74 Year Old Man Nabs Thief Now Faces Charges

[TnRebel]

CAMBRIDGE, Minn. -- A farmer who chased down a thief and held him at gunpoint until authorities arrived now faces a more serious charge than the thief himself.

Kenneth Englund, 74, was charged with second-degree assault, a felony. The thief, who the sheriff said admitted stealing about $5 worth of gasoline from Englund's neighbor, was charged with misdemeanor theft.

Sheriff Mike Ammend said people can't take the law into their own hands, and that Englund's actions were "an invitation to a shootout. There's so many things that could have gone wrong here."

On Oct. 15, Englund pointed a gun at Christian Harris Smith, 28, and a woman at the vacant farm next to Englund's place in Bradford Township. He then chased their vehicle at speeds of 70 mph, according to the criminal complaint. A 3-year-old child was in the vehicle.

During the chase, Englund used a cell phone to call the sheriff's office and asked if he should "blow them away," according to the complaint. His shotgun turned out to be unloaded.

Bradford Township, about 45 miles north of Minneapolis, does not have a police force, and Englund said criminals can escape by the time a deputy arrives from Cambridge, 15 miles away

More than 350 people attended a fundraising dinner for Englund last month and a petition has circulated supporting him.

Englund, a Township Board member for 37 years, pleaded not guilty, was released without having to post bail and is to return to court Feb. 22.

Smith was charged with another theft and was held in the county jail on a felony warrant from another state.

 

[Gord]

Pulling a gun on a guy who's siphoning gas and then going on a 70MPH car chase while calling police to ask if you should "blow him away" - why, whatever is wrong with that?

Sorry, no sympathy from me. This guy's a moron.

 

[carterbeauford]

"By all means, blow the suspect away, sir."

Don't even know where to start with this one

 

[thexrayboy]

Apparently this guy is not the sharpest tool in the shed, however when we start punishing the people who catch criminals more severely than the criminal that initiated the incident we are no better and no more free than our
sheeple relatives in Great Britain. People as a rule "take the law into their own hands" for one overwhelmingly simple reason. They know that if they do not the odds of the criminal being caught and facing actual justice are poor at best.

 

[Gord]

however when we start punishing the people who catch criminals more severely than the criminal that initiated the incident

When the crime of petty theft is answered with the threat of deadly force, yes, that is appropriate.

We left frontier law behind a while ago, I guess this guy didn't get the memo.

Endangering the lives of a small child and any number of other people engaging in a high-speed pursuit is just icing on the cake.

 

[pacodelahoya]

If the police had caught the guy in the act of stealing, they would have used the threat of deadly force to affect an arrest. If the guy had then ran from the police, they would have chased him, child in car or not(I watch cops on tv). Heck, the nearest police are 15 miles away, assuming the place is rural, certainly more than 15 minutes away. If the citizens didn't look out for each other, who would?

 

[koja48]

A bit excessive, considering the circumstances. With owning a gun comes responsibility . . . unfortunately, some folks only possess the gun . . .

 

[saspic]

Okay, we can probably agree a better idea would have been to get the descriptions of the suspects and their car to the police along with a license plate number.
But let's not forget to assign blame where blame is due...taking your 3 year old kid with you to steal is unforgivable.
For all we know Englund was unaware of the child (not to excuse his disproportionate actions).

 

[SoCalShooter]

They are trying to avoid vigilantism. Which is fine, but when citizens do intervene to help then they get punished? The citizen seems to have taken it a little farther than he should have though I dont think chasing him in the car is something he should have done.

 

[MechAg94]

Why do I have the suspicion that they are going to prosecute the homeowner and not do anything to the crooks?

 

[MechAg94]

We left frontier law behind a while ago, I guess this guy didn't get the memo.

IMHO, if the police fail to enforce the law, the citizens should have the right to do so. We only gave up the frontier ways since the police were there to take action on our behalf.

I agree that he should not have tried to chase them down. That is going a bit beyond reasonable for most people. However, I think I would still be sympathetic if I were on the jury.

 

[gunsmith]

this is DUPLICATE THREAD!

OK?

 

[Gord]

Nowhere in the article does it say that the police do not enforce the law. Crazy Geezer is quoted as saying that it can take a while for police to arrive, which sucks, but still doesn't change the fact that "stole five bucks worth of gas" is generally not seen as a legitimate reason to draw down on somebody (cop or not) or that Geezer could easily have caused a wreck in the process of attempting to carry out his God-given duty of "blowing them away."

I'm glad this guy doesn't work at a minimart:

Man: Hey, how you doin'?
Geezer: Jest fine, yerself?
Man: Great. Twenty dollars on pump six, please. [walks out]
Geezer: [BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG] [reload] [BANG BANG BANG]
Geezer: Sonofabitch forgot to pay for his Snickers™!

 

[ajax]

How about when police officers get into high speed pursuits and kill people over misdemeaners. This old man did nothing that the local PD would have done accept in this case the local PD are apparently not so local and the guy would have gotten away. Also I'm not saying the old guy did the right thing I'm just making a comparison.

 

[Gord]

The local PD is (I am assuming) trained in pursuit tactics and high-speed driving and the like, and they're also backed up by the letter of the law and massive liability insurance. The geezer is not.

 

[razorburn]

Repost and duplicate thread.

 

[Gord]

Link and mod alert already, then. I'm not noticing the original thread in a cursory skimming of the subforums I'd expect to see it in.

 

[snowtigger]

Mr Englund is in no way responsible for endangering a child. That responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of the THEIF.
He, and he alone initiated the action that resulted in the child's endangerment. He could have de-escelated the confrontation at any time.
While holding the theives at gunpoint, Mr Englund did not shoot. Had the theif surrendered at that time, the child would have been safe.
As far as pointing a gun at thieves, good for him. Thugs like this one know these types of crimes are not going to be investigated, unless they are caught in the act. The police can not be everywhere, and the job falls on the shoulders of the citizen to stop these thugs.
Mr Englund made one mistake; the gun was empty. If the thug had pulled a gun, it could have got him killed.

 

[Gord]

Too bad deadly force isn't an appropriate response to petty theft (Texas notwithstanding).

And, yes, the child was further endangered (moreso than it already had been by being brought along) by Geezer's decision to instigate a high-speed chase. I doubt the perps would have burned off at 70MPH without a shotgun-toting loon on their butts.

What if the guy had just run out of gas and, not finding anyone home upon knocking on the door, had left five bucks on the doormat and gone to dump a gallon from a gas can into his car so he could get back to town and refuel?
What if Geezer had actually shot them (deliberately or accidentally)? What if he'd shot the child?
What if a crash had occured as a result of the pursuit?

If anyone had actually been injured, we'd all be calling for jailtime for this guy - "he shot someone over five bucks worth of gasoline?!" Since no one was hurt (despite the numerous opportunities for such) it's all A-OK, though?

 

[STAGE 2]

Why is it that everyone here assumes the comment made by the old guy wasn't tongue and cheek? Isn't it possible that he could have been making a poorly timed joke.

Furthermore, the age disparity of the guy and the perp may very well justify the use of a firearm. After the chase and such, seeing as how the perp was some 40 years his junior, the case could easily be made that carrying was justified to protect himself from someone who had just committed theft.


Regardless of everyone's take on this, its indisputable that if there were more people like this, there would be less people engaging in crime. Spotting the pol;ice is easy, but trying to figure out of the guy at the check stand is going to respond is next to impossible.

 

[Gord]

That may be true, but it is not legal. The system isn't perfect, but taking things into one's own hands (especially in such an irresponsible manner) simply isn't justified.

Mr. Englund may have been well within his rights to take a firearm with him to confront the thieves (in itself a really dumb idea) but he most certainly was not justified in pointing that firearm at the suspects.

If they had produced their own firearm, he'd have been stupid and dead.
If his shotgun hadn't been unloaded, he'd be stupid and quite possibly up on a lot worse charges than brandishing or assault.

As it is, he's stupid and lucky.

 

[BigBlock]

If the police had caught the guy in the act of stealing, they would have used the threat of deadly force to affect an arrest. If the guy had then ran from the police, they would have chased him, child in car or not(I watch cops on tv).

The difference is cops are highly trained, and they aren't senile old men. Most 74 year olds I've met shouldn't be driving period, they REALLY shouldn't be chasing people at 70mph while trying to shoot/talk on a cell phone.

Regardless of everyone's take on this, its indisputable that if there were more people like this, there would be less people engaging in crime.

There would also be more shootings of the innocent by people who are too stupid to handle a firearm and too quick to point it at someone.

 

[jojosdad]

Here's the original thread:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=252149&highlight=englund

If you use the search button you can usually find threads faster than by browsing.

 

[swingset]

Well, clearly the man who brought the criminal to justice is the bad guy.

Thanks guys for clearing it up for me. I was almost ready to celebrate someone doing what the police could not.

 

[STAGE 2]

The difference is cops are highly trained, and they aren't senile old men.

First, cops aren't highly trained for squat. You average cop knows alot about procedure, but that doesn't make him or her any more capable than non-leo's. This goes doubly so for firearms training. Most here on this board could probably outshoot the average police officer

Secondly, why is this guy senile? Do you know him personally? Have you see his medical records?

Most 74 year olds I've met shouldn't be driving period, they REALLY shouldn't be chasing people at 70mph while trying to shoot/talk on a cell phone

74 just isnt that old. Its really not. Granted people might not be in their physical prime, but that is really neither here nor there. At the end of the day this guy managed to chase dowm the perp without any injury to anyone else so he probably falls outside your characterization.