• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Stockton gun owner thwarts armed robbery at restaurant

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.


http://cbs13.com/local/stockton.restaurant.shooting.2.1704547.html



Armed Customer Opens Fire On Restaurant Robbers CBS Stockton police are looking for three would-be robbers after an exchange of gunfire with an armed customer foiled their plans to hold up a restaurant.

Police say when three men walked into the restaurant around 5 a.m. Wednesday, a customer inside restaurant tried to leave.

Two of the suspects pistol-whipped the man, but he broke free and pulled out a handgun.

Police say one of the suspects fired at the customer, then all three would-be robbers ran from the restaurant.

Police say the customer gave chase, firing another shot as the three suspects fled.
 

heliopolissolutions

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
542
Location
, ,
imported post

He shot back at them...as they fled?

I'm not passing any judgment, that would be silly, its a 3 paragraph blurb.
Kinda makes you scratch the noggin though.
 

Nick Justice

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
34
Location
, ,
imported post

Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.




Not enough info...but....

If he shot at them in as they were fleeing, it's assault WDW or attempted murder if the guy is not a cop, unless the perps were still shooting as they fled.

Once the bad guy starts to flee, there is usually no more imminent danger to your life and limb, so you cannot shoot him in the back.
 

merle

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
109
Location
Tahoe, Nevada, USA
imported post

In CA, it should be legal to use deadly force to stop these idiots. Not only did they commit assault, battery but did it with a deadly weapon. If this person was trying to initiate a "citizens arrest", then I'd think he'd be fully supported:

"When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace. "
 

Army

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
289
Location
San Luis Obispo, California, USA
imported post

Nick Justice wrote:
Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.




Not enough info...but....

If he shot at them in as they were fleeing, it's assault WDW or attempted murder if the guy is not a cop, unless the perps were still shooting as they fled.

Once the bad guy starts to flee, there is usually no more imminent danger to your life and limb, so you cannot shoot him in the back.
They assaulted him, attempted murder of him, and remained armed and a threat as they fled the area. That's a good shoot in my book.
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

A few years ago a Sacramento man shot and injured a FLEEING teenager who was attempting to steal the car out of his driveway.

IIRC, the Sacramento DA basically said, 'well, we're pretty sure the homeowner broke the law, but with our auto theft rates it's pretty unlikely to get a jury to take pity on the car thief... so we aren't going to prosecute him.'

Sorry for lack of citation; brief Google search didn't turn anything up.
 

merle

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
109
Location
Tahoe, Nevada, USA
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
A few years ago a Sacramento man shot and injured a FLEEING teenager who was attempting to steal the car out of his driveway.

IIRC, the Sacramento DA basically said, 'well, we're pretty sure the homeowner broke the law, but with our auto theft rates it's pretty unlikely to get a jury to take pity on the car thief... so we aren't going to prosecute him.'

Sorry for lack of citation; brief Google search didn't turn anything up.
This sound about right? http://www.kcra.com/news/11620508/detail.html
 

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

Pretty sure that's it... guess he wasn't fleeing... my memory isn't what it used to be.

Even so, he shot a presumably unarmed person outside his home in defense of property. Here in CA any cop, gun store clerk, or NRA member would expect this guy to be prosecuted.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
21
Location
, ,
imported post

Case Law on shooting at fleeing felon:

Tennessee v. Garner
, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1][/sup], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may use deadly force only to prevent escape if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.

It would not be difficult for a citizen in this case to explain that the dirtbags who just pistol whipped and shot at him are still a threat to the public as they flee, with their gun, down the street. I call it a good shoot and it it appears covered by case law.

I know the case law refers to LEO, but an armed person could easily use the same ruling.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.

Could be any one of those three possibilities.

I don't think, though, that a guy with "an illegally carried firearm" is a "regular guy."

By definition, such a guy is a criminal, often a felon.

There are many reasons for carrying illegally. Most of them are bad for society.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

HankT wrote:
CA_Libertarian wrote:
Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.

Could be any one of those three possibilities.

I don't think, though, that a guy with "an illegally carried firearm" is a "regular guy."

By definition, such a guy is a criminal, often a felon.

There are many reasons for carrying illegally. Most of them are bad for society.
There are many who also choose to ignore stupid laws.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
HankT wrote:
CA_Libertarian wrote:
Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.

Could be any one of those three possibilities.

I don't think, though, that a guy with "an illegally carried firearm" is a "regular guy."

By definition, such a guy is a criminal, often a felon.

There are many reasons for carrying illegally. Most of them are bad for society.
There are many who also choose to ignore stupid laws.

You mean when people decide for themselves that the gun regs are "stupid laws?"

Probably not many (relatively)who ignore "stupid laws" relating to guns. Penalties are awfully painful.

I gottaestimatethatmost, by far,of the illegally carried guns are carried by killers, robbers, drug guys and other neerdowells.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,221
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

marshaul wrote:
HankT wrote:
By definition, such a guy is a criminal, often a felon.
A trivial misdemeanor in California.

Hardly my idea of a "criminal". :quirky

Yup, just a misdemeanor. Though it's probably got some future firearms restrictions attached (not sure about that).

There are (personal knowledge) a lot of people in California that have decided the misdemeanor penalty for carrying without a permit is substantially less than the penalty of not being armed when your life is at risk. I'm not talking about gang bangers or other criminal elements, I'm talking about good citizens who have decided that their lives are worth more than the threat of a misdemeanor arrest that would occur only if they came into contact wtih law enforcement AND were found to have the weapon.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm just saying that there are a lot of folks doing just that. I was one of the "priviledged ones" when I lived in California and had a permit. But I lived in a community where the Chief of Police issued them unless there was a good reason not to. For many who live in the "occupied territories" that isn't an option and so they chose to exercise their constitutional right and take the risk.
 

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
imported post

HankT wrote:
sudden valley gunner wrote:
HankT wrote:
CA_Libertarian wrote:
Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.

Could be any one of those three possibilities.

I don't think, though, that a guy with "an illegally carried firearm" is a "regular guy."

By definition, such a guy is a criminal, often a felon.

There are many reasons for carrying illegally. Most of them are bad for society.
There are many who also choose to ignore stupid laws.

You mean when people decide for themselves that the gun regs are "stupid laws?"
Why, yes, because the lesser of two evils is surviving a conflict. The laws are racist in intent, applied equally to all and designed to foster the interest of the State and keep lawyers, cops, morticians and judges employed.

Probably not many (relatively)who ignore "stupid laws" relating to guns. Penalties are awfully painful.
There are TONS of people who carry regardless of the laws.

I gottaestimatethatmost, by far,of the illegally carried guns are carried by killers, robbers, drug guys and other neerdowells.
My estimation is that your estimation is way off. Good people comprise about 99.9% of society and it is nearly guaranteed that a good portion of them are packing, which definitely outweighs the criminal element.
My thoughts in blue.
 

MK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
396
Location
USA
imported post

When an armed person who has engaged you turns his back and makes movement away from you, how are you supposed to know if he's fleeing the scene or scurrying to a better defensable postion to attack you from?

The man could be running to a building corner or to get behind a car and send more fire your way for all you know. He has a firearm and has already used it in the commission of a crime. I would think a citizen has good reason to put one in his back once its turned to him. Why not end the threat right then and there if you can instead of waiting a few moments and to see if the threat is deciding on his own to end it?

If the robber wants the encounter to end with his life intact, the best option would be to drop the weapon and put his hands high in the air while loudly communicating his wish to surrender.
 

greg36f

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
71
Location
, ,
imported post

Army wrote:
Nick Justice wrote:
Not sure if this is open carry, CCW permitee, or even an illegally carried firearm... but the bottom line is that firearms in the hands of regular people can stop crime.




Not enough info...but....

If he shot at them in as they were fleeing, it's assault WDW or attempted murder if the guy is not a cop, unless the perps were still shooting as they fled.

Once the bad guy starts to flee, there is usually no more imminent danger to your life and limb, so you cannot shoot him in the back.
They assaulted him, attempted murder of him, and remained armed and a threat as they fled the area. That's a good shoot in my book.
On its face, this is NOT a good shoot. With some articulation it can be.I normally say that if you shoot someone in your house it is safe to talk to the police. In this case, I would probably give a brief public safety statement then shut up till I talk to my attorney.

"My client simply went into Dennys get some food to feed his starving children and this, this THIS CRAZY GUN OWNER started shooting at my innocent client!!!!!!...My client need a hug, not jail......
 
Top