Former Civic Hero Now Labeled a Vigilante, for his latest use of his Revolver - Photo

If there are folks supporting what Witter did, maybe they shouldn't have CHLs either given they don't seem to understand the law. It is hard to make proper legal decisions when you don't understand the law.
Click to expand...

Well, the main problem is that some parts of the Portland Metro area are going to hell. Drugs and gang activity are fueling increased violence and a lot more theft. It has got worse in the last couple of years for sure. Unemployment is extremely high, and one in five Oregonians is now on food stamps.

The police are hamstrung, though, as every time a black man is shot, there are charges of racism, and even large public protests. The Reverend Jessee Jackson even came to Portland this past February, to lead a major protest rally, charging the police with racism.

Here is a photo of Jackson appearing last February with leaders of the Portland Black Community, condemning the police for racism:

Jesse+jackson.jpg


Even more recently, the mayor of Portland ( a very liberal gay Democrat ), fired the police chief of the city, who happened to be a woman. But he did not fire her over problems with handling the increasing crime. She was instead fired due to the outrage over these incidents of alleged police wrongdoing. So the liberal mayor ( who has even publicly admitted to having a sexual relationship with an 18 yr old intern after initially lying about it and denying it ever happened during his election campaign ) cares more about addressing the issue of police brutality, than he does the crime situation.

The folks on the more conservative side of the political spectrum in the Portland Metro area are getting a bit frustrated with the whole mess, I do believe. They are such a minority, though, that they cannot influence matters politically. Anyway, I think that may be why some have made comments in support of Witter. People are feeling frustrated, and don't feel that the government is doing enough about crime.

P.S. - Gresham, the city where this incident with Witter took place, is right next to Portland, and is part of the Portland Metro area. It really is all one contiguous metro area. You really cannot even notice when you go from one city to the next, unless you pay close attention to signs.

P.P.S - The liberal Portland City Government does not even support the right of any citizens to have a Concealed Handgun License. But they can't do anything about it, as state law has precedence.

.
 
Last edited:
I'd really have to say that Witter is lucky that he wasn't charged with attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon.
Click to expand...


Well, the judge that Witter appeared before felt differently. He dropped the two most serious charges, and left only the two most minor misdemeanors.

I don't know what Witter's attorney may have said in court to argue for the dismissal of the additional charges. Perhaps Witter's lack of any police record played a role.

Remember that a year ago Witter was hailed as being a hero for coming to the aid of a man who had been badly beaten with a hammer, and was covered in blood.

.
 
Police start the charging process by arresting for violation of certain sections of the law, and the prosecuting attorney formalizes those charges in a charging document.

So, as I said, it's lucky Witter wasn't charged with attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon.

That would have made his treatment at the hands of the press, and treatment of gunowners in general, probably a lot worse.


"Remember that a year ago Witter was hailed as being a hero for coming to the aid of a man who had been badly beaten with a hammer, and was covered in blood."

This second incident makes it seem as if Mr. Whitter might have a touch of "superman syndrome."
 
Police start the charging process by arresting for violation of certain sections of the law.

So, as I said, it's lucky Witter wasn't charged with attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon.
Click to expand...


I fully understand that. But the judge who Witter appeared before did not even support the much lesser charges the police made of unlawful use of a weapon and reckless endangerment.

So if the judge felt that those far lesser charges were not appropriate, then how on earth could he have ever agreed with assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder??

.
 
He would have been much better off taking down a license plate number and direction of travel. Shooting at a fleeing car? This man has been watching too many movies.

He's lucky that the two charges have been dropped. He'll loose his gun and license for sure. I can't say I disagree with that either. We don't need another mall ninja out there.
 
He'll loose his gun and license for sure.
Click to expand...


Are you saying that the police can permanently keep his revolver??

I heard a report that the Sheriff has no plans to give him back his CHL, no matter what. But I've heard nothing said by anyone about the status of his gun.

If he is found guilty of these misdemeanors, would it be normal procedure for the police to keep his gun permanently? There are no laws in Oregon or at the Federal level that would prevent him from buying another gun, as these are only misdemeanors.

So what would be the point of confiscating his revolver?

.
 
He's a loose cannon and a danger to others. He inserted himself into a situation that was not violent, had no real potential to become violent, and in which he was not involved until he chose to be.

What if he'd succeeded in blowing out the tires? You've got two criminals who've just been deprived of their means of escape. That equals two cornered animals.

What if the thieves were armed and chose to return fire? More people would have been placed in danger, and it would have been Witter's fault for escalating the situation to that point.

What if he'd maimed or killed one of these guys? He'd be on trial for manslaughter, possibly murder.

What if a miss or a ricochet had injured a bystander? My understanding is that his backstop was a public rail station.

From the article,

Witter said he took action because police often show up only after a crime has taken place.
Click to expand...

I'd say that's fairly close to the definition of vigilantism. I won't speculate as to what legal penalties he deserves, but something needs to happen to make this man rethink his decision to carry a gun.

According to another article,

“I felt it was the right thing to do, I never pointed my weapon at anybody. The shots were controlled shots at the car,” Witter said. "I would do it again."
Click to expand...

That's going to hurt his legal defense. This guy doesn't need to be talking to the media at all.
 
Last edited:
"I fully understand that. But the judge who Witter appeared before did not even support the much lesser charges the police made of unlawful use of a weapon and reckless endangerment.

So if the judge felt that those far lesser charges were not appropriate, then how on earth could he have ever agreed with assault with a deadly weapon or attempted murder??"

Judges will often dismiss lesser charges while leaving far more severe charges in places if they feel that those lesser charges are not borne out by the facts as stated in the charging documents.

That's the funny thing about criminal charges - they aren't necessarily so closely linked together that if you take out a lesser one the more severe ones fall.

Years ago I covered a murder trial in which one guy killed a romantic rival. He was originally charged with probably 10 or 15 different things. It was a real paper fest.

But the case was so clear cut, that every lesser charge except one or two were dropped (I think the prosecution dropped some, I think the judge canked one or two in pretrial hearings, IIRC) in favor of murder in the second degree.

Personally, I don't really care what they charge this imbecile with other than in the context of the severity with which Witter's ill conceived actions allow press and anti-gunners to categorize ALL CCW holders.

As I noted above, had Witter been so charged, his actions would have had a far more damaging effect on the rest of us.

This guy tossed himself under the bus, and he really deserves to have it roll over him.

I, personally, do not think that he should get his CCW back. Ever. His past service in terms of helping rescue a man being beaten is nice, but it really does nothing to mitigate the severity of what he's brought on himself.
 
What if a miss or a ricochet had injured a bystander? My understanding is that his backstop was a public rail station.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is the issue that the police complained about the most. There was a Park & Ride parking lot just down the street, where there was a platform for Portland's MAX light rail public transportation system.

The Portland Metro area is very heavily populated, with a total population of 2.7 million.

In comparison, population of the entire state of Oregon is only 3.9 million. The largest city in the county that I live in has 140,000 people.

A lot of the state is very sparsely populated.

.

.
 
"Well, the main problem is that some parts of the Portland Metro area are going to hell. Drugs and gang activity are fueling increased violence and a lot more theft. It has got worse in the last couple of years for sure. Unemployment is extremely high, and one in five Oregonians is now on food stamps."

So?

Frustration with the societal situation doesn't give Witter carte blanch to do what he did.


Ailing society /= license to chase after petty criminals and fire your gun with no just provocation.
 
This guy tossed himself under the bus, and he really deserves to have it roll over him.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you would have preferred that Witter had been charged with attempted murder, and sent away to state prison for a long time.

I doubt many would support such an extreme position.

.
 
So?
Click to expand...

I stated that to explain why I feel some folks have made statements in support of Witter, on local online forums and also talk radio. I made that quite clear in the statement.

My argument was not that it justified Witter's actions. You have taken a snippet out of context from my statement to make it appear that was what I was talking about.

That is most unfair of you.

.
 
Are your reading comprehension skills really that poor?

As I noted above, had Witter been so charged, his actions would have had a far more damaging effect on the rest of us.

That would have made his treatment at the hands of the press, and treatment of gunowners in general, probably a lot worse.


Can you tell me which one of those statements indicates that I wish Witter would have been so charged so that the press and anti gunners could get even more leverage over on all gun owners?
 
"I stated that to explain why I feel some folks have made statements in support of Witter, on local online forums and also talk radio. I made that quite clear in the statement."

I know you did.

That's why my response was what it was.

It doesn't matter how poorly the police perform their duties, which you outlined in the subsequent paragraphs.

It doesn't matter how much crime there is on the streets, which you outlined in the subsequent paragraphs.

It doesn't matter how many criminals walk away from the system, which you alluded to in the subsequent paragraphs.

It doesn't matter how frustrated people get with a broken criminal justice system, which you stated in the subsequent paragraphs.

NONE of that gives ANYONE, you, me, Witter, anyone, the right to go outside the tenets of the rights and responsibilities of, and legal restrictions on, a CCW holder.

Witter appears to have been thinking that, by his actions, he could somehow make things better in his community.

On the contrary, he has only made things worse, for himself, for his community, and for gunowners in general.
 
On the contrary, he has only made things worse, for himself, for his community, and for gunowners in general.
Click to expand...
Sad but true. How many armed robberies and shootings have taken place in Portland since then, and how much press did they get compared to Witter's escapade?

In some respects, it's still looking like 1992 out there. The media is still pouncing on every dolt-with-a-gun story and giving it a wide audience. How much reporting do we see when a gun is used in the legitimate abatement of crime? Almost none.

But when someone has a negligent discharge in Wal Mart or marches down a city street with a gun in his hand, we see a flood of ink and camera time over the matter. We are still fighting a war of public perception, and to look at the comparitive reporting, we're not doing very well.

Here's a bonus question. How many folks here remember Broughton and Kostric carrying guns at political rallies? I'm guessing around 90%. How many folks here can name any of the speakers at those rallies? Almost none.

My point is, the "scary guy with the gun" aspect sticks in the public memory for quite awhile, even after all the other details have long since faded.
 
I believe there is a significant diference between taking the law into one's own hands and taking law enforcement into one's own hands. They are two different things but I could be mistaken.
Click to expand...

Exactly. We need to be very careful with using the term "vigilante" and call the press on it whenever they use the term incorrectly. What Witter was attempting to do was make a citizen's arrest. Most all of us agree that he used excessive force in doing so. If he'd stopped the perps and then hung them from lamp posts, then he would have been practicing vigilantism.
 
i agree what he did was wrong. even if it had been the police that shot at the hood rats it wouldnt have been justified. not over a couple of ipods or cell phones. i think he should lose his carry permit.
 
Mike Irwin said:
"I stated that to explain why I feel some folks have made statements in support of Witter, on local online forums and also talk radio. I made that quite clear in the statement."

I know you did.

That's why my response was what it was.

It doesn't matter how poorly the police perform their duties, which you outlined in the subsequent paragraphs.

It doesn't matter how much crime there is on the streets, which you outlined in the subsequent paragraphs.

It doesn't matter how many criminals walk away from the system, which you alluded to in the subsequent paragraphs.

It doesn't matter how frustrated people get with a broken criminal justice system, which you stated in the subsequent paragraphs.

NONE of that gives ANYONE, you, me, Witter, anyone, the right to go outside the tenets of the rights and responsibilities of, and legal restrictions on, a CCW holder.

Witter appears to have been thinking that, by his actions, he could somehow make things better in his community.

On the contrary, he has only made things worse, for himself, for his community, and for gunowners in general.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with this. Whitter is an idiot looking for a place to be stupid. He found that place it looks like. Take his CCW permanently and fine him $500 and 1 year probation. He could do some community service work as well.

Horrible decision making processes can rarely be changed. All you could hope to do is make someone like this afraid of pulling their weapon in a like situation. But it won't change the fact that the individual still thinks he should.
 
He deserves the maximum sentence. You use a firearm to stop or prevent GBH or death not in the defense of iPhones......Now in defense of iPads...maybe :p:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top