NEWS: CPL Holder makes a bad choice :(

imported post

http://www.freep.com/article/20091229/NEWS01/91229061/1001/rss01

Tigh Croff’s home in Detroit had been broken into three times in the last week.
So when he found two men in his backyard on the 8600 block of Manistique at 12:30 a.m. Monday, the east-side resident — who is licensed to carry a gun — gave chase, Detroit police said.

One man got away through the streets south of Jefferson and Alter. The other stopped running, turned around, put his hands up and, according to a police source, taunted the 31-year-old homeowner.

“What are you going to do?” Herbert Silas of Detroit reportedly asked, his hands still in the air. “Shoot me?”

“Absolutely,” Croff told investigators he replied before pulling the trigger, the source said. Silas was hit once in the chest, killing him.

Silas, 53, was unarmed when he was fatally shot, Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office spokeswoman Maria Miller said today.

Croff now faces charges of second-degree murder and felony firearm, Miller said. He is set to be arraigned at noon Wednesday in Detroit’s 36th District Court.

Detroit police spokesman John Roach would not discuss specifics of the shooting. The phone number listed for Croff’s home was disconnected.

Zlati Meyer contributed to this report. Contact TAMMY STABLES BATTAGLIA : 313-223-4456 or tbattaglia@freepress.com

imported post

I feel bad for him, in a city where police don't often respond for hours to calls I dont condone what he did but... I mean.... well...I won't say it.

imported post

Why would you feel bad? He should have never left his property! Even then he'd have a hard time justifying himself.

imported post

Most simply, he did not abide by the deadly force law. (according to the news article)

It's unfortunate that a licensed carrier made such a huge mistake. He deserves what he gets.

imported post

This was not a mistake... but rather a stupid decision.. there is a difference!

imported post

I applaud him, it will send a message.

So many of us will say "he broke the law", yet the law is our enemy. We spend a great deal of time, if not most of it discussing how to deal with the law when we are supposed to be gun people, not armchair attorneys. But because we live in a socialist state, we have to be. We have to constantly be discussing legal things instead of gun things, we have to be cautious about the law, the police, what we say, and even what we type. the law is the enemy people, it does not care about you, or your rights. We have to ask permission to use those rights, we have to feel like carrying the attorneys number and a voice recorder on us, and live in fear of registration, and in fear of exercising our rights, but when someone has had enough, you say he broke the law. F*** the law. These people had it coming, now the law is going to punish the guy who couldnt take it anymore, even though as evidenced by his permit, he had a good history, and at least tried to do the right thing the right way, this law will destroy his life, his finances his family and his future. All because the law failed to do what he accomplished in a few seconds. We should not be more afraid of our government than the criminals but because of the law, we are. The guy deserves a medal! It is the criminals that should be afraid to leave their homes, and afraid to live in them. There should be nowhere we wouldnt take our dates, children, or mothers, there should be no "bad areas' and nowhere we shouldnt feel safe on a dark night, and we should never, ever be afraid of the law. Open Season on these BG's until there are none left.

:cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss:

imported post

....got me started

I almost forgot to mension what the media is going to do with this, and folks like pelosi brady and the rest of them. they will attack permits, and gun owners with this when the guy actually did the right thing by nailing this little p.o.s.

When the criminals do something like putting their hands up, and saying what are you gonna do, shoot me? then they are manipulating the law, and using it to taunt, and to provoke, hiding behind such a law, and confirming that the law is crap. He deserved to get shot.

This is like the guy who is driving too slow trying to be "safe" and "legal" slamming on the brakes if you try to encourage them to move. They are manipulating the law, and contradicting their own point of "safety", by making the situation more dangerous, provoking the situation, and forcing an "accident". Its your fault legally, even if they caused the accident. All they had to do was move or speed up a little, but because of the "law", they are enabled to be selfish, rude, and violent causing the problem. And you wonder why people cant drive anymore.They deserve to get hit because they hid behind the law, manipulating it, just like this guy deserved to get shot by doing the same thing.

imported post

Ditto on what he said ^^..



Suck's that he had to be pushed to this extreme because the police can't do their job's..

Everything else I want to say is summed up in stainless' post.

imported post

The report doesn't say they were ever armed. It doesn't say that these were the people who were breaking into his home and it doesn't indicate in any way that his life was in danger. They were "just on his property".

This being said, not that I trust the media, but as it's reported he didn't make a good moral decision. (law set aside) I wouldn't shoot a guy for stealing property, but I might beat his ass pretty good.


As for the socialist police state you mention however, I agree.

imported post

CrossPistols wrote:

Why would you feel bad? He should have never left his property! Even then he'd have a hard time justifying himself.

Click to expand...

I know its easy to say what he should not have done, I'm just saying that detroit can be a world of its own. Some people who live there have been victimized to the point that they take this action when they feel threatened. Again, not saying I agree but... If you can't rely on the police due to them being understaffed I think the general perception on things that happen to you changes.

Again, I think it sucks that it did happen either way.

imported post

ethernetweb wrote:

The report doesn't say they were ever armed. It doesn't say that these were the people who were breaking into his home and it doesn't indicate in any way that his life was in danger. They were "just on his property".

This being said, not that I trust the media, but as it's reported he didn't make a good moral decision. (law set aside) I wouldn't shoot a guy for stealing property, but I might beat his ass pretty good.


As for the socialist police state you mention however, I agree.

Click to expand...

If someone is in your yard at 1230 am I think there is reason to think they are up to no good. AGAIN not justifying what he did but just looking at it from all sides. And why did the guy taunt him?

A good friend of mine was a police officer in detroit in the 70's through the mid 80's. He said.. Funny thing when you go to a group of people that won't comply and they say your gonna have to shoot me first...He said if you shoot the first one none of the others say it after him :shock: Different time back then I suppose But also makes ya think twice about taunting someone with a gun in the middle of the night after you were trespassing on their property.

imported post

Where you live is no excuse. The minute he left his yard chasing them, he became the aggressor. We can't say well Detroit is a different place. The laws are the laws and have to be followed by everyone. If we condone it because its Detroit what do we safe when questioned about carrying in so called safer cities. Do we agree and stop carrying because that city has a different image than Detroit. We can't allow that to happen. If the story is as told then he deserves to be punished and we need to stop defending him. He committed a crime and supporting him only casts a negative shadow on all who legally carry.

imported post

Location only comes into play because he lives in a high risk area.
I believe the point was that the laws that we are supposed to follow actually impede us, and assist the criminal in his activities. The laws in place only impede a criminal if he is caught. If the People would be allowed to take matters into their own hands as this man did, criminal activity would slow to a crawl. I'm not condoning what this man did, in relation to the rules and regulations we have in place now, but his motivation is as basic as human nature gets. If a fly buzzes my steak once, I wave it away, if it does it again, I swat it.
This is a razor's edge we're dancing on. On one hand, we have laws in place to keep things civil. On the other hand, we have People defending their livelihoods, as they should be allowed to. It would send a tremendous message to the criminal element of society, and possibly re-inject a healthy dose of respect that our society is so grossly lacking. Unfortunately, there are folks out there who would take it to an extreme. Where is the balance?

imported post

We should all be hoping for Jury Nullification.

imported post

I can see both sides of this argument. On one side, we need laws to protect US too. Say your walking down the street, and someone guns you down. If there wereno laws on the books to impede what this guy did, then ANY of us could be gunned down in the street, and the perp would only have to say that wewere on his property and he made chase and killed us, right?



On the other hand, I agree that there are too many laws. I believe the framers would freak if they could see what we the people are burdened with. It seems that when new legislation is passed, the old should be scrubbed from the books. Also, in my business when the rules change, "they" inform us. Shouldn't we as citizens get some sort of update, and who made the changes? Then we know who to yell at?

imported post

I might as well post this to save HankT the trouble:

HPCSD[suP]©[/suP]

[suP]HankT's Postulate of Civilian Self-Defense[/suP]
It is a bad strategy to shoot an unarmed person[suP]©[/suP].

Personally, I think we couldstand abit more Southern Justice up here in the Mitten State.

imported post

Springer,

A little Southern Justice could be used everywhere.

B

imported post

I feel the same for Mr. Croff as I do for the cop that has a perp surrender and then issues a beating or has a negligent discharge and kills the perp, HE WENT TOO FAR! This is a nation of laws, just because we feel disappointed in the system and we feel that the system let us down, doesn't mean that we shoot every crack-head that steals our hubcaps. Sure Mr. Croff wanted results, but he doesn't know that these are the same guys that visited him on two other occasions. Shoot responsibly, know when to say when.springerdave.

imported post

I hope I never have to experience my home being broke into 3 times in one week and then see a couple people in my yard in the middle of the night. Hard to really say how one would react after feeling so violated, and it happening so recently. Was he right in doing it? NO. Was he in the mindset he was in the week prior to getting his home broken into 3 times.. Maybe... Maybe not.

Im not trying to support his actions, I just think as a society we have to look a bit deeper and put our selves in his shoes. If your home had been broken into 3 times in the last week and you found 2 people in your yard in the middle of the night how would you feel? Really try to think of how you would have felt when the sanctuary of your home had been violated THREE times in a week...

EVERYBODY has a breaking point.

imported post

He went too far! We can't as a group, condone this behavior. Sure the guys in his yard were probably up to no good. That is not going to add up to a death sentence. Other ways to handle it. I've been a victim of violent crime in the past and I understand somewhat Croffs feelings of helplessness and also the empowerment that he gained by being armed, but there needs to be balance. Mr Croff tipped the scales the wrong way.