Night Prowler 0 Posted May 30, 2013 Where did the warning shot end up? What is his warning shot bounced off and killed an innocent guy just working in his yard? Point taken. Not saying it was the smartest thing to do in that situation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 30, 2013 where is video where you need it? The article leaves a lot to be desired out too. Where was the burglar? Where was the good guy? Inside or outside his house? Why give a warning before the warning shot? Either warning, or shoot..... or if the article is correct, the guy is already running away, why fire warning shot? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JackDaWack 2,895 Posted May 30, 2013 Never understood the idea behind a warning shot... who the hell wastes ammo!!?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 30, 2013 Never understood the idea behind a warning shot... who the hell wastes ammo!!?!?! Especially if it is a 50 BMG.... humn, anyone use a 50 BMG in a home defense/breakin situation? Would be fun stuff. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sixtytwo327 14 Posted May 30, 2013 Tough call: fire one bullet as a warning, or just let him take your flatscreen? These days, they cost about the same... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soju 153 Posted May 30, 2013 Where did the warning shot end up? What is his warning shot bounced off and killed an innocent guy just working in his yard? Unless I missed the article about a guy randomly getting shot mowing his lawn by a stray round, I'd say he didn't hit anybody. Since we can't go back in time and change events that already took place, what good does it do saying "what if he hit an innocent person." If you want to play that game, then I have an equally likely one. What if the robber felon didn't think he was going to do anything and pulled out a gun of his own? What if the felon did attack him? What if simultaneous to the warning shot, Barney Fife while shooting at a range a half a mile away overshot the berm and the round hit his neighbor mowing his law? He stopped a crime. Nobody got hurt. Sounds like a win-win to me. It never fails to amaze me how many of you so called gun advocates actually argue against using guns in real scenarios, and the only option is do nothing or kill someone. As if stopping a crime without hurting anyone is now a bad thing. The only way to stop criminals is straight vigilante justice? Pass. For the record, I'm not a big fan of 'warning shots'. I'm also not a big fan of criminalizing someone with well meaning intentions when they don't hurt anybody just because they might have in your made up hypothetical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 30, 2013 Unless I missed the article about a guy randomly getting shot mowing his lawn by a stray round, I'd say he didn't hit anybody. Since we can't go back in time and change events that already took place, what good does it do saying "what if he hit an innocent person." If you want to play that game, then I have an equally likely one. What if the robber felon didn't think he was going to do anything and pulled out a gun of his own? What if the felon did attack him? What if simultaneous to the warning shot, Barney Fife while shooting at a range a half a mile away overshot the berm and the round hit his neighbor mowing his law? He stopped a crime. Nobody got hurt. Sounds like a win-win to me. It never fails to amaze me how many of you so called gun advocates actually argue against using guns in real scenarios, and the only option is do nothing or kill someone. As if stopping a crime without hurting anyone is now a bad thing. The only way to stop criminals is straight vigilante justice? Pass. For the record, I'm not a big fan of 'warning shots'. I'm also not a big fan of criminalizing someone with well meaning intentions when they don't hurt anybody just because they might have in your made up hypothetical. I don't think he should be serving jail time... but the guy did not think.... at the very least. Why did he have to fire a shot towards the guy? Why didn't he wait for the burglar to come into his house? Why don't we let drunks drive, without punishment unless they kill someone? Firing warnings shots, in the ground or somewhere else, the bullet is going somewhere. The warning shot did absolutely nothing, especially if we take the article, that the guy was already running away. Yes, I am an advocate for gun rights, but I am not an advocate for stupid gun owners. It is good that a crime was stopped, but he did not take the best course of action. Should he get jail time? No, but I think there should be a fine or whatever is the local ordinance for a discharge is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spike 7.62 0 Posted May 30, 2013 It never fails to amaze me how many of you so called gun advocates actually argue against using guns in real scenarios, and the only option is do nothing or kill someone. As if stopping a crime without hurting anyone is now a bad thing. The only way to stop criminals is straight vigilante justice? Pass. It's not vigilante justice, it's real justice. It amazes me that you think a gun can be used as anything except a deadly weapon, such as a warning horn or a fire work. Shooting when you don't believe someone is an immediate threat is not an example of "well meaning intentions". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted May 30, 2013 I fail to see why anyone would think a gun is the only option, and a warning shot the right thing. Pepper spray might work wonders to make someone drop your stuff and back off, so will a fire extinguisher to the face. Just because you own a gun, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't own non-lethal devices and know how to use them. Why do you think cops carry them? The gun isn't the answer to every problem, just like the whole hammer/nail thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fred2 367 Posted May 30, 2013 Maybe he just missed, and called it a warning shot, thinking it would be less embarrassing than being called a bad shot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 30, 2013 Maybe he just missed, and called it a warning shot, thinking it would be less embarrassing than being called a bad shot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gunguy1960 2 Posted May 30, 2013 Maybe an extra magazine filled with blanks, along with a slidefire stock on your gun, full auto warning! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 Maybe an extra magazine filled with blanks, along with a slidefire stock on your gun, full auto warning! Would be fun shit, won't it? If I was a bad guy trying to break into a house, and someone yelled hey, stop, and I turn around and am staring at the business end of an AR.... I would crap my pants.... forget the warning shot. Devil's advocate.... If the bad guy had a gun, and saw the guy fire warning shot at him, would he be justified in shooting back? Or your rights go out the window when you are committing a crime? What if you are walking across a property minding your own business? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BD104X 1 Posted May 31, 2013 When I took the Florida CCW course (in Florida), the instructor told us that under no circumstance is a warning shot acceptable and it is punishable by up to 7 years in prison in Florida. The reasoning he gave was that, according to FL law, you may not use a firearm to gain the upper hand in an argument. Use of deadly force is only justified if you have reason to believe your life or well being is in imminent danger. His advice was that If you feel threatened, you inform the person that you are armed and willing to protect yourself. If that doesn't de-escalate the situation or the threat reaches to the point that you fear for your life or well being, THEN you shoot. Plain and simple. ** Not looking for a pissing match, just thought the legal perspective as explained from what i would assume to be semi-reliable source was interesting and made sense! ** Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 When I took the Florida CCW course (in Florida), the instructor told us that under no circumstance is a warning shot acceptable and it is punishable by up to 7 years in prison in Florida. The reasoning he gave was that, according to FL law, you may not use a firearm to gain the upper hand in an argument. Use of deadly force is only justified if you have reason to believe your life or well being is in imminent danger. His advice was that If you feel threatened, you inform the person that you are armed and willing to protect yourself. If that doesn't de-escalate the situation or the threat reaches to the point that you fear for your life or well being, THEN you shoot. Plain and simple. ** Not looking for a pissing match, just thought the legal perspective as explained from what i would assume to be semi-reliable source was interesting and made sense! ** exactly to what I eluded to. I think the Florida is 7 - 14 - Life? Scratch that, found it. 10 - 20 - Life The law specifies exactly what categories of crimes fall under it, it mandates that offenders be sentenced to the law's maximum allowable extent for the committed felony, and that the mandatory sentences must be completed consecutively to any additional sentence an offender must serve.[2][6] The law's name comes from three main mandatory sentences: 1) producing a firearm during the commission of certain felonies mandates at least a 10-year prison sentence; 2) firing one mandates at least a 20-year prison sentence; and 3) shooting someone mandates a minimum sentence of 25 years to life regardless of whether a victim is killed or simply injured. The maximum penalty is a life sentence unless the defendant is charged with felony murder or first degree murder in which case the maximum is the death penalty.[2][6] In addition to the "10-20-Life" rule itself, the law also established or increased other mandatory minimum sentences:[2] At least a sentence of 3 years in state prison for felons who possess a firearm; At least a 15-year prison sentence if the offender is in possession of either a machine gun or a semiautomatic gun with a high-capacity box magazine while committing a crime listed under statute 775.087; At least a 3-year prison sentence for aggravated assault with a firearm; At least a 3-year prison sentence for aggravated assault on a police officer;A,B At least a 3-year prison sentence for aggravated assault on a person aged 65 years or older;A At least a 3-year prison sentence for aggravated battery on a person aged 65 years or older;A At least a 5-year prison sentence for aggravated battery on an officer;A,B At least an 8-year prison sentence for possessing a machine gun, or semiautomatic firearm while committing any type of battery on an officer or person aged 65 years or older.A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Donobieus 15 Posted May 31, 2013 I don't think he should be serving jail time... but the guy did not think.... at the very least. Why did he have to fire a shot towards the guy? Why didn't he wait for the burglar to come into his house? Why don't we let drunks drive, without punishment unless they kill someone? Firing warnings shots, in the ground or somewhere else, the bullet is going somewhere. The warning shot did absolutely nothing, especially if we take the article, that the guy was already running away. Yes, I am an advocate for gun rights, but I am not an advocate for stupid gun owners. It is good that a crime was stopped, but he did not take the best course of action. Should he get jail time? No, but I think there should be a fine or whatever is the local ordinance for a discharge is. What a bunch of crap.....You would REALLY wait for the intruders to enter your house before you fired a shot? when a warning shot INTO THE DIRT would scare them away and not endanger your family at all...This guy took the SAFEST course of action for his family. How much worse would it be if he had killed him with the first shot?? Think about what'd you'd do....THEN express your opinion...otherwise dont judge a snap decision by a vet.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 What a bunch of crap.....You would REALLY wait for the intruders to enter your house before you fired a shot? when a warning shot INTO THE DIRT would scare them away and not endanger your family at all...This guy took the SAFEST course of action for his family. How much worse would it be if he had killed him with the first shot?? Think about what'd you'd do....THEN express your opinion...otherwise dont judge a snap decision by a vet.... This has nothing to do about him being a vet, if you knew me, you would know I have nothing but respect for them. This has everything to do with firing a warning shot which is stupid. He either felt in danger, in which case he should of use deadly force to defend his life, or he did not, in which case he was discharging a firearm at someone who was not endangering himself. We don't know if the guy was inside his house, outside or anything. If the good guy was inside the house, and the bad guy was breaking in.... how does the vet put the round into the ground? Into his floor? Or was the bad guy out the door already, running away and the good guy puts a round into the ground to chase him away? We know nothing about what actually happened. As the LEO officers on this board already posted... a warning shot is still use of deadly force. You can't just shoot of rounds to chase someone away. Having a gun barrel pointed at them will do that by itself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 Here is another article that makes it a bit more clear. Guy was inside the house, bad guy was breaking into the back door... " “There was nothing that the suspect was doing that was aggressive enough to justify the shooting. In fact, the suspect was walking away,” said Medford Police Lt. Mike Budreau. " Point 1...Bad guy should go to jail, and would not be a great loss of life. No arguments from me. My argument is... if the guy was already walking away, is it ok for you to fire a shot at someone? http://www.kdrv.com/man-attempts-to-stop-felon-with-firearm/ Do you discharge a firearm when there is no longer an immediate threat to you? One more link.. http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/corey-thompson-oregon-iraq-afghan-veteran-loses-ar-15-and-arrested-for-firing-warning-shot-at-intruder-77711/ This was in an Apartment Complex. Of course there is no danger to anyone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spike 7.62 0 Posted May 31, 2013 All we know is that he screwed himself by firing when he didn't think he needed to. Then he REALLY screwed himself when he told that to police, because now it's going to bite him in court. Like it or not a gun is one thing and one thing only- a deadly weapon. To use it otherwise is unsafe and in this case illegal. If you want to play the escalation of force game, use less-lethal weapon systems. And his veteran status means nothing in this situation. It doesn't make him any smarter or any more qualified with his weapon. The biggest dumbest scumbags I've ever met have been in the military. All it means is he signed his name on a DD Form 4. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Donobieus 15 Posted May 31, 2013 This has nothing to do about him being a vet, if you knew me, you would know I have nothing but respect for them. This has everything to do with firing a warning shot which is stupid. He either felt in danger, in which case he should of use deadly force to defend his life, or he did not, in which case he was discharging a firearm at someone who was not endangering himself. We don't know if the guy was inside his house, outside or anything. If the good guy was inside the house, and the bad guy was breaking in.... how does the vet put the round into the ground? Into his floor? Or was the bad guy out the door already, running away and the good guy puts a round into the ground to chase him away? We know nothing about what actually happened. As the LEO officers on this board already posted... a warning shot is still use of deadly force. You can't just shoot of rounds to chase someone away. Having a gun barrel pointed at them will do that by itself. What i meant is that a vet would certainly have more wits about him than an average citizen....and if he felt that a round in the dirt was better than a round in someones head than im with him....You all talk about deadly force....how many of you have applied it?? I will scream and yell for my 2A Rights but taking a mans life is not my ultimate goal. If i can scare someone away without killing him than i'm all for it...and so should you all be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 Here ya go... the video. So the guy admits going into combat mode, goes outside to shoot a warning shot at a guy walking away. Winning. There is absolutely no way a 223 round will skip, or splatter and go 20 directions. We have never seen that of course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 What i meant is that a vet would certainly have more wits about him than an average citizen....and if he felt that a round in the dirt was better than a round in someones head than im with him....You all talk about deadly force....how many of you have applied it?? I will scream and yell for my 2A Rights but taking a mans life is not my ultimate goal. If i can scare someone away without killing him than i'm all for it...and so should you all be. Watch the video. Do you see any dirt? Only pavement of a parking lot. He fired at a guy who was already scared away and running away. I can see if he has 5 acres and the guy is on his property and knows it. He is in a freaking apartment complex. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Night Prowler 0 Posted May 31, 2013 Not the setting I pictured for a warning shot. So now I have to change my previous opinion. They are both jackasses. Originally I pictured it being much more open if he fired a warning shot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 Not the setting I pictured for a warning shot. So now I have to change my previous opinion. They are both jackasses. Originally I pictured it being much more open if he fired a warning shot. Lol, yeah. I originally figured Oregon.... big open spaces. Did not think it was an apartment complex. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soju 153 Posted May 31, 2013 I don't think he should be serving jail time... but the guy did not think.... at the very least. I agree. Why did he have to fire a shot towards the guy? Why didn't he wait for the burglar to come into his house? Not sure, and waiting till a criminal gets into my house sounds like a much worse idea than firing a warning shot, as bad as an idea that is too. Why don't we let drunks drive, without punishment unless they kill someone? Apples and oranges. Driving drunk is stupid and selfish. Protecting yourself/family/property is a legitimate purpose even if you may have gone about it in a less than ideal method. Firing warnings shots, in the ground or somewhere else, the bullet is going somewhere. The warning shot did absolutely nothing, especially if we take the article, that the guy was already running away. As I said, I don't advocate warning shots. I don't know why he did it. I don't know what he was thinking. I don't know his life experience. I wasn't there. But he certainly doesn't sound like a criminal to me. Yes, I am an advocate for gun rights, but I am not an advocate for stupid gun owners. I'm not sure anybody is but this is reality. It is good that a crime was stopped, but he did not take the best course of action. Should he get jail time? No, but I think there should be a fine or whatever is the local ordinance for a discharge is. Sure, I don't disagree. I said I don't think he should be criminalized for his actions, as I believe you suggested. A fine for a local ordinance discharge violation is far different from being arrested and your firearm taken. It amazes me that you think a gun can be used as anything except a deadly weapon, such as a warning horn or a fire work. 1. I said I wasn't advocating warning shots. 2. You seriously think the only use for a firearm is to kill? It is impossible to stop a crime by drawing a firearm unless you shoot them? Despite that ridiculous notion, and regardless of whether or not you think it is a good idea, I can assure you, guns have been used effectively in situations where nobody got shot. Shooting when you don't believe someone is an immediate threat is not an example of "well meaning intentions". So you must wait until someone is an immediate threat, losing any upper hand you may have had, putting yourself at much greater risk first? Are you suggesting he had criminal intentions? Yes, you can exercise poor judgment with well meaning intentions. I'm not sure what reality you live in. People do dumb things with good intentions all the time. Sometimes it gets people hurt or killed. Sometimes it doesn't. It should be addressed. It doesn't necessarily mean they are criminals. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 All solid points... this case, the guy really is an idiot. From the three stories, and his own personal statement, he was inside his apartment when someone was trying to break in. He tells the guy he is armed and would fire a warning shot. Bad guy turns around and goes away. No problems up to here. This dummy, then goes outside and fires a warning shot AT the guy, in an apartment complex.... because his combat training kicked in. If you are on 5 acres of property, and you know your property and you are not endangering anyone, sure... I can see how the no discharge laws can be BS.... but this tool fires his AR in an apartment complex, at a guy. He is an irresponsible gun owner. I quite frequently run in the evening, as do many others, in a development. If the guy is no longer a threat, ie turned around and was leaving.... what good does a warning shot do? What are the pluses? While he may pull that stuff in the sandbox, he does not own the property around the apartment complex, he is not on his own property, he had no right to fire a warning shot at someone who was obviously outside his house. At no point in any of the articles or the video does he say bad guy got in. Problem was solved when he told the guy he has a gun and would fire. Then instead of calling cops, he goes after the guy, outside his property. I would be far more ok if he was on his own property defending it... knowing more details and that he was in an apartment complex.... this guy deserves the charges. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WVisHome 0 Posted May 31, 2013 I see both sides of this argument....great entertainment. Personally, i don't think the guy "deserves" the charges....but I can understand why they're warranted. Also...I also believe a "warning shot" is much more effective than a barrel pointed at someone. Actions speak louder than words. Besides...you can get charged for both "brandishing" and "negligent discharge".... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Soju 153 Posted May 31, 2013 I think we mostly agree. After reading more about what happened, it seems much more boneheaded then I thought before. As I said, I'm not sure why he did that, or what going through his head. I still don't think he is a criminal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WVisHome 0 Posted May 31, 2013 So you must wait until someone is an immediate threat, losing any upper hand you may have had, putting yourself at much greater risk first? I will say though...according to the law....yes, as unfortunate as it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted May 31, 2013 I will say though...according to the law....yes, as unfortunate as it is. Whats an immediate threat? If you are 30 feet from someone, and someone walks through your door with a weapon, immediate threat, shoot to stop. If you are in your doorway, and the guy is 30 feet and walking away with a weapon.... immediate threat? Does it constitute a threat? If the bad entered his apartment, I would be A OK with whatever the guy chose... warning shot or not... his personal choice at that point. From all things indicative... no longer a threat. What we don't know is where he took the warning shot from? His doorway or he left the confines of his apartment. As long as no one got hurt, ie bystanders, whatever the town ordinance is, he should have it thrown at him... what he did was irresponsible. Do the charges carry jail time? I really hope he does not get jail time, but he should seek help.... especially if we take him for his word... "military training kicked in". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
