• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Armed citizen takes down auto thief

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Very cool. Just had an armed citizen chase a person down who stole his car, chase her on foot, apprehend her and hold her pending our arrival. No shots fired, and no muss, no fuss. Like most citizen (and cop) uses of force, the bad guy is in custody with minimal force (actually bad girl) and she's off to jail!

Another positive story of a lawfully armed person (concealed not open, though) helping to thwart crime

RP'S WORK TRUCK WAS JUST STOLEN, HE'S IN PURSUIT...A BLU AND WHI BOX TRUCK, SB

SHE JUST BAILED OUT OF THE TRUCK ON *** AVE SE, THE TRUCK IS STILL IN GEAR..NO LONGER HAVE RP ON THE LINE HE'S TRYING TO STOP THE VEHILCE..
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Must be nice to live in a state where the use of lethak force is allowed for the protection of property. Most of us live where the mere mention of a handgun, let alone the display, will get you into more trouble than the BG who was stealing your stuff.

Effecting a citizen's arrrest (apprehend and detain) camn also get yu in a lot of hot water if you do not dot all the "t's" and cross all the "i's".

It sux that the system is set up that way, but that is the way the world is shaped for an awful lot of us.

stay safe.
 

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Must be nice to live in a state where the use of lethak force is allowed for the protection of property. Most of us live where the mere mention of a handgun, let alone the display, will get you into more trouble than the BG who was stealing your stuff.

Effecting a citizen's arrrest (apprehend and detain) camn also get yu in a lot of hot water if you do not dot all the "t's" and cross all the "i's".

It sux that the system is set up that way, but that is the way the world is shaped for an awful lot of us.

stay safe.

I was thinking the same thing. I'm glad it all worked out, and I'm a little surprised the 'authorities' didn't try to nail him to the wall, assuming they didn't..
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
I was thinking the same thing. I'm glad it all worked out, and I'm a little surprised the 'authorities' didn't try to nail him to the wall, assuming they didn't..

isaid he was armed and prepared obviously. He never took his gun from his holster. If he shot her while she was absconding, that would not be justified.

Holding her at gunpoint would be. But he merely held her down.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Must be nice to live in a state where the use of lethak force is allowed for the protection of property. Most of us live where the mere mention of a handgun, let alone the display, will get you into more trouble than the BG who was stealing your stuff.

Effecting a citizen's arrrest (apprehend and detain) camn also get yu in a lot of hot water if you do not dot all the "t's" and cross all the "i's".

It sux that the system is set up that way, but that is the way the world is shaped for an awful lot of us.

stay safe.

he did not use deadly force nor did I imply he did. I said he was armed, not that he fired. holding her at gunpoint would be fine, shooting her would not be - assuming she was running away

We are fine with people holding felons at gunpoint, but again he did no such thing, nor did I say he did.

However by being armed, he was prepared for the worst
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Ayup! If the apprehension did not warrant lethal force, and a firearm was displayed it could mean trouble for the citizen. LAC carry for one reason only, and that is self defense. The person in this case is very lucky things didn't go south.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
he did not use deadly force nor did I imply he did. I said he was armed, not that he fired. holding her at gunpoint would be fine, shooting her would not be - assuming she was running away

Holding at gunpoint IMO IS
the threat of lethal force. This is not a good incident to show what citizen carry is for. The citizen is very lucky not to be facing charges.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Ayup! If the apprehension did not warrant lethal force, and a firearm was displayed it could mean trouble for the citizen. LAC carry for one reason only, and that is self defense. The person in this case is very lucky things didn't go south.

In my jurisdiction, we have NO PROBLEM with citizens holding auto thieves and burglars at gunpoint. I've investigated over 2 dozen such incidents. In exactly zero did the armed citizen get in trouble.

ymmv
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent

Holding at gunpoint IMO IS
the threat of lethal force. This is not a good incident to show what citizen carry is for. The citizen is very lucky not to be facing charges.

facing charges for what?

He never took his gun from his holster.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
I'm seeing a lack of reading comprehension. I never said he held her at gunpoint. Read my original post. I merely said he was armed

In a later post I said that IN MY JURISDICTION WE ARE totally cool with citizens holding auto thieves and burglars at gunpoint.

That's not my opinion. It's my experience in over two dozen such incidents I havew personally invesatigated . In none of those instances did the citizen get in any trouble whatsoever.

YOUR jurisdiction may handle things differently.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Make up your mind, in your previous post you posted holding at gunpoint. You need to be at least consistent. Do you have a media citation for this event?
d her

Jesus christ. REad my original post. I said he was armed. I never said he her AT GUNPOINT. i SAID *if * he held her at gunpoint, we would have no problem with that;

Please cite where I said he DIDI hold her at gunpoint
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Still waiting on that citation? And it seems this is not a incident then that involves open carry, or the right to keep and bear arms. Since you say the firearm was not part of the incident. IOW it has nothing to do with this site, it is not open carry related.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
For the reading comprehension impaired. HERE'S MY OP

Very cool. Just had an armed citizen chase a person down who stole his car, chase her on foot, apprehend her and hold her pending our arrival. No shots fired, and no muss, no fuss. Like most citizen (and cop) uses of force, the bad guy is in custody with minimal force (actually bad girl) and she's off to jail!

Another positive story of a lawfully armed person (concealed not open, though) helping to thwart crime



Nowhere did I say he drew his gun or held her at gunpoint

PERIOD.

In a later post I said *if* he held her at gunpoint, we (the cops) would have NO PROBLEM with that. I have investigated over two dozen incidents of armed citizens holding auto thieves and burglars at gunpoint. In NONE of them did they get in troublde
 

Tackett

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Messages
54
Location
Charleston, wv
Make up your mind, in your previous post you posted holding at gunpoint. You need to be at least consistent. Do you have a media citation for this event?

Dude.

He has always said the citizen never took the gun from the holster.


What this has to do with the dude having a gun still escapes me. If he was totally unarmed, the situation would have played out exactly the same way. :dunno:

Good story though. At least he didn't sit around and wait for someone else to fix his problem.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
For the reading comprehension impaired. HERE'S MY OP

Very cool. Just had an armed citizen chase a person down who stole his car, chase her on foot, apprehend her and hold her pending our arrival. No shots fired, and no muss, no fuss. Like most citizen (and cop) uses of force, the bad guy is in custody with minimal force (actually bad girl) and she's off to jail!

Another positive story of a lawfully armed person (concealed not open, though) helping to thwart crime



Nowhere did I say he drew his gun or held her at gunpoint

PERIOD.

In a later post I said *if* he held her at gunpoint, we (the cops) would have NO PROBLEM with that. I have investigated over two dozen incidents of armed citizens holding auto thieves and burglars at gunpoint. In NONE of them did they get in troublde
Apparently you have no comprehension of your own post. The gun according to you in follow up posts had absolutely nothing do with the apprehension. So it has nothing to do with being lawfully armed, unless you are suggesting that because people are armed they should play cop and chase down suspects, and people who are not should cower. The more you post the more foolish it gets.

I still waiting on that citation? BTW where are you a cop? I want to make sure I do not go where it is acceptable for people to wave around guns for non self defense reasons.
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Still waiting on that citation? And it seems this is not a incident then that involves open carry, or the right to keep and bear arms. Since you say the firearm was not part of the incident. IOW it has nothing to do with this site, it is not open carry related.

Im still waiting for you to support your claim. I never said he drew his gun or held her at gunpoint. You assumed that./

For christ's sake
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
Apparently you have no comprehension of your own post. The gun according to you in follow up posts had absolutely nothing do with the apprehension. So it has nothing to do with being lawfully armed, unless you are suggesting that because people are armed they should play cop and chase down suspects, and people who are not should cower. The more you post the more foolish it gets.

I still waiting on that citation? BTW where are you a cop? I want to make sure I do not go where it is acceptable for people to wave around guns for non self defense reasons.

Again, you made a claim. Support it. where did I ever say he drew his gun and/or pointed it at anyone? Still backpedaling
\
you said "Make up your mind, in your previous post you posted holding at gunpoint. You need to be at least consistent. Do you have a media citation for this event? "

I NEVER said he held her at gunpoint. Support your claim/.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Again, you made a claim. Support it. where did I ever say he drew his gun and/or pointed it at anyone? Still backpedaling

You are making the claims, YOU said lawfully armed, then later you brought up holding at gunpoint, you didn't clarify. This incident has NOTHING to do with lawfully armed by your own posts. You have yourself confused. This incident has nothing to do with open carry or RKBA. The person was not open carrying, did not use the their gun, and is no different than a unarmed person making a citizens arrest.

Still waiting on that citation?
 

PALO

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2012
Messages
729
Location
Kent
You are making the claims, YOU said lawfully armed, then later you brought up holding at gunpoint, you didn't clarify. This incident has NOTHING to do with lawfully armed by your own posts. You have yourself confused. This incident has nothing to do with open carry or RKBA. The person was not open carrying, did not use the their gun, and is no different than a unarmed person making a citizens arrest.

Still waiting on that citation?

Exactly. You ASSUMED he drew his gun and held her at gunpoint despite the fact I never said that. I merely said he was armed. I just booked her for pete' sake. And my agency does not issue press releases (nor does the press report on) routine auto theft arrests. That's the NRA's point in their mag. The vast majority of defensive uses of guns, let alone citizen arrests where the person is armed but does not use their gun, are never reported by the media. Does your local PD issue press releases for a routine auto theft arrest? Mine doesn't.

I'm happy to live in a jurisdiction where ordinary citizens can and do hold people at gunpoint for auto theft and burglary. Happens not infrequently.

If I make a traffic stop of a stolen car, I make the stop at gunpoint, btw. That's common sense felony stop procedures.

Next time try some reading comprehension. He told hme he would not have gone after her if he wasn't armed. The firearm gave him the confidence to give chase and make the arrest. Good for him. As an unarmed citizen he would not have done so.

I'm not going to expect intellectual honesty from you and see you admit you fabricated that I said he held her at gunpoint. But the thread speaks for itself. I never made that claim

hth

Cheers and have great day!
 
Top