Fresno

cato · Dec 2, 2009

imported post

http://www.fresnobee.com/updates/story/1733237.html

I wonder if he was carrying it or retrieved it once home?

Homeowner holds men breaking into house at gunpoint, phones for help

Published online on Wednesday, Dec. 02, 2009
By Jim Guy / The Fresno Bee

Two men who broke into a home Tuesday night east of Fresno were held at gunpoint by the homeowner until deputies arrived, Fresno County Sheriff's spokesman Chris Curtice said today.

The victim returned to his home in the 5000 block of West Belmont Avenue just before 10:30 p.m. and noticed that the front door was open, Curtice said. As he looked through the open door, the victim saw Archie Dews in the living room, rummaging through items of his property, he said.

Curtice said the victim pulled out a handgun and confronted the first man, who raised his hands but then started moving towards the victim. Fearing for his life, the victim fired a warning shot and ordered the man to lie on the ground, Curtice said. As he was lying on the ground, a second man walked into the room from the hallway. The victim ordered him to the ground.

While holding both suspects at gunpoint, the victim called the Sheriff's Office from his cell phone, Curtice said. Deputies arrived and took both suspects into custody.

Several items belonging to the victim were found in the pockets of both men, and deputies also found more of the victim’s stolen property in the suspects' white Volvo that was parked in front of the house, Curtice said.

Investigators learned that some of the recovered stolen property had been taken last month during a prior burglary at the house, he said.

The first suspect was found to have three outstanding arrest warrants for traffic-related crimes. The second was found to be on felony parole. He was also charged with parole violations.

art work by Oleg Volk:

coolusername2007 · Dec 2, 2009

imported post

Sure seems like he had his weapon on him. How do you get to the front door, look in, see the robber, and draw on him and still have time to retrieve your gun from some other room and out of a locked container. Open carrier? LUCC? CCW? Maybe it was hidden under the front door mat.

I wonder if the homeowner knew about the other guy who did the same but ended up shot? Sure would like to hear that 911 audio. "No, really, I'm the homeowner...please don't shoot me!"

CA_Libertarian · Dec 2, 2009

imported post

Fired a warning shot? What did he shoot at? Did he put one into the floor (which might ricochet and hit someone/something he doesn't want to shoot)? Maybe the ceiling (where it may travel through and end up on the other side of town)? Or did he just put it through the wall (and possibly into the neighbor's house)? Unless this guy had a big pile of sandbags in his house, he took a risk by negligently discharging his firearm.

NEVER fire a 'warning' shot. The only time your gun should ever go off is if it's pointed purposefully at a person/object you intend to destroy.

Hopefully this guy gets some proper training in the handling of firearms... sounds to me like he's an accident waiting to happen...

N6ATF · Dec 2, 2009

imported post

Ugh, warning shot.

I'm thinking CCW or LOC. Front door, open door, saw the guy in the living room, pulled it. Not much time to unlock and load.

By Google Maps, 5000 block of West Belmont Avenue 93723 is west of Fresno, not east of it. If you look at the street density compared to the city center, I'm wondering if it's unincorporated county.

Or maybe he just loaded as soon as he went on his "secure" private property.

woody510 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

I have to agree with Libertarian on this one warning shot my A$$ i would have walked right in the house told him to get on the floor he moved toward me boom he's done then his buddy walks out and he would get one try on the floor then a 3 second count he don't move fast enough boom then call the cops and tell them to come clean this F'in mess in my living room these two burglars are bleeding all over my carpet and hang up. END OF CALL

first of all they where already in the home thats good enough to shoot them right there but it was 1030pm so it's dark to... $h*t my statement would have been i couldnt tell if they where armed officer and (these are the magic words here folks) "I WAS IN FEAR FOR MY LIFE" learned those from a RET. LT. from Berkeley PD he told me if your ever in a situation where you shoot some one and they die if the DA hears you give that in your statement that 9 times out of 10 if it was justifiable case wont even make it to court and charges dropped, he cant get a conviction because they cant get a jury too go 100% beyond a reasonable doubt

bigtoe416 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

woody510 wrote:

I have to agree with Libertarian on this one warning shot my A$$ i would have walked right in the house told him to get on the floor he moved toward me boom he's done then his buddy walks out and he would get one try on the floor then a 3 second count he don't move fast enough boom then call the cops and tell them to come clean this F'in mess in my living room these two burglars are bleeding all over my carpet and hang up. END OF CALL

first of all they where already in the home thats good enough to shoot them right there but it was 1030pm so it's dark to... $h*t my statement would have been i couldnt tell if they where armed officer and (these are the magic words here folks) "I WAS IN FEAR FOR MY LIFE" learned those from a RET. LT. from Berkeley PD he told me if your ever in a situation where you shoot some one and they die if the DA hears you give that in your statement that 9 times out of 10 if it was justifiable case wont even make it to court and charges dropped, he cant get a conviction because they cant get a jury too go 100% beyond a reasonable doubt

So you'd walk into your house without worrying about clearing any corners? That sounds like a tactical mistake. There's two options here, both with risks (of course, this is all dependent on how the house is laid out):

1. Hold the suspect at gunpoint from outside
Pros: Can draw on the suspect from the instant you see him, you can see him and he probably can't see you (since it's dark).
Cons: The suspect can potentially make a quick move to get out of your sight, you're more exposed to attack from the sides and rear if there is another suspect.

2. Enter the house and hold the suspect at gunpoint
Pros: Better angles so the suspect can't quickly get out of your sight
Cons: Hard to safely enter the house and guarantee your safety since you can't keep a suspect at gunpoint while clearing doorways/rooms/corners, suspect knows more about the situation since he can see you.

Personally I would have stayed outside and called the cops and not revealed my presence. If the suspects exited the house then I'd order them to stop. But that's me.

On a separate note, if you come upon a suspect in your home and nobody is home and you're outside then there is little reason to shoot him IMO. You fire your gun to protect yourself or others, not because somebody is in your unoccupied house attempting to steal some stuff. Saying those magic words of "I was in fear of my life" won't make much sense when the suspects haven't even realized you were there yet. Nor will it work when you claim on a public message board that you will murder somebody and then claim that you were in fear of your life. Stuff like that would likely be used against you in court, and the jury would likely put a significant weight to your statements from your post. I know I would.

In conclusion, don't kill people unless somebody's life is actually at risk.

Edward Peruta · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

"While holding both suspects at gunpoint, the victim called the Sheriff's Office from his cell phone"

Exactly like Justice Scalia described in Heller!!

The handgun in one hand the a phone in the other!!

A very good case of bearing arms outside, (returning),the home

Decoligny · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

Anyone approaching me in a situation as described above gets one warning shot. If the hole that the warning shot makes in the center of his chest doesn't immediately convince him that he should stop, a second warning shot will be delivered as close to the first as possible.

Time between warning shots will be only as long as it takes the gun to clear the spent shell and chamber another round.

Captain_Awesome · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

Good find Cato. Hadn't heard about this one yet. Seems like there have been quite a few citizens defending themselves around my little city recently. makes me feel proud

.

Here's two others I've heard about: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/centralvalley/story/1201210.html

http://www.kmph.com/Global/story.asp?S=11611845

Surprisingly enough the Fresno Bee had the best title(in my opinion). The other two were just sad.
"No guns for store owners, community leaders say"
"Vigilante Justice"

Either way, I'm proud to be hearing more of these stories, and less of the usual "store owner shot in robbery".

oc4ever · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

Remember, the use of guns is to defend yourself. Administering justice (via the death penalty) tends to get the homeowner in legal problems. A burglar can not be shot just because he is in your house. You need to be in fear of your safety.

An example of this occurred in California. A 15 year old thief decided to break into a house. The crook did not know the homeowner was home. As he was prying the window open with a screwdriver, the homeowner, a man, armed himself, and waited 5-10 minutes for the thief to enter. As the kid was going through the window, the homeowner came around the corner and fatally shot him. The police arrested the homeowner for murder. The homeowner could not show self defense (the crook was halfway in the window when he was shot) and had waited, without calling the police in hiding to administer justice. He ended up going to jail.

There is also cases of drunk people coming home to track houses (that look alike ) and being shot as intruders. Being drunk and walking into the wrong house should not be a reason to kill another person, especially if no threat to life is involved.

Remember the use of a gun is a final decision. You can only use the amount of force that is necessary to effect an arrest. I think a warning shot is reasonable in your own home to establish force without injury if you don't mind making holes in your house, or getting hit by a ricochet. If he advances on you after being warned that you are going to kill him..well he just made a really bad choice and is going to die. If the burglar runs away in the opposite direction and you shoot him(no self defense)your are probably going to prison. No thief is worth that.

woody510 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

I don't mean to put you out there like this but you kinda asked for it please don't take this the wrong way!! i also apologize for such long post guys had to get it all out

Personally I would have stayed outside and called the cops and not revealed my presence. If the suspects exited the house then I'd order them to stop. But that's me.

ON THE FIRST NOTE : Once they're outside your home you have just about taken all your right to lethal force away from yourself and made it easier for the DA's case when he tells the court "THEY WERE SHOT FLEEING THE SCENE" which means they didn't pose a threat to you they weren't trying to harm you and your life wasn't in danger they where just evade capture from the LEA:

the police work on this same principle they give you a command and what's going to happen "GET ON THE GROUND OR I WILL TASER YOU" police are trained command and follow through, just like "knock and announce" when you serve a search warrant this was pounded into our head when i took my PC 832

Lethal or Deadly Force :In the American court system, life is normally given priority over property. This is why, in most states, you cannot shoot a thief running away with your property. Nor will you be allowed -- again in most states -- to shoot a person who has just robbed you and is running away. The immediate threat to your person has passed.<---strait from the law book is where this one came from!!

Secondly: Thats probably why the same burglars came back to hit his house again and if got away again would most likely try burglarizing his home again i don't know if you have ever had your house robbed but it makes you feel pretty much defenseless and the police take prints but you never get your priceless items back and you still feel stripped and very uncomfortable and a little paranoid in your own home

Now i feel comfortable with the layout of my house as most people probably do if you have lived there for any long period of time i feel i could sweep my home way better than any LE could because i know where all the good hiding spots are good 'ol hide and seek when i was lot younger

See this is where the "What If Factor" comes in to play which is why i created a email account specifically for this site and op'ed to leave no name just location i have never posted from a "Hard Lined" computer always from the laptop on a open network which the IP address could very well be traced back to this computer with is used by multiple people and has no personal or identifying info stored and because im some what of a paranoid person i have a second laptop which is my personal. when i use this pc everything i need is stored on a small portable hard drive that i store for safe keeping and file back-up i make sure to clear the systems Cache and temp internet files ie. systems cleanup and defragment after i use it

and now im going to quote myself here make sure you read it twice k!

I have to agree with Libertarian on this one warning shot my A$$ i would have walked right in the house told him to get on the floor he moved toward me boom he's done then his buddy walks out and he would get one try on the floor then a 3 second count he don't move fast enough boom then call the cops and tell them to come clean this F'in mess in my living room these two burglars are bleeding all over my carpet and hang up. END OF CALL

bigtoe416 wrote:

Nor will it work when you claim on a public message board that you will murder somebody and then claim that you were in fear of your life. Stuff like that would likely be used against you in court, and the jury would likely put a significant weight to your statements from your post. I know I would.

Now show me where i used the term MURDER anywhere in my post?

Awww... got you!...

now see if that will hold up against 12 people. Beyond a reasonable dought... again not to say this in a mean way which you most likely will take it like that but, i bet you would be on that jury they look for people like that not people like me who look at the bigger picture they want closed minded individuals who are easy to convince so the DA gets that conviction which is one of the reasons why when you go to jury duty they ask if your LE or have ever been LE or Reserve LE (which i have been and thats why i know all this) please tell the court, and not just because of "conflict of interest" but because they don't want you on the jury the DA knows you have seen and know the law from both sides and you will be that one juror who is the odd man out.

At least from my experience. but im just a 25yo punk kid what do i know?

bigtoe416 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

woody510 wrote:

Awww... got you!...

now see if that will hold up against 12 people. Beyond a reasonable dought... again not to say this in a mean way which you most likely will take it like that but, i bet you would be on that jury they look for people like that not people like me who look at the bigger picture they want closed minded individuals who are easy to convince so the DA gets that conviction which is one of the reasons why when you go to jury duty they ask if your LE or have ever been LE or Reserve LE (which i have been and thats why i know all this) please tell the court, and not just because of "conflict of interest" but because they don't want you on the jury the DA knows you have seen and know the law from both sides and you will be that one juror who is the odd man out.

At least from my experience. but im just a 25yo punk kid what do i know?

You're right, if I am outside and they go to leave, I have no legal ability to shoot them. However, if you walk into your house and tell them to freeze and they just walk away, you have no legal ability to shoot them either. So either way, we have no legal ability to shoot them. The difference is, by calling the police, I am buying more time for me not to have to get involved. Generally I don't want to have to shoot people if I can avoid it.

When it comes to entering a building by yourself against an unknown number of assailants, that's never going to be a good idea. I don't care if you're James Bond, you're running huge risks by entering a house by yourself with no prior information on what you are up against. If I had to do it then I'd do it. If I could avoid it, I would.

Your plan to avoid leaving electronic evidence against yourself is admirable, but I'm afraid when you think defragging your hard drive covers up any information that you might be missing some stuff.

It's interesting that you are calling me close minded for offering an alternative viewpoint. You're suggesting that if a person had walked into a house and shot a suspect because he moved would be found not guilty by a jury of his peers aside from the case where I was on your jury? Especially if in that trial, evidence came forth which demonstrated how you would kill that suspect even though your life was not in danger? I suspect we have extraordinarily different perspectives on how justice works.

woody510 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

You're right, if I am outside and they go to leave, I have no legal ability to shoot them. However, if you walk into your house and tell them to freeze and they just walk away, you have no legal ability to shoot them either. So either way, we have no legal ability to shoot them. The difference is, by calling the police, I am buying more time for me not to have to get involved. Generally I don't want to have to shoot people if I can avoid it.

there would be no yelling of freeze i would calmly say in a clear and raised voice "GET ON THE GROUND OR I'LL SHOOT" they have already broken and entered your home i'm pretty sure with some intent to cause bodily harm because thats always a factor when you commit a B&E and now after i have spoke a clear command he is coming towards me i hope that you know 100% that he is trying to just get by you because he wants to flee which i very highly doubt thats what was going through that burglars mind knowing that his buddy is there to now once he is in arms reach of your firearm your done because at the same time you don't know if this guy is trained in some type of martial arts or hand to hand or if he is concealing a knife and wants to get close to stab you which you don't have time to think all this over its a very very stressful situation and personal at the same time because its your house and property they are destroying so you really have to make that split second decision to engage or stand down i would hope that you or anyone would never have to be in this situation as taking a human life i will admit is wrong but i have to much to lose to take that risk to stand down my family depends on me. In this Fresno case the guy fired a warning shot and it worked i'm glad but who's to say those guys won't be back on the street in a year or two and come looking for him when he isn't expecting it every action has a reaction and there is always that "what if" but just like the courts i like to make examples so others know and maybe we do have different views on the law i'm just telling you what i know first hand from my training

i posted this in another thread but thought you mite wont to read it?? - whats even sadder is that a 55yo woman whom my family has known for years fell victim to a tragic home invasion by 2 black and 2 asian young men about 2 weeks ago they broke into her home around 4am stuck a shotgun in her face then she was bound at the wrist and ankles with duct tape and gaged with a wash cloth then beat and stuck in a closet where her neighbors found her like 5 hours later when they noticed her front door was open and went to check on her she had also been robbed for all her electronics and jewelery which the electronics could have been replaced but my mom told me that she had jewelry from the great depression that belonged to her mother and grandmother which i feel if your coward enough to do some thing like this to a women yet an elderly women thats some ones mother daughter and grandmother you deserve to be beat 2 inches from your life and shot and from what my mom told me and the description these guys couldn't have been more than 17 or 18 years old

Decoligny · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

oc4ever wrote:

Remember, the use of guns is to defend yourself. Administering justice (via the death penalty) tends to get the homeowner in legal problems. A burglar can not be shot just because he is in your house. You need to be in fear of your safety.

An example of this occurred in California. A 15 year old thief decided to break into a house. The crook did not know the homeowner was home. As he was prying the window open with a screwdriver, the homeowner, a man, armed himself, and waited 5-10 minutes for the thief to enter. As the kid was going through the window, the homeowner came around the corner and fatally shot him. The police arrested the homeowner for murder. The homeowner could not show self defense (the crook was halfway in the window when he was shot) and had waited, without calling the police in hiding to administer justice. He ended up going to jail.

There is also cases of drunk people coming home to track houses (that look alike ) and being shot as intruders. Being drunk and walking into the wrong house should not be a reason to kill another person, especially if no threat to life is involved.

Remember the use of a gun is a final decision. You can only use the amount of force that is necessary to effect an arrest. I think a warning shot is reasonable in your own home to establish force without injury if you don't mind making holes in your house, or getting hit by a ricochet. If he advances on you after being warned that you are going to kill him..well he just made a really bad choice and is going to die. If the burglar runs away in the opposite direction and you shoot him(no self defense)your are probably going to prison. No thief is worth that.

"Curtice said the victim pulled out a handgun and confronted the first man, who raised his hands but then started moving towards the victim. Fearing for his life, the victim fired a warning shot and ordered the man to lie on the ground, Curtice said."

If ever put in the position of FEARING FOR MY LIFE, I will shoot the attacker with the sole purpose of stopping the threat. I will not risk my life, or the life of anyone who may be in the line of fire, with a "warning shot". Thus my statement of he will get a warning shot to center of mass. I will continue to apply the same warning repeatedly until the attacker ceases to be a threat to my life.

The examples you state above have absolutely nothing to do with the case in the article.

woody510 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

i was merly bringing in those senerios i already stated my opinion and how i would handle the situation if i walked into my house and confronted an intruder gave a command and he started towards me dam right i would be in fear for my life i think anyone would because you have no way of telling if this other person is going to cause you harm plain and simple like i said the statement to the police would be i shot because I WAS IN FEAR FOR MY LIFE now in the case of that 15yo that guy should go to jail i can disarm a 15yo with an arm bar or wrist lock and hold him till the cops get there especially if i have the jump on him because i'm already in hiding he had more than enough time to think over what he was going to do 5 or 10 min is more than enough time, i believe they call that "Lie And Wait" which shows some sort of premeditation so yeah by law he is guilty because he had other options,

demnogis · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

There was already i big discussion about scenarios like this on calguns. You are allowed to draw and aim to detain an offender (use the force necessary to detain). If they escalate the situation, you are allowed to use adequate force to defend yourself.

Don't ever shoot to kill unless you absolutley have to. In these types of discussions everyone projects their opinion and goes straight to shooting to kill as the endgame. If plainly killing the intruder/offender/burglar is your method of neutralizing the threat, you need to take a step back from the boards and re-evaluate your worldview.

Liberty1 and cato can elaborate on the relevant PC for detaining/arresting and necessary force. I can't type and browse on my handheld.

mjones · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

Woody, I hate to sound like a net nanny, but could you please use more punctuation, capitalization and paragraph breaks in your posts?

It looks like you've got things to say, but I'm afraid I can't take the time to try to decipher them.

woody510 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

this is true its called "necessary force" or AKA "Equal Force" same tactics the police are taught he is unarmed then pepper spray he has a stick or bat depending on size then baton and or taser he has a knife then taser or possibly gun has to be determond at the time of contact he has a gun then lethal force is always an option but alot of the general public dosn't know this so the police find it ok to jump the gun and draw down on you to get there way.

sorry i type fast and also on an Iphone, touch screen sucks

mjones · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

woody510 wrote:

this is true its called "necessary force" or AKA "Equal Force" same tactics the police are taught he is unarmed then pepper spray he has a stick or bat depending on size then baton and or taser he has a knife then taser or possibly gun has to be determond at the time of contact he has a gun then lethal force is always an option but alot of the general public dosn't know this so the police find it ok to jump the gun and draw down on you to get there way.

In your home, if the intruder used force to enter the home, and the 'intruder' is not a family member nor someone who lives there, you have the statutory presumption that the intruder is there to causegreat bodily injury or death.

Code:

198.5. Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or
great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to
have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great
bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that
force is used against another person, not a member of the family or
household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and
forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or
had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

 As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant
or substantial physical injury.



199. The homicide appearing to be justifiable or excusable, the
person indicted must, upon his trial, be fully acquitted and
discharged.

Streetbikerr6 · Dec 3, 2009

imported post

demnogis wrote:

There was already i big discussion about scenarios like this on calguns. You are allowed to draw and aim to detain an offender (use the force necessary to detain). If they escalate the situation, you are allowed to use adequate force to defend yourself.

Don't ever shoot to kill unless you absolutley have to. In these types of discussions everyone projects their opinion and goes straight to shooting to kill as the endgame. If plainly killing the intruder/offender/burglar is your method of neutralizing the threat, you need to take a step back from the boards and re-evaluate your worldview. (OR MOVE TO TEXAS)

Liberty1 and cato can elaborate on the relevant PC for detaining/arresting and necessary force. I can't type and browse on my handheld.

+1

I can't even count how many times I have this argument with Californians here that don't know the law.

"if any damn burglurrrr dem der walk into my house and is stealing my t.v.imma git my gunn and shoot em!!"

"Uh... yah thats fine and dandy but get ready to face a jury if the police charge you for manslaughterstupid."

Only shoot if you feel a real threat for your life. If a man is in your house with a tv in his hands walking out and youfelt you had toshoot him because you were going to die.. get ready for a cop to place you under arrest andto face a jury of your peers... oh and not just any peers... California peers, the worst kind. Sure you might feel you and your thoughtsare the majority here but wait till you walk into a court room.

Fresno

Newbie

Regular Member

State Researcher

Banned

Regular Member

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member