Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Delaware open carry shooting.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New Castle, DE, ,
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    http://delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs..../NEWS/80215055
    Police say liquor store worker shooting at robber was justified


    By ESTEBAN PARRA, The News Journal

    PostedFriday, February 15, 2008at9:06 pm

    Bernis Martin was just trying to protect himself.

    And as far as Wilmington police are concerned, him shooting a 15-year-old boy during a foiled Wednesday night robbery was justified.

    It is now, however, up to the Delaware Attorney General’s Office to make a legal decision on whether Martin was justified under state law in using deadly force when the boy shot at him outside his BGM Liquor Store in Wilmington. The boy reportedly shot at Martin first.

    Attorney General Beau Biden’s Office declined comment Friday.

    Widener University associate law professor, Lawrence Connell, said justified use of deadly force boils down to whether Martin’s belief he was in danger was reasonable.

    “He has to have an honest and actual belief that his life is in danger,” Connell said, adding that in this scenario it seems it might.

    According to Martin and police, the 53-year-old shop-keep was locking up his store at 11th and Lombard about 10 p.m. when a a gunman wearing a white-and-black bandanna on his face ordered him to “Give it up, old head.”

    Martin said he dropped his bag and plates and raised his hands. When the gunman demanded money, Martin said he reached into his pocket and forked over about $300.

    Martin went back into his store as the gunman started backing away.
    But when Martin looked out the doorway, he said the gunman yelled “what are you looking at” and fired his rifle.

    That’s when Martin said he reached for his Smith & Wesson M&P 9 mm pistol, which he holsters to his hip -- Delaware law allows people to carry an exposed weapon without a permit.

    After pulling the gun, Martin fired seven times.

    One of the shots wounded the gunman in the right thigh and sent his three alleged accomplices banging on doors crying for help, police said.

    Martin said he didn’t know at the time there was a total of four people and assumed Friday they were hiding in a nearby alleyway.

    City detectives later learned that the 15-year-old turned up at Crozer-Chester Medical Center in Upland, Pa., telling medics he was wounded in downtown Wilmington. Detectives went to the hospital, interviewed the teen and returned him to Wilmington.

    The teen, along with a 17-year-old boy, Christopher Whittaker, 20, and Cory Clark, 20, were charged with first-degree robbery, possession of a firearm during a felony, reckless endangering and conspiracy.

    Although some may argue Martin shouldn’t have fired as many shots, Connell said others can say that Martin may have reasonably believed the gunman was positioning himself to fire back.

    Martin said he fired into the residential street because it was empty that night.
    “If it wasn’t, this wouldn’t have happened,” he said about the robbery.

    While Wilmington Police Chief Michael Szczerba said he does not want to see business owners shooting shoplifters, he said his department “would never discourage anyone from defending themselves from ruthless criminals.”

    But he urged that if anyone elects to uses deadly force - including his officers - they must use extreme caution to prevent an innocent person from being injured.

    In this case, Szczerba said Martin “had no choice from what we can tell.”

    Martin, too, said a person should use other options before resorting to deadly force.

    “Nobody should have to go through that on either side,” he said. “If you do things the right way, you probably won’t experience that in life. It’s just unfortunate I had to.”

    For business owners, Martin encourages them to get bullet-proof plexiglass windows, cameras and other security items to deter robbers - deadly force should be the last option.

    “If they ask for money, comply with all their demands,” he said. “Everything is material. It can always be replaced. But life is more important.”

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    Excellent article all the way through... until the very last sentance. Sigh. Almost had it dead right.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    PavePusher wrote:
    Excellent article all the way through... until the very last sentance. Sigh. Almost had it dead right.
    Agreed.

    Law abiding citizens' lives are more important than material things. In this case we are talking about the life of an armed thief.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  4. #4
    Regular Member zoom6zoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,694

    Post imported post

    “He has to have an honest and actual belief that his life is in danger,” Connell said
    Someone pointing a gun at you and actually pulling the trigger would seem to qualify IMHO.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kent county, Delaware, USA
    Posts
    322

    Post imported post

    this is an example of how we can never know:

    "The defendant knows that the necessity of using deadly force can be avoided with complete safety by retreating, by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto

    he surrendered the money, he retreated inside the store, he was still shot at.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Lewes (At The Beach), Delaware, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    MustangDave wrote:
    Delaware law allows people to carry an exposed weapon without a permit.
    :celebrateCan you believe that it was in the article:celebrate

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    363

    Post imported post

    7 shots and only one hit, in the thigh. Yikes.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    DrewGunner wrote:
    7 shots and only one hit, in the thigh. Yikes.
    The shooter was a citizen and not necessarily a CQB trained keyboard cowboi or cop-wannabe.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran Dutch Uncle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,715

    Post imported post

    One hit out of 7 shots puts him about on par with the hit ratios for police shootings.

  10. #10
    State Researcher .40 Cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    COTEP FOREVER!, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,379

    Post imported post

    Dutch Uncle wrote:
    One hit out of 7 shots puts him about on par with the hit ratios for police shootings.

  11. #11
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bear, Delaware, USA
    Posts
    1,241

    Post imported post

    PavePusher wrote:
    Excellent article all the way through... until the very last sentance. Sigh. Almost had it dead right.
    I'd have to agree with the last sentence, actually... I mean, if someone had a gun on you, are you going to A) Give them your wallet, or B) see if you can draw, get a sight picture, and pull the trigger faster than they can move their finger? If you try to run and lunge at the person, you're most likely going to wind up bleeding on the floor.

    Now, if that person is a decent distance away and pulls a knife on me, damned straight I'm going to, at the very least, draw down on him, but the guy did the right thing... give up the cash, try to disengage and, if there's still a threat and you're safely able to, use deadly force.



  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bear, Delaware, USA
    Posts
    1,241

    Post imported post

    DSF Training wrote:
    MustangDave wrote:
    Delaware law allows people to carry an exposed weapon without a permit.
    :celebrateCan you believe that it was in the article:celebrate
    I perked up when I saw that.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Wynder wrote:
    PavePusher wrote:
    Excellent article all the way through... until the very last sentance. Sigh. Almost had it dead right.
    I'd have to agree with the last sentence, actually... I mean, if someone had a gun on you, are you going to A) Give them your wallet, or B) see if you can draw, get a sight picture, and pull the trigger faster than they can move their finger? If you try to run and lunge at the person, you're most likely going to wind up bleeding on the floor.

    Now, if that person is a decent distance away and pulls a knife on me, damned straight I'm going to, at the very least, draw down on him, but the guy did the right thing... give up the cash, try to disengage and, if there's still a threat and you're safely able to, use deadly force.
    I think it depends on how one reads that last line. In the situation you propose, unless one has the proper training, giving up one's possessions is probably the best option. Unfortunately, the same line is used by proponants of the "self-defense is no defense" school of thought, where one is to negotiate with criminals threatening one's life rather than resorting to force. I see what you're saying now, but any time someone says something along the lines of, "just give them what they want," my gut reaction is "um, no."

    To state the obvious, there is no guarantee that giving up one's possessions will ensure one's safety. If someone is going to threaten your life, I doubt they're very trustworthy. Grabbing one's wallet or other possession to give to the robber 1) occupies one's hands and prevents one from drawing if the situation changes and 2) takes up valuble time. I'm under the impression that in many self-defense situations like this, time is of the essence. If someone is pointing a gun at you, if you can get a shot off within a second or so, you stand a much better chance than if you wait until you can use the "element of surprise" 30 seconds or longer after the initial approach, when the situation may be far less advantageous. While some robbers do just want the money and don't want to hurt you, others may want to clean up witnesses and/or might be eyeing up your ass... so as long as there is a direct threat to one's life, the best option is still to eliminate that threat rather than hoping that one's attacker falls into the former category, unless of course other factors exist.

    Just for the record, my last paragraph wasn't directed at your post, Wynder, but rather to explicate what I described in my first paragraph.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Trevorton also Wilmington DE, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    42

    Post imported post

    I was thrilled also when I read that they actually admitted to the legality of open carry. Makes me wonder how many LEOs read that.

  15. #15
    Regular Member sccrref's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
    Posts
    741

    Post imported post

    DSF Training wrote:
    MustangDave wrote:
    Delaware law allows people to carry an exposed weapon without a permit.
    :celebrateCan you believe that it was in the article:celebrate
    I can believe it as we all know you cannot believe what you read in the paper.:what:

    I could not believe that they put it in there either. It must have been written by a conservative nut job and all of the liberals had the day off.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Empire of, Alaska, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    I'm wondering if his parents will be charged with something in this... I hope so in some respects. What is your 15 year old doing out with a gun, probably illegal, and robbing a store with it? You're his parents, you are responsible for him. Suck it up.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Schofield wrote:
    I'm wondering if his parents will be charged with something in this... I hope so in some respects. What is your 15 year old doing out with a gun, probably illegal, and robbing a store with it? You're his parents, you are responsible for him. Suck it up.
    That's going down a dangerous path that's the wet dream of gun grabbers everywhere: blaming parents for the gun crimes of their children, in an effort to dissuade parents from allowing their children access to guns.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    2 things no one has mentioned yet.
    No OC deterent in this case.
    The OCer wasn't shot first.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    DrewGunner wrote:
    7 shots and only one hit, in the thigh. Yikes.
    The shooter was a citizen and not necessarily a CQB trained keyboard cowboi or cop-wannabe.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******
    in the heat of the situation, i doubt if many of us could do much better. even highly trained police officers miss thier targets more often than not...

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    It intrigues me that the boy didn't notice the OCed handgun. or maybe he did and got the drop on him? if that's the case why didn't he ask for that too? something makes me think the boy didn't see the gun, or was to nervous to notice. This brings up another good question and argument to the deterent claim. Would a criminal be too concentrated on what he/she's about to do to notice a citizen OCing? if so then it's no different than CCing (other than comforting soccer moms). and if that's the case I'd much rather OC due to faster draw times and better comfort.

    or it could have just been too dark to see it. no big deal. great article.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Empire of, Alaska, USA
    Posts
    69

    Post imported post

    It's possible things have been muddled by the news. The reason the criminal shot at the clerk might have been because he suddenly noticed the clerk was carrying a gun and looked back at him. Though this still counts as "crimintal too dumb/intent to notice firearm."

    And about the parent responsibility thing: I only meant that parents have a reasonable amount of responsibility to know what their kids are doing under a certain age, usually 18. If parents took more responsibility for their children instead of allowing them to become a part of the system's problem, things wouldn't be so bad.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    363

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    DrewGunner wrote:
    7 shots and only one hit, in the thigh. Yikes.
    The shooter was a citizen and not necessarily a CQB trained keyboard cowboi or cop-wannabe.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******
    Citizen, cop, military, swat, the pope. He's reasonible for the lead that comes out of his noise maker. But I'm sure he checked to see what was in the background before shooting and missing 6 times.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    Martin said he fired into the residential street because it was empty that night.
    “If it wasn’t, this wouldn’t have happened,” he said about the robbery.
    Exactly.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Marquette, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    253

    Post imported post

    But when Martin looked out the doorway, he said the gunman yelled “what are you looking at” and fired his rifle.

    That’s when Martin said he reached for his Smith & Wesson M&P 9 mm pistol, which he holsters to his hip.
    ...anyone else think that maybe Martin should have fired sooner?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    way sooner...

    having a rifle pointed at you is a very real and life theatening thing, and i would have been looking for the first opportunity to stop that threat.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •