NH man charged after he stopped a Robbery ! [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : NH man charged after he stopped a Robbery !


Gunnut 45/454
02-22-2012, 19:43
Here we go again NH cops take a mans guns after charging him with discharging his pistol to stop a robber!! They went and took every gun he had from his home -I'm sure they all are on they way to being destroyed as we speak! :steamed:




http://forum.pafoa.org/national-11/164315-nh-man-faces-jail-after-using-gun-nab-robber.html

NH Trucker
02-22-2012, 22:09
Yup, here we go again is right... There were two threads about this in the GNG lounge yesterday. Yes, he stopped the burglar, but under NH state law he had no legal justification for firing his weapon, regardless of where he aimed it. And that is what he's being charged with, UNLAWFULLY DISCHARGING HIS WEAPON, aka, felony reckless conduct. Yeah, it sucks, but he did break the law in his firing a "warning shot" and now has to deal with the legal consequences of not knowing the laws of where he lives.

And his guns are NOT on their way to being destroyed, so relax. In fact, New Hampshire DOES NOT destroy confiscated guns even after a felony conviction. They go to public auction, but that is ONLY after a felony conviction, and years in storage. He was arrested for a felony charge, and it's standard for the police to confiscate a person's weapons until things are cleared up. New Hampshire is FAR from comparable to the BS in the liberal cess pools in southern New England. I know, a guy stopped a crime and is being punished for having done something illegal in the process. It sucks, but it is what it is. Maybe if more people educated themselves on what is lawful and unlawful in using their firearms, things like this can be avoided. Also, if more people educated themselves in the laws of a state they're criticizing before jumping to conclusions that a guy only got arrested because the northeast is full of gun grabbing commies, threads like this could be more educational and less filled with emotional rants about how "unfair" it all is. Just a thought...

And for the record, there is the possibility that the charges will be dropped against him. Contrary to what you may believe, New Hampshire is actually a VERY pro-gun state.

Jerry
02-22-2012, 23:39
Yup, here we go again is right... There were two threads about this in the GNG lounge yesterday. Yes, he stopped the burglar, but under NH state law he had no legal justification for firing his weapon, regardless of where he aimed it. And that is what he's being charged with, UNLAWFULLY DISCHARGING HIS WEAPON, aka, felony reckless conduct. Yeah, it sucks, but he did break the law in his firing a "warning shot" and now has to deal with the legal consequences of not knowing the laws of where he lives.

And his guns are NOT on their way to being destroyed, so relax. In fact, New Hampshire DOES NOT destroy confiscated guns even after a felony conviction. They go to public auction, but that is ONLY after a felony conviction, and years in storage. He was arrested for a felony charge, and it's standard for the police to confiscate a person's weapons until things are cleared up. New Hampshire is FAR from comparable to the BS in the liberal cess pools in southern New England. I know, a guy stopped a crime and is being punished for having done something illegal in the process. It sucks, but it is what it is. Maybe if more people educated themselves on what is lawful and unlawful in using their firearms, things like this can be avoided. Also, if more people educated themselves in the laws of a state they're criticizing before jumping to conclusions that a guy only got arrested because the northeast is full of gun grabbing commies, threads like this could be more educational and less filled with emotional rants about how "unfair" it all is. Just a thought...

And for the record, there is the possibility that the charges will be dropped against him. Contrary to what you may believe, New Hampshire is actually a VERY pro-gun state.

:laughabove: :rofl:

The “MORONS” are voting liberal ******-bags into office so as far as I’m concerned they reap what they sow. I wouldn’t set foot in such a liberal cesspool and would hope neither would any supporter of the Constitution. It is illegal to discharge firearms in the city limits here also. HOWEVER! If you are protecting yourself (against a burglar) it is perfectly legal.

janice6
02-22-2012, 23:44
He turned to me and I shot at him.........I missed.

NH Trucker
02-23-2012, 09:13
:laughabove: :rofl:

The “MORONS” are voting liberal ******-bags into office so as far as I’m concerned they reap what they sow. I wouldn’t set foot in such a liberal cesspool and would hope neither would any supporter of the Constitution. It is illegal to discharge firearms in the city limits here also. HOWEVER! If you are protecting yourself (against a burglar) it perfectly legal.

If you actually read the MANY articles on this story, the shooter admits that he fired the shot JUST TO SHOW HE WAS SERIOUS, and NOT to protect himself. That's why he was arrested. Because he fired his weapon in an area not deemed safe for shooting, it was considered reckless conduct, which is what he was charged with. So, with the shooter ADMITTING that he was only firing to make the burglar "know he was serious," how does that constitute self defense?

I'm not sure what you're lauging at, my knowlege of the laws of MY state, or your ignorance of this state, its laws, its populous, and your lack of ability to comprehend what's written out for you in clear, plain english?

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

NH Trucker
02-23-2012, 11:02
He turned to me and I shot at him.........I missed.



THAT would have worked out much better for him, especially if he included saying that the burglar started to come at him, rather than admitting that he deliberately fired a warning shot "just so the guy knew he was serious." That would have been deemed lawful use of force by statute. Too late now...

NH Trucker
02-23-2012, 12:01
Looks like the County Attorney decided to drop the charge against the shooter. Public outcry vs. an elected official.


I'm glad the guy was able to get out of this. But my whole arguement in ALL of the threads on this was that firing a warning shot is not legally justified in this state, especially in a residential neighborhood. Just because people don't agree with a law doesn't mean the police are wrong in enforcing it. They're doing their jobs. Why should the laws only be applicable to some and not all?

Rustin
02-23-2012, 12:45
Education is so important and overlooked. There is a very thin line defining where and when lethal force can be applied. Firing a warning shot is something you see in hollywood and is very much an illegal discharge. I think pointing a gun at someone or at least drawing one is showing that your serious. In ohio drawing your gun is considered lethal force.Think of it this way, there are 12 lawyers attatched to every bullet you fire. Glad the guy didn't get in trouble but people need to Train and educate themselves. It's a dangerous and unpredictable world out there.

SpringerTGO
02-23-2012, 13:19
He stopped a criminal, but admitted firing a shot that was not self defense.
If he had spoken with an attorney before speaking with the police, things might have gone differently. But he was so much in the right, just like a lot of people on Glocktalk think they will be, that he had nothing to hide.

Gunnut 45/454
02-23-2012, 14:36
NH Trucker
Thanks for the update- but the charges should never have been filed in the first place!!
Now maybe you folks could get that law removed from the books as a felony? Just change it to a fine of like $10. Now lets see if he gets his firearms back?:supergrin:

Jerry
02-23-2012, 14:44
If you actually read the MANY articles on this story, the shooter admits that he fired the shot JUST TO SHOW HE WAS SERIOUS, and NOT to protect himself. That's why he was arrested. Because he fired his weapon in an area not deemed safe for shooting, it was considered reckless conduct, which is what he was charged with. So, with the shooter ADMITTING that he was only firing to make the burglar "know he was serious," how does that constitute self defense?

:laughabove: :rofl:
The “MORONS”

Evidently you missed my opening statement. I’ll explain! As in, he’s a moron for saying he shot to show he was serious. As in, the MORONS of “your” state put MORONS in office that make emotional, irrational MORONIC laws.


I'm not sure what you're lauging at, my knowlege of the laws of MY state, or your ignorance of this state, its laws, its populous, and your lack of ability to comprehend what's written out for you in clear, plain english?

What I’m laughing at is the MORON that shot to scare and admitted it, the MORONIC law makers of “your” state, the BRILLIANT people of "your" state that have elected them and you for your BRILLIANT attempt to justify his being arrested for protecting his property.

I am not ignorant of the laws of “your” state. At least it looks like the county attorney has half a brain. He'll probably be voted out next election. :rofl:

And before you ballistic about all the MORON statement… We have our share here too.:crying:

NH Trucker
02-23-2012, 16:17
Evidently you missed my opening statement. I’ll explain! As in, he’s a moron for saying he shot to show he was serious. As in, the MORONS of “your” state put MORONS in office that make emotional, irrational MORONIC laws.



So, you think that it's ok for someone to shoot to threaten and not in self defense? As the shooter himself stated it wasn't? I can't really speak for whoever wrote the law that outlined Felony Reckless Conduct, since that was passed in 1994, and I was 14 at the time.



What I’m laughing at is the MORON that shot to scare and admitted it, the MORONIC law makers of “your” state, the BRILLIANT people of "your" state that have elected them and you for your BRILLIANT attempt to justify his being arrested for protecting his property.

I am not ignorant of the laws of “your” state. At least it looks like the county attorney has half a brain. He'll probably be voted out next election. :rofl:

And before you ballistic about all the MORON statement… We have our share here too.:crying:



I bet you guys do. A friend of mine is stationed down in N.O. with the Navy, and she tells me all about it. But is there any place that DOESN'T have morons, either in the population or government?

But here's the thing with this case... He wasn't defending his property, nor did he fire his weapon in self defense. And I never defended the arrest as him having been charged for protecting his property, because that wasn't what he was charged with at all. He wasn't justified to shoot in the reason he did. I've stated this every time I've replied to comments on here, and that is why I asked about your comprehension skills (probably uncalled for but understand the frustration here.)

I'm all for someone apprehending a burglar. I would do it for my neighbors, and I would hope they'd do it for me. Here, you are able to intervene and stop someone committing a felony. But for **** sakes, if you're going to fire your weapon, make sure you are legally allowed to do so. The guy openly admitted that he didn't shoot in self defense, he just wanted to scare the burglar. So really, he was not legally justified in firing his weapon. That's why he was arrested. And the unlawful means which he fired his weapon is what everyone seems to be defending.


Now I'm curious, down there in Lousiana, are you allowed to fire warning shots?

NH Trucker
02-23-2012, 16:22
NH Trucker
Thanks for the update- but the charges should never have been filed in the first place!!
Now maybe you folks could get that law removed from the books as a felony? Just change it to a fine of like $10. Now lets see if he gets his firearms back?:supergrin:


Yeah, he will get them back. Most likely by the end of the day too. I'll leave it at I have first hand knowlege of getting back confiscated weapons from police agencies in this state. :whistling: They are usually pretty good about it.


As far as decriminalizing the guy's actions, I hope they don't. There is no justification for "shooting to scare." It's irresponsible and dangerous, and just plain stupid. Shoot if you must, but ONLY if you must.

Jerry
02-24-2012, 12:15
So, you think that it's ok for someone to shoot to threaten and not in self defense?

ABSOLUTELY! True story! When I was twelve we were at the height of the integration turmoil. I and a friend were chased to my home by a mob (100 to 200, to scared to count) of blacks. I was running and screaming for my father’s help. Bricks and rocks were being thrown at us as we literally ran for our lives. My dad came out of the house and fired a shot into the ground and the mob literally melted into the background. He called the police and told them what had happened. The officer told him that since he, my dad had “illegally” discharged a firearm in city limits (I told you we have the same MORONIC law here) that he, the officer, was writing it up as call canceled, however he would tell his fellow officers to be on the alert for trouble. Now tell me, was that a "JUSTIFIABLE“ WARNING SHOT? Or perhaps he should have just killed as many people as he could? Should he have been arrested?

Your guy was being honest and as usual it was used against him. If he hadn’t fired he may or may not have been arrested for brandishing a firearm. Another MORONIC law designed to stifle people's ability to defend themselves. I agree that if you draw a firearm you should be ready to use it. But it isn’t ALWAYS necessary to kill someone to prove your were justified in pulling it or shooting it. I, myself have had to draw my weapon. Thankfully I didn’t have to shoot. And I was smart enough (have heard too may horror storied about the good guy being arrested) not to report the incident. :supergrin:

NH Trucker
02-25-2012, 11:22
Yours was a MUCH different senario than this guys. You were being chased and had objects thrown at you with the intent to injure and/or kill you. Had the mob caught you, they would have probably killed you. The guy in the story was NOT threatened or assaulted. He only fired to "show the guy he was serious." Hold the guy at gun point, but DO NOT FIRE the weapon unless there is a clear reason to. Had the burglar been aggressive or threatening, he would have been justified in firing, warning or center mass, and he wouldn't have been in any trouble. That was not the case here, as he had no reason to shoot, which is why I dissented to his actions, and why he was arrested in the first place.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Jerry
02-25-2012, 12:34
Yours was a MUCH different senario than this guys. You were being chased and had objects thrown at you with the intent to injure and/or kill you. Had the mob caught you, they would have probably killed you. The guy in the story was NOT threatened or assaulted. He only fired to "show the guy he was serious." Hold the guy at gun point, but DO NOT FIRE the weapon unless there is a clear reason to. Had the burglar been aggressive or threatening, he would have been justified in firing, warning or center mass, and he wouldn't have been in any trouble. That was not the case here, as he had no reason to shoot, which is why I dissented to his actions, and why he was arrested in the first place.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I'd agree with you except for two things. The news media is known for screwing up the truth when it comes to guns and evidently the county attorney agrees he was in the right since he/she dropped the charges. Either that or the guy played the game and paid the $$$$. No, I have no faith in the judicial system. It’s not about justice it’s about $$$$. But that’s a discussion for another time.