Bystander fires at shoplifters ??

Glaron · May 5, 2019

Very badly worded lead into this. Could be interesting.
Isn't using a vehicle as a weapon deadly force in escaping? The guy shot at tires.

Need more information to come out, but it seems "news" wants to make the perps victims. :rolleyes:

State troopers responding to the mall determined that four people had stolen items from the mall and were trying to flee when the driver intentionally smashed into a mall security vehicle.

A bystander with a concealed gun permit shot at the vehicle’s tires. The suspects jumped out and ran away. No injuries have been reported.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/5/man-fires-shoplifters-fleeing-concord-mall-delawar/

sgt23preston · May 5, 2019

KEY words:

Bystander = NOT involved...

Self Defense = clearly NOT self defense...

Questions = Where did the bullets go after they went thru the tires ? = Illegal Discharge & Reckless Endangerment...

I'll be that he gets charged with something...

Mark75H · May 5, 2019

I agree. In New Castle County, it won't be pretty for the shooter.

In liberal minds, there are no criminals, only victims of social disease.

DutchV · May 5, 2019

Nobody in imminent danger? Time to be an observant bystander. Maybe get some photos. Keep the gun hidden unless things get froggy.

rseymorejr · May 5, 2019

Nobody should be shooting at tires. Having said that if a couple of the shoplifters had gotten nailed I wouldn't be unhappy about that. I hate a thief.

babalou · May 5, 2019

I see it as a good thing. People always gripe about bystanders not getting involved. so far good points are made, but To me wrong is wrong. I know not life snd death but perps need to know any bullshiite they pull may end up with consequences on their part. Stuff stolen is money someone else toiled to get.

danb · May 5, 2019

Defense of others is a defense. If the driver was ramming a mall security vehicle and putting others at risk, the shooting seems justified. However, shooting at tires is something that only works in movies. If deadly force is justified, aim at the driver.

babalou · May 5, 2019

True

danb said:
Defense of others is a defense. If the driver was ramming a mall security vehicle and putting others at risk, the shooting seems justified. However, shooting at tires is something that only works in movies. If deadly force is justified, aim at the driver.

But then you will not get the car to flip over a parked car and blow up like it had ten pounds of C4 in it.

Occam · May 5, 2019

All of my instructors have said to only shoot at the tires if you're leaning off a motorcycle at over 100mph, hanging off the bottom of a helicopter, or being propelled through the air by a gigantic gas explosion that otherwise isn't hurting me.

spoon059 · May 5, 2019

Occam said:
All of my instructors have said to only shoot at the tires if you're leaning off a motorcycle at over 100mph, hanging off the bottom of a helicopter, or being propelled through the air by a gigantic gas explosion that otherwise isn't hurting me.

Guns in both hands too, hopefully...

Rambler · May 5, 2019

spoon059 said:
Guns in both hands too, hopefully...

Chow Yun-Fat approves.

danb · May 5, 2019

Occam said:
All of my instructors have said to only shoot at the tires if you're leaning off a motorcycle at over 100mph, hanging off the bottom of a helicopter, or being propelled through the air by a gigantic gas explosion that otherwise isn't hurting me.

So I cant do it standing from my sunroof while driving with one hand at 80 mph down i-95? Huh.

Mark75H · May 5, 2019

danb said:
Defense of others is a defense. If the driver was ramming a mall security vehicle and putting others at risk, the shooting seems justified. However, shooting at tires is something that only works in movies. If deadly force is justified, aim at the driver.

But if the ramming was over and they were fleeing, it was just assault, not defense of others.

MackM · May 5, 2019

Glaron said:
Very badly worded lead into this. Could be interesting.
Isn't using a vehicle as a weapon deadly force in escaping? The guy shot at tires.

Need more information to come out, but it seems "news" wants to make the perps victims.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/5/man-fires-shoplifters-fleeing-concord-mall-delawar/

Don't know what the local attorney general will say but shooting at tires is almost always ill-advised. State can accuse shooter of carelessness, saying bullets could go anywhere, nobody's life was in danger since perps were leaving the scene, etc. etc. Safe bet was to just be a good witness and video the car to get tag number and occupants' descriptions. Cops sometimes shoot at drivers of vehicles that try to run them over or drive off with a cop hanging on the door, etc. But the claim there is that the cop's life is at risk so deadly force is authorized. Not so for a CCW holder, a 3rd party bystander, when nobody's life is in danger because the perps are fleeing. Now if the car was then headed for the CCW holder, that might support a self-defense plea. Just my thoughts and I am not a lawyer.

172pilot · May 8, 2019

spoon059 said:
Guns in both hands too, hopefully...

Dont forget to hold them both sideways... :-)

John from MD · May 8, 2019

They are going to make this guy look like a cowboy and that will make the rest of us look bad. I'm sure they will imply all CCW holders are cowboys waiting for the opportunity to show off. :sad20:

tmo8320 · May 8, 2019

John from MD just said it.
Folks are gonna paint with a broad brush.

No accounting for this person was being an irresponsible jack wagon.

Literally...this person.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sailor · May 8, 2019

He DOES HAVE a leg to stand on

This is a tough one, but not without some merit.
>You CAN claim self defense with deadly force if you meet the requirements.
>You CAN use deadly force to defend another person IF AND ONLY IF you would be able to use deadly force IF YOU WERE IN THEIR SHOES.

Man deliberately attacked with a two ton car? Sounds like an attack with deadly force.
Person attacked may be able to defend themselves with deadly force- if they were not the aggressor (moved their vehicle in the way of the perp), etc...
Thus a bystander may be able to defend them with deadly force.

Better have a good lawyer, and be ready for an interesting court case....

lazarus · May 8, 2019

sailor said:
This is a tough one, but not without some merit.
>You CAN claim self defense with deadly force if you meet the requirements.
>You CAN use deadly force to defend another person IF AND ONLY IF you would be able to use deadly force IF YOU WERE IN THEIR SHOES.

Man deliberately attacked with a two ton car? Sounds like an attack with deadly force.
Person attacked may be able to defend themselves with deadly force- if they were not the aggressor (moved their vehicle in the way of the perp), etc...
Thus a bystander may be able to defend them with deadly force.

Better have a good lawyer, and be ready for an interesting court case....

One thing that is going to screw you is even if you were able to use deadly force to stop the threat, almost every state in the union does NOT allow warning shots. Considered reckless endangerment. Generally for good reason. Lots of cases of people being in life and death situations admitting to firing an intentional warning shot in to the sky, pavement, whatever and ending up with reckless endangerment charges and convictions.

Attempting to Shoot out the tires as a civilian is probably more likely to end up landing this guy with a charge and conviction than if he had shoot at the driver. It can’t have been THAT deadly a situation to try to shoot out the tires the DA is going to argue and if it wasn’t, he shouldnt have been shooting his gun.

outrider58 · May 9, 2019

lazarus said:
One thing that is going to screw you is even if you were able to use deadly force to stop the threat, almost every state in the union does NOT allow warning shots. Considered reckless endangerment. Generally for good reason. Lots of cases of people being in life and death situations admitting to firing an intentional warning shot in to the sky, pavement, whatever and ending up with reckless endangerment charges and convictions.

My first warning shot is in your chest. Get back up, and my second warning shot is going into you cranium. :innocent0

Bystander fires at shoplifters ??

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Camp pureblood 13R

USMC LLA. NRA Life Member

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

Ultimate Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

Ultimate Member

Doing the best with the worst.

dont be a dumbass

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Member

Member

American Patriot

Active Member

Member

Ultimate Member

Eats Bacon Raw

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics