but ultimately left the couple tied up and mainly unharmed. The escapee went to the next house where a minister lived, tied him up, found a shotgun, and shot and killed the minister.

My wife worked with the woman who had been tied up but not harmed. She always thought she survived because there wasn't a gun in the house. So, yes, an unsecured gun can be used by the bad guys.
 
KyJim, did the police think anything had happened differently at the minister's house, other than the presence of the shotgun?

It just seems to me that if the killer had wanted to kill people he had already tied up, most houses have kitchen knives, phone cords, or leftover plastic shopping bags.

So I wonder if any other variables came into play at the second house.
 
I'm not above baiting them. Leave one that doesn't work loaded with dummy ammo where they're sure to find it. The rest are in the safe, except the one I have on me.
 
She always thought she survived because there wasn't a gun in the house.
Click to expand...
the flip side to this is that she/they may not have been tied up at all if they had a gun and knew how to use it. I say she got lucky the villan was in a hurry to move on...
 
The First 48; Detroit MI real life events...

I don't watch A&E's The First 48 very often.
I did hear about 2 years ago that the mayor of Detroit MI kicked the A&E network & production company out because they recorded the murder of a 2 year old girl! :eek:
I never saw that ep but I could see why the city's mayor or PD wouldn't want that covered.
 
I can see how anyone should be enraged that they would be recording instead of doing everything humanly possible to stop it the moment it looked like she could be in danger.

And these stories can just as well read "Homeowner fails at self defense".
It's just too easy to look at the end state of an encounter and then use that perfect hindsight and yet fail to accurately play the cause and effect game.

In point of fact, hindsight is not 20/20 because we actually don't always spot every pertinent fact. We also can not deduce with perfect accuracy a person's intentions relative to their actions because those actions may have been provoked by an unknown influence. The victim might say something that enrages the perpetrator, or an object like a newspaper clipping in a frame might sparc something. Maybe he has unknown plans and the clock is a concern, yet through the course of events the plan becomes overcome by events and is never a known factor despite it's impact on the outcome.
 
The story sounds like a hit piece on gun owners. I haven't read or listened to the story, because I couldn't find it from the link. However, I would ask those that have read it what facts were given concerning the following:

1. Age of the perpetrators
2. Background of the perpetrators
3. Criminal history of the perpetrators
4. Details on the theft, destruction, terror and cruelty imposed by the perpetrators.

The bottom line is this. Regular, good people can be careless - it's just a part of life. Good people loose their wallets, keys, purses, cell phones, and other stuff routinely. Good People forget people's names, miss appointments on occasion, drop breakable items. Good people don't always lock their home doors, car doors, and windows. EVERYONE is guilty of being careless on occasion, and that doesn't make them bad, evil, reprehensible, reckless, worthy of punishment or even severe admonishment.

The perpetrators of the crime, however, are evil, bad, law-breaking, people who would hurt and kill others simply for their own material gain. That's the real story! How psychopaths destroy lives and society's willingness to place blame elsewhere rather that dish out swift, severe punishment for the perpetrators.
 
KyJim, did the police think anything had happened differently at the minister's house, other than the presence of the shotgun?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I didn't get back sooner. Just missed this.

I really don't know the answer to that. My wife's co-worker relayed the story to her over 20 years ago. I do recall that the co-worker thought they were searching for a gun in her house but she may have simply surmised this. I know this sounds anti-gun but I think there are some people who might commit a murder with a gun rather than using a knife or club and "getting their hands dirty." However, that would likely not be the case if the bad guy simply wanted to kill someone like the famous Johnny Cash song line: "I shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top