This country is crazy. He probably would have been better off letting the guy break to his house and stealing from him, it would have been cheaper. Not to mention the guy is a veteran, our government trained him how to handle a weapon.

 

http://www.inquisitr.com/681593/man-arrested-for-firing-warning-shot-at-burglar/

 

 

A man was arrested for firing a warning shot at a burglar. Corey Thompson of Medford, Oregon, fired the shot when he found Jonathon Kinsella trying to break into his home. He has now been arrested for firing his weapon.

As a veteran, Thompson explains that grabbing his AR-15 was a natural reaction. He contends that it was never his intention to harm Kinsella, he simply wanted to frighten him off the property. Thompson reportedly warned the burglar that he would fire the warning shot before it happened.

 

As reported by MSN, Thompson served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Kinsella is a convicted felon who was wanted at the time of the break-in. Despite the circumstances and the backgrounds of both men, Thompson was arrested for discharging his weapon.

Medford Police Lieutenant Mike Budreau states that Thompson simply went too far:

“There was nothing that the suspect was doing that was aggressive enough to justify the shooting. In fact, the suspect was walking  away.”

As reported by KDRV News, Thompson admits he did fire the weapon:

“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 anybody’s residence. It  was at the ground specifically.”

Despite his explanation, Corey Thompson was arrested for firing a warning shot at the burglar. Authorities explain that bullets from an assault rifle can ricochet after hitting their intended target. As the area was residential, police are concerned that someone else may have been harmed.

Thompson had to surrender his weapon as it was used in the commission of an alleged crime. He has been charged with unlawful use of a weapon, menacing, and reckless endangerment. If found not guilty, his weapon will be returned.

People often purchase weapons to defend themselves and their homes. However, discharging a weapon may lead to criminal charges. Corey Thompson was arrested for firing a warning shot at a burglar that attempted to break into his home.

 

 

F'n ridiculous...

Would have been better for all parties to let the guy break in, and then kill him...

Should have shot him through the door with a double barrel shotgun like Ol' Joe Biden told us to.

unreal

Would have been better for all parties to let the guy break in, and then kill him...

 

But even then you really shouldn't do anything unless your life is in danger or they pose a threat. I've always thought about this, if someone breaks into my house and i catch the perp in the act and he drops everything and starts walking out as I have my gun pointed at him yelling at him telling him to stop, I cant do anything about it without getting into trouble. If the guy is coming at me or has a weapon it's a different story.

Sorry, warning shots are stupid, and against the law pretty much everywhere.  Unless you live in your own mountain valley, you are endangering someone's life. He broke rules 2 and 3 at the same time. 

 If the guy is coming at me or has a weapon it's a different story.

Just make sure the guy WAS coming at you with a weapon.

Just make sure the guy WAS coming at you with a weapon.

But even then you really shouldn't do anything unless your life is in danger or they pose a threat. I've always thought about this, if someone breaks into my house and i catch the perp in the act and he drops everything and starts walking out as I have my gun pointed at him yelling at him telling him to stop, I cant do anything about it without getting into trouble. If the guy is coming at me or has a weapon it's a different story.

 

It's worse than that.  Even if he's walking out with his arms full, you're not allowed to use deadly force to stop him. 

 

So not trying to be funny here, but would you legally be allowed to tackle the guy in that case?

I'm with Vlad on this one.

 

Gun Owners face enough issues with negative press.

 

Stupidity like this helps nobody.

I'm with Vlad on this one.

 

Gun Owners face enough issues with negative press.

 

Stupidity like this helps nobody.

 

It doesn't matter what happens, the in thing is negative gun press. This guy could have saved 10 people and there would still be an issue. He'd still be a "gun nut".

It's worse than that. Even if he's walking out with his arms full, you're not allowed to use deadly force to stop him.

 

So not trying to be funny here, but would you legally be allowed to tackle the guy in that case?

As long as he poses no physical threat to you or your family I don't think you can, in NJ anyway.

When will people learn to just STFU when questioned by the police. If he remained silent and got an attorney, all that would have happened as a minor inconvenience of his rifle being impounded, and being charged for breaking a no-discharge ordinance which is almost always a petty crime or misdemeanor.

 

Now he has some insane felony charges to face. "warning shots" are a threat of deadly force directed at a person, and without proper cause is along the lings of aggravated assault. In the law's eyes it is pretty much as serious as actually shooting someone. This is why all self defense classes never promote using "warning shots". Either you are clearly justified in using deadly force in self-defence, or you are not. There's no gray allowed, where "warning shots" live. You can't say "I sorta kinda felt that my life was in danger, but not so much to shoot the guy so I just gave him a warning shot".

What a load of BS! Perhaps he should of his in the closet while this guy just robbed him blind and maybe even hurt his family if he had one.

Either you are clearly justified in using deadly force in self-defence, or you are not. There's no gray allowed, where "warning shots" live. You can't say "I sorta kinda felt that my life was in danger, but not so much to shoot the guy so I just gave him a warning shot".

Agreed.

His rifle was confiscated also.

You'd probably get sued for hurting his back.

 

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

How do you "truly" know if a criminal poses a threat to you or your family? Simple honest question.

 

He could have yelled stop, felt the threat was gone, then the criminal decides to turn or become a threat again? How close is this criminal? what is tackling him going to do? what if in the course of wrestling him the criminal got your weapon?

 

You only have seconds to decide. And all of you preaching "this kind of stupidity" dont have a clue unless you've actually been in a situation such as these that are popping up in the news. Yeah it's real easy to say "what you'd do or what you think you would do" but that all could change when faced with a similar situation.

 

We also don't know the full story or how populated the residential neighborhood is or many other variables, but we all like to chime in.

 

I know some of you are going to really not like this post but I am just tired of seeing all the judgements across these forums I am on (cue the free speech comments). I usually just don't respond, but felt I had to pose my point of view. Everyone is so negative anymore.

How do you "truly" know if a criminal poses a threat to you or your family? Simple honest question.

 

He could have yelled stop, felt the threat was gone, then the criminal decides to turn or become a threat again? How close is this criminal? what is tackling him going to do? what if in the course of wrestling him the criminal got your weapon?

 

You only have seconds to decide. And all of you preaching "this kind of stupidity" dont have a clue unless you've actually been in a situation such as these that are popping up in the news. Yeah it's real easy to say "what you'd do or what you think you would do" but that all could change when faced with a similar situation.

 

We also don't know the full story or how populated the residential neighborhood is or many other variables, but we all like to chime in.

 

I know some of you are going to really not like this post but I am just tired of seeing all the judgements across these forums I am on (cue the free speech comments). I usually just don't respond, but felt I had to pose my point of view. Everyone is so negative anymore.

 

Easy one... using deadly force to scare off intruders is both stupid and illegal. The act of scaring someone off signifies that you felt that you weren't in serious danger. If he felt his life or his family's life was in danger, he should have shot and killed the guy, then sorted it out in court.

 

If the guy kept his mouth shut, and got a lawyer... any mention of "warning shots" would have been instead "Mr. so-so felt his and his family were in immediate harms way while the felon was trying to break into his home, the wanted criminal did not heed his warnings. The wanted criminal was about to gain entry into the home when Mr so-so shot at and missed the intruder in self-defense"

In Florida there are minimum sentences for Drawing your gun, or shooting your gun. So minimum 7 years iirc for brandishing.

 

However, no issues if it is in self defense.

 

I get being noble and firing a warning shot... here is a question, where did that warning shot go?

 

Where is that round going to come down? Whom might it hit? That warning shot does not go into outer space and does land somewhere. If I lived in that town, I would be mighty pissed off of someone shooting rounds in the air.... but no issues if it was self defense.

As far as I'm concerned if somebody is breaking into your house where your stuff is that you worked for, you do what you need to do. I have no sympathy for some ass hat pos that decides its easier to steal from somebody than get a job. The vet should be commended for showing restraint and not beating the guys ass.

In Florida there are minimum sentences for Drawing your gun, or shooting your gun. So minimum 7 years iirc for brandishing.

 

However, no issues if it is in self defense.

 

I get being noble and firing a warning shot... here is a question, where did that warning shot go?

 

Where is that round going to come down? Whom might it hit? That warning shot does not go into outer space and does land somewhere. If I lived in that town, I would be mighty pissed off of someone shooting rounds in the air.... but no issues if it was self defense.

Article says discharged into the ground.

As far as I'm concerned if somebody is breaking into your house where your stuff is that you worked for, you do what you need to do. I have no sympathy for some ass hat pos that decides its easier to steal from somebody than get a job. The vet should be commended for showing restraint and not beating the guys ass.

Where did the warning shot end up?

 

What is his warning shot bounced off and killed an innocent guy just working in his yard?

Article says discharged into the ground.

And skipped off to where?

 

Unless the ground was wet... that round likely went somewhere.

I'm with the law on this one.

 

A firearm is a deadly weapon and may only be used when deadly force is authorized. It is not a whistle or pepper spray, if you want to "scare" it is the wrong tool. Also you never shoot to wound, you only ever shoot to kill, period.

 

This guy screwed himself by saying he didn't want to kill the perp.. That means he didn't believe his life was in danger, which makes this a BAD shooting.

 

Keeping a firearm for self defense means you are supposed to know this sort of thing!

 

Someone else nailed it- Never, ever, under any circumstance talk to the police. Claim your right to an attorney and let him be your contact with law enforcement.

Ok.... having read the article completely.... the guy says he fired it at the ground. Terrific.... where did it go?

 

Rounds most frequently skip off and fly somewhere else.... and then we still have to take the guy for his word that he fired it into the ground.

 

If he felt in danger, shoot the bad guy, hell, miss and shoot him in the leg and give him a very very bad day if he was the aggressor... but I agree with others, he could of done more harm, not thinking about it.

 

Shoot some matches, you will know about ricochets. Past few matches, in FL and Vegas... there were issues that people were ducking for ground.

I'm with the law on this one.

A firearm is a deadly weapon and may only be used when deadly force is authorized. It is not a whistle or pepper spray, if you want to "scare" it is the wrong tool. Also you never shoot to wound, you only ever shoot to kill, period.

This guy screwed himself by saying he didn't want to hurt the perp.. That means he didn't believe his life was in danger, which makes this a BAD shooting.

Keeping a firearm for self defense means you are supposed to know this sort of thing!

Very true... then there is the question of.... is shooting a round into the ground by the perp more effective than simply screaming, "hey, stop right there, and having an AR pointed". Bad guy would of either run away or stopped right there, end of story.

Deadly force is Deadly force is Deadly force.  if you discharge a firearm in that situation YOU ARE USING DEADLY FORCE. If You fire a warning shot..guess what,  you didnt have the Justification to use Deadly force in the first place, or you would have used it on the Actor. PERIOD. 

His only possible maybe kinda defense might be that he reverted to some military experience, like "We used to fire a lot of warning shots at hajji in Afghanistan, and under stress I did the same in this case". 

 

Still a terrible idea.