• 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.

Utah man shoots would be carjacker

J_dazzle23

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2013
Messages
643
This guy graduated the same high school as i, just a few years prior.

Good on him.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Car jacking suspect killed by third party LAC

It appears a fellow with a notable criminal record including prior car jackings tried his luck one too many times. According to the article on KSL, an LAC with a permit to carry heard screams from the female victim and intervened. When the carjacker lunged for the LAC's gun which was in hand (not sure whether low ready or pointed at carjacker), the LAC shot and the carjacker was fatally wounded.

Over at UtahConcealedCarry, a member reports arriving at the scene after everything had happened, but while the parking lot was still cordoned off. He spoke to one of the investigators and it was the investigator's strong opinion this was a justified shoot.

Full report at the link above. Excerpts:

KSL said:
Capt. Ned Jackson of the Orem Police Department said the man who shot the would-be carjacker had a weapon and a concealed weapons permit. He had stopped at the store to purchase food en route to a planned target shooting outing.

...

The man who came to the aid of the woman was described only as 31 years old. He was parked near the woman in the parking lot and overheard her screams as the would-be carjacker pulled her out of her Mercedes SUV. He ran to her aid.

"According to the citizen’s statement, the suspect starts to walk to the back of the car and lunges at him trying to grab the gun. The citizen shoots one round, shoots the suspect in the chest," he said. The shooting occurred about 11:20 a.m.
...

Jackson said it did not appear that the man who was shot was armed but the case remained under investigation. All of the parties were interviewed at the Orem Police Department Saturday afternoon, Jackson said.

Jackson said he did not anticipate that the shooter would face charges but the investigation is ongoing.

Charles
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Jackson said it did not appear that the man who was shot was armed but the case remained under investigation. All of the parties were interviewed at the Orem Police Department Saturday afternoon, Jackson said.

No, Lieutenant, the carjacker wasn't armed, but he was trying to arm himself by reaching for a gun--the gun in the citizen's hand.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
No, Lieutenant, the carjacker wasn't armed, but he was trying to arm himself by reaching for a gun--the gun in the citizen's hand.

This is exactly the reason I wince anytime the armed/unarmed status of a non-cop shot by a cop is made the central point of such stories.

The question shouldn't be whether the person/suspect/bad-guy/citizen was armed or not armed, but whether he poses an imminent, credible threat to the life or limb of an innocent person.

A peaceful, LAC, OCing is clearly armed. But that should never justify getting shot by cops or anyone else.

On the flip side, a couple of young, healthy males don't need any weapons beyond their hands to drag the proverbial 90 pound woman into the bushes.

Pointing a gun at someone, or threatening them with a knife, or swinging a baseball bat or tire iron in anger against an innocent person makes obvious that an imminent, credible threat exists to life and limb. But that is far different than merely possessing any of these items in a peaceful, lawful manner.

Charles
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
This is exactly the reason I wince anytime the armed/unarmed status of a non-cop shot by a cop is made the central point of such stories.

The question shouldn't be whether the person/suspect/bad-guy/citizen was armed or not armed, but whether he poses an imminent, credible threat to the life or limb of an innocent person.
SNIP
+1

The DRT guy from the sound of things was an imminent, credible threat and was justifiably neutralized. As always, information from the MSM leaves room for skepticism until all facts are in evidence.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Carjacker's Mother has allegedly said there was no need to kill her unarmed son!

She is entitled to her opinion---- mine is if you take the chance to violate the law and attempt to carjack someone you gotta accept the consequences as they come!

To his mother, I fully recognize that you don't like the death of your son, but look to the proximate cause of his attempting to carjack someone in the presence of someone else willing to step up and defend the victim!
 

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
........if you take the chance to violate the law and attempt to carjack someone you gotta accept the consequences as they come!

someone else willing to step up and defend the victim!

Yes/

The man told police he went to assist the woman, and the 27-year-old male suspect lunged at him in an attempt to grab his gun.


Let us review. Perp arrives in a stolen truck. Bad move #1 Perp pulls woman, screaming, out of her vehicle. Bad move #2. Capping it off,(no pun intended) he lunges at a Legally Armed Citizen and gets his ticket punched. I see this as a justified shoot.
Yes, I would sleep well after that.
View attachment 12506
 

OC Freedom

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2014
Messages
646
Location
ADA County, ID
It's just property, nobody deserves to be killed over property.

I'm assuming your statement is meant to be sarcasm? In my view theft of property is right up there with murder, rape, and assault. BTW the article mentioned that the victim was being assaulted.
 

OC Freedom

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2014
Messages
646
Location
ADA County, ID
Yes/

The man told police he went to assist the woman, and the 27-year-old male suspect lunged at him in an attempt to grab his gun.


Let us review. Perp arrives in a stolen truck. Bad move #1 Perp pulls woman, screaming, out of her vehicle. Bad move #2. Capping it off,(no pun intended) he lunges at a Legally Armed Citizen and gets his ticket punched. I see this as a justified shoot.
Yes, I would sleep well after that.
View attachment 12506

+1
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
I'm assuming your statement is meant to be sarcasm? In my view theft of property is right up there with murder, rape, and assault. BTW the article mentioned that the victim was being assaulted.
Tongue firmly planted in check. Not all assaults are created equal under the law. A armed assault would most likely justify lethal force. State laws vary and your state's law must be researched to be sure.

Some members of OCDO have stated, repeatedly, that the theft of property is not justification to employ lethal force. In this incident it appears that the shooter may not be prosecuted.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Was he running away with the property at the time he was shot?
The ex-perp attacked the shooter. Thus the justification to ventilate the ex-perp. Why would a citizen not be a good witness. Cops would prefer, in UT it seems, that armed citizens be good witnesses first and intervene as only a very very last resort.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Tongue firmly planted in check. Not all assaults are created equal under the law. A armed assault would most likely justify lethal force. State laws vary and your state's law must be researched to be sure.

Some members of OCDO have stated, repeatedly, that the theft of property is not justification to employ lethal force. In this incident it appears that the shooter may not be prosecuted.

OC4ME, et al., while this this is a couple of years old I'm not locating anything more current on al gore's invention...http://ccwvslaw.org/item/888
quote: Self-defense laws throughout the nation see crimes against persons differently than crimes against property. In most states, you can shoot someone committing a felony crime against your person. In no state may you shoot someone committing a crime against property.

If someone commits a felony crime against your person in these jurisdictions, you may legally shoot them. Conversely, if you want to make a living by felony crimes against persons, these are not the safest states to ply your trade.

Stand-your-ground: Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia unquote

ipse
addendum:

that said...and again for the record, i am one of the proponents who will not intervene during the theft of property from someone as i, nor those near and dear, are not facing death or serious bodily injury from the event!! (please understand my firearm will be out and at the ready, and seeking cover, but will not intervene!)

invoking the death penalty for theft of property is not something i could live with.

finally, if, as it sounds like, IMHO the defender screwed up their SA posture and got way to close to the situation, at that point that is their problem and the good samaritan deserves whatever judicial or civil consequences are forth coming.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
It's just property, nobody deserves to be killed over property.

Nope. It was a car jacking involving the assault of an innocent victim.

In the moment, it seems it was the BG's lunging for the good-Samaritan's firearm that resulted in the carjacker getting shot.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Some members of OCDO have stated, repeatedly, that the theft of property is not justification to employ lethal force.

That is the law in Utah.

Most moral men tend to abide the same standard.

In this incident it appears that the shooter may not be prosecuted.

This shooting has almost nothing to do with theft of property. Carjacking is not merely theft of property, but assault on the owner/driver/occupant of the car. That assault justified the use of deadly force (pointing a gun).

The carjacker's attempt to take the gun from the good guy was more than sufficient reason (legally under Utah law, and morally) to pull the trigger and end the threat.

Barring something almost unimaginable coming to light odds of a prosecution or even any successful civil suit in Utah are approaching zero.

Charles
 
Top