Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Headshot from spinning car?

  1. #1
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    Police: Man Shot Dead In Car Justifiable The Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office announced Friday that the shooting death of a man whose body was found in a car on April 1 was a justifiable homicide.
    Police said the shooting happened at Cassat and Shirley avenues in the Hillcrest area on the Westside just after midnight.
    Officers said Christopher Alfaro, 24, was driving in a car when he was shot to death by someone in another car by one shot to the head.
    Police said Alfaro rammed another car during a road rage battle. They said the other driver started spinning out, and that’s when he grabbed his gun and started shooting.
    “He fired one shot from his car at the other vehicle driven by Mr. Alfaro,” JSO Lt. Larry Schmitt said. “The bullet struck Mr. Alfaro in the head. That car continued to drive southbound on Cassat Avenue until it crashed on Shirley Avenue.”
    Police said the 38-year-old shooter called them immediately after the shooting. They said he does have a concealed weapons permit.
    Officers said when Alfaro rammed the other car, the other driver became the victim of an aggravated battery, which is why police said the shooting was justifiable.
    “Based on the facts of this specific incident, we don’t have probable cause to believe that it was a murder,” Schmitt said.
    The police will make the recommendation to the state attorney’s office, but prosecutors will decide if they want to press murder charges.


    Surely the car came to rest before he fired, right? It doesn't read that way, but a spinning car, shooting through 1 or 2 panes of glass that will deflect the angle of the round, and BOOM HEADSHOT. If this happens to you it's because god wants you dead.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  2. #2
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770

    Post imported post

    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    A couple of theoretically hypothetical questions, 'cause we're never going to get real answers:

    1 - "Police said Alfaro rammed another car during a road rage battle." Does that mean they were engaged in mutual combat? Did the other driver disengage? IF so, how did he show he was quitting?

    2 - " They said the other driver started spinning out, and that’s when he grabbed his gun and started shooting." Does that mean he was lining up his car for another ramming attack, or just that his tires were spinning as "[t]hat car continued to drive southbound on Cassat Avenue until it crashed on Shirley Avenue”? It sounds like the latter, which means --

    3 - If Alfaro was headed southbound on Cassat Avenue away from the scene of the attack, wouldn't he shooter be firing after the threat had ceased to exist? (Shooting him in the back (of his car??) as he was fleeing the scene?)

    Yes, I think I'd be just a bit upset if some yahoo had just rammed my car while I was in it - especially if it was done on purpose to try and hurt/kill me. But the law says to protect against death or great bodily injury, not to retaliateagainst someone who's no longer threatening/trying to kill/injure you.

    Anybody want to suggest where I missed something?

    stay safe.

    skidmark

    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Post imported post

    I'd say that once someone has used his car to assault you, the reasonable assumption, until you are absolutely certain that there is no longer any threat at all, is that the attack is continuing. If the assailant is driving off, dial 911. If he is in position to use his car as a deadly weapon again, fire.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dallas, Texas, USA
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    I saw this movie - it had Angelina Jolie in it, didn't it? :P

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Covington, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    89

    Post imported post

    simmonsjoe wrote:
    If this happens to you it's because god wants you dead.
    A bullet will always tell the truth-Denzel Washington in"Man on Fire"

  7. #7
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    skidmark wrote:
    A couple of theoretically hypothetical questions, 'cause we're never going to get real answers:

    1 - "Police said Alfaro rammed another car during a road rage battle." Does that mean they were engaged in mutual combat? Did the other driver disengage? IF so, how did he show he was quitting?

    2 - " They said the other driver started spinning out, and that’s when he grabbed his gun and started shooting." Does that mean he was lining up his car for another ramming attack, or just that his tires were spinning as "[t]hat car continued to drive southbound on Cassat Avenue until it crashed on Shirley Avenue”? It sounds like the latter, which means --

    3 - If Alfaro was headed southbound on Cassat Avenue away from the scene of the attack, wouldn't he shooter be firing after the threat had ceased to exist? (Shooting him in the back (of his car??) as he was fleeing the scene?)

    Yes, I think I'd be just a bit upset if some yahoo had just rammed my car while I was in it - especially if it was done on purpose to try and hurt/kill me. But the law says to protect against death or great bodily injury, not to retaliateagainst someone who's no longer threatening/trying to kill/injure you.

    Anybody want to suggest where I missed something?

    stay safe.

    skidmark

    “Based on the facts of this specific incident, we don’t have probable cause to believe that it was a murder,” Officer Schmitt said.

    I'd say this means, no, it wasn't mutual combat... I see what your saying about the spinning out... and it must have been reasonable to assume he was still in danger.

    I sure wish reporters -all of 'em, even the friendly ones- would write more concisely and carefully. The "road rage battle" comment is obviously confusing and at odds with the Officer Schmitt's summary.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  8. #8
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    CommonMan101 wrote:
    I saw this movie - it had Angelina Jolie in it, didn't it? :P
    LOL. I almost made a WANTED comment but decided to see how long it took someone else to do it.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SLC, Utah, USA
    Posts
    144

    Post imported post

    eye95 wrote:
    I'd say that once someone has used his car to assault you, the reasonable assumption, until you are absolutely certain that there is no longer any threat at all, is that the attack is continuing. If the assailant is driving off, dial 911. If he is in position to use his car as a deadly weapon again, fire.
    I agree 100% Last night I was ona 2 hour jog/walk, it was about 1:30-2:00 in the morning and I heard a car hauling A down the hill. It ended up being a Porsche 911 Turbo and one of the bigger AMG Mercedes that were racing. It kind of spooked me quite a bit, as I had seen/heard very few cars that night, I was up on the hillside where a group of hospitals were.

    Anyways, it got me thinking as to what I would do if say, instead of 2 cars racing, what if it was a car trying to make a pass at me and hit me or a drive by? Once they "miss" and are past me, would that be considered "fleeing?" would I be justified in shooting as the car is driving past me?

    In my opinion I think that I would be 100% justified in opening fire at a car that had just tried to hit me, etc... They could easily be coming back around for another pass... Until the threat is no longer there, I think you are justified.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    simmonsjoe wrote:
    Police said
    There's your problem.

    Just because the Police said it, doesn't mean it is anywhere near accurate, or that it even happened....

    This could actually be a report of the Tooth Fairy getting a Boob Job. You never know what will come of it once the Cops 'investigate' and tell their report to the Media....

    Sure, we like to look for facts... Ever play that game where you whisper something in one person's ear, then the next, etc, and see how it comes out at the end of the line?

    Now play it with 2 people (a cop and a reporter) who's entire purpose in life is to lie and distort....

    Youy'd get more useful information from a Ouija Board and Loaded Dice.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dallas, Texas, USA
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    YoZUpZ wrote:
    eye95 wrote:
    I'd say that once someone has used his car to assault you, the reasonable assumption, until you are absolutely certain that there is no longer any threat at all, is that the attack is continuing. If the assailant is driving off, dial 911. If he is in position to use his car as a deadly weapon again, fire.
    I agree 100% Last night I was ona 2 hour jog/walk, it was about 1:30-2:00 in the morning and I heard a car hauling A down the hill. It ended up being a Porsche 911 Turbo and one of the bigger AMG Mercedes that were racing. It kind of spooked me quite a bit, as I had seen/heard very few cars that night, I was up on the hillside where a group of hospitals were.

    Anyways, it got me thinking as to what I would do if say, instead of 2 cars racing, what if it was a car trying to make a pass at me and hit me or a drive by? Once they "miss" and are past me, would that be considered "fleeing?" would I be justified in shooting as the car is driving past me?

    In my opinion I think that I would be 100% justified in opening fire at a car that had just tried to hit me, etc... They could easily be coming back around for another pass... Until the threat is there, I think you are justified.
    I'm a little confused as to what the bold part means in context with the rest of the paragraph - unless you meant "gone" instead of "there". That would make sense to me.

    I don't know how I'd react until I was actually in that situation but I think they would have to turn around and start another charge at me before I would feel justified in drawing on them. If they made a swipe at me and would have hit me if not for my getting out of the way I would be on the phone calling the police and trying to remember all I could for describing them. Once they turn around I think I would try for the radiator first then raise my aim if they kept coming. Getting to cover - if possible - would rank really high on my to do list, I think.

    But, like I said, I really don't know how I'd react untilI am in that situation. Too manyreal life variables to consider from an armchair like this forum.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Was this guy the shooter?

    [flash=320,256]http://www.youtube.com/v/ovsVU6mktOw&hl=en_US&fs=1&[/flash]

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SLC, Utah, USA
    Posts
    144

    Post imported post

    oops... good catch, I meant to say "until the threat is no longer there"

  14. #14
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Post imported post

    many states have a thing about "fleeing felons"

    in my state if you have reason to believe that the person that just attacked you will come back and hurt you,or somebody else,you may take shots to stop said fleeing felon.
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  15. #15
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    YoZUpZ wrote:
    eye95 wrote:
    I'd say that once someone has used his car to assault you, the reasonable assumption, until you are absolutely certain that there is no longer any threat at all, is that the attack is continuing. If the assailant is driving off, dial 911. If he is in position to use his car as a deadly weapon again, fire.
    I agree 100% Last night I was ona 2 hour jog/walk, it was about 1:30-2:00 in the morning and I heard a car hauling A down the hill. It ended up being a Porsche 911 Turbo and one of the bigger AMG Mercedes that were racing. It kind of spooked me quite a bit, as I had seen/heard very few cars that night, I was up on the hillside where a group of hospitals were.

    Anyways, it got me thinking as to what I would do if say, instead of 2 cars racing, what if it was a car trying to make a pass at me and hit me or a drive by? Once they "miss" and are past me, would that be considered "fleeing?" would I be justified in shooting as the car is driving past me?

    In my opinion I think that I would be 100% justified in opening fire at a car that had just tried to hit me, etc... They could easily be coming back around for another pass... Until the threat is no longer there, I think you are justified.
    once they are fleeing you are not in immediate danger. Your proposed situation is unclear.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  16. #16
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    ixtow wrote:
    simmonsjoe wrote:
    Police said
    There's your problem.

    Just because the Police said it, doesn't mean it is anywhere near accurate, or that it even happened....

    This could actually be a report of the Tooth Fairy getting a Boob Job. You never know what will come of it once the Cops 'investigate' and tell their report to the Media....

    Sure, we like to look for facts... Ever play that game where you whisper something in one person's ear, then the next, etc, and see how it comes out at the end of the line?

    Now play it with 2 people (a cop and a reporter) who's entire purpose in life is to lie and distort....

    Youy'd get more useful information from a Ouija Board and Loaded Dice.
    My bad. You are correct.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  17. #17
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Was this guy the shooter?

    ROFLMFAO
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SLC, Utah, USA
    Posts
    144

    Post imported post

    simmonsjoe wrote:
    YoZUpZ wrote:
    eye95 wrote:
    I'd say that once someone has used his car to assault you, the reasonable assumption, until you are absolutely certain that there is no longer any threat at all, is that the attack is continuing. If the assailant is driving off, dial 911. If he is in position to use his car as a deadly weapon again, fire.
    I agree 100% Last night I was ona 2 hour jog/walk, it was about 1:30-2:00 in the morning and I heard a car hauling A down the hill. It ended up being a Porsche 911 Turbo and one of the bigger AMG Mercedes that were racing. It kind of spooked me quite a bit, as I had seen/heard very few cars that night, I was up on the hillside where a group of hospitals were.

    Anyways, it got me thinking as to what I would do if say, instead of 2 cars racing, what if it was a car trying to make a pass at me and hit me or a drive by? Once they "miss" and are past me, would that be considered "fleeing?" would I be justified in shooting as the car is driving past me?

    In my opinion I think that I would be 100% justified in opening fire at a car that had just tried to hit me, etc... They could easily be coming back around for another pass... Until the threat is no longer there, I think you are justified.
    once they are fleeing you are not in immediate danger. Your proposed situation is unclear.
    My point was that, if they are in a car, there is no way you can tell if they are fleeing... If someone tries to run you over with a car, they don't drive up to you, stop. then hit you, then stop with the car on top of you...So just because someone is driving away from you, does not mean that they are fleeing, they could be making a second round. Same with drive by shootings, if they miss their target, many times, they come back around. Just because someone is traveling in a direction away from you does not mean that they are fleeing...

    A few years back, I'm sure ya'll heard about the story of that lady who hit her husband witha car and ran over him multiple times. She hit him, circled around, ran over him again, circled around, ran over him again, etc... If the guy had a gun, an shot her, when her car happened to be facing away from him after the first hit, would you say she was fleeing, and therefore find him guilty? I hope not.

  19. #19
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664

    Post imported post

    YoZUpZ wrote:
    simmonsjoe wrote:
    YoZUpZ wrote:
    eye95 wrote:
    I'd say that once someone has used his car to assault you, the reasonable assumption, until you are absolutely certain that there is no longer any threat at all, is that the attack is continuing. If the assailant is driving off, dial 911. If he is in position to use his car as a deadly weapon again, fire.
    I agree 100% Last night I was ona 2 hour jog/walk, it was about 1:30-2:00 in the morning and I heard a car hauling A down the hill. It ended up being a Porsche 911 Turbo and one of the bigger AMG Mercedes that were racing. It kind of spooked me quite a bit, as I had seen/heard very few cars that night, I was up on the hillside where a group of hospitals were.

    Anyways, it got me thinking as to what I would do if say, instead of 2 cars racing, what if it was a car trying to make a pass at me and hit me or a drive by? Once they "miss" and are past me, would that be considered "fleeing?" would I be justified in shooting as the car is driving past me?

    In my opinion I think that I would be 100% justified in opening fire at a car that had just tried to hit me, etc... They could easily be coming back around for another pass... Until the threat is no longer there, I think you are justified.
    once they are fleeing you are not in immediate danger. Your proposed situation is unclear.
    My point was that, if they are in a car, there is no way you can tell if they are fleeing... If someone tries to run you over with a car, they don't drive up to you, stop. then hit you, then stop with the car on top of you...So just because someone is driving away from you, does not mean that they are fleeing, they could be making a second round. Same with drive by shootings, if they miss their target, many times, they come back around. Just because someone is traveling in a direction away from you does not mean that they are fleeing...

    A few years back, I'm sure ya'll heard about the story of that lady who hit her husband witha car and ran over him multiple times. She hit him, circled around, ran over him again, circled around, ran over him again, etc... If the guy had a gun, an shot her, when her car happened to be facing away from him after the first hit, would you say she was fleeing, and therefore find him guilty? I hope not.
    You answered your own question idiot.
    illegal ≠ immoral legal ≠ moral
    [SIZE=1]"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. "Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent." - Thomas Jefferson
    G19 Gen 4; Bersa Thunder 380; Sig Sauer P238; Kel-Tec su-16c

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Post imported post

    No. He didn't answer his own question. Nor is he an idiot. I thought this site was better than name-calling.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post


Posting Permissions

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