Crazy crackhead video

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK. I've got a question for LEOS and/or LV residents. How about running this type of criminal out of town? If you have habitual crackheads/street people/panhandlers/thugs hanging around why can't you simple put them on a bus to somewhere else? I lived in Irvine (Orange County) California for awhile, and the cops there don't put up with this crap. If some derelict even drives through that town, they get stopped and written up for any possible violation and are shown the city limits. As a result, you don't see human trash on the streets. If I were police chief, I'd give them $20 and put them on a Greyhound bus to San Francisco or some other liberal craphole.

And simply move the problem from town to town? What sense does that make?

"Putting them on a bus out of town" went out 30 years ago, and I am not sure that my job wouldn't be at risk if I were to try it today.

You can't "show them to the city limits", either. Sure, they have a vehicle that has some violations. You cite them and release them. You have no legal justification that would stand up in court for "showing them to the city limits".
 
You have no legal justification that would stand up in court for "showing them to the city limits".
OK. What about vagrancy laws? Disturbing the peace violations? Urinating on the street? Panhandling? Menacing passers by? Are those no longer violations?
 
"Putting them on a bus out of town" went out 30 years ago,

Nope. Salt Lake City did the same thing just before the 2002 Olympics...sent all the bums and vagrants to Vegas....
:neener:
I seem to remember a clip of the LV mayor on TV pitching a fit about it....
 
It's a sad commentary when the rights of street vermin trump the rights of law abiding productive citizens and law enforcment's hands are tied by foaming at the mouth leftist lawyers.
 
The more I think about it - if this incident didnt justify a shooting then why do you even bother to carry at all???

It only takes ONE hit with that bar to kill you, and you ARENT gonna get ANY more warning of the injury to come than having two windows smashed in your face.

And whats scary is if CCW holders cant even agree on that then how are you going to convince the tentative, gun shy general public of that? Or of any reason to shoot and/or carry for that matter.
 
OK. What about vagrancy laws? Disturbing the peace violations? Urinating on the street? Panhandling? Menacing passers by? Are those no longer violations?


Riley, the North end of the strip and the surrounding area is nowhere that you want to be. I grew up in Las Vegas, and if all my family weren't still living there, I wouldn't go back. Of course there are laws against these things, but with a legal system that is overtaxed and under funded, and with these criminals spending less if any time in the revolving door prisons, by the time you arrest the last criminals from the area, the first ones you arrested are showing up right after them. These criminals can make a better (or easier) living on the corner, and with nothing really to deter them, what's to keep them from doing this? I'm all for enforcing laws, but the root of the problem is deeper than this, and not the point of this thread.

To those that said the driver should jump the curb, I have a question: Are PT Cruisers built differently where you are from? Let's say the driver tries that, and gets high-centered, what then? Now they are immobile, and left to the devices of this feller, and assuming they are not armed, they must appeal to his good graces (if he has any). Sure, if they can get away by jumping the curb, great, but since we can't truely appreciate the height of the curb from this footage, maybe it was too high, and the driver was aware of this. You say, hypothetically, jump the curb. I say, hypothetically, the curb may be too high to jump in a passenger car. I'll go measure the curb next month when I'm down there, if anybody really cares.

It's easy to pick this apart from our end. I'f I'm fearing for my life, which *I* would have been, he get's whatever amount of force I can deliver, whether it's by running him over, or shooting him.

(Anyone else think this might be Gary Payton? ;D )
 
"....when this occurred ('98? '01? '03?????), or even IF a police or damage report was filed...."



Citizen,



This appears to be of 2004 vintage as there is a white/cream? colored 2005 Chrysler 300C just ahead of the PT Cruiser. That model was just released earlier this year.



Now, *zipping up nomex*



Justified or not, I think anyone of us would have found great pleasure in shooting that piece of chit but I could not guarantee the BG as a target and backstop so no joy. Given his state of mind, drawing a weapon would not have only fanned his flames as he truly feared no one and there is no way for me to know that so I would not have a lot of time to think on it before he attempted to do me further harm. In this case drawing would immediately have to have been followed by a couple of quick doubletaps to COM. Since I dont have CCW, running him over would have been the best thing to do to stop the attacker with the least amount of repercussion (no smoking gun, etc.) and it would have been a fitting means to an end (BG hits car, car hits BG) but BG could have easily sidestepped and clocked me in the bing-bong. Evading with vehicle would have probably been the safest alternative from a legal point of view if nothing else. In summation, that guy is a domestic terrorist who used intimidation to his benefit. I would have attempted to run the BG over while making an escape explaining, "he got in the way".
 
She could of turned the wheel and escaped even if it meant hitting the car in front of her.

Hmmmmm... you mean the car directly in front of the PT cruiser?

The car at the instersection?

Okay so...

The car gets pushed in to the intersection.

<Big Accident Occurs>

Lot's of children and a puppy dog die resulting from the accident.

Bad news.
 
A few here have mentioned moral issues in their posts.

If you have moral issues about protecting yourself or worse your family, while you contiplate in your head the morality of the issue in front of you, you may very well get yourself or worse others killed.

The very first question out of my mouth when giving CCW classes is "Does anyone have moral issues with taking the life of someone else in their own self protection".
If there are, I send them home and allow them to think about those issues.
If they can't clearly define the difference between murder and killing someone in self defense, they have no business carring a firearm in my opinion.

Those who live in states where the right to self defense is so neutered down, whats the sense in going thru the motions of carrying when the fear of protecting yourself and others is so overwhelming?

That's why I live in Florida were we can shoot this guy as an attempted car jacker and our assets are protected from lawsuits from the scumbags family.
 
To simplify the video:

You're strapped in your car in a parking lot. There are vehicles surrounding you not really moving much if at all. Driving away isn't much of an option.

Out of friggin' nowhere, a crazed freak starts smashing in your windows. One wrong flick of the crowbar and you're dead.

"Reflective contemplation is not required in the presence of an upraised knife."

You'd better be ready to stop him NOW, 'cuz running away is not a guaranteed option. Decision better be made ahead of time.

I'm with the others here who observe dismay that a disturbingly large number of posters would not fight back, even having seen that video. He's smashing in your windows with a crowbar inches from your head, you can't drive away without severe harm to others, and you wouldn't COM him pronto?!?
 
I've read this thread very carefully, and I respectfully submit that many of our more gung-ho members urgently need a testosterone-reduction program! :fire:

Points to ponder:

1. You may use deadly force only when there is an immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or serious injury to yourself or to those legally under your protection. Whilst this threat is certainly immediate, it's directed against your vehicle, not against you: and there is another means of avoidance open to you, even if it means driving over a curb. In many jurisdictions in the USA, you would face charges if you shot this guy - no ifs, buts or maybes about it. Sure, there are some jurisdictions that would congratulate you, but I daresay they're in the minority.

2. You are responsible for the effect of every bullet you fire. At close range, in a crowded city street, you are likely to have some overpenetration problems: and with the perp moving around as he was, you may well miss with one or more shots. There's an excellent chance that one or more of your bullets may hit someone else - and then you're up the creek without the proverbial paddle!

3. You have a much stronger legal case to use your car as a defensive weapon than you do to use a gun. Is he standing in front of your car, bashing it? "My foot slipped off the brake, and the car rolled forward, pinning him between my car's front bumper and the rear bumper of the car ahead of me." Is he moving around your car? "I attempted to evade his attack, and unfortunately he placed himself in a position where he was impacted during my manoevres. I did not deliberately target him - I was steering the car towards an escape route." These are MUCH more defensible options, legally, than the use of a firearm.

4. You have to consider the long-term consequences as well. Do you travel to that area regularly? Do you live nearby? If so, remember that this crackhead has buddies, customers and suppliers, all of whom are going to be VERY unhappy with you, and may well come looking for evens. Are you prepared to face this very real possibility? If one or more of them try to assault you on the streets, you will very likely end up using lethal force to defend yourself. This may happen more than once. Guess what the justice system is going to do to you? "Well, now, let's see... John Doe has run over one guy, shot two more, and threatened another, all in the space of a week. This guy is a menace to society! Let's take him down!" (And if any of you think that the cops will deal with this situation in any other way, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you... their priority is maintaining order, and they'll do it in the most expedient way possible - FOR THEM!)

Think about these things.
 
I'm sorry, Preacherman, but we're going to have to disagree. And I absolutely disagree in the most stringent terms with your #3 suggestion to lie to the authorities about using your car in self-defense. I cannot disagree more strongly with that advice. "My foot slipped off the brake and the car rolled forward"? I am actually a little shocked that you would suggest it.
and there is another means of avoidance open to you
This is not clear from the video. In fact, the inability of the driver to escape, while obviously trying with all their being, would show how escape was not available to this victim. Even if there were an avenue, which the video does not show exists, this person was incapable of escaping. The element of fear the incredibly sudden and violent attack created in the victim paralyzed her. This is the reality of it. This victim was unable to escape and survived only because this particular killer, on this particular occasion and in this particular moment decided to stop short of murder, although he had the opportunity, the ability, the history and the potential for crossing that line in the blink of an eye.

However I do agree that given the dangers of stray rounds and the crowded environ, it may make more sense to use the cruiser instead of the firearm. Although the angle is such that I think you're safe from impacting innocents, although rounds would certainly leave the area.

Your #4 concerns are, to be blunt, a little silly. I am far, far, less concerned with hypothetically pissing off scum-of-the-earth gang-bangers in some possible future than I am with getting my and my families heads bashed in in the here and now.

And I suppose we'll just have to disagree about the prosecution issue. My kingdom for a cop or attorney from Vegas to chime in on that point.

Whilst this threat is certainly immediate, it's directed against your vehicle, not against you:
An odd observation. You obviously have a far better understanding of this particular insane drug-addled criminals inner workings than I am capable of mustering. I am actually stunned, more than stunned, that people are evaluating a crack-sucking self-professed violent murderer smashing in your side window with a crowbar as not really a serious threat of harm to your person.

I would love to roll back time here and show people not the entire clip, but only up until the guy takes the first swing at the windshield. Without the benefit of the entire episode, I wonder if people would be so quick to 'know the mind' of this walking horrorshow.

And I take a mild offense at being described as in need of a 'testosterone-reduction program'. Disagree all you want, that's why we're here, but please leave the personal insults at the door, if it's not too much trouble.

- Gabe (do I get to invoke the flaming anger smiley now? :fire: ;))
 
That grey line is pretty fine, but some of us just can't make it out because of our graphite fiber-impregnated sunglasses.
Another thinly-veiled insult. A good discussion about a serious question is going to get locked down here because some people can't contain their rabid contempt.

- Gabe
 
and called an unknown a mall ninja
I didn't call you a mall ninja, Styles. I described your advice as 'mall-ninja-ish'. I clarified that point early on. My point, that I made clear, was that getting out of the car and 'facing down' the guy is a 'mall-ninja' move.

Not to mention it was after you threw the 'rambo' thing out.

This horse is dead and there is no progress being made here. The debate has stalled and the only place to go is down. Lock it.

- Gabe
 
Last edited:
I'm in agreement with preacherman. I'd use the car. He put himself in front of it setting himself to be decapitated at the knees. I agree that this person (the driver) was frozen in time in sheer terror. I would not have. and in answer to.

If you have moral issues about protecting yourself or worse your family;

None whatsoever but a firearm at a crowded intersection was not the best form of protection at that time.
 
Stopping the threat via BF Goodrich... :fire:

He placed himself in harms way (in front or in back of the car a couple of times). It is hard to swing a crowbar when a tire/wheel attached to a car, is sitting on or driven over part of your anatomy.

No, I wouldn't have shot. The weapon of choice was already "at hand" :rolleyes:

The next person to be dealt with would be the moron with the camera, and he/she would be dealt with legally ...
 
Dimensions of the area!

Ok, so, being the intrepid reporter that I am, I went down there last night.

It's a regular 6 inch curb. After the sidewalk (coming "back towards" the cameraman from the street) there is another 6 inch high by 8 inches wide bumper barrier curb-like-protrusion (presumably to keep parked cars from rolling out onto the sidewalk).

There's no parking lot entrance on that entire section of sidewalk, and before you can get to the corner, right on the curb, there is a light pole. So there's really no way to go halfway up the sidewalk and go around the car in front of her until you're past that.

The newspaper boxes might interfere. I'm not sure. Also, I dunno if a PT Cruiser could straddle that curb. They're pretty short.

Hrmmmm. I shoulda taken some pictures of the area from the other side.

-Ogre
 
Last edited:
I get a page not found.

I wonder if all the hits killed the bandwidth or something...
 
OK. What about vagrancy laws? Disturbing the peace violations? Urinating on the street? Panhandling? Menacing passers by? Are those no longer violations?
You lock people up for those types of offenses. You don't "escort them to the city line". Officers have no legal authority to do that sort of thing.
 
Nope. Salt Lake City did the same thing just before the 2002 Olympics...sent all the bums and vagrants to Vegas....
And if they actually did that, they are lucky to not have found themselves at the receiving end of a lawsuit.
 
Something to ponder:

NRS 200.120 “Justifiable homicide†defined. Justifiable homicide is the killing of a human being in necessary self-defense, or in defense of habitation, property or person, against one who manifestly intends, or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against any person or persons who manifestly intend and endeavor, in a violent, riotous, tumultuous or surreptitious manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein.

So, there it is in black and white.

Seems to me that this person was definitely "manifesting intent".
 
Ok, so, being the intrepid reporter that I am, I went down there last night.

You sir are more intrepid then I :p

So did you see our grining crackhead? Shoulda got his autograph ... he's probably famous now (this is the 3rd forum I've found links to the video ... I imagine thats why the link keeps dying)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top