blaming the laws on the books? it was a judge that made the decision to basically do nothing…not the lawbooks.
So in OK…stealing a car is punishable by death?
I’m not in OK, but it could be at my house. I car thief has to ask himself… “Am I feeling lucky?” Well, are ya punk?
CSA 
2 Likes
Someone inside your home - then yes blow him away. But that’s well beyond car theft. That’s personal endangerment…no problem with that. But that’s now the way the story was told. If your car is parked in your driveway and someone is out there hot-wiring it then are you saying it’s OK to kill him? That I have a problem with.
The homeowner grabbed a firearm and went outside to stop the car thief and said thief attempted to run the homeowner over with his own car.
As far as I’m concerned the homeowner should be given a key to the city for saving the expenses of pursuing felony conviction number 54 and unclogging the court system at least a small amount.
I’m sure the police department was secretly a bit elated over this as the thug had a multiple conviction history of eluding police, assault and battery upon an officer, assault and battery with a deadly weapon upon an officer, and a few others.
5 Likes
Good riddance, low down parasite car thief, no value to society, whatsoever
1 Like
While I own and have carried hand guns when I felt the need I am opposed to the concealed carry, stand your ground and castle law legislation that has become popular lately. The current hand gun legislation gives an implicit presumption of justifiable homicide to those who feel they have a need and a right to carry a fire arm with them. Without these new gun laws a gun death was considered homicide until determined otherwise in court and only in the most desperate of situations would most people shoot someone. But that has changed and for the worse in my opinion. And in this state I am pre qualified for an ‘enhanced(?)’ concealed carry permit but see no need for it. More and more it’s becoming the wannabe Cordell Walkers that I fear. Friendly fire from an undisciplined self proclaimed law man is as deadly as hostile fire from a criminal.
2 Likes
In that context then the home owner was defending themselves…No problem with shooting then and possibly killing them. But that wasn’t expressed from the start. It’s no longer just a car theft issue, but a self defense issue.
2 Likes
Personally I never felt the need to carry a gun. I’m not opposed to people who do. I just never felt so scared or threatened that I needed a gun to protect myself and family.
I know a guy who carries a gun for protection. But he is scared of every single NON-WHITE person he sees. I mean real scared. He thinks everyone of them is out to rob them or kill him or rape their daughters. After 911 his anxiety really went up. I’ve seen him in a store and spots someone he THINKS is Muslim…First thing he does is puts his hand on his concealed gun and takes the safety off. I’m fully expecting to hear about him getting arrested for killing 10-12 innocent people because of his paranoid delusions. But then again I also believe he may just be too scared to even pull his gun on someone. A situation happens that may require firearm intervention…he’s be in the corner of the room curled up in the fetal position.
Friend I grew up with and went to Nam with became a cop in NYC after Nam. He’s one of the bravest people I know. In his 30 year career as a NYC cop (retiring as a highly decorated sergeant) he only pulled his gun ONCE. Never fired at anyone.
Yes, @MikeInNH, the hyper paranoid carrying firearms is becoming my greatest concern when out in crowded public situations. I recently took a friend out to eat and saw two men with pistols clearly visible and a third with a bulge in his jacket that May West would never have been flattered to see. And as for vets, it’s peculiar that while quite a few recently returning vets feel the need to be armed very few Vietnam vets do. Or so it appears in my area. Maybe at my age, driving vehicles no self respecting crook would want and never carrying more than $40 in cash allows me the freedom to not worry about being robbed. There was a time that I often made significant cash night deposits at a nearby bank branch and sometimes became suspiscious of any vehicle in sight. There was never a problem so it seems I was needlessly paranoid.
"thief attempted to run the homeowner over with his own car."
That makes all the difference in the world. Self defense=justifiable homicide.
2 Likes
Maybe the Viet Nam veterans have had enough time to put their demons in their place, but some recent vets that saw a lot of combat have not. I worked with a combat veteran of Viet Nam, and he said his mother walked into his room shortly after he returned home. She looked at him for a while, and she was so glad to see him that she had to touch his foot. He woke up, caught himself, and told his mother not to do that again because the next time he might try to kill her before he awoke completely. Another one didn’t think he was suitable for regular folk back home, and went to Romania to guard the embassy for a few years until he got himself straight.
Well I am particularly concerned about some veterans returning home and rushing out to re-arm themselves. I’m glad that carrying a hand gun wasn’t trendy in 1970.
Can we please get away from PTSD and back to the original subject? I’ll plead as a personal favor if necessary. I have personal reasons for my plea.
I think we all agree that this fatal hit & run was totally avoidable and never should have happened. Our criminal justice system as it regards dealing with drunk drivers is horribly broken and needs to be straightened out. I’ve long advocated that our system is pathetically lenient with DUIs, and in this case (and in many, many thousands of others) it has cost a life needlessly, and ruined the lives of the victim’s children, parents, spouse, and everyone close to the victim.
This lady should not have been allowed on the road. I believe the best way to accomplish this is to impound the vehicle of a driver that fails a field sobriety test no matter who owns it, confiscating it upon conviction and returning it if acquitted. Other penalties could be added depending on the severity of the abuse. By the time the total violations accumulates to 30, a person should have spent significant time in jail and gone through repeated and continuing therapy programs. Yes, this is a “tough love” approach. But not as tough as that imposed on the victims’ families for the rest of their lives.
It’s time to end this nightmare. It’s way past time to get serious.
5 Likes
A family friend was killed a few years ago when a drunk driver rear ended her at a red light- he was doing 80+ at the time and did not even slow down.
The guy was from PA and did not have a license- he had 40 DUIs against him. The truck he was driving belonged to a friend of his. Of course the friend said he had stolen his truck, probably to absolve himself of anything that happened.
I believe he got 5~10 years, maybe more, I can’t recall, but he did get prison time for the girl’s death.
Probably the judge in your friend’s case was still in touch with reality,and still had a conscience, unlike the judge of that woman mentioned earlier