Farmer chases a thief, catches a felony charge

[ojibweindian]

There is absolutely no moral ground in shooting someone for stealing. Not in the law, not in the Bible.

Exodus 22:2

http://bible.cc/exodus/22-2.htm

As far as the law goes, that's a state-to-state kind of thing. In Texas, you might be able to.

Personally, it's my opinion that a person that steals from you has made you a slave for the amount of time it took you to earn the money to pay for the stolen item.

Seeing as how I'm not too fond of being a slave, I don't react well to thieves.

 

[Cosmoline]

I ask again, why was the shotgun UNLOADED. This seems to be a key element. If the man really believed he had a right to use deadly force, he would not have been chasing them with an unloaded weapon. It seems clear that he was trying to brandish a deadly weapon to scare them out of some desire to punish their misconduct. But the fact that it was unloaded undermines any argument that he had a justification for using the weapon.

 

[razorburn]

... So a guy steals five bucks worth of gas. The farmer takes off to play Paladin. Whoopee. He runs his mouth. Whoopee. They wind up in a big mouth-music brannigan, but nobody's hurt. For all the babbble of "Woulda/coulda/shoulda" nobody got hurt.

IMO, the sheriff should have deliberately and on purpose thrown a screaming, foaming fit of butt-chewing of all concerned, scaring the bejeezus out of them. Along the lines of, "If you ever pull this dumb a stunt again, I'll BURY you under the jail!" And that's just for openers. Take the shotgun, "You can have it back when I think you've learned to behave!"

And then gone back to his office. As much justice would have been done as needed to be done.

I disagree, Art. The man, with possibly the weakest justification I've ever heard, engages in a high speed chase, endangering 2 adults and a 3 year old, then proceeds to detain them and threaten their lives. If this were a 19 year old urban black man engaging in a high speed chase running down an old, rural white family with a toddler, pulling them over and detaining them against their will and threatening to "bust a cap in yo ass" with his "gat", only because he remembered seeing the same kind of car in the neighborhood the same day his homies hub caps went missing (without actually seeing them commiting the crime), how do you think the members of THR would react? Exact same situation, demographic changed.

I'm sorry, it's not just no harm, no foul. He went on a high speed chase, detained people against their will and brandished/threatened their lives. There was a serious, and intentional risk to their lives forced upon them by the farmer. And that counts for something. There's a lot of things that are still crimes, even if nobody was hurt. Negligent disregard is a crime, even if nobody was hurt. If someone tries to kill you or otherwise puts your life in significant danger, but doesn't succeed and you're not hurt, he can't just go, "hey, no harm, no foul." and walk away. What if it had just been someone who coincidentally had the same model car, and happened to be passing through that day? There's even a good possibilty that the car he'd seen hadn't even actually stole the radiator that day. He didn't see the crime in process. So many things are wrong with this.

 

[308win]

He saw them again and confronted them. They took off and chose to drive 70, the victim wasn't on their rear bumper pushing them. They felt they had to drive at high speed to escape - escape from what? Yes, he detained them, I am sure against their will because they were thieves (habitutal is seems and not very competent ones at that). As far as I am concerned, the sheriff should deputize him and increase his department's clearance rate.

Ojibweindian has it right:

Personally, it's my opinion that a person that steals from you has made you a slave for the amount of time it took you to earn the money to pay for the stolen item.

 

[larry_minn]

The first stories from media were very one sided. They had NOTHING about the (car chase) or that he did NOT see them steal anything. That is why I tried to (temper) my responses because that has happened before.

 

[Blue Line]

I think we need to send Mr. Englund a link to this forum. Then he'd know not to chase crooks with an EMPTY gun!

 

[ArfinGreebly]

70 mph = High Speed??

A quick look at the road map and aerial photos of that area kinda take the edge off that.

I'm guessing 70 mph out in that country ain't gonna be no thang.

Long stretches of country road, mostly straight stuff.

Heck, even where I live a 70 mph chase would probably go unnoticed, as long as it wasn't in the fast lane where it would slow things down.

Gotta love journalists. Squeeze every last drop of drama from news fragments.

 

[thales]

*


OK, it was only five bucks worth of gas, and the thief had a three year old in the car, and the cops are usually more than fifteen minutes away, and even common thieves should not have shotguns pointed at them, and geezers should not drive at all, let alone chase thieves at 70 mph. Therefore, Mr. Englund should have just let the thief get clean away. Since he did not, they should toss him in the slammer and forget where the key is for endangering thieves and other innocent people.

Huh? Seriously people, there is a major crime problem in this country. One of the main causes of that crime problem is that people are allowed to get away with minor crimes. Then they get the idea that they can get away with anything so they commit major crimes. The underfunded and undermanned police are busy enough pursuing major criminals that they don't have time for the small fish. Does anyone seriously believe that the police would have diligently pursued an expensive, time-consuming investigation in this case for five bucks worth of gas?

The devout anti-gun types want you to to leave the defense of your life and property to the police. They want the police to be better armed than the people. They want the police to be slow in responding to crime so that there will be a perpetual need for more police funding. They want there to be a continual crime problem so that the people will tolerate ever more intrusion into their liberty. They want to see people like Mr. Englund portrayed as dangerous, lunatic, vigilante criminals in order to promote their gun contol, anti-liberty, statist agenda.

It appears that some of the police are quite willing to prosecute citizens for "taking the law into their own hands" or forcibly and unlawfully disarm them (remember New Orleans?) when the the citizens are sorely frustrated by the inability or unwillingness of the police to effectively control crime. Just remember that the power of the law and the government ultimately rests in the hands of the people. Forget that at your peril.


*

 

[razorburn]

You either didn't read the thread or the article. You're probably a redirect from the dupe thread. I'll clarify it again for you. The old fool did not see them steal anything. He just remembered seeing the same car there the other day when a radiator went missing from someone else's truck, and that was the sole reason for leading the family on a high speed pursuit, holding them at gunpoint, and threatening their lives. Incredibly foolish and irrational move. It was just coincidence that they turned out to have siphoned $5 of gas. He thought they had stolen a radiator. It could've been anybody, it just turned out to be a guy who siphoned gas. If you and your family had coincidentally the same model car and passed through the area that day, then that old man would've chased you guys down and put a shotgun in your kids face. He went on a rampage with nothing of quality to even support the notion that they were theives.

 

[gunsmith]

"old fool"?? c'mon Raze!

The old fool did not see them steal anything

Not very high road burn, you can do better.

Lets see...hmmm...he didn't see them steal yet steal they did.
He some how surmised from keen observation of his environment
and having learned from past experience that they neglectful parents were up to no good.

I bet his comment about blowing them away was just meant to put some scare into them & there was never any intent.

As has been noted in rural areas people do 70 in the slow lane, I say cut the guy a break and give the kid to some relatives because the parents don't have a clue.

 

[razorburn]

Well... he isn't a member here that I'm attacking and it's not really harsh language, used frequently in reference to liberals and gun grabbers. Harsher language was used against the victims already. I think the guy qualifies. He thought they stole a radiator off a truck, something he also didn't actually see them doing, and that was his reasoning for the pursuit/holding them at gunpoint. It was only by coincidence that it turned out they had siphoned gas. That was something he didn't even suspect. Whether you think it's fast or not doesn't matter... the speedy pursuit is just one of many things wrong with the situation. The worst aspect of this is that it could've happened to anybody... the justification was so poor it was almost an indiscriminate act. Anyone else who had a similar car and happened to drive by the guy would've been given the same treatment.

 

[roo_ster]

I would be proud to call the farmer my neighbor. And grateful he was keeping a keen eye on the neighborhood.

We need more solid citizens like him. Instead, we get bed-wetters too timid to make the effort to help out the community.

 

[STAGE 2]

Ditto. Maybe if we had more concerned citizens like this there would be alot less crime.

 

[thales]

*


After further review and consideration I note that Englund's neighbor (a relative it appears) had been a victim of a long series of thefts, that Englund correctly concluded that the dirtbag he eventually ran down was the person responsible, that the crime rate had increased considerably in the area lately, that the people of the area had complained loudly about the crime wave at a town hall meeting, and that the Sheriff had done precisely nothing about it.

I think that Englund should not only have his case dismissed, he should be given a good citizenship medal and deputized. The Sheriff and Prosecutor should be removed from office.


*

 

[MN_Strelok]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10958651/from/RS.2/

Gas thief defends man who pointed gun at him

Updated: 8:48 a.m. CT Feb 15, 2007

CAMBRIDGE, Minn. - A man pleading guilty to stealing gas and a car radiator offered words of support for the retired farmer who was charged with threatening him with a shotgun.

Kenneth Englund, 74, confronted Christian Harris Smith and a woman on Oct. 15 at a vacant farm near Englund’s home as Smith was taking gasoline from a vehicle, police said.

Englund chased the pair while calling the sheriff’s office on a mobile phone.

After the vehicles stopped and a deputy sheriff arrived, Englund’s shotgun was found to be unloaded, according to the criminal complaint.

A felony assault charge against Englund on Monday was reduced to two misdemeanors: pointing a gun at another person and disorderly conduct.

A judge sentenced Smith, 28, to 90 days in jail last week. As Smith entered his guilty plea, he defended Englund’s actions.

“I don’t think he should be held responsible for, you know, anything involving any of these issues,” Smith said. “I committed a crime and, you know, he did what he probably thought was right to ... resolve the situation.”

Smith said that in addition to paying restitution to the owner of the property, he would like to do “whatever I can” to help Englund, according to a court transcript.

Englund’s attorney, Brian Toder, said he will fight the reduced charges.

Englund did not point the shotgun at anybody, Toder said. “Even if he did, that’s reasonable force. He’s with a guy who he thought was a drug-crazed meth-head.”

Englund, a member of the Bradford Township Board, has received an outpouring of support in the community about 45 miles north of Minneapolis as well as from around the country.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

I didn't see that one coming. At least the farmer isn't facing a felony any more.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

if

the thief was an addict he might feel guilt and remorse when hes not high. thats the rub though once you get high all bets are off

 

[Ryder]

I don't what big cities you all come from but I (and the other people I knew) grew up driving dirt roads at 70mph every day. Used to love that huge dust cloud behind the car. There was nothing dangerous about it. I don't recall hearing of anyone crashing from that. This "something bad might happen" fear mongering is the the garbage ruining our freedom.

As for the police station being 14 miles away, mine's 25 miles and I couldn't be happier. I don't want a cop on every corner. I drive more than 50 miiles a day and haven''t seen a cop in months. You're sure not going to hear me whining about that!

We don't have much crime around here and what there is isn't very notable. I've had to ask old farmers like Mr. Englund if they had a gallon of gas to spare and they were always very kind and generous. The thought of me stealing it was out of the question. My reason for that was because if I got shot doing it I would deserve it.

You guys who want to be fair to the criminals and put the burden on the honest people be sure and let us all know how your little experiment works out.

 

[pacodelahoya]

Ryder,

I'll tell you how it's working out. It's here, it's now, it,s the new and improved America.

It's called the NAU. Just like the three musketeers, all for one and one for all(they were French too...socialist even then).

Every one will be taken care of, no need to think for yourself. Everything handed to you on a silver platter. And it's free..all free. No need to be accountable for your actions. If you do something wrong, it's because society failed you, not because you are a thieving scumbag.

If you are even remotely able to take care of yourself or you question the status quo...well mister we have a little suprise for you, you are a baaad man.
You can't take the law into your own hands, you can't own livestock without microchips, how can we keep an eye on you if you are not dependent on us?

 

[gc70]

Just a little clarification about "threatened to blow them away" - the major media usually provides abridged information and local reports have more details:

Englund, according to the 9-1-1 recording, explained he had a shotgun, which turned out to be without shells.

“I got the shotgun on them right now,” Englund told the dispatcher.

“Stop or I’ll blow them tires ... Don’t come no closer; get in that car,” Englund’s voice was heard after he and the car he was following stopped.

And the innocent mother... was driving the car.

 

[pacodelahoya]

GC70,

Now wait for the deafening silence as everyone scrambles to apologize!





It's like the old SNL church lady bit



....What? Bagels? I thought they said they were eating beagles....Nevermind.......

 

[gc70]

Apologies? You have to be joking; after three pages of posts, everyone's views are cast in stone.

 

[pacodelahoya]

Well, at least a little sarcastic. l

 

[razorburn]

It's not what he said that we took issue with. But I'll waste no further breath on this, as nobody bothers to read anything that doesn't support the viewpoint they'd already long ago decided on, chosen after only reading the title, anyway.

 

[gc70]

It's not what he said that we took issue with.

But it sticks in one's perception of the event.

nobody bothers to read anything that doesn't support the viewpoint they'd already long ago decided on

Too true; and we often pick up another poster's characterization or extrapolation which further distorts the event.

 

[razorburn]

Yes, for simpletons, things like that may be taken as a reflection of his character and that is what brought down contempt on the farmer. They make a lot of judgements based on what they feel about a person's character. Nobody should make absurd extrapolations based on what they feel about a person's character, just the best evidence and facts we have available at the time. None of the thinking people have considered that a deciding factor in judging his actions. Oh, but look at me. I'm replying again. So much for my resolve.