This is what gives the rest of us a bad name

I completely agree Buzz

I was more referring to IF you feel a need to intervene wondering why a weapon had to be involved

Since it was allegedly not loaded it seems unlikely that the man felt threatened

Too many people see being armed as a license to "mix it up"

Nothing should be further from the truth
 
Actually, having an unloaded weapon doesn't mean the person feels there is no threat, it may just indicate that, as with many concealed carriers, they feel the use of the talisman of the weapon is sufficient to ward off violence. A rather insane idea, of course, but rather common among many people, as shown by the "you don't even have to pull the trigger for the gun to stop the crime" attitude.

As for confronting shop lifters, etc., don't take that to an indication that we shouldn't do so. It was more a thought excercise intended to get people to recognize 1) the situation we will be in if petty theft goes completely unchecked, since it's a given that such petty theft tends to be a gateway crime and 2) the situation we are currently in is, in many ways, the result of these kinds of attitudes. Most businesses/locations which are known not to confront shop lifters, robbers, etc., become known as easy targets and either go out of business or become targets of increasingly greater acts of theft and violence. The person who knows they can steal a candy bar today has reason to believe they can steal the contents of the cash register tomorrow.
 
Too many people see being armed as a license to "mix it up"
Click to expand...

That couldn't be further from the truth. Possibly in some cases but not across the board.

I'd be more worried about the thieves & criminals seeing the moral turpitudes expressed more & more as a license to up the ante in their crimes.

Yoou guys should also quit making it sound like the farmer guy shot or wanted to shoot the petty thief, he did not shoot him.
 
In a recent case here in Minn. in which facts are few: it appears that a family man used a shotgun to defend his family but his failure to shoot the offender over a "minor' incedence caused he and his son to be shot dead, and his wife is in the hospital. All shot with his shotgun.

The facts are NOT out, but it appears if you tell some one to stop while holding a shotgun and they do not, you had better shoot them dead, over a minor thing, or they will shoot you.

This statement only stands until the truth comes out, but people here are trashing the old man with only as many facts.
Bob
 
This sure has been a lively debate.

I think some people are not reading closely enough though. The comparisons of small children or elderly stealing food were not made to the guy stealing the gas but in reference to an absurd statement made by a board member that all people caught stealing are "trash" should be shot dead the first time they are caught before they can begin their life of crime.

I agree with most of what Antipitas said. People should be involved in safe guarding their communities. I was ok with everything the farmer did up until the "blow them away" remark which was way out of line for the crime committed. Slippery slope arguments are not valid in cases like these. you cannot say because he stle 45 in gas that he will go on to committ larger crimes. it is not an argument you can make with any certaintly. I could easily say that because I saw someone speeding I should chase them down and blow them away before they kill someone in an accident.

In my opinion the farmer should have gotten their plate number, then I was even ok with him following them while talking to the police. But when he decided to make it a potentially deadly situation by involving a firearm and even asking permission to kill them, he stepped over a line that made him a greater threat than the theif.

As far as being a coward...there is nothing cowardly about not escelating an event to it's maximum level. That is an idea that all of us should hold onto when we carry.."avoid trouble at all cost" and when it cannot be avoided do not escelate it unless there is no other option.
 
The man was within the law. It is an old, and still technically legal regardless of how much DAs and police supervisors wish it wasn't, legal tradition called a Citizen's Arrest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Arrest

Stealing is not a minor offense. In principle it is someone taking a portion of the fruit of someone elses labor (essentially, their life). Thieves have no regard for the life and liberty of other people.

Personally, I wouldn't have kept after him at 70mph over a gallon of gas (EDIT: now that I think about it they probably burned more gas in the chase than the guy actually stole, :D). At that point I would have made sure to get the license and report it to the sheriff along with his heading. To continue a pursuit at this point might be putting other people in danger on the road.

I can't stand self-righteous civil "servants" who who like to throw around words like "vigilante"
 
Last edited:
The man was within the law.
Click to expand...
Actually that is probably not true.

Most states require the offense to be either a felony or a higher degree misdemeanor for a citizen's arrest to be an option.

Even in these cases there are rules about how much force is appropriate. You can only use "due force" and often there are rules about endangerment of innocent by-standers.

All being said though, I am not sure what part is worse...that the old man held them at gunpoint or that he did it with an unloaded firearm. Pulling and unloaded weapon is a good way to get yourself killed. Then we would have had a real tragedy. A man trying to do the right thing (even if he did get a little caught up in the moment) getting himself killed.
 
If this story were posted with the location being identified as Britain, we would be roundly jeering the British authorities for emasculating the citizenry.
 
Stick to the facts

Ok first off Playboypenguin, the perp did not commit just one misdomeaner. As a retired LEO, who was one for real, I can list at least three things the perp can be charged with. Criminal tresspassing, theft, and reckless operation of a motor vehicle, breaking and entering to name a few. I'm sure a good prosecutor could list many more, like adding to the deliquincy of a minor, child endangering, etc. etc.

Now what the farmer did was not exactly the brightest thing to do. Especially if it involved a car chase, however it is the farmers right under the constitution to protect the property of himself as well as that of a third person. And to answer your question about little old ladies stealing food, YES I have seen security guards tackle old ladies for stealing cat food at the local drug stores. So that argument is a moot point.

If you are truely a LEO as you say, then you know as well as I do that if someone was breaking into your home while you were away and your wife was alone with the kids. You would want her to shoot first and ask questions later, especially after the things we have seen on shift. Now the point I am making is this. Usually 95% of the time, before a major burglary happens, a thief will do little things to the place first. Meaning, breaking lights, stealing little things, breaking locks, to test the observance of neighbors and the security. Now was this a test for something bigger later on, only the perp knows. But as an LEO I have seen this happen all too often.

An English philospher once said that the law is an ass. And it is true when lawyers, and other free thinkers twist things around so the law no longer protects the innocent but the criminals.

Both were wrong, but the farmer should not be charged, sounds like someone is up for re-election or trying tomake a name for themselves politically.
 
I must say I am surprised over the amount of disagreement here. When did society start caring so much about thieves? This is NOT a victimless crime which we can discuss casually over beers. This is theft. Why are so many here willing to overlook justice? I am not talking about lawyers, police and judges....they have long lost the true meaning of the word justice. I mean if you hurt someone intentionally, then don't be surprised to be hurt yourself. An eye for an eye and all that.

Personally I would have preferred if the guy had shot him. One less scum bag with no sense of honor walking around. I certainly wouldn't be shedding any tears. And why haven't the defenders of scum addressed the before mentioned fact that the guy is in jail again for a different theft! This country is becoming insane.
 
Ok first off Playboypenguin, the perp did not commit just one misdomeaner. As a retired LEO, who was one for real, I can list at least three things the perp can be charged with. Criminal tresspassing, theft, and reckless operation of a motor vehicle, breaking and entering to name a few. I'm sure a good prosecutor could list many more, like adding to the deliquincy of a minor, child endangering, etc. etc.
Click to expand...
I also had a brief stint as an LEO.

As the old saying goes "never ask a cop about the law". There is a reason some people are LEO's and some are prosecutors.

None of the acts this theif did classified at the time as a felony. Those are the facts. It was NOT felony trespassing, it was NOT grand larceny, and to try and use the events that occured after the pursuit took place to justify the actions of the farmer would not be a wise legal move.

The farmer or anyone else could only react to the crime they were viewing. Not past or future thefts.

I am not defending the theif. I believe he should be caught, tried, and punished according to the severity of his crime. Being gunned down or "blown away" is not in accordance with his crime. I would want to know alot more about the situation before I started calling for his head as some people did right away. Was he a career criminal or was he someone in a bad way and in a bad place that stole just enough gas (possibly after trying to find the owner of the property first) to get his family to a better place? All these things would factor into how severly I would want to see him punished.

Noone is defending the crime but that does not mean we have to swing the full other way and want to "kill all lawbreakers on sight". Am I supposed to gun down anyone that crosses onto my property while hiking or hunting. And after I do should noone "shed a tear" over the person I killed? It is posted and they know better but they still often choose to do it since our property is a short cut to the main road. That makes them tresspassers.

I also do not buy into all that "crime is becoming the norm" crap. Are you saying most people are not law abiding?

I think we have some examples in this thread of some very angry people with some feelings of helplessness taking out their hostilities in the only way they know how. When people start calling for a person that steals some gas to be gunned down you have to think there are underlying factors at work.
 
I've been following this one without comment for a few days and after seeing WVladamire and Antipitis' posts as well as a few others, I'm glad to see there are still a few folks around who understand that it's not about the $5 or the gas. It's about the fact that crime is becoming a norm and accepted part of everyday life and that is unacceptable. It has nothing to do with the misrepresented "vigilante justice" it has to do with being fed up with everyone taking the attitude of it's not my job, it was only $5, petty theft is a part of life accept it. I for one refuse to accept theft and crime as a norm. Maybe I'm old fashioned, maybe you think it's an 1870 attitude, I'm ok with it. I hope those of you who don't want to get involved understand when your neighbor turns his head when you need a hand.
 
I think it is funny that there are people on this board that think the man with the gun was in the wrong.

Simply amazing
 
2ndamd:
Check what is being shoved down the throats of kids in public school and you will both amazed and dismayed to the point of tears.
Bob
 
Can we at least get a few facts straight? The "blow them away" was not a remark. It was a question directed to the 911 operator. That alone changes the whole scenario many of you are complaining about.

Now, I personally think it was a stupid thing to ask, but it was not a statement to the effect that the Farmer was gonna "blow them away." It was a question. Stop there. Please. :rolleyes:

The thing I was trying to address, was the odd behavior many of you display, when you keep saying the the cops should handle this problem. Folks, it was plainly stated that the cops were not handling this problem or the apparently on-going problem of petty thievery in that area. Nothing was being done! How long do you let it continue before you get up enough nerve to do the job you hired (through your taxes) others to perform? It's still the duty of a citizen to stop crime when it occurs right in front of you.

Great jumping Judas on a pogo stick! What ever happened to civic duty? :mad:

As far as all this talk about the Farmer being responsible for the high speed chase; the women; the child... What in Holy Hannah's name were they doing with this crook at the scene of a crime? The crook is the one that took off like a bat out of hades. He is the one responsible for his girly friend and her kid. He didn't have to leave. He coulda been a man and let himself face the consequences of his actions... But No! Like any petty crook, he took off. Endangering the lives of everyone around him in the process.

The Farmer needs a swift kick in the rear for his part, but the onus is on the crook. Period.

And for those of you that took exception to my remark on cowardice, get over it. Because it is sheer cowardice that says, "Petty crime is the norm and should be accepted" or "I don't want to get involved." I don't accept that world for a minute.

And if you think it was an ad hominem, you had better brush up on your definitions. It was directed to no single person. It was directed to the attitude shown in the paragraph directly above. :barf:

This isn't about guns. It's about crime and the attitude many in the U.S. display about it.

Now, as for escalating events... I work in a large grocery store. I confront petty crooks, day-in and day-out. I stop them at the door. I chase them in the parking lot. I have tackled them. Not only have I never had to draw from concealment during this type of escalation, they (the crooks) haven't a clue that I'm armed! The fact is, I'm a citizen and I'm making an arrest. Over $1.59 in candy stolen from the store.

Does that make me a gun crazed lunatic ready to take the law into my own hands? If so, then so be it. I can not only live with that label, I sleep very well at night.
 
This isn't about guns. It's about crime and the attitude many in the U.S. display about it.
Click to expand...
Now, I personally think it was a stupid thing to ask, but it was not a statement to the effect that the Farmer was gonna "blow them away." It was a question. Stop there. Please.
Click to expand...
My initial beef with the farmer is "about guns". In my opinion, asking that question shows willingness to perform the act. My problem is someone in possession of a firearm thinking this was a situation where "blowing them away" was even something to consider. This doesn't seem like a responsible enough attitude for a gun holder. I would hope we would hold ourselves to a higher standard.
 
I believe in Texas you cant perform a citizens arrest except for felonies. I am not going to hold a gun on someone for $5.00 worth of gas. Nor will I engage in a vehicle chase for petty theft. What I will do is note the description of the suspects, the vehicle make, vehicle tag number and a timeline. I will then call the police department with the pertinent info and give them my contact info in case they need a witness. I have no training nor certification as a peace officer.

I have called in intoxicated drivers before.

Now if someone is in danger of losing their life being raped or armed robbery that is a horse of another color. That would require immediate intervention.

As was once said its not Dodge City and you aint Wild Bill Hickock.
 
I think we have some examples in this thread of some very angry people with some feelings of helplessness taking out their hostilities in the only way they know how. When people start calling for a person that steals some gas to be gunned down you have to think there are underlying factors at work.
Click to expand...
What underlying factors are at work that cause people to have feelings of helplessness?

Could it be the inability of law enforcement to stop or catch all criminals? Could it be petty but recurring crimes that law enforcement lacks the resources to stop? Could it be the official attitude that citizens should refrain from any involvement other than calling the already-overtaxed law enforcement agencies?

Frustration occurs when law enforcement professionals can't get the job done and actively discourage citizens from contributing to the effort.
 
In Oklahoma, a citizen's arrest can be made for any felony witnessed by the citizen, and can also be made for any midemeanor that is classified as a "breach of the peace." Larcent, no matter how minor, definitely qualifies as a breach of the peace.

We, as law enforcement, cannot be everywher at every time. When a citizen witnesses a crime, and is able to apprehend a subject legally, we have a chance to do something. Otherwise, chances are, the crime would go unpunished. This is especially true in rural areas, where deputies are normally spread very thin.

If I had been the responding officer, I would have been greatful to the gentelmen, and given him a stern warning about the dangers faced when doin this ort of thing, followed by a swift pat on the back, and the offer to buy him a cup of coffee.
 
Say I decide to hold that $5.00 gas thief at gunpoint.

So if I get a summons to a civil suit is the police department going to pay for my legal defense? Or if an overzealous DA decides to press criminal charges are you going to be there to hold my hand? If the police want citizens to apprehend petty thieves then they should have some kind of citizens academy or a clearly stated policy for the public by the department and the DA. If the suspect decided to get physical is the police department going to pay for my medical bills or my lost work if the injury is bad?


My question would be did Farmer Brown have his gas pump secured with a good lock? If he did we might not be having this discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top