jlmiracle 7 #1 October 9, 2002 This happened yesterday. Memphis, TN - One man has killed, one has been killed. All of it for a car. Samuel Williams saw it unfold. "When I heard the gunshots I ducked. I didn't want no stray bullets hitting me. I was directly across from it." 'It' is a used car dealership. Williams says it started when a man stopped to make a payment. A thief jumped in the man's car and drove off. The owner of the car is an off-duty security guard. He pulled his .40 caliber Smith and Wesson pistol and started shooting. "He (the thief) sped away and I thought he was going to get away cause he was driving pretty straight. All of a sudden he took a turn and hit the light pole," says Williams. The thief hit a light pole and a fire hydrant before the car rolled over. The unidentified man who took the car was dead. Police say - one bullet found its mark. But police can't say if the shot or the accident killed him. They also can't say if the shooter is in trouble. "It would have to be a ruling by the AG's office and maybe a grand jury.. but we won't know until we put everything together," says Capt. R.D. Roleson. While the police are investigating this shooting, people on the street are talking. They're talking about whether or not the guard went too far or if the thief got what he deserved. "I don't have any sympathy for him but I don't think you should be shot if you steal a car. He might have been young. We have a lot of stupidity around here but it's not worth losing a life for," says Chris Hunter. Will the shooter lose his freedom too? The police will give the case to the Attorney General's office in the morning. Then it will be up to them to decide to prosecute or not. In the meantime, police have not released the shooter nor the thief's identity . Do you think charges should be brought against the shooter? JudyBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SBS 0 #2 October 9, 2002 Yes, I think the shooter went too far. It was a car...that is not self defense. -S_____________ I'm not conceited...I'm just realistic about my awesomeness... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #3 October 9, 2002 Quote Do you think charges should be brought against the shooter? Although its a shitty situation, someone having died, NO, they shouldn't. I know for a fact that in Texas, if everything was in order (the man who's car was stolen wasn't on drugs or drunk, etc) he would be set free. That has to do with the laws that state that you have the right to protect your property. You've got to feel sorry for the guy who reacted to his car being stolen, though, since this will most definately haunt him for the rest of his life.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kinney29 0 #4 October 9, 2002 I fit was in SC, the shooter would not be prosecuted. The states attorney general has made it very clear that if you shoot someone taking your property or breaking into your home and you shoot them with a registered gun you will not be prosecuted. ANd in SC everyone has a gun. Just yesterday a robber got shot by a store clerk after they left the building. Then chased them in his car for 10 miles before the other car got a flat and wrecked. Guess what, the store clerk is not gonna be charged. I'm gonna miss the south. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jlmiracle 7 #5 October 9, 2002 I don't think he should be prosecuted either. JudyBe kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #6 October 9, 2002 Depends on Tenn. state law. In some states you may ONLY shoot at somebody if they are a threat to persons -- NOT property. It's a pretty black and white case depending on what state law says. Too bad the reported screwed up and didn't quote it. The reporter certainly -should- have been able to do a minimum amount of research via the Police PIO and found out.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
indyz 1 #7 October 9, 2002 I think that (assuming the laws are in TN are the same as many other states) from a legal standpoint the guy should walk, but morally I don't think the shooting was justified, and it certainly wasn't self defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SBS 0 #8 October 9, 2002 It's a pretty sad commentary on human nature and our society when a material object is determined to be more valuable than a human life. Having an intruder in your house is one thing, or someone in the process of stealing from you...you don't know what they are about to do...THAT could be self defense. When someone is getting away, though, they are no longer threatening you...it is a vindictive attempt at taking someone's life because they pissed you off. So what, a rig, a car, $20, big fucking deal...it's not worth someone's life, and allowing people to believe that it's ok to take such drastic measures for something to trivial is going to take our moral standards by the hand and continue them on the walk down the low road...welcome to the world where vigilantes rule. -S_____________ I'm not conceited...I'm just realistic about my awesomeness... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkymonkeyONE 4 #9 October 9, 2002 Quote You've got to feel sorry for the guy who reacted to his car being stolen, though, since this will most definitely haunt him for the rest of his life. I have to say here that shooting this moron would definitely not "haunt me" for any amount of time. I am all about being able to defend what's mine. When I was growing up, everyone I knew had a gun in the back window of their truck and a pistol in the glovebox. Everyone in the house could shoot and clean the family guns and nobody was stupid enough to even think about breaking into someone else's house. We never locked our doors to our house and we very rarely brought the keys to the vehicles inside. There were far fewer robberies back when people knew they would likely be killed for trying to steal your car or break into your home. Today's litigious society makes me sick. Just my opinion as a fairly callous and world-weary individual. C. Blue, esq. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bivar 0 #10 October 9, 2002 I totally agree.---------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JJohnson 0 #11 October 9, 2002 In the Old West you got hung for stealing a horse. why? Because you are taking a persons way of life, a way to get to their work, to town...however you want to say it. The thief knew he ran the risk of bodily injury. He had to expect a reaction, the reaction he got may be excessive. But he certainly did not take into account how his actions were going to effect anyone else. If I tell your wife she's a fat ugly warthog, in front of you at dinner....I can expect to get the shit kicked outta me. If you happen to kill me in the process...it may be excessive, but my stupidity still caused it. Level of stupidity does dictate the repercussions of your actions. Stupidity is supposed to be painful, even fatal....for the good of the species. Shooter goes free. JJJJ "Call me Darth Balls" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #12 October 9, 2002 Yeah...I agree. We've taken natural selection out of the equation with all our advances in medicine. The only way we have to weed out the dumb, offensive dregs of society is to shoot them! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SBS 0 #13 October 9, 2002 So, you call my wife a fat pig, I beat you to death, that's ok??? I totally agree that the actions of the theif or assailant are to blame, but it is up to us to be responsible for our actions, and putting value where it belongs. I'm sorry, but my friends and family are worth the lives of another, but I own nothing material that cannot be replaced. Just like the true test of a marriage does not come when things are all hunky dorey, nor does the test of true morality exist when everything is going your way. It is specifically in those situations where you have to make a split second decision that you will know who you truly are. "Oh, I overreacted...sorry you're dead." just doesn't cut it for me. -S_____________ I'm not conceited...I'm just realistic about my awesomeness... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bbarnhouse 0 #14 October 9, 2002 Quote In the Old West you got hung for stealing a horse Ummmm this law is still on the books in many SW states and for cattle rustling as well.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meathorse 0 #15 October 9, 2002 Quote welcome to the world where vigilantes rule. Better than a world ruled by thieves Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #16 October 9, 2002 totally agree. the theif was still in the act of stealing, so until IMO until he gets out of range he's still subject to being stopped. one would think so long as he didnt reload hunting him down after the fact would be to far____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SBS 0 #17 October 9, 2002 Better than a world ruled by thieves ------------ That is a fallacy, that the choices are either one or the other. There are others, in which a theif get's his due, and the other person has maintained what I see as the moral high ground. If it were true, though, that it is either thiefs or vigilantes, I would still have to disagree with you. I see vigilantes and theives as existing near the same moral plane. -S_____________ I'm not conceited...I'm just realistic about my awesomeness... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sar911 0 #18 October 9, 2002 Based on the limited information provided and assuming that it is correct, I predict that the shooter will be charged at least with reckless public endangerment. While I have no sympathy for the thief, the fact is the shooter endangered the public as is evident by the subsequent accident not to mention where the hell the other bullets went. He was not in fear of his life, only the loss of property. Now not only has he lost his car but also the civil suit will clean his clock. He did not shoot to stop the vehicle, he shot to kill! Another thought, will a civil jury find him negligent for leaving his keys in the car in a public place? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bmcd308 0 #19 October 9, 2002 Quote So, you call my wife a fat pig, I beat you to death, that's ok??? Excellent analogy. This is almost exactly the same thing as engaging in a confrontational felony. Do you actually believe what you are saying, or are you lefty pacifist types just trying to get the reasonable people here riled up? ---------------------------------- www.jumpelvis.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #20 October 9, 2002 Quote are you lefty pacifist types just trying to get the reasonable people here riled up rea·son·a·ble Pronunciation Key (rz-n-bl) adj. -Being within the bounds of common sense -Not excessive or extreme; fair I don't think shooting wildly at a fleeing automobile fits those definitions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #21 October 9, 2002 Stealing Also not reasonable--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #22 October 9, 2002 >Do you think charges should be brought against the shooter? Yep. Use of a weapon to protect yourself or others is perfectly justifiable, even if there's no 100% clear threat - i.e. you should be able to shoot someone in your house if they don't stop when you tell them to stop. Use of a weapon to stop a crime is iffy. That's the province of the police, who are trained in the use of deadly force. The moral problems with killing someone accidentally (i.e. you see a "carjacker," aim and fire, and hit the repo guy) far, far outweigh the problems with losing the property. It's probably defensible, but far from clear. Shooting someone driving a car down a street, killing them and causing the car to go out of control, is in no way defensible. It presents a risk to others on the street that they did not accept, and he should be prosecuted for doing so, to the same extent someone who drove drunk down a street and smashed into a light pole would be. Thank god the out of control car didn't kill anyone, or he'd be up on manslaughter charges at the very least. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #23 October 9, 2002 Cop: Why did you shoot him 30 times? Me: I thought I had another clip but I must have left it in my other pants. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SBS 0 #24 October 9, 2002 Stealing Also not reasonable -------------- I don't think anyone here has tried to say that the theif was an example of the human being that we all long to be. One person being unreasonable does not, though, give another carte blanche to be unreasonable as well...and in this case, also trying to injure/kill someone else, and worse, endangering the lives of others that were around and had nothing to do with the situation. -S_____________ I'm not conceited...I'm just realistic about my awesomeness... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #25 October 9, 2002 Quote endangering the lives of others that were around and had nothing to do with the situation. Unfortunately, I am all too familiar with a case just like this one. Just up the street from where I work a woman was killed some years ago. A man's car had been stolen and he was firing a handgun at the thief. Well, this was right around 2PM, on a week day, and the streets were very busy. He hit a woman with one of the shots and killed her. I heard this story because my manager was explaining why Bellsouth has a policy that no one can leave company property while on break. Only on your lunch hour. I guess it caused a lot of multi-million dollar hassle with insurance companies. With the power comes a MAJOR responsibility! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
