Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Man uses shotgun to fix speeding cars in his neighborhood LOVE THIS

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Shelton
    Posts
    138

    Man uses shotgun to fix speeding cars in his neighborhood LOVE THIS

    What I find most interesting is that the judge said there is nothing wrong with going outside with an unloaded shotgun... this was a funny read.


    http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_hav...c-tribulations

    When 41-year-old Sporko almost got hit by a car he decided that enough was enough and he would get drivers attention.

    "There was traffic coming down the road yesterday and they were speeding coming up on the sidewalks and I came out with a shotgun and tried to slow them down," said Sporko. "It was an unloaded shotgun and as the judge says there is nothing wrong with coming outside your house with an unloaded shotgun."

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    68
    I love that Judge. Have to get that person to a CCDL meeting!

  3. #3
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Why are we celebrating this?

    It is not illegal to walk around with a shotgun slung whether it is loaded or not. This man was arrested and had his firearm(s) seized.

    Under what definition is this acceptable?



    Now, I am not sure he was using the best judgment here, but I sure don't see anything he is being accused of that is criminal. Why should we applaud the judge for seizing this veteran's property and right to self defense for something that is legal, while applauding him for telling us that shotguns are legal in plain view unloaded?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Shelton
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by Shawn Mitola View Post
    What I find most interesting is that the judge said there is nothing wrong with going outside with an unloaded shotgun... this was a funny read.


    http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/new_hav...c-tribulations
    Rich you need to calm down a bit I think. Where exactly do you see me saying that i'm applauding him or celebrating anything? I only said it was "interesting" and a "funny read" I found the comment by the judge "interesting" because given the way they normally react I would have expected him to throw the book at him. Also we shouldn't be blaming the judge HE didn't seize anything..the cops did. HE didn't arrest anyone... he did the RIGHT thing by throwing it out it's the cops who once again overstepped their authority.

    I suppose if your comment was aimed at this
    beanoboy7

    I love that Judge. Have to get that person to a CCDL meeting!
    then I apologize but even that doesn't seem like he is celebrating anything more like applauding the judge for again... doing the right thing.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Shawn Mitola View Post
    Also we shouldn't be blaming the judge HE didn't seize anything..the cops did. HE didn't arrest anyone... he did the RIGHT thing by throwing it out it's the cops who once again overstepped their authority.
    We don't know that he didn't order the firearms seized, and he apparently has not ordered them returned either.

    Also, for him to go out of his way to state that is ok for an unloaded gun to be in plain sight is another misdirection. There would have been zero difference whether it was loaded or not.

    You may be right that I am more bothered by this than I should be, but I don't see anything in this article that is fair or just, including the judge.

    And for reference, I am not worried much about the people here, since I think most people understand this guy was within his rights and deserved no police interaction. But this is worrying:

    http://www.ctguntalk.com/smf/general...-tribulations/
    Last edited by Rich B; 10-13-2011 at 03:12 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Granted, he didn't break the law, but......

    What if an armed citizen is walking down the street, and he doesn't see 'em because he's too fixed on the traffic. Points the shotgun in the same direction of the armed citizen. Armed citizen thinks it's aimed at him and takes action to defend himself.

    Guy is then dead for his own dumb reason.

    May not be illegal, but still dumb.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    What if an armed citizen is walking down the street, and he doesn't see 'em because he's too fixed on the traffic. Points the shotgun in the same direction of the armed citizen. Armed citizen thinks it's aimed at him and takes action to defend himself.
    Wait... what? Who is pointing a shotgun at anyone?

  8. #8
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Rich, I gave a possible example of what could happen in the scenario outlined.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Rich, I gave a possible example of what could happen in the scenario outlined.

    Jonathan
    In what scenario?

    He had an openly carried firearm on his own property.

    I must be missing something here...

  10. #10
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Nothing said he was limited to his own property.

    Just said he came outside his house.

    His property or not. If he's on his property and points a shotgun at someone, they have a right to defend themselves. We don't have enough detail about the situation. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation and how it could go horribly wrong.

    He has the right on his property, no doubt. But, if someone perceives his actions as a furtive movement and defends themselves, they are just as much in the right. I wouldn't hold it against them.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Nothing said he was limited to his own property.
    The article says that. And it wouldn't make a difference either.

    His property or not. If he's on his property and points a shotgun at someone, they have a right to defend themselves. We don't have enough detail about the situation. I'm talking about a hypothetical situation and how it could go horribly wrong.
    If I am open carrying and I point my handgun at someone it is a crime as well. I am not seeing your point.

    If I am driving a car and I start aiming it at people on a sidewalk, I could be shot or arrested.

    He has the right on his property, no doubt. But, if someone perceives his actions as a furtive movement and defends themselves, they are just as much in the right. I wouldn't hold it against them.
    Now you have completely lost me.

    Are you seriously advocating the shooting of people who carry firearms lawfully be ruled justified?

  12. #12
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Rich, yer a smart guy. What aren't you getting.

    I'm saying what the guy did is legal - agreed?

    I'm saying that if he points his gun in the general vicinity at an armed citizen, it could be considered a furtive movement - agreed?

    If said citizen perceives it to be a furtive movement and neutralizes the perceived threat - that citizen isn't legally liable (or shouldn't be) - agreed?

    I was saying sometimes, the way something is done, whether legal or not, can be a dumb thing. This is one of them examples. I don't think he just stood there with a shotgun and people slowed down. Look at the neighborhood. Nobody would see the firearm unless it was indeed displayed in a manner to make it visible. With a shotgun, that process would usually involve raising the firearm to a certain level. That is what I perceive could be viewed as a possible furtive movement.

    Open carry is a right, I exercise it often. Doesn't mean there are a few idiots in the herd.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  13. #13
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    For the record, I don't see a link between brandishing a shotgun and open carrying.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    I'm saying that if he points his gun in the general vicinity at an armed citizen, it could be considered a furtive movement - agreed?
    This right here. This is what I don't get. Why is this relevant? Where does this come from? If someone points a firearm at someone it is a crime. Why are you relating carrying a firearm openly with pointing it at someone?

    Open carry is a right, I exercise it often. Doesn't mean there are a few idiots in the herd.
    The same logic is used by anti-OCers and anti-gunners all the time. I am not seeing the tie in. Nothing in the article says anything about him threatening anyone or pointing the firearm at anyone.

    The judge told him that his carrying of a firearm was not illegal.

    Do we not think the judge and media would have hopped on a completely different story if he was pointing his firearm at people?

    If the guy was pointing his firearm at people, I would be the first jury member to vote for conviction. I see nothing so far that says anything of the sort.

    I would say you are prematurely convicting the man on hearsay, but I haven't yet heard anyone who alleges that he point his firearm at anyone.
    Last edited by Rich B; 10-14-2011 at 12:52 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    For the record, I don't see a link between brandishing a shotgun and open carrying.
    Long arms carry is off topic, but so is this whole thread.

    Regardless, you are the one who is equating brandishing with carrying in the open.

  16. #16
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    You pointed it out right there, we don't have enough info.

    And I'm not using the anti's argument. open carrying and brandishing are two different things. Open carry with your hands on your firearm in public are two different things entirely.

    I was painting a scenario based on what "could" have happened had he been perceived to have been pointing the gun at someone.

    Sometimes you and I are dancing on the same head of a pin.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    You pointed it out right there, we don't have enough info.
    Right, but I am siding with 'innocent until proven guilty'.

    There hasn't even been an allegation of him threatening anyone. (Sounds familiar!)

    Arguing that someone openly carrying a firearm may or may not be in the wrong because he could potentially do something stupid or criminal is exactly the argument we hear against OC and against carry in general all the time.
    Last edited by Rich B; 10-14-2011 at 01:23 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    connecticut
    Posts
    125
    'innocent until proven guilty'

    all but forgotten these days. People would rather pass judgement than allow courts to decide the facts.

  19. #19
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    That's a whole lot of Bravo Sierra.

    I WAS POINTING OUT HYPOTHETICALLY what could REASONABLY happen.

    I wasn't accusing the guy of anything. I also said we needed more info on his case - has nothing to do with my hypothetical example.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

Posting Permissions

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