Man with unloaded gun killed by victim


PDA






straightShot
May 19, 2007, 08:34 AM
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070519/NEWS01/705190372

A self defense situation where the reporters and the police both got it right...


May 19, 2007

BY BEN SCHMITT and JACK KRESNAK

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITERS

A robbery and crime spree aided by an unloaded gun came to a halt late Thursday when the gunman met more than his match: a gun with bullets.

Charles Parker Jr., 18, of Detroit was killed when a 53-year-old man pulled out a 9mm handgun and shot the teen, who was armed with an unloaded .22-caliber handgun.

Detroit police are calling it self-defense.

The botched carjacking on Grand River and Prevost came after a string of robberies in Detroit on Thursday, which police said were committed by Parker and four others, ranging in age from 16 to 20.

The robberies began about 8:40 p.m. Thursday at Kentucky and Curtis when a 16-year-old was robbed of his cell phone, a silver chain and his wallet, by at least two of the suspects, police said.

At 9:30 p.m., the robbers attempted to carjack a couple in the driveway of their home in the 19600 block of Appoline, police said. One pointed the unloaded gun at the couple and pulled the trigger.

The teens fled without the car.

Later, police said, the robbers saw a man at a Detroit car wash and tried to carjack him. The one approached with the unloaded gun and the other wielded a baseball bat, police said.

That's when the man washing his car fired, striking Parker.

Parker's alleged accomplices took him to Sinai-Grace Hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. Hospital security officers detained the other youths until police arrived. Police spokesman James Tate said a 17-year-old Detroit female, 16-year-old Southfield boy, a 19-year-old Southfield man, and a 20-year-old Detroit man are in custody.

They face arraignment on armed robbery charges today in Detroit's 36th District Court.

After the shooting, police questioned the 53-year-old man and released him, noting that he had a valid concealed weapons permit.

Then they gave him back his gun.

Contact BEN SCHMITT at bcschmitt@freepress.com.

If you enjoyed reading about "Man with unloaded gun killed by victim" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Johannes_Paulsen
May 19, 2007, 08:47 AM
I am glad the couple wasn't injured and that this man was able to stop these thugs!

slewfoot
May 19, 2007, 08:52 AM
Charles Parker Jr., 18 formerly of Detroit is now where he belongs.

Geno
May 19, 2007, 09:01 AM
Wow...they released him "...and gave him back his gun."

Risasi
May 19, 2007, 09:59 AM
I don't believe in evolution...but that is natural selection at work there.

Double Naught Spy
May 19, 2007, 10:03 AM
A self defense situation where the reporters and the police both got it right...

Somehow, I don't see calling the hero of the story a victim. He made sure he was NOT a victim. He might have been the INTENDED victim

It is sort of like articles you read where it is reported that bystanders took action. At the point where a person takes action, they are no longer a bystander, but an actor.

Len S
May 19, 2007, 10:14 AM
DNS,

Of course you are right. A big, HOWEVER, is in order here. In this day and age ,when we, as gun owners need all the public support that we can get. To show that a "victim" turned the tables on a thug gives the sheeple a thing to ID with and maybe, just maybe come to our side. We have let the left and mainstream media make guns and gun owners the outsiders. They have told the big lie so many times and it is so commonplace that people accept it as fact. Let "victims" turning the tables onthugs become common place so it, instead of the big lie, is accepted as truth. We as "gun people know the man chose not to be a victim. Maybe we should say the gun "enpowered" the man to not be a victim. Oh how I hate that "enpowered them" phrase.

Len

230RN
May 19, 2007, 10:22 AM
Glad to hear of the savings to the State of uncounted dollars in incarcerating the perpetrator.

And they gave the intended victim his gun back! Woo-Hoo!

Questions:

(1) Doesn't Michigan have one of those laws wherein accomplices in the commission of a felony where death results can be charged with murder? Or is this not applicable in this case?

(2) Can the Brady Boobs count this 18-year-old's death as another "child's" death by a firearm?

erik the bold
May 19, 2007, 01:23 PM
(1) Doesn't Michigan have one of those laws wherein accomplices in the commission of a felony where death results can be charged with murder? Or is this not applicable in this case?

If I remember correctly;

Q1: Yes

Q2: N/A in this case, as no innocent death occured.

In Michigan, someone convicted of aiding and abeting are considered the same as the perpetrator and consequential applicable punishiment would apply

ravencon
May 19, 2007, 01:24 PM
Somebody has to say it-- Never bring an unloaded gun to a gunfight.

General Geoff
May 19, 2007, 01:28 PM
It takes some serious lack of vision to try carjacking with an unloaded gun.


Kudos to the man with the 9mm.

The Deer Hunter
May 19, 2007, 01:32 PM
Dumb kid got what he deserved. I'm curious as to where he got the gun.

Elza
May 19, 2007, 02:22 PM
230RN: (2) Can the Brady Boobs count this 18-year-old's death as another "child's" death by a firearm?erik the bold: Q2: N/A in this case, as no innocent death occured.

Since when does this stop the Brady bunch???!!!

Sage of Seattle
May 19, 2007, 03:08 PM
No ammo for the punk's gun, eh?

I'm wondering if his thought process went something like this: "Man! Just another two or three carjackings and I'll finally be able to afford a box o' them eXtreme SHOCK bullets!!"

Caimlas
May 19, 2007, 03:13 PM
Wait, they didn't charge the thug's accomplices with murder? Wasn't that the standard practice if someone died during the commissioning of their armed crimes?

MarshallDodge
May 19, 2007, 03:24 PM
The 53 year-old-man "had enough gun" and knew how to use it. :cool:

Vonderek
May 19, 2007, 03:43 PM
Don't let the .45 guys read this thread!...guess the 9mm has enough "oomph" after all!

Edmond
May 19, 2007, 03:58 PM
Doesn't Michigan have one of those laws wherein accomplices in the commission of a felony where death results can be charged with murder? Or is this not applicable in this case?

Even here in IL, the accomplices would be charged for murder because their leader died during the commission of a felony.

I hope they get charged like that. Put 'em away for 20 years.

Flyboy
May 19, 2007, 05:15 PM
Q2: N/A in this case, as no innocent death occured.
And that's why the Brady Bunch talks about "children killed by guns," not "children murdered by guns." We know their definition of "child" reaches up into the early- to mid-twenties; you think they're going to let the fact that the thug was in the process of committing a violent felony keep them from adding it to their tally?

atomd
May 19, 2007, 05:18 PM
The 53 year old man should have politely asked if the gun was loaded. He then should have politely asked the criminal if he intended to engage in a gun fight. Then he should have immediately dropped his gun and fled to the nearest gun-free zone. After all, the criminal could have easily taken his gun from him and shot him with it. What is this world coming to when good citizens are allowed to defend themselves?!?! :D

<SLV>
May 19, 2007, 05:36 PM
How many shots did he fire? One? The kid didn't die "at the scene"...

Mr White
May 19, 2007, 06:31 PM
I'm just glad they didn't refer to the dead punk as the victim.

But I have no doubt that the Bradys will use this to tell of another promising life cut short by gun violence. They're masters at spinning a story to suit their agenda. "Several youths asked a man for a ride home and he shot and killed one of them."

gear_merc
May 19, 2007, 06:49 PM
+1 all around. :D
That's gun control. Hitting your target = dead punk. :evil:

I hope they do prosecute the "friends" for the "felony murder rule".

They gave him his gun back??? What were they thinking? :neener:

Wonder how long he had to wait to get his gun back?

langenc
May 19, 2007, 07:12 PM
Bradys will most likely count it as a child.

Zen21Tao
May 19, 2007, 09:02 PM
But I have no doubt that the Bradys will use this to tell of another promising life cut short by gun violence. They're masters at spinning a story to suit their agenda. "Several youths asked a man for a ride home and he shot and killed one of them."

Actually what I think they'll do is use counter-factual thinking and blame the incident on the easy availability of firearms. They'll try to make it sound like the teen would have been at home in his bed asleep, at the movies with friends, or studying diligently at the library if he hadn't able to acquire that evil gun. Thats right, in the Brady's eyes he wouldn't have been committing the crime in the first place if he didn't have the gun. Of course, they will conveniently leave out the part where the other attacker/robber was armed with a baseball bat that he used during the attempted robbery.

david_the_greek
May 19, 2007, 09:17 PM
no way this is too weird, someone I know was actually robbed just a night ago in detroit. I ran into him today and he was robbed at gun. he didn't bother making the police statement because he himself is a questionable character and was in the area I'm assuming for nothing good. could have been the same guy(s). glad that man defended himself, its sad how desperate its getting in our area.

DRZinn
May 19, 2007, 10:35 PM
Detroit police are calling it self-defense.Is it me, or does that sound a little derisive, like they doubt it?

straightShot
May 19, 2007, 11:44 PM
I don' think that the police doubt that it was self defense at all. The police see too much garbage going on in the city and they become numb to responding to lesser things, but when someone dies, every angle has to be examined.

I didn't see the County Prosecutor mentioned anywhere in the story, but it sounds like this didn't even get to her desk and the guy who had to defend himself was not charged at all. It must have been an extremely evident incident.

fast eddie
May 20, 2007, 12:15 AM
Don't let the .45 guys read this thread!...guess the 9mm has enough "oomph" after all!Too Late.
They gave him his gun back??? What were they thinking?
I would have given it back too!:neener:

Macpherson
May 20, 2007, 01:41 AM
This can't be right, where's the sob story from the deceased's mother/grandmother/cousin/fellow gangbanger about their son's killer is walking the streets a free man?? Doesn't this newspaper know they are supposed to lampoon the innocent victim and his "evil" gun?

Looks like an open and shut case all around, which is a nice change :D

Rosstradamus
May 20, 2007, 02:03 AM
The kid didn't die "at the scene"...

How do you know that? His friends carted him away. He could have been dead before he hit the ground as far as we know. All the article said was that he was DOA, which means he died some time between being shot and being examined. Exactly when that was is unknown except to his friends, and I didn't see them quoted anywhere.

And I agree with Vonderek: Don't let the .45 guys read this. It will upset their little applecart.

Aguila Blanca
May 20, 2007, 02:04 AM
Somehow, I don't see calling the hero of the story a victim. He made sure he was NOT a victim. He might have been the INTENDED victim

It is sort of like articles you read where it is reported that bystanders took action. At the point where a person takes action, they are no longer a bystander, but an actor.
You're dating yourself. You must be thinking back to a time when journalism majors were expected to learn how to write in correct English. Now they study "investigative techniques" and Muck Raking 201.

ArfinGreebly
May 20, 2007, 03:23 AM
Then they gave him back his gun.
Bravo!

Somehow, I don't see calling the hero of the story a victim.
Double Naught Spy, I'll take it.

Normally the press labels the deceased bad guy "victim" which makes the good guy the bad guy.

I'll take the "armed victim" label for this guy.

jeepmor
May 20, 2007, 08:12 AM
And this is why they say "criminals prefer unarmed vicitims." ;)

2TransAms
May 20, 2007, 11:17 AM
And I agree with Vonderek: Don't let the .45 guys read this. It will upset their little applecart.Hey now. I'm a .45 guy,but I know the 9 has closed plenty of accounts. I think I'm in good hands with my Glock 19 handy.

Glad to see the hero/intended-victim got away clean. Seems like the little punk gangters and wanksters start to think they're invincible after a while. Nothing like 124 grains of reality check at 1,100 feet per second.

chopz
May 20, 2007, 11:52 AM
It takes some serious lack of vision to try carjacking with an unloaded gun.

well who the heck would want to steal a car with a bunch of bullet holes in it?

Green Lantern
May 20, 2007, 12:13 PM
I'm wondering if his thought process went something like this: "Man! Just another two or three carjackings and I'll finally be able to afford a box o' them eXtreme SHOCK bullets!!"

LOL!!!!! :D

Q2: N/A in this case, as no innocent death occured.

I "Ga-Ron-TEE" that the Bradys will somehow spin it to suit them. Either count it as a "child" KILLED by a gun (and technically of course that's right), or possibly how Zen described it. IE, if there were no guns, this kid (and all the other punks in the country) would have INSTANTLY been transformed into an upstanding citizen and gone to the park to play ball with his former gang rivals...:barf:

DRZinn
May 21, 2007, 01:24 AM
I don' think that the police doubt that it was self defense at all. I meant it looks like the writer of the story doubts it.

Matt G
May 21, 2007, 02:38 AM
Too bad the old man didn't have a pistol when he was confronted earlier this month in that same city by Deonte Bradley (http://http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/05/vet-beaten-for-car.html). You've heard about that case, yes?

Detroit really looks like a nice place not to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there.

ebd10
May 21, 2007, 02:42 AM
Parker's alleged accomplices took him to Sinai-Grace Hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. Hospital security officers detained the other youths until police arrived. Police spokesman James Tate said a 17-year-old Detroit female, 16-year-old Southfield boy, a 19-year-old Southfield man, and a 20-year-old Detroit man are in custody.


I LOVE a happy ending!

mobeewan
May 21, 2007, 02:56 AM
Actually what I think they'll do is use counter-factual thinking and blame the incident on the easy availability of firearms. They'll try to make it sound like the teen would have been at home in his bed asleep, at the movies with friends, or studying diligently at the library if he hadn't able to acquire that evil gun. Thats right, in the Brady's eyes he wouldn't have been committing the crime in the first place if he didn't have the gun. Of course, they will conveniently leave out the part where the other attacker/robber was armed with a baseball bat that he used during the attempted robbery.


Yeah, And mention they didn't have any money to pay him for the ride so they were offering him an unloaded gun in tradefor him giving them a ride.

helpless
May 21, 2007, 03:09 AM
Detroit police are calling it self-defense.

well thats nice to hear...

flynlr
May 21, 2007, 05:06 AM
since this had a happy ending and all .

I wonder if the shooter can sue the family for the cost of the ammo.

IndianaBoy
May 21, 2007, 12:30 PM
The only problem I see with that article is when they refer to the carjackers cohorts as 'youths' instead of 'criminal scumbags who hopefully learned a lesson'.

Chuck got what he deserved.

gregma
May 21, 2007, 02:18 PM
I was thinking of a better title for this thread. How about:

Criminal dies from work-related hazard.

Thanks!
Greg

ZeSpectre
May 21, 2007, 02:32 PM
"One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that 'violence begets violence.' I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure — and in some cases I have — that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy."

-Jeff Cooper, "Cooper vs. Terrorism", Guns & Ammo Annual, 1975

nelson133
May 22, 2007, 06:46 AM
Not mentioned by any other poster is that Michigan passed the "Stand Your Ground" package of bills last year and the shooter is protected by them. He can't be sued so there is no reason for relatives to come out of the woodwork weeping and wailing, no money is possible.
Under these laws it is very difficult for a prosecutor to charge the shooter with anything. Under these laws, the shooter had no duty to retreat when in a place it was legal for him to be. We still have the crappy gun registration scheme going, but it is better to be a gun owner/carrier in Michigan now.

GuyWithQuestions
May 22, 2007, 07:14 AM
When assisting in a felony and someone dies, does that mean if one of the intended victims or a bystander dies because of it, or does it also include if one of the felons in your group dies? I was just curious how the law is set up. Let's say someone comes up to you and is like, "Hey (your name), a bunch of friends and I are going to rob a bank. Do you want to come with us?" You, "Sure!" Then when you're there, if the person who invited you started shooting the bank workers after stealing the money obviously you'd be sharing the blame. But let's say the tables were instead turned and the bank manager pulls out a machine gun and guns down the guy who invited you to the felon outing. Would you be considered one of the murderers in your leader's death? I was just curious about how it works legally.

Tom Servo
May 22, 2007, 02:55 PM
ut let's say the tables were instead turned and the bank manager pulls out a machine gun and guns down the guy who invited you to the felon outing. Would you be considered one of the murderers in your leader's death? I was just curious about how it works legally.
In many states, yes. Say I'm the guy who gets shot. Since you were committing a felony and someone (doesn't matter who) died in the process, then you would be charged with 2nd-degree murder in most states.

And yes, Brady will find some way to call the perp a "child." For years, they've been to twisting DOJ statistics which imply that a "child" is anyone under the age of 25. Remember, they don't care about such irrelevant things as "facts" and "statistics." They're concerned with emotional appeals and scare tactics.

glummer
May 22, 2007, 04:50 PM
Can the Brady Boobs count this 18-year-old's death as another "child's" death by a firearm?

N/A in this case, as no innocent death occured.

And that's why the Brady Bunch talks about "children killed by guns," not "children murdered by guns."

I think a main tactic is to count the numbers only when talking about “children killed” (which includes the deceased in this case), and carefully use NO figures when talking of “innocent” children killed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Man with unloaded gun killed by victim" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!