Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Man fined $10K for defending his "property rights"

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    460

    Post imported post

    LEWISBURG -- A Media man said he was defending his family business when he fired a handgun at four adults who were changing a baby's diaper outside his Allenwood gas station two years ago.

    Just as Sudhir Kumar, 45, was set to go on trial for terroristic threats, simple assault and reckless endangerment, he entered a no-contest plea to the terrorist threat charge Tuesday in Union County Court.

    "He believes he was justified," said Union County District Attorney D. Peter Johnson.

    Kumar was originally charged with felony criminal attempt to commit homicide and aggravated assault for firing a 9-mm pistol at a group of people on June 20, 2006, at the 24/7 Truck Stop Fuel Food Market on Route 15 in Allenwood.

    Nolan Proctor, Michael Kimler, Troy Matty, Tara Proctor and her 7-month-old daughter were around a car at the truck stop changing the infant's diaper when Kumar came out of his business and asked them to leave.

    Kumar allegedly went back into the store and returned with a handgun, fired a shot in their general direction and threatened to kill them.

    Before the scheduled trial, Johnson withdrew the felony attempted homicide and aggravated assault charges.

    On Tuesday, Kumar pleaded no-contest to terroristic threats and told Judge Louise O. Knight, "I fired to get them to leave, in order to save my wife, family and property."

    In exchange for the plea, Kumar will be fined $10,000, serve one year of house arrest and 48 months on probation.

    Kumar, who no longer owns the truck stop, must also forfeit the handgun.
    http://www.dailyitem.com/0100_news/l...170003058.html

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    674

    Post imported post

    Man Hit with $10,000 Stupid Tax.


    Fixed that one for you.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Castle Rock, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    779

    Post imported post

    Sheesh, I know where that place is...graduated not far from there Mifflinburg '89. That dude is a nut from the word go...

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,155

    Post imported post

    Agree that he was indeed hit with a Stupid tax.

    Then again, having survived such, loaded diapers can indeed pose a valid threat to one's life, family andbusiness. My kid's dumps would peel wallpaper three houses away!

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

    Post imported post

    WTH is wrong with that guy? It only takes a few stupid gun owners to give the ammunition to the antis to paint us all with a broad brush.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Just remember folks, this is a result of not enough pro-shooting-people laws. If we had laws like Texas, then heros like this gentleman wouldn't have done anything illegal! Any real man would have shot all of those people who were trespassing.



  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Indiana, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    674

    Post imported post

    Er...

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    WTH is wrong with that guy? It only takes a few stupid gun owners to give the ammunition to the antis to paint us all with a broad brush.
    I understand your concern, but there are always going to be a few nutcases.

    Just remember that the anti-s paint themselves with the blood of the innocents who were deprived of the means to defend themselves. They brush themselves in it; they they shower in it, they wallow in it, they drink it at the altarof theirillusory utopia.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    460

    Post imported post

    I am still waiting for someone to ask why there was no charge of defiant trespass.

    Maybe the station owner should have had a "no changing diapers" sign?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,155

    Post imported post

    I am still waiting for someone to ask why there was no charge of defiant trespass.
    a) They apparently were asked to leave, not told to leave.

    b) Kind of hard to leave immediately while in the middle of changing a diaper.

    c) Anyone who attempted to prosecute such a charge would be laughed out of court.

    On the shooter's side, they did have a loaded diaper. If you've ever experienced one of them, they can indeed be deadly - known to make old ladies gag two blocks away.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Post imported post

    ne1 wrote:
    I am still waiting for someone to ask why there was no charge of defiant trespass.

    Maybe the station owner should have had a "no changing diapers" sign?


    No sign would be required if this guy is the owner. Even if charged, the people could raise the defense of necessity. In any event, absent some missing information - there appears to be none, this guy is a nutjob and is getting off easy. Deadly force cannot be employed to cure a trespass (although I don't think there was one) even in Texas and that stupid comment, even in jest should be deleted. Smiley faces do not negate everything.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Paul, Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    44

    Post imported post

    On Tuesday, Kumar pleaded no-contest to terroristic threats and told Judge Louise O. Knight, "I fired to get them to leave, in order to save my wife, family and property."







    SO......what was in that diaper that put his wife, family, and property in mortal jepardy????

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post


  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    My eyes are bleeding after reading that last post...

    I wonder, though, whether a lit cigarette or a fired round is more explosion-inducing. Especially if the bullet richochets and produces a hole that will cause more gas fumes. Poor choice, IMO.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post


  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Nitrovic? Is that you?

    I'm curious where the information in that post was derived... it provided a detailed account of the incident, albeit while entirely unformatted and utilizing gigantic paragraphs.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Clayton, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    228

    Post imported post

    Had a armed person been in or around the car the idiot "defending his property rights" could have been shot and killed, without violation of law occurring. He was playing with fire.

    $10,000 seems cheap to me. He should have gotten some serious time.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    ne1 wrote:
    Maybe the station owner should have had a "no changing diapers" sign?
    State law preempts diaper changing signs. Sect. 565897.0975467.g.d.e.

    Baby gotta pooh, baby gonna pooh . . . . . that's what babies do

Posting Permissions

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