update to Trailer theft/shooting of career criminal from south of the border.

[HBARleatherneck]

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=154646&catid=339

JEFFERSON COUNTY - An 81-year-old man was sentenced to two years of unsupervised probation after he shot a man in the face after police say he believed someone was stealing his trailer.


Robert Wallace pled guilty to one count of reckless manslaughter and one count of illegal discharge of a firearm into an occupied motor vehicle in a Jefferson County courtroom.
Wallace was originally charged with attempted first degree murder, a charge that could have sent him to prison for decades.
Wallace was arrested in Feb. 2010 after he fired a shot into a vehicle driven by two men who appeared to be stealing a flatbed trailer from his property which was adjacent to his house in Wheat Ridge.
Alvaro Cardona, 28, and Damacio Torres-Ochoa, 33, were later arrested and charged with stealing Wallace's trailer.
Both were charged with one count of theft from an at-risk victim.
Cardona, who suffered a serious brain injury, is now blind in one eye as a result of the gunshot wound.
An arraignment in the Torres-Ochoa case has been set for October 4

[CrufflerSteve]

It is also in the Denver Post: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_16164664 It makes the point he pled guilty to felonies so he won't be shooting at anything. I'm conflicted. I'm glad an old guy who was a crime victim won't be going to jail. OTOH, blasting away at fleeing criminals seems very reckless. Was he making sure all of those bullets couldn't hit anything else. Not many of us have houses surrounded on all sides by shooting berms.

Steve

[Elhuero]

There would be less crime if criminals knew they could be shot at for stealing.

Cops never have to check for berms when they use their firearms in the line of duty.

[claimbuster]

Let's watch and see if the would be thief gets a lesser sentence.

[Mad][Mad]

[jim02]

He has lost his right to legaly use a firearm for self defense now, the conviction is unjustified in my book and he was wronged by the justice system. If the justice system did their job with these 2 thieves during their previous offenses this man would have never been put into the situation.
Major fail for the Colorado justice system in this case.

I hope the 2 criminals get the max penalty as this is not their first offense and have been treated to a free ride by our justice system in the past.

[SA Friday]

He has lost his right to legaly use a firearm for self defense now, the conviction is unjustified in my book and he was wronged by the justice system. If the justice system did their job with these 2 thieves during their previous offenses this man would have never been put into the situation.
Major fail for the Colorado justice system in this case.

I hope the 2 criminals get the max penalty as this is not their first offense and have been treated to a free ride by our justice system in the past.
Come on... He got off with a sentence way lighter than it could have been. The circumstances were obviously taken into consideration. Secondly, blaming the legal system for this guy shooting at fleeing thieves is like blaming earth's rotation for el nino winds.

Stealing a trailer doesn't equate to ending another human's life no matter how scummy they are for stealing.

[Elhuero]

Come on... He got off with a sentence way lighter than it could have been. The circumstances were obviously taken into consideration. Secondly, blaming the legal system for this guy shooting at fleeing thieves is like blaming earth's rotation for el nino winds.

Stealing a trailer doesn't equate to ending another human's life no matter how scummy they are for stealing.


Ok what's your address, what nice stuff do you have and when are you normally not home? (don't want to get shot at)

.. hey wait a minute... you just said stealing doesn't equate to ending another human's life, so what have I to fear? heck, after I load up the truck I'll stay for dinner!

[jim02]

Come on... He got off with a sentence way lighter than it could have been. The circumstances were obviously taken into consideration. Secondly, blaming the legal system for this guy shooting at fleeing thieves is like blaming earth's rotation for el nino winds.

Stealing a trailer doesn't equate to ending another human's life no matter how scummy they are for stealing.

Maybe your not aware of the theives previous history of theft and plea deals to ag tresspass. If the justice system would have not given these criminals plea deals they would not have been on the street to commit the crime against the victim.

If you do something that causes someone else to be hurt that is called negligence, this is negligence by the justice system that set up the situation.

The only circustance that was taken into consideration was the public found out and they had to face the pressure of the people and now they are tring to save some face.

[BushMasterBoy]

Maybe a Governors pardon is in order? He does have that power. When we have invaders from a foreign country committing crimes against U.S. citizens it is tantamount to war. The law is not based on logic, but experience. Too bad he did not shoot out their tires, pretty good shot to hit one in the head.
In retrospect, lock up your valuables including trailers. I chain mine up with a heavy duty lock. Another lock on the tongue too for good measure. Outsmart the bastards!

[SAnd]

Maybe a Governors pardon is in order

Ritter will never go against his or Hickenlopers base.

[ronaldrwl]

The only circustance that was taken into consideration was the public found out and they had to face the pressure of the people and now they are tring to save some face.

+1, Bingo, Yahtzee!

[roberth]

He has lost his right to legaly use a firearm for self defense now, the conviction is unjustified in my book and he was wronged by the justice system. If the justice system did their job with these 2 thieves during their previous offenses this man would have never been put into the situation.
Major fail for the Colorado justice system in this case.

I hope the 2 criminals get the max penalty as this is not their first offense and have been treated to a free ride by our justice system in the past.

The 2 illegals will probably get ag trespass and walk, well one will walk, the other is in a chair. LOL

[cebeu]

"Cardona...is now blind in one eye as a result..."

Will Cardona be able "see" the error of his ways?

Will Cardona now "have an eye" on his future?

or;

Will Cardona just "have an eye out" for other felonious opportunity in the future.

Steal someone's s*** and lose a body-part..."an eye for an eye" so-to-speak, how ironic for Cardona?

[OgenRwot]

OTOH, blasting away at fleeing criminals seems very reckless.

IMHO, very bad shoot. If you can find a lawyer that can prove you were in fear for your life because two guys are hauling ass away from you I want him on retainer.

ETA: As far as the illegals...well that's a whole other story all together. But as for this guy, the above is my stance.

[BPTactical]

Mr Wallace is damn lucky to walk away a free man. His actions after this incident are what sealed his fate.
After reading the detectives report it is apparent that:
1-He did not notify law enforcement of this incident promptly.
2-He did not advise law enforcement that he had discharged his weapon.
3- He was not forthright with the detectives when questioned. It was only after they questioned him for quite some time that he admitted he discharged his firearm.

I would be willing to bet that had he had a conversation similar to this the dynamics of this case would be entirely different:
"911, whats your emergency?"
" I heard noises outside and when I looked I saw two men tying to steal my trailer with their truck. I grabbed my pistol and went outside to try and stop them and they got in the truck and tried to run me over, I was scared and fired a couple of shots at them."
"Are they still there?"
"No"
"Was anybody injured"
"I dont know, I was scared. Like I said I fired a couple of shots at the truck when they tried to run me over, I dont know if I hit them or not. I was scared they were going to run me over."
"OK then, everything is going to be OK- put the gun in a safe place and wait for the officers, they are on their way."
"OK"

Mr Wallace's next call should have been to his Attorney.

I think this situation would have turned out much better for Mr Wallace.

A scenario I was taught:
You go to 7-11 to get a soda and a candy bar. While walking back to your car Mr. Punkass pulls a shank on you and demands your money. You blade to him and draw your weapon and advise him to stop. He turns and runs away. You get back in your car and proceed on your way home. All of a sudden the red and blues are behind you and you are taken down on a felony stop. You are arrested and your car gets towed.
Why?
Because Mr. Punkass called Johnny Law when he got home and told them you pulled a gun on him.
Now YOU get to deal with a felony menacing rap.
The correct way to deal with it is as soon as Mr. Punkass runs away and you re-holster your weapon YOU make the call to Johnny Law and file an attempted robbery report. That way you get to go home and bed the Mrs. instead of spending the night with Bubba in the joint.

It is the actions you take after an incident that are just as critical as protecting your life.

The truer travesty is the the fact that one of the illegals had a lengthy rap sheet and had been popped for trying to steal a backhoe. He recieved- Agricultural Trespass.
The fact that we are a "Sanctuary" state is the true travesty.

[CrufflerSteve]

IMHO, very bad shoot. If you can find a lawyer that can prove you were in fear for your life because two guys are hauling ass away from you I want him on retainer.

ETA: As far as the illegals...well that's a whole other story all together. But as for this guy, the above is my stance.

It's one of those things that happens so fast. I'm sure the old fella didn't think all this through at the time. With his age and possible charges the deal probably made the most sense to him.

There are lawyers around who can handle this stuff. Years ago I heard a public defender talk at the Pikes Peak Firearms Coalition. He's based out of Pueblo. He'd defended this guy in the Springs who'd walked into a biker bar with an AK and some hand grenades. I believe the AK was illegally full auto. He shot and killed one guy. Might have wounded some others. My memory is hazy. He got the guy off! The shooter still faced fed time for the weapons stuff but he got him off of all the murder and other state charges. I remember thinking at the time - "I want him for my lawyer."

Anyways, he turned up at PPFC a few years later and he had a pair just showing up there. The crowd started real hostile but he did make one point. Who are the scumbags? Whoever the cops and DA say is. I'm sure most scumbags are really & truly dirt but people like this old guy get dragged in and ground up. He pointed out all the cases where DA's have trimmed away at make my day.

If you ever get into trouble, make sure you can afford good lawyers.

Steve

[Irving]

Maybe a Governors pardon is in order? He does have that power.

This is a good point. Ritter probably will pardon them.

[claimbuster]

In many situations I think of the old quote, "you have to walk in another man's moccasins".

Many, many years ago I was a carpenter and framed houses. My tools were all stored in a locked tool box in the back of my P.U.

On two occasions, thieves, at night, broke into my tool box and stole everything. Those tools were how I earned my living. Mrs. CB and I were dirt poor and when those tools were gone we had a real problem. I couldn't work.

I can assure you that had a third attempt been made and I would have heard it from our apartment window, and based on the fate of Mr. Wallace, I would still be in prison today because somebody would have died.

Wallace was probably wrong, in that there is no doubt. But ask yourself have we seen the whole picture and if you were faced with the same situation, how sanely would you have reacted?

Just my opinion on a tragic situation.

[OgenRwot]

Many, many years ago I was a carpenter and framed houses. My tools were all stored in a locked tool box in the back of my P.U.

On two occasions, thieves, at night, broke into my tool box and stole everything. Those tools were how I earned my living. Mrs. CB and I were dirt poor and when those tools were gone we had a real problem. I couldn't work.

That's what insurance is for. Homeowners/renters takes care of that. And if you were either in jail for shooting said perp in the back or paying thousands in legal fees for your defense in criminal and then in civil court you could have paid for your tools ten times over.



Wallace was probably wrong, in that there is no doubt. But ask yourself have we seen the whole picture and if you were faced with the same situation, how sanely would you have reacted?

Just my opinion on a tragic situation.

I spend a lot of my time going through scenarios over and over again in my head. I know that in the heat of the situation things get hazy and you do things you shouldn't but playing out situations in my head is half the battle. You must have a plan if you're going to take on the huge responsibility of arming yourself and possibly using that tool to defend yourself. Sure plans go to shit, like I said, but you need to mentally prepare.

Secondly, if I hear something go bump in the night I am calling the cops and arming myself and STAYING INSIDE! You don't know who is out there or how many there are or what they are armed with. Not one possession of mine is worth my life or my livelihood. Trucks, tools, trailers...they are all replaceable. Your life is not.

[Irving]

That's what insurance is for. Homeowners/renters takes care of that.


No it won't. You'd have to have a business policy to cover those tools. Many of the policies like that I sold had a specific $2,000 deductible on tools, when the deductible for everything else was only $500. I hated selling that particular policy because lots of guys like carpenters or mechanics can have $20,000 in tools easily, but the chances of someone stealing ALL of them are usually slim (not all tools in the same place at one time).

There were other policies, but many people only cared about getting the lowest price and wouldn't pay more for a company that had more reasonable deductibles. None of this really negates your point about the point of insurance, but since I have some personal experience in the matter, I thought I'd clear some things up.

[claimbuster]

That's what insurance is for. Homeowners/renters takes care of that. And if you were either in jail for shooting said perp in the back or paying thousands in legal fees for your defense in criminal and then in civil court you could have paid for your tools ten times over.


Yes and no! Tools that are used in your line of business are NOT covered under your H.O. insurance. Been there.

Agreed, legal defense costs would have paid for the tools many times over, no doubt.

But you are assuming we would be in total control of our emotions and completely sane AT THE TIME.

In some respects it's like coming home from work early and finding your wife in bed with the neighbor. You have two options:
You could say, "Gee honey, does this mean that you don't love me any more?"
Or, you could shoot both of them.The two extremes, I know.

What would you do if YOU were faced with this emotionally charged situation. How sane would you be if you had a Glock under your jacket? Think about it for a few minutes, before you respond.

I for one, am not totally positive, because my emotions are not that predictable.

I contend that sitting in front of our computer screens is not where we could be in reality.

[Byte Stryke]

That's what insurance is for. Homeowners/renters takes care of that.

Secondly, if I hear something go bump in the night I am calling the cops and arming myself and STAYING INSIDE! You don't know who is out there or how many there are or what they are armed with. Not one possession of mine is worth my life or my livelihood. Trucks, tools, trailers...they are all replaceable. Your life is not.


No it won't. You'd have to have a business policy to cover those tools. Many of the policies like that I sold had a specific $2,000 deductible on tools, when the deductible for everything else was only $500. I hated selling that particular policy because lots of guys like carpenters or mechanics can have $20,000 in tools easily, but the chances of someone stealing ALL of them are usually slim (not all tools in the same place at one time).

There were other policies, but many people only cared about getting the lowest price and wouldn't pay more for a company that had more reasonable deductibles. None of this really negates your point about the point of insurance, but since I have some personal experience in the matter, I thought I'd clear some things up.

It took me 4 years and several thousands of dollars and lost Days at work to have my Truck repaired and my tools replaced.
All because There was no witness.
I lost thousands in Lost/Defaulted contracts, Wages, etc.
In the Construction trade an Insurance policy takes months to come through and the work doesn't stop and wait.
If you don't show up, the telephone calls start.
If you don't show up that day, The letters start.
Don't show up that week, the Subpoenas start.

Not justifying what the guy did... just saying, sometimes the things in your truck ARE your livelihood.

[Byte Stryke]

In some respects it's like coming home from work early and finding your wife in bed with the neighbor. You have two options:
You could say, "Gee honey, does this mean that you don't love me any more?"
Or, you could shoot both of them.

forgot one
3. Begin Laughing Hysterically and shout "YOUR PROBLEM NOW BUDDY!"



:D

[Lochinver]

I really gotta see both sides of this here. Yeah, his property was being stolen. But his life was not in danger. The law is about being in defense of your life and the lives of others.

in the eyes of the law, property is another story.

If someone was stealing my trailer (tools, etc other property) yeah, I'd be pissed, but I would hope that shooting would not enter my mind.

I'm glad he won't do actual time, he didn't deserve that. I'm disappointed that he had to agree to a felony though.

[theGinsue]

+1 This ^^^

[claimbuster]

forgot one
3. Begin Laughing Hysterically and shout "YOUR PROBLEM NOW BUDDY!"



:D

Yup, I forgot that one. Hehe.

[ROFL1][ROFL1]

[Scanker19]

He should have called the cops. They would have helped, if they even sent a person out to file a report.[Help]

It's cool though we have the best justice system in the world, and it always works. So much that we decided to share it with two broke ass countries.

Its cool though, we'll just go F**k ourselves.[Hang]

[Marlin]

forgot one
3. Begin Laughing Hysterically and shout "YOUR PROBLEM NOW BUDDY!"



:D

Or "My wife ran off with my best friend, and took the dog. Damn, I'll miss that dog."

[Marlin]

No it won't. You'd have to have a business policy to cover those tools. Many of the policies like that I sold had a specific $2,000 deductible on tools, when the deductible for everything else was only $500. I hated selling that particular policy because lots of guys like carpenters or mechanics can have $20,000 in tools easily, but the chances of someone stealing ALL of them are usually slim (not all tools in the same place at one time).

There were other policies, but many people only cared about getting the lowest price and wouldn't pay more for a company that had more reasonable deductibles. None of this really negates your point about the point of insurance, but since I have some personal experience in the matter, I thought I'd clear some things up.

This.... Many moons ago, a guy I worked with went out of town over the weekend. While he was gone, somebody decided they needed his truck more than he did,along with all of his tools in the truck box. By the end of the next week He had a new truck. Tools, not so much. If it hadn't been for the fact that we worked for a decent guy that gave him the Jr. sparky starter kit, he would not have had tools for three months. Because that's how long it took for the insurance people to decide that claim was valid.

[BPTactical]

Some really good points here and a lot for anybody who owns/carries a firearm to consider.


I personally would like to see the law changed to "No duty to retreat" and to include any part of your real property.

[ronaldrwl]

After reading the detectives report it is apparent that:
1-He did not notify law enforcement of this incident promptly.
2-He did not advise law enforcement that he had discharged his weapon.
3- He was not forthright with the detectives when questioned. It was only after they questioned him for quite some time that he admitted he discharged his firearm.


I give you this. I believe this is true; but why do you think it's true? What I get out of the whole incident is that citizens do not trust the police anymore. Most of us have seen the video lecture about “do not talk to the police”. We've all seen report after report showing abuse of power and unpredictable actions by DA's and LEO's. I don't want to be anti-police. I have my grandfathers badge from when he was a officer in Denver many moons ago. I have cousins, uncles and friends on the force, that are good cops. But I know not to talk to or trust the police. It's a damn shame.

[Byte Stryke]

I give you this. I believe this is true; but why do you think it's true? What I get out of the whole incident is that citizens do not trust the police anymore. Most of us have seen the video lecture about “do not talk to the police”. We've all seen report after report showing abuse of power and unpredictable actions by DA's and LEO's. I don't want to be anti-police. I have my grandfathers badge from when he was a officer in Denver many moons ago. I have cousins, uncles and friends on the force, that are good cops. But I know not to talk to or trust the police. It's a damn shame.


+1
Dont say shit, If you Say shit you will be in Deeper shit later.

[sniper7]

Just read about this whole thing.

hoestly, I could care less if the illegals were both dead for stealing the guys trailer.
maybe the laws need to change and you can defend person and property with deadly force. I see it as a way to reduce crime.
I am not going to be stealing any trailers so what does it matter...are you going to steal trailers? then you shouldn't have any disagreement with me.

I am glad the old man is only losing his gun rights over the deal and not the rest of his life spent in a shit hole where taxpayers have to cover his expenses.

the two illegals should have never been in the country in the first place, don't deserve the use of our justice system, so there should have been no charges in the first place.

they both broke the law being in the country illegally, driving without a license, among several others, probably fake IDs, identity theft etc, and now theft.

[Byte Stryke]

Just read about this whole thing.

honestly, I could care less if the illegals were both dead for stealing the guys trailer.
maybe the laws need to change and you can defend person and property with deadly force. I see it as a way to reduce crime.
I am not going to be stealing any trailers so what does it matter...are you going to steal trailers? then you shouldn't have any disagreement with me.

I am glad the old man is only losing his gun rights over the deal and not the rest of his life spent in a shit hole where taxpayers have to cover his expenses.

the two illegals should have never been in the country in the first place, don't deserve the use of our justice system, so there should have been no charges in the first place.

they both broke the law being in the country illegally, driving without a license, among several others, probably fake IDs, identity theft etc, and now theft.


^This^

[BPTactical]

Points taken and like I said-Lots to consider for a firearm owner.
This really sings of a double edge sword.

Screwed if you do talk.
Screwed if you dont.......

[Jolly Green]

Probation is better than hard time.

[68Charger]

Can't say for sure- wasn't there, but it sounds like a bad shoot- and badly handled after he made the mistake..
Learning from his mistake, I would follow in my truck, while calling 911 on my cell- block their way if possible... if they pull a weapon, then it's a clean shoot...

Is it wrong that with all the discussion about insurance, it brings back attitude that insurance is simply a payment plan for paying criminals indirectly?

I mean, if the scum wouldn't steal, then I wouldn't have to pay these payments to cover me "just in case" they do...

[Elhuero]

Losing your gun rights vs. going to jail is a shitty deal.

He should have just been a "good citizen" and let the illegals steal his stuff, called the police, made a report.

Then he would have had to go through the hassle of making an insurance claim and paying higher premiums to receive restitution.

Meanwhile Alvaro and Damacio would take his trailer to El Paso, sell it and enjoy some carne asada and tecate.

I wouldn't be willing to wager on whether the police would ever find them, the trailer, or make an arrest. Theft and property crime is not a priority for them. They'd have actually be there at the moment and see it happening to be willing to do anything about it.

(bitch and moan all you want, call me anti cop, whatever. I'm speaking from personal experience.)

Folks, this is a case in point of what the gun grabbers and police state proponents want.

They want to make it so expensive and problematic to defend yourself, your property and use your rights that you will just give up trying.

They want you to just call them, let them do "their job" because they are "trained".

They are the only ones in this country professional enough, that they know of, to carry that glock .40

And as someone pointed out, who knows what would have happened to him without all the media attention.

[rockhound]

ill bet the one with fewer pupils in his head will think twice before he steals another trailer.[ROFL2]

[Jumpstart]

Just read about this whole thing.

hoestly, I could care less if the illegals were both dead for stealing the guys trailer.
maybe the laws need to change and you can defend person and property with deadly force. I see it as a way to reduce crime.
I am not going to be stealing any trailers so what does it matter...are you going to steal trailers? then you shouldn't have any disagreement with me.

I am glad the old man is only losing his gun rights over the deal and not the rest of his life spent in a shit hole where taxpayers have to cover his expenses.

the two illegals should have never been in the country in the first place, don't deserve the use of our justice system, so there should have been no charges in the first place.

they both broke the law being in the country illegally, driving without a license, among several others, probably fake IDs, identity theft etc, and now theft.
I agree. To bad the oldtimer wasn't a better shot.

[theGinsue]

Some really good points here and a lot for anybody who owns/carries a firearm to consider.


I personally would like to see the law changed to "No duty to retreat" and to include any part of your real property.

Isn't this what Texas has? It seems to work well for them so why not for us too?


+1
Dont say shit, If you Say shit you will be in Deeper shit later.

+1. I got myself in trouble 11 years ago. When questioned by the police I thought that the right thing to do was to be honest and forthright and tell the truth - the whole truth. Because of this I ALMOST lost my family and my career. Things eventually came around for me but it was the single worst point in my life. I made a mistake and it almost destroyed me. The lesson I learned from all of it was: You have a right to remain silent; USE IT!

I don't have anything negative to say about the LEO's in this situation - they did their jobs and did it correctly. I do take issue with the justice system. What I found most perplexing was how strongly the DA (then later the USAF JAG) went after me. I admitted my screwup and tried to make ammends for it and took positive action to see that it never happened again. Then I see repeat violent and drug offenders walk away with a slap on their wrists time and again because they know how to play the system to their advantage. The charges are now officially dismissed and the JAG was told to back off by my commander (he is an amazing man!) so no courts martial or Article 15.

All to often our justice system takes the stance of taking littel to no action for hateful and recidivistic criminals which often tends to re-victimize the innocents. We've got individuals committing crimes over and over again and being released. I find this particularly heinous when the criminal is in this country illegally and they are allowed to stay here (illegally) so that they can victimize more people.

Someone said in another post that the justice system works. I disagree with that statement. I think we are a country that thrives on litigation for the sake of litigation. We've got too many lawyers who seek to get criminals off even if they are the dregs of society (I know, it's their job, but hey!...). I also think that the bulk of our judges have adopted an ultra-liberal mindset (the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals comes to mind). We have the ultimate court in the land, the SCOTUS, who can't seem to properly interpret the Constitution to realize that the Bill of Rights IS to provide protections for the individual citizen without washing down their "findings" or "opinions" to the point where they aren't black & white - they're more gray than anything. The result is that nothing gets settled and RIGHTS aren't protected from the various government entities. No, I don't think our justice system works at all any more.

[Irving]

I'm torn on the whole defending your property issue. If it become legal for me to shoot someone for stealing my car, can the cable company come shoot my family for stealing cable? *I've never stolen cable before.*

Of course I want to be able to defend my property, but good luck to the guy who has to set the value threshold on when it is okay to kill over property, just maim, attempt to detain, or let it go and call the police and insurance.

[Scanker19]

I don't think Cable is real property or it belongs to anyone except the cable head honcho. he might come down and shoot you.

but if i work my ass off to get things i'll be damned if some ass-hat is going to come by and mess with it, or steal it.

[Irving]

The girl working at the makeup counter at TJMaxx will be able to blast your 13 year-old daughter for shoplifting that one time she hangs out with those kids you told her not to be with.

[Jumpstart]

The girl working at the makeup counter at TJMaxx will be able to blast your 13 year-old daughter for shoplifting that one time she hangs out with those kids you told her not to be with.

Texas has had no problems with this happening.

[StagLefty]

I agree. To bad the oldtimer wasn't a better shot.

Then he would have been charged with murder and gone to jail for the rest of his life.

[Jumpstart]

Then he would have been charged with murder and gone to jail for the rest of his life.

Yep, probably.

[Irving]

Texas has had no problems with this happening.

That's because, in reality, the make up counter girl doesn't own any of the merchandise and has zero attachment to it.

[TS12000]

Stealing cable is a felony, gotta love those special interests

[SA Friday]

When someone steals they take a person's potential livelyhood. They deny the person of their possessions and possibly the use of the possessions to earn a living. It's a haneous crime, but can be compensated. Ammends can be made, the possessions returned or equatible monetary compensation made.

When someone shoots at a person, they potentially take a persons life. They deny or attempt to deny the person of their LIFE. It's the ultimate haneous crime when done for purposes other than self defense. You cannot make ammends to a person who loses their eye, or arm, or leg or life in this manner.

There is something very few have thought about in this crime posting on this thread; he didn't know the two thieves. He didn't know their identities, their status as illegals, their rap sheets... All he knew is was they were driving away with his trailer and was pissed, so he shot one of them in the back side of the face. Play the scenario however you want, but using any of the info about the thieves in justifying the shoot is wrong. The old guy didn't have any of it when he made the decision to shoot away either.

This is a bad shoot no matter how you boil it down, and the old guy knew it. His actions after the fact prove it. If you don't think they are having problems with situations like this in TX because their laws allow for this, then why did the old guy going out and shooting the thieves coming out of his neighbor's windows become such an issue? TX has problems with their "no duty to retreat" law also.

[SA Friday]

[quote=theGinsue;243369I don't have anything negative to say about the LEO's in this situation - they did their jobs and did it correctly. I do take issue with the justice system. What I found most perplexing was how strongly the DA (then later the USAF JAG) went after me. I admitted my screwup and tried to make ammends for it and took positive action to see that it never happened again. Then I see repeat violent and drug offenders walk away with a slap on their wrists time and again because they know how to play the system to their advantage. The charges are now officially dismissed and the JAG was told to back off by my commander (he is an amazing man!) so no courts martial or Article 15.

All to often our justice system takes the stance of taking littel to no action for hateful and recidivistic criminals which often tends to re-victimize the innocents. We've got individuals committing crimes over and over again and being released. I find this particularly heinous when the criminal is in this country illegally and they are allowed to stay here (illegally) so that they can victimize more people.

Someone said in another post that the justice system works. I disagree with that statement. I think we are a country that thrives on litigation for the sake of litigation. We've got too many lawyers who seek to get criminals off even if they are the dregs of society (I know, it's their job, but hey!...). I also think that the bulk of our judges have adopted an ultra-liberal mindset (the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals comes to mind). We have the ultimate court in the land, the SCOTUS, who can't seem to properly interpret the Constitution to realize that the Bill of Rights IS to provide protections for the individual citizen without washing down their "findings" or "opinions" to the point where they aren't black & white - they're more gray than anything. The result is that nothing gets settled and RIGHTS aren't protected from the various government entities. No, I don't think our justice system works at all any more.[/quote]
So.... You didn't commit a crime knowing full well that you were committing a crime and the potential rammifications of doing so? Sound to me like you knew, did the right thing, and your commander used his descretionary rights to save your ass, just as the JAG was using their descretionary rights to recommend a court martial. The system appears to have worked flawlessly in your situation. Any discomfort you felt during the process appears to have been self-inflicted not from the confession, but from actually committing the crime in the first place.

No disrespect Ginsue, I like you, but I have to call this one out for what it is.

[ronaldrwl]

theGinsue's post sounded like a honest appraisal of his experiences and what he learned from it.

[BigBear]

When someone steals they take a person's potential livelyhood. They deny the person of their possessions and possibly the use of the possessions to earn a living. It's a haneous crime, but can be compensated. Negative! I've had two $2K trumpets stolen from me. Total "monetary compensation" wasn't even half the value. Insurance is a crock. It affected my life and my income until I could replace the horns. I had to sell a car to replace them... hence my crappy ass car I have now. Ammends can be made, the possessions returned or equatible monetary compensation made. I disagree due to the lost time, wages, etc.

When someone shoots at a person, they potentially take a persons life. They deny or attempt to deny the person of their LIFE. Then they shouldn't steal. It's the ultimate haneous crime when done for purposes other than self defense. You cannot make ammends to a person who loses their eye, or arm, or leg or life in this manner. I agree, but they shouldn't put themselves in the situation to lose it in the first place yes?

There is something very few have thought about in this crime posting on this thread; he didn't know the two thieves. He didn't know their identities, their status as illegals, their rap sheets... All he knew is was they were driving away with his trailer and was pissed, so he shot one of them in the back side of the face. Play the scenario however you want, but using any of the info about the thieves in justifying the shoot is wrong. The old guy didn't have any of it when he made the decision to shoot away either. Agree.

This is a bad shoot no matter how you boil it down, and the old guy knew it. His actions after the fact prove it. If you don't think they are having problems with situations like this in TX because their laws allow for this, then why did the old guy going out and shooting the thieves coming out of his neighbor's windows become such an issue? TX has problems with their "no duty to retreat" law also. TX does have it's problem, especially with illegals and stealing, etc... Nothing is ever 100% garunteed to work. However, there are some communities that are doing it right. Don't bash it because of one or two bad examples in the hundreds of successful foils. <--- Not directed towards you SA, just a general comment.

[Byte Stryke]

The girl working at the makeup counter at TJMaxx will be able to blast your 13 year-old daughter for shoplifting that one time she hangs out with those kids you told her not to be with.

holy disproportionate argument batman.

We are talking about trespass/B&E and grand larceny, not petty shoplifting.
Nice slippery slope though, Fear monger.

[ROFL1]

[Irving]

It IS a slippery slope, but it is a valid point. You don't need to break and enter to steal someone's car out of a parking lot.

[hollohas]

When someone steals they take a person's potential livelyhood. They deny the person of their possessions and possibly the use of the possessions to earn a living. It's a haneous crime, but can be compensated. Ammends can be made, the possessions returned or equatible monetary compensation made.

When someone shoots at a person, they potentially take a persons life. They deny or attempt to deny the person of their LIFE. It's the ultimate haneous crime when done for purposes other than self defense. You cannot make ammends to a person who loses their eye, or arm, or leg or life in this manner.



You think criminals should be compensated for the things they lose as punishment for their crimes just the same as good people should be compensated for the things they lose because criminals took them? Wow.

Should we also make amends to the criminals who spend time in jail for the time they lost outside? Maybe we should pay them for their lost wages for the jobs they lost while in jail...or more likely, the lost money from the things they would have stolen if they weren't in jail...maybe we tax payers should pay to have this guy's eye replaced as amends to him. Criminals should not be given anything back that they lost as punishment for their crimes. Do the crime, pay the punishment. This guy would have had NO punishment if he didn't get shot. The moral of the story is, don't steal. The threat of irreversible bodily damage is a serious crime deterrent.

[Elhuero]

If he had stayed in mexico and obeyed the law he'd still have his eye.

You will be prosecuted for stepping out of the ever shrinking box of permitted self defense actions that the government is drawing around you.

Meanwhile it you back into a cop car, they'll shoot at you nine times.

[Mtn.man]

I think the only crime here was the guy didn't kill the SOB's and then tell them he was in fear for his life.

[SA Friday]

You think criminals should be compensated for the things they lose as punishment for their crimes just the same as good people should be compensated for the things they lose because criminals took them? Wow.

So, it's OK for the average citizen to punish? Can you state in any way that this guy shot at these two thieves for anything but anger and revenge? He blew part of the guy's face off... Do you seriously want this type of action condoned here in CO? Man I end up saying this a lot on this site; be careful what you wish for. Better think this one through fellas. There's a reason only one state has this type of doctrine.

Sorry, I'll explain more when I get home from work...

[SA Friday]

Sorry to hear about the horns, but don't let the fact that the insurance company wouldn't completely replace them cause you to overlook that they were replaceable. Get your eye blown out of your head, that's not replaceable. No matter how dear they were to you, I suspect you eye is more dear.

[Byte Stryke]

Don't do the crime if you cant do the time.
I believe that if you illegally enter someones property with the intention of committing a felony and you are then Injured to whatever degree in the commission of said felony. I believe you are Fucked. You Fault, Shouldn't have done it.

If we argue that a property owner cannot defend themselves and their property against criminals, the Robbers that were shot during the ARMED ROBBERY of the liquor stores in Aurora, they are getting fat checks and the Victim is then victimized again.

I am NOT Arguing the circumstance of the trailer guys... I am arguing the fact that We as law abiding citizens MUST retain the right to defend ourselves and our homes without worrying that we have to pay some jackhole after we shot him in the the commission of a crime against us!

[hollohas]

So, it's OK for the average citizen to punish? Can you state in any way that this guy shot at these two thieves for anything but anger and revenge? He blew part of the guy's face off... Do you seriously want this type of action condoned here in CO? Man I end up saying this a lot on this site; be careful what you wish for. Better think this one through fellas. There's a reason only one state has this type of doctrine.

Sorry, I'll explain more when I get home from work...

First of all - I never said it was ok that average citizens punish criminals for crimes they commit even if that is exactly what this was. But I don't feel bad for the criminal as you seem to. It's clear the guy being stolen from was angry. But the bad guy stole and now he will is serving a punishment for it. Cry me a river bad guy, I'm sure you'll miss your face. Do stupid shit...

Second - I am not arguing this was a good shoot. According to the laws of this state it wasn't unless the bad guy was trying to run him over or shoot him or another while stealing from him. The guy being stolen from broke the law. But I am glad his punishment doesn't include jail time.

Third - Can you argue that the threat of irreversible bodily harm is not a great crime deterrent?

My point was that you said you can't make amends for ruining someone's life by shooting at them and taking a body part from them. I say, why should you? In this case that someone was a criminal. In another words, amends means compensation. You cannot equate getting insurance payments for goods stolen from you with a bad guy losing something for committing a crime. Criminals don't deserve compensation for anything they lose due to their criminal activities...period. If you're a criminal, be prepared to face the consequences...they may be severe.

[hollohas]

Don't do the crime if you cant do the time.
I believe that if you illegally enter someones property with the intention of committing a felony and you are then Injured to whatever degree in the commission of said felony. I believe you are Fucked. You Fault, Shouldn't have done it.

If we argue that a property owner cannot defend themselves and their property against criminals, the Robbers that were shot during the ARMED ROBBERY of the liquor stores in Aurora, they are getting fat checks and the Victim is then victimized again.

I am NOT Arguing the circumstance of the trailer guys... I am arguing the fact that We as law abiding citizens MUST retain the right to defend ourselves and our homes without worrying that we have to pay some jackhole after we shot him in the the commission of a crime against us!

Exactly.

[OneGuy67]

If we argue that a property owner cannot defend themselves and their property against criminals, the Robbers that were shot during the ARMED ROBBERY of the liquor stores in Aurora, they are getting fat checks and the Victim is then victimized again.

Correct me if I am wrong, Byte, but didn't the bad guys shoot first in both robberies when the cashier presented their weapons? I thought I saw that on the video that was released. If that is true, the clerks were defending their lives from a deadly force encounter and no cop or D.A. would argue otherwise. The very fact the bad guys were waving their firearms around as shown in the video would be enough for a 'rational person' (that's the legal threshold in most cases) to fear for their lives.

[Jumpstart]

That's because, in reality, the make up counter girl doesn't own any of the merchandise and has zero attachment to it.
That's right. So why bother with the comparison? (rhetorical question)

[ronaldrwl]

Question:
Can LEO's shoot only when a life is threatened?

[StagLefty]

Question:
Can LEO's shoot only when a life is threatened?

Only if doughnuts are threatened too (sorry I couldn't help it) [ROFL1]

[Irving]

Originally Posted by
Big Bear
Negative! I've had two $2K trumpets stolen from me. Total "monetary compensation" wasn't even half the value. Insurance is a crock. It affected my life and my income until I could replace the horns. I had to sell a car to replace them.

Some how, I don't see you making a public apology thread to everyone that might work in the insurance industry. :p

[Mtn.man]

Question:
Can LEO's shoot only when a life is threatened?


They don't need a reason, a pop can is enough reason to kill your ass, and any perp found dead on my property for whatever reason is/was armed.


My grandpaw shot alot of robbers in his day never was arrested or charged, his motto shoot first ask ?'s later.

[SA Friday]

First of all - I never said it was ok that average citizens punish criminals for crimes they commit even if that is exactly what this was. But I don't feel bad for the criminal as you seem to. It's clear the guy being stolen from was angry. But the bad guy stole and now he will is serving a punishment for it. Cry me a river bad guy, I'm sure you'll miss your face. Do stupid shit...

Second - I am not arguing this was a good shoot. According to the laws of this state it wasn't unless the bad guy was trying to run him over or shoot him or another while stealing from him. The guy being stolen from broke the law. But I am glad his punishment doesn't include jail time.

Third - Can you argue that the threat of irreversible bodily harm is not a great crime deterrent?

My point was that you said you can't make amends for ruining someone's life by shooting at them and taking a body part from them. I say, why should you? In this case that someone was a criminal. In another words, amends means compensation. You cannot equate getting insurance payments for goods stolen from you with a bad guy losing something for committing a crime. Criminals don't deserve compensation for anything they lose due to their criminal activities...period. If you're a criminal, be prepared to face the consequences...they may be severe.

I can agree with a lot of what you are talking about. Personally, I have no sympathy for the thieves in this case. Their decision to steal the trailer started the whole sequence of events and one of them paid dearly. But, (issue one) many posts have related a desire to pursue a change in law in this state to allow deadly force use to protect property when no circumstances of threat to live or limb exist. This is very dangerous ground IMO. Sure it will be one hell of a deterent to theft of property, but it's going to cost in a few innocent lives along the way too. Additionally, it's disproportional in response. That's what I was alluding to with the trailer vs an eye discussion. I can easily see multiple scenarios where a law like this would end more than one teenager's life over really bad decisions.

My biggest fear in coming from these two thread about this situation is how it will play out in the minds of potential future decisions made by gun owners. If you convince yourself shooting at two people fleeing with your posessions is the right thing to do, how will you react in the heat of the moment. There have been multiple threads of scenarios and how people should defend themselves on this site. I doubt very many of you would have felt so adament about defending the shooter if this was simply a scenario instead of real life with all the background information. This was a bad shoot and most everyone agrees, but more than a few here have convinced themselves this shooter really didn't do anything wrong. Well, he did and any cop, lawyer, judge etc worth anything can explain his actions cost him from the second he decided to pull the trigger on two guys running away and of no life or limb threat. His lying about it after the fact compounded the issue. I feel sorry he was put in those circumstances, but I stopped condoning his actions from the very second he pulled the trigger.

Sorry, I'm tired. My paragraph structure is for crap in this post...

[Byte Stryke]

Correct me if I am wrong, Byte, but didn't the bad guys shoot first in both robberies when the cashier presented their weapons? I thought I saw that on the video that was released. If that is true, the clerks were defending their lives from a deadly force encounter and no cop or D.A. would argue otherwise. The very fact the bad guys were waving their firearms around as shown in the video would be enough for a 'rational person' (that's the legal threshold in most cases) to fear for their lives.

I Dont have answers on that... the video was a bit too blurry for me.
I agree with the whole Rational person argument. I just feel that a person has a right to protect their property and livelihood from willful theft.

Im not talking about capping a toddler for lifting a piece of candy at the convenience store here, Im talking Grown adults showing up at your place of business, Residence or property with the intention of Grand larceny, Armed robbery, Something felonious. There is a Shoot and suddenly the victim is "replacing the eye." so to speak.



My Point, summarized.
I am just saying that if you are Injured on private property during the commission of a felony, You should have NO Civil or Criminal recourse for whatever compensation you may feel you are owed from ANY Party.

Now, That doesn't mean that the owner, if he does something wrong, can't be punished by the people and courts. But it does mean the Thug isn't getting Paid.


:D

[sniper7]

So, it's OK for the average citizen to punish? Can you state in any way that this guy shot at these two thieves for anything but anger and revenge? He blew part of the guy's face off... Do you seriously want this type of action condoned here in CO? Man I end up saying this a lot on this site; be careful what you wish for. Better think this one through fellas. There's a reason only one state has this type of doctrine.

Sorry, I'll explain more when I get home from work...

I would say it is okay for the citizen to punish on his own property. Just like someone with a ccw.

You don't hear much about that one state or its citizens mowing down everyone who walks on their property trying to take things.

The trailer could have contained his livelihood on it,..or someone said before their tools in their truck and they couldn't work. What happens if that guy losses his house, his wife or anything else because he couldn't afford insurance or they took months to pay and he couldnt work. I am just fine with someone taking action, even deadly force to protect their personal property be it this guy having his trailer stolen or a person getting car jacked. To me, i am not going to be stealing anyones stuff.
I was brought up to work hard for the things you want and need and ill be dammed if someone can just stroll/drive in and steal everything i have worked for without some type of reprecussion.

[Marlin]

I'll just say this, Head on to a construction site and start picking up tools and taking them out to your car. Let me know how it goes for you..













I can wait the 3-4 months it'll take you to get out of ICU...

(True story)

Oh, no prosecutions, because He "tripped". OSHA was there for a hour or so. but left with a giggle when he learned what really happened.

[Drilldov2.0]

In cases like this I believe the court should have the exact amount of time as the defendant did to make a decision.

And defending your family, yourself, or your property should always warrant the use of deadly force.