Farmington, NH man arrested after stopping burglary

[jrd929]

:cuss: small town cops, who think they own the town. I thought NH adopted the castle doctrine? I guess it would of been better if he just went and killed the guy. I don't know of any legal defense funds, but if anyone knows anything about one, I'd love to donate to his defense. Simply ridiculous.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/2...ge-after-firing-gun-into-ground-near-burglar/

Jon

 

[nhsig220]

Why would you want to support him? The guy is a dumbass. Any right minded gun owner knows that you do not fire warning shots. EVER!

 

[jrd929]

Why would you want to support him? The guy is a dumbass. Any right minded gun owner knows that you do not fire warning shots. EVER!

I don't know what he was thinking at the time, but I'm sure you know that when dealing with a likely high stress situation like that a lot can go through one's mind, and little mistakes like that can easily happen. Even if he was wrong I don't see the need to crucify the guy, for shooting dirt. Either way it stopped the burglary. Also where does the PD draw the line? Whats the difference between firing a warning shot and missing the bad guy, and having to take a second shot, both shots missed. The only fine line is the direction. I just don't see anything good coming out of the PD's decision. I would hope I wouldn't do that under the same situation, but if put under a high stress situation like that, I could understand how something like that could happen, especially someone untrained in self defense who thought he was just trying to help a neighbor. I just think it falls under the making a mountain out of a mole hill category in this case.

 

[nhsig220]

I don't know what he was thinking at the time, but I'm sure you know that when dealing with a likely high stress situation like that a lot can go through one's mind, and little mistakes like that can easily happen. Even if he was wrong I don't see the need to crucify the guy, for shooting dirt. Either way it stopped the burglary. Also where does the PD draw the line? Whats the difference between firing a warning shot and missing the bad guy, and having to take a second shot, both shots missed. The only fine line is the direction. I just don't see anything good coming out of the PD's decision. I would hope I wouldn't do that under the same situation, but if put under a high stress situation like that, I could understand how something like that could happen, especially someone untrained in self defense who thought he was just trying to help a neighbor. I just think it falls under the making a mountain out of a mole hill category in this case.

Wow, simply amazing.

 

[rscottie]

The person committing the burglary should not be in less trouble than the person that stopped the burglary.

Shooting in to the ground as a warning shot is NEVER a good idea, BUT, it should not result in felony charges and such that will ruin a man's life.

When police officers fire their weapons inside offices, in their cruisers, reholstering, etc., they are never charged for having an accidental discharge which is really just doublespeak for improper handling of the firearm.

I submit that this man improperly handled his weapon by shooting a hole in the ground, ironically done safely as the muzzle had been pointed down.

Usually, the police officer shoots himself in the foot or sometimes even a fellow worker yet they are given some slack and not charged.

It does seem that this is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

[MAC702]

...Shooting in to the ground as a warning shot is NEVER a good idea, BUT, it should not result in felony charges and such that will ruin a man's life...

I agree except that I never use the word never.

In utmost irony to prove its absurdity here, I think the burglar's lawyer should argue that his client should be released because his arrest was fruit of the poisonous tree of the "illegal" warning shot. Wouldn't that beat all?

It is promising that the DA has not yet pressed charges while looking at this case.

But even if not charged, I wonder how long before they give him back his eight guns that were seized.

 

[MilProGuy]

Just because we carry handguns does not authorize nor equip the average citizen to to take on the job of a law enforcement officer. This man, however well meaning, had no business tackling this situation himself. That's what we have 911 and the police department for.

My handgun is carried for the defense of myself and my family, and it is also in my home for the defense of myself and my family against an uninvited intruder; not for protecting the belongings of my next door neighbor.

This well-meaning neighbor didn't know if the puke who was stealing his neighbor's "stuff" had a gun or not. He could have gotten himself killed trying to protect his neighbor's laptop computer or stereo, or whatever it was the miscreant was stealing.

 

[rscottie]

Just because we carry handguns does not authorize nor equip the average citizen to to take on the job of a law enforcement officer. This man, however well meaning, had no business tackling this situation himself. That's what we have 911 and the police department for.

My handgun is carried for the defense of myself and my family, and it is also in my home for the defense of myself and my family against an uninvited intruder; not for protecting the belongings of my next door neighbor.

This well-meaning neighbor didn't know if the puke who was stealing his neighbor's "stuff" had a gun or not. He could have gotten himself killed trying to protect his neighbor's laptop computer or stereo, or whatever it was the miscreant was stealing.

Even if I agree with what you are saying, I still say that what he did should not warrant felony charges.

 

[MilProGuy]

Even if I agree with what you are saying, I still say that what he did should not warrant felony charges.

No, he should not be facing felony charges.

And neither should his firearms have been confiscated.

 

[Makarov]

This is a case of small town cops hating citizens that carry weapons and they have big egoes. Heck, the cops are probably originally from MA, or NY and moved to NH with their anti-gun agenda. I see alot of that in New England, even in Ohio. Here is my common sense approach to the problem. Drop the charges against this citizen and put the robber in jail.

 

[oldbanger]

Felony charges against a New Hampshire man who fired a warning shot at an alleged robber have been dropped. :banana:

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/charges-against-man-who-fired-warning-shot-at-man-suspected-of-robbing-his-home-dropped-20120223

 

[MAC702]

Just because we carry handguns does not authorize nor equip the average citizen to to take on the job of a law enforcement officer. This man, however well meaning, had no business tackling this situation himself. That's what we have 911 and the police department for...

I'm glad you aren't my neighbor.

While he did a few things wrong, I applaud him for getting involved. We cannot sit here and say he was ignorant and didn't know the risks of confronting an intruder. Each situation has be played by the man at the scene at the time.

Citizens should absolutely have the OPTION to help each other in this regard.

Yes, sometimes, that best option is to make a phone call and be a good witness.

Besides, LEOs, just like neighbors, do NOT have the obligation to protect individual citizens, they just have the option, when convenient.

 

[sawah]

I do not blame the cops. The prosecutor decided to make the charges for one thing.

Also, none of us would make this mistake, because we have awareness of the use of a firearm and this man didn't follow any of those principles. He shot a warning shot, he fessed up to it BEING a warning shot, he was not in the gravest extreme, and he didn't gather information about the guy.

Here's what the ideal response would be.

a)Stop I have a firearm get on the ground NOW!

b)Kept the gun out of it and taken out his video camera (which everyone should carry, IMO, who carries a firearm) and film the guy and his getaway van/car and get a license$plate and call it in to 911 and preview the plate and call that in also. The cops would have stopped him (the BG) shortly and all would be well. All to often people brandish, or shoot warning shots, and fail to realize they are not the police, and that what is needed is INFORMATION. Who, what, when, and plate number.

c)He should not have volunteered that he shot his firearm, but if inevitable, 'oh the gun went off accidentally in my nervousness'. IANAL, but I think that would be less actionable than an intentional discharge into the ground.
Now, I wasn't there so call it my 2 cents, but if he had time to do all that drawing and shooting the ground, he had time to use his cam and video or snap the identity enough to recognize the guy and get the plate number.

YES, I understand his frustration. I also understand why the prosecutor needed to charge him (initially). I look for his charges to be plea bargained down, but he'll spend a bunch of money getting his guns back (why weren't they in a locked gun safe?). He should have called his attorney right after 911. No attorney on speed dial? Then don't use your firearm so carelessly.

I'm being a bit harsh, but again, no one here would make this kind of mistake. A firearm is in defense of self or loved ones in the gravest extreme, period.

I do feel for the guy and I think 'justice' was not served well.

 

[KBCraig]

Felony charges against a New Hampshire man who fired a warning shot at an alleged robber have been dropped. :banana:

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/charges-against-man-who-fired-warning-shot-at-man-suspected-of-robbing-his-home-dropped-20120223

Fleming says he took his 38 millimeter, and went looking for the suspect...

38 millimeter? That's 1.50 caliber! The man must be a real hoss.

 

[doobie]

Charges dropped.... thankfully.