VETERAN’S AR-15 CONFISCATED BY POLICE- And he's facing criminal charges!

Short story is- Felon trying to break into a Veteran's house, Vet pulls AR-15 out, tells the criminal he's armed and will be giving him only one warning, and fired a warning shot. Now he's in deep doodoo... Not sure what to think on this one, trying to be objective and see from both sides of the story...

Quote:

---

MILITARY VETERAN’S AR-15 CONFISCATED BY POLICE – BUT THE REASON WHY IS THE REAL STORY

An Oregon man has had rifle confiscated and is facing criminal charges after he attempted to stop a wanted felon from breaking into his home by firing a warning shot.
Police in Medford, Ore., say the incident occurred at around 11:30 p.m. on Sunday. Officers responded to an apartment complex in the area after receiving a disturbance call. During their investigation, cops heard a gun shot and a man running away toward the complex’s parking lot.


Authorities say 40-year-old Jonathon Kinsella, a wanted felon, was attempting to flee the scene when he was arrested on outstanding warrants, including for burglary and assault.

Military veteran Corey Thompson, 36, told KDRV-TV that the wanted felon was trying to beak into his home via the back door. Defending his property, Thompson said he warned the criminal that he was armed and he was giving him his one and only warning shot.


“This is the end result. You break into someone’s house, there’s consequences,” Thompson said.


Wielding his AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, the veteran made good on his threat and fired one warning shot. The bullet did not strike the suspect or anyone else.
“When I’m dealt with a stressful situation, being a veteran from Iraq and the Afghanistan war, it’s natural. I just jump into combat mode. I told him, ‘I’m going to give you a warning shot’,” Thompson explained.
However, police later determined he wasn’t justified in firing his weapon. Medford Police Lt. Mike Budreau said “there was nothing that the suspect was doing that was aggressive enough to justify the shooting.”
Apparently, for police in Medford, a wanted felon trying to break into a law-abiding citizen’s home isn’t enough to justify a warning shot.

Thompson was charged with unlawful use of a weapon, menacing and reckless endangering. The veteran’s AR-15 was seized by police because they claim it was used in the commission of a crime.

Thompson said he doesn’t agree with the police’s decision in this case.


“I can see where they’re coming from, with those kinds of ordinances and stuff. I understand yes, I did discharge my weapon but I was careful not to fire it at any body’s residence. It was at the ground specifically,” he added.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...into-his-home/

---

Granted I wouldn't fire a warning shot... But sounds like the police detectives might be siding with the criminal a bit here? [Dunno]

We live in an age where defending the US Constitution and enjoying your Natural Rights is punishable.

Warning shots in stateside self defense is a dumb idea all around. We're not doing EOF measures against daydreaming Iraqi drivers anymore here. A totally different AO means totally different ways of doing things.

It's dumb that he had it confiscated, but he shouldn't have expected anything else to happen.

I went round and round with a buddy of mine about firing warning shots... lets just say Im not going to do it lol

Though I understand his EOF intent, and his honesty as to the situation, I believe he would have been better off not speaking to the police without an attorney present.

If I ever have to pull the trigger, I will not say a word without an attorney - too difficult to keep up with legal nuances, too easy to get into a world of trouble.


ETA:
Did not our VP recommend this tactic?

I understand why he gave the intruder a warning shot..... Some mil member get stuck/develope bad habits from training and shitty ROE/EOF

I think the huge no no was the fact that it was an apartment complex an he didn't know the line of sight behind his target. My guess is if it was in rural America the cops wouldn't have had a problem with it but discharging a firearm in city limits a huge no no.

Without knowing the details of the encounter, it's hard to really comment... despite the perp actually being a felon, he hadn't yet broken in to the house so firing even the first shot was probably premature (at face value of the article). I agree it's stupid as hell that the cops would do this to him, Andy and Barney sure wouldn't, but we are all practically guilty until proven innocent this day in age.

What a mess, but I've been raised to believe warning shots are a bad idea anyway.

The one positive in the whole story is that the firearm was used somewhat responsibly to stop a criminal. The more of those that make the media the better.

Isn't this kind of what Dumbass Joe was recommending? Fire through the door.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sandman76

Isn't this kind of what Dumbass Joe was recommending? Fire through the door.

---

hahaha, yep. Sure is :)