[lapidator]

http://www.local6.com/news/2272794/detail.html

Business Owner Chases, Runs Over Robbery Suspects In Hummer
Two Suspects In Critical Condition

POSTED: 1:56 p.m. EDT June 16, 2003
UPDATED: 2:35 p.m. EDT June 16, 2003

A business owner in Phoenix, Arizona took matters into his own hands after a group of men robbed his business, according to a Local 6 News report.




Police say three armed suspects walked into the the Mr. Insurance building in Phoenix and demanded money. A fourth suspect was in the getaway car, according to the report.

Ivnestigators said after the suspects left with the store's money, the co-owner jumped into his Hummer and chased after the suspects.

Police said that the man, identified only as Peter, followed the suspects through a neighborhood and eventually caught up with them. He then rolled his Hummer over their car.

Two of the suspects were taken to the hospital in critical condition.

The two other suspects managed to get away but police later caught them as well.

It is not known if Peter will face charges.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Check out the photo!

:D:cool:

[gunsmith]

"it was an axident":evil:
he was "following" them and trying to read the plates when they stopped short....yeah...thats the ticket!!!

[Standing Wolf]

I tell you, I just love news stories with happy endings!

[BB93YJ]

I wonder what the 'B.C.' of a Hummer is....:what:

[rick_reno]

I was coming back to our H1 open top last summer, and a family was standing by it. I heard the adult male tell his son that he didn't think it was very "nimble". I commented that I bet it's nimble enough to drive over your car.

[mattd]

The owner should sue them for scratching his humvee.

[Jim March]

Bill Clinton's comments:

"Well hey, I know what good can come of a Hummer!"

:D

[Kharn]

Whats the preferred pintle-mounted weapon to accessorize a Hummer when chasing down the scum of the Earth?
M134 .308 minigun, M2 .50, TOW, or ?

Kharn

[Hemicuda]

In this instance, I think one of the big "tow behind" steam roller drums full of counterweight might be the best "tow behind" add on... don't you?

[Jeff White]

Kharn,

there is a dual mount in the supply system. MK19 40mm automatic grenade launcher on one side, M249 5.56mm squad automatic weapon on the other. Get some M995 AP for the SAW and you're all set to chase down badguys :D.

Jeff

[Kharn]

Hemicude:
My rule on this subject is: whenever you come upon a junked car (even if you just junked it by running over it) and have a good backstop, you MUST shoot the hell out of it, preferribly until it explodes into flames or just flat out explodes. :evil: :D

The tow-behind roller would also slow the Hummer down too much, reducing the chances of running over other cars and resulting in lost shooting oppertunities.

Jeff White:
I like the idea already. How many tax stamps would that be, and can I get an M240 instead of the M249?

Kharn

[Mike Irwin]

He probably will face charges.

He should face charges.

[tyme]

I dunno... I'm usually extremely insistent that the rule of law ought to be respected even for the most heinous crimes, but that's based on the track record of the CJS and the fact that a CJS by its nature can't be perfect.

If someone chases robbers while not breaking traffic laws too badly, and in the process said robbers' vehicle gets run over by the pursuer, hey, that's life, they shouldn't have robbed him. He wasn't trying to kill them, just stop the car.

If he was _wrong_, or if he or anyone else involved had some doubt that the car he was chasing was the getaway vehicle, fine, put him on trial.

[Mark Tyson]

The moral of the story is:

Never anger a man who drives a humvee.

[mattd]

He was protecting his property.

[standby]

I think we need to ban Urban ASSAULT Vehicles (UAV'S)! There is absolutely no reason for a civilian to own such a powerful and dangerous weapon on the streets. Why, these were made for one reason and one reason only: WAR! (facetious mode off)

I really wouldn't be surprised if someone publicly (and loudly) proposes this.

Yes, this is my first post here. Just couldn't resist:cool:

[standingbear]

now thats one ticked off driver.i can just about imagine the thoughts going through those bad guys' minds as they turned around an saw the guy they just robbed gaining distance on them in a hummvee.(enter roadrunner sound.."beep beeep")

[mattd]

Humvees are really stable suvs I must say, I think this is the only suv to actually make you safer.

UAV are called suvs, and people are trying to ban them.

[Hand_Rifle_Guy]

That guy went WAY too far. Like Mike Irwin said, he should face charges. It was not at all his job to chase anyone, and driving on top of them when they weren't ACTIVELY trying to kill him qualifies as mis-application of deadly force.

'Acourse, maybe they were trying to shoot him or something. Lack of any such claims would imply such was not the case, however.

But I must confess to truly enjoying the picture in the context of the story presented. An actual guilty pleasure, that.

All the same, that guy's out of hand. [furtive thumbs-up :uhoh:] He needs some anger managment counseling. [very quiet loud cheers :uhoh:] Running people down over petty cash is a bit "over the top". [suppressed laughter :uhoh:]


:evil:

[Legionnaire]

Hey, I thought that's what S.U.V. stood for ...

... suburban ussault vehicle!

[Edward429451]

He should face charges.

:rolleyes:

He got em' didn't he?:D

I don't understand you guys logic that he should face charges. Petty cash or not, its the principle. What if they had just raped his daughter/wife, should he go free then? They still wouldn't have been an active threat then either.

They were still an active threat. To the community at large, to him and his family and his business. If he'd have made it easy for them by 'doing the right thing (?) and letting them go, maybe they'd have come back for more next week. Ever hear of robbers robbing the same place over and over again? Me too. These guys won't be robbing his place or anyone else's place again now.

[Dannyboy]

Charges? OK, give him a ticket for reckless driving.

[Atticus]

Charges? How bout double parking?
He's definately in the wrong....but you gotta love it.

[Lord Grey Boots]

All the same, that guy's out of hand. [furtive thumbs-up ] He needs some anger managment counseling. [very quiet loud cheers ] Running people down over petty cash is a bit "over the top". [suppressed laughter ]

Yeah, what HRG said.

Actually, I suspect he was just trying to force the badguys to stop, and found himself on top of their car. I suspect it was less of a deliberate case of double decker parking and more of an accidental one.

[ravinraven]

I think the guy with the hummer needs about six months of training and practice in how to wipe out low-lifes with the thing. After all, they all survived. Damn!

[Walther P99]

The scum must have been totally inattentive to what was going on behind them. Once they found out the victim was chasing them in the Hummer, they should have been able to easily outrun him once they hit open road; although H1s (looked like one from photo) can go almost anywhere, they're VERY slow getting there.

However, there may be missing details that precluded the perps from escaping...

Good catch, though.

[Mike Irwin]

Ed,

No problem. Let's just return to the days of the blood feud, then.

There's a simple logic that applies here -- you're not the judge, you're not the jury, you're not the executioner.

If you're defening yourself, someone else, or in some states tangible property, from imminent, immediate, grave harm, that's one thing.

That's called self defense.

No threat of imminent, immediate, grave harm, and there's no basis for self defense.

At that point your actions become revenge, or vengeance , and there's simply no room for that sort of action in this horrific abortion we call human civilization.

There's also a much deeper consideration here.

What if every CCW holder begins practicing not self defense, but vengeance?

Hey, he stole the wife's purse? Run down the block after him and shoot him in the back.

See a kid breaking into cars? Use your car to pin him, and then finish him off with your CCW.

Want to become the proof that the anti-gunners are looking for as the reason why citizens can't be trusted to act responsibly with firearms?

[Edward429451]

Mike, WADR, thats ridiculous, extreme thinking and. shortsighted.

Its not return to the days of bloodfued, its return to the days of dont tread on me with impunity, have respect for your fellow man.

If you're defening yourself, someone else, or in some states tangible property, from imminent, immediate, grave harm, that's one thing.

Textbook answers sound good on paper but will get you into trouble in the long run. If they had just robbed you, is it reasonable to assume that they'd go rob / rape someone else? Of course. Once they cross that line the first time with no resistance, thet get bolder next time, go farther with their disrespect for mankind. Kinda like an alchoholic having his first drink ever. If they go unchecked, it dont bode well for the community.



At that point your actions become revenge, or vengeance , and there's simply no room for that sort of action in this horrific abortion we call human civilization

No Mike, its not necessarily vengance, but rather justice and a show to the community that we will not take this lieing down. Its a show to the criminal community that they better not try that crap on good citizens cause it wont fly. Letting them go would be a horrific abortion. It would encourage them to commit more crimes. When the criminal knows that they might just get chased down and ran over or shot for their actions, they might just decide to stay home and not go do robbries tonight. It keeps a certain balance in place that keeps this horrific abortion of a civilization from being a total hellhole where the criminals rule.

What if every CCW holder begins practicing not self defense, but vengeance?

Even if them guys live, they will think real hard before trying that stuff again. Even if they return to crime, they will certainly leave that particular mans business alone. What if every CCW holder begins practicing self defense and justice. Vengance is mine sayeth the lord. That dont mean we have to offer ourselves as sheep to the criminals and allow any sort of injustice the wish to give us, I mean, get real. The 'administration' has its agenda, the criminals have their agenda, and you would have good citizens roll over for everyone? Extreme thinking at its worst. We are the checks and balances my friend. For the administration and the criminals. That don't mean we get to go wild on them, but it don't mean we let em go either. Sometimes maybe depending on the circumstances but theres a reasonable middle ground to be found between your extreme thinking and extreme vigilantiism.

Hey, he stole the wife's purse? Run down the block after him and shoot him in the back.

Maybe, maybe not. If we hold ourselves to extreme rules of engagement, criminals will pick up on it and use that against us so crime will rise. If they think they might get shot in the back, it'll quell their enthusiasim for crime a little bit. Ya just never know, do ya'?


See a kid breaking into cars? Use your car to pin him, and then finish him off with your CCW.

C'mon Mike, get real. No other options but kill him or let him go? Extreme narrow minded thinking. Very unrealistic. Look for the middle ground for options. Situational ethics and personal brain power must be figured in. You cant subscribe to extremes, or it would rob you of your judgement and you are then just a robot killer or a sheep waiting to be slaughtered.

Want to become the proof that the anti-gunners are looking for as the reason why citizens can't be trusted to act responsibly with firearms?

Of course not. But do you want to be the proof to the criminals that if you go for your gun, all they have to do is turn their back to you and you wont fire? Yes, I'm armed and dangerous. No I'm not an armed threat. Methinks the propaganda machine may be working on you.

I agree with most of your posts on this forum Mike, but not this time. No offense.

[Gewehr98]

And that's a dangerous precedent, in and of itself. Never mind the fact that it's being broadcast on a firearms forum like THR. :(

[Edward429451]

Maybe it is a bad precedent. But no worse than the bad precedent of bringing charges against the man who chased down the BG's who just shoved a gun in his face.

I'm not saying I would've chased them down. I'm saying I wont condem the man who did. If they would not have shoved a gun in his face and robbed him, there wouldn't have been any so called vigilantiism now would there?

No easy answers. I'll continue to chew on it with an open mind.

But it sends the wrong message to the criminal element that if they know that all they got to do is get out the door and then all they have to worry about is the po po. There's something fundamentally wrong with this type of thinking. Bad precedent in and of itself. Sounds good on paper, but too many holes.
hmmm.:scrutiny:

I got strong armed one time. Gave him my money (all .63 cents) and then he wanted my leather biker wallet also. I said no you'll have to fight me for it. He left, I kept my wallet. Spirit de' resistance works.

[Edward429451]

To further clarify my view..

If this crime had happened 100 or 150 years ago it would have been totally socially acceptable for the victim to chase down the BG and trample him with his horse, or even shoot him. THE CRIME HAS NOT CHANGED. Only peoples way of thinking about it has changed. Peoples perceptions have changed due to a deceptive propaganda campaign (whole nother thread), which slowly made it socially unacceptable (and even quasi illegal) for most to stand up for yourself in the face of victimization.

Are we now calling right wrong and wrong right? Just because the majority has changed its way of thinking doesn't change the truth. It doesn't make mr Humvee guilty either. You can't legislate morality, dangit!

I assert that anyone who could conceive of bringing charges on mr Humvee for his actions has been at least partially sucked in by the propaganda machine. We must resist this social conditioning and cling to the truth. I'll also add that I think we are liable for our 'collateral damage' that we may create in instances of this nature. Mr. Humvee had no collateral damage, and cleaned it up rather nicely, dontcha' think?

If one chooses to chase the BG's he accepts the responsibility of possible collateral damage at the onset. If he chooses to not chase them down, thats a judgement call and simply strategy & tactics. It should not be a quasi law though. I do not advocate wanton violence, but I'll be hanged before I let society dictate my conscience to me. Let the criminal beware.:neener:

If I'm not politically correct enough for THR, Oleg can PM me and tell me to move on, which I will, no regrets, no hard feelings. But I do refuse to perpetuate a deception and a wrongness that has been bestowed on us American people through propaganda.

[Gewehr98]

Were those robbers to die from Mr. Humvee's monster truck driving skills, would justice have been served in your mind's eye?

Think carefully about your answer, because we're talking about the taking of a human life here, over the theft of inanimate, material property.

The threat to the property owner's life or limb had ceased as soon as the robbers left the store with their loot. In that same instant, as the threat subsided, the store owner lost his self-defense legal justification, whether it be by firearm or Humvee. His actions went from self-preservation to straight-out revenge. Judges and juries of 100 years ago frowned upon revenge killings, as they would in this day and age. As they should in this particular case...

[Sergeant Bob]

Were those robbers to die from Mr. Humvee's monster truck driving skills
Wow, bummer.
The threat to the property owner's life or limb had ceased as soon as the robbers left the store with their loot.
Really? How do you know that? Suppose they decided to come back another day (hey, that was easy, let go back for more!)?
What if they just go down the road and find someone else to rob? That seems to be the business they're in so that's not so far fetched. By the time Mr. Humvee calls 911 and the cops arrive, they will be long gone and might already be pulling another job. Maybe the next one doesn't go so well and they end up killing someone (it was an armed robbery so we have to assume they would shoot someone if they felt threatened).

I don't think he was trying to kill them anyway. Probably just trying to stop them. If he had been trying to kill them he probably would have run over them again.

I think the man did a service to his community.

[Edward429451]

Were those robbers to die from Mr. Humvee's monster truck driving skills, would justice have been served in your mind's eye?
Think carefully about your answer, because we're talking about the taking of a human life here, over the theft of inanimate, material property.

I do not hold inantimate objects above human life. We're talking about more than money here. Its the principle of the matter. I think its reasonable to assume that the BG's would have shot Mr. Humvee if they felt threatened or so inclined. I also think its reasonable to assume that the BG's propensity to violence would have continued and even encouraged if Mr. Humvee had let them go.

Them robbers violated Mr. Humvees absolute right to live in unmolested peace. If someone shoves a gun in your face and you deal them back death, they got what they asked for. If it was not a life & death situation, then why did the BG's pick up deadly weapons before going to pay a visit to Mr. Humvee?

I doubt that I would have chased them down. I dont know for sure b/c I wasn't there and it didn't happen to me. I may have. If I was robbed yesterday and decided to let them go, but seen the guy(s) today, I might shoot em in the back and feel good about it. If you would let them go, it speaks of you as either a very forgiving spirit, a man with a huge heart, or a paranoid spirit, willing to let the threats of a third party dictate your conscience and actions. I prefer to think the former of you rather than the latter. Only you know for sure.

So to answer your question, yes I think justice was served. Such is the price for choosing a life of crime. Maybe they thought they'd get a discount and be let go? They did get a discount if they live.

Probabilities are high that these BG's will not reoffend. The community is a little safer.

Will I get on the internet and state conclusivley that I'll let robbers go? Not on your life. I refuse to send a message of reassurance to the criminal element.

[Steel]

IMHO:

Mr. Humvee's actions should not be encouraged, but the the DA should definitely cut him a lot of slack and only give him a slap on the wrist rather than make him an example and hammer him.