Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Burglar forced to clean up his mess at gunpoint

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Zundfolge, Oct 18, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Source

    :D
     
  2. kingpin008

    kingpin008 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    5,435
    Location:
    Howard County, Merry Land
    Awesome. Should'a made the bastard put on a frilly pink maid's outfit while he was doing it. They'd love that down at the local jailhouse. :evil:
     
  3. MilsurpShooter

    MilsurpShooter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,541
    Location:
    Under a rock somewhere
    Wait officer, don't take him yet, he hasn't finished the bathroom :D
     
  4. .cheese.

    .cheese. Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    3,808
    legally - you can't do this correct?

    doesn't it become kidnapping or something, or being held against your will...

    not that I think the homeowners were wrong.... I just have a feeling it was technically illegal.
     
  5. bannockburn

    bannockburn Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    13,157
    Well, he is trespassing on your private property, and has been caught in the act of breaking and entering, and in possesion of stolen goods; you're holding him at gunpoint would probably be seen as a citizen's arrest of a felony suspect. However, I personally don't like the idea of the suspect moving around while he's under "house arrest". Too many things that could go wrong, plus what happens if any of his "buddies" stop by to help with the looting; maybe they forgot to check for any copper plumbing to steal? No, I think I would just have him prone on the floor, hands on his head till the police get there.
     
  6. Jorg Nysgerrig

    Jorg Nysgerrig Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,823
    Eh, might be violating Alabama law Section 15-10-7: It is the duty of any private person, having arrested another for the commission of any public offense, to take him without unnecessary delay before a judge or magistrate, or to deliver him to some one of the officers specified in Section 15-10-1, who must forthwith take him before a judge or magistrate.

    I think you'd be hard pressed to find a DA willing to file charged for the "unnecessary delay".
     
  7. Pigspitter

    Pigspitter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Messages:
    614
    I've always wanted a cleaner where the power off switch was a trigger. that's when they work real good.
     
  8. Officers'Wife

    Officers'Wife Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    3,012
    Location:
    A long way from heaven and too close to Chicago
    As Truman was reported to have said once...

    Yes, it's illegal but why spoil the beauty of it.

    Or maybe even more appros is Gilbert and Sullivan- Let the punishment fit the crime... tra la... let the punishment fit the crime.

    Selena
     
  9. joab

    joab Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,830
    Location:
    Ocoee, Fla
    Is there a changing sentiment in America or are forum members just getting better at finding stories about homeowners fighting back shown in a positive light these days
     
  10. Pilgrim

    Pilgrim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,957
    Location:
    Nevada, escaped from the PDRK via Idaho.
    I suppose a prosecutor who is really a jerk could charge the homeowner with false imprisonment.

    Pilgrim
     
  11. RoadkingLarry

    RoadkingLarry Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    NE Oklahoma
    Sad part is the homeowner will probably get sued and lose.
     
  12. Geno

    Geno Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,847
    What's the guy's beef, he got to be "the-maid-of-Honor". Baha!

    We could say in the end the thief "really-cleaned-up!" Hahaha!

    Doc2005
     
  13. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    If I were the judge, I'd give him an extra five years to reconsider the arrogance of his complaint.
     
  14. buttrap

    buttrap Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,088
    Location:
    Oregon
    Looks legal to me. The guy called the cops and he did have the right to keep the hood restrained or under control till the cops showed. Really splitting hairs if its tied up,locked up or worked up.:rolleyes:
     
  15. Griff

    Griff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    321
    Location:
    NC
    The stones this home owner showed by getting some instant revenge are not accessible to those who second guess themselves in such situations. We can learn from his example, though.

    When my mother's home was burglarized, she told us that it was not the actual value of the stolen objects that had her twisted up in knots, but the intangible principal of the act. She no longer felt safe in her house. This man has not only caught the thief, but also regained a lot of his dignity and self respect by virtue of his actions, not by proxy of some far off court ruling. Good job, Sir!

    I'd be willing to bet that most cops understand this on the same level, and are glad to see it. I think that its a common sense issue, though. Go too far, and they won't be able to turn a blind eye for the good guys. He did the right thing, and I'm glad you posted this.

    Cheers, Y'all
     
  16. iiibdsiil

    iiibdsiil Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2004
    Messages:
    740
    Location:
    910 / 813 / 561
    Good story! The cop laughing at him makes it even better!
     
  17. Sheldon J

    Sheldon J Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    991
    Location:
    Cereal City, Michigan
    Don't call the police yet, the house needs a second coat of paint!
     
  18. 2ndamd

    2ndamd Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    519
    Location:
    Brownsville thru El Paso
    Hahaha! LOL!
    Take that you POS!
     
  19. MarshallDodge

    MarshallDodge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,287
    Location:
    Utah, USA
    Too funny!

    I would have been hard pressed not to shoot the guy. Hopefully he does not come back for revenge when he gets out.
     
  20. Cavalier Knight

    Cavalier Knight Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    New York NY
    He would have made me a pot roast with home made gravy before it was over.
     
  21. plexreticle

    plexreticle Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,240
    This is a funny story but poor judgment on the homeowner part.
     
  22. MinnMooney

    MinnMooney Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,608
    Location:
    east-central Minnesota
    Awesome. Should'a made the bastard put on a frilly pink maid's outfit while he was doing it. They'd love that down at the local jailhouse.

    I saw this on the news late last night, also. What a hoot..... until you realize that the burglar/jerk might hire a lawyer and sue the homeowner. I think that judges should take this case to heart and think about restitution where they have to work for their victims. Me thinks that not too many victims would want the perp around anymore.... except this particular, ballsy homeowner!!
     
  23. dhoomonyou

    dhoomonyou Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    700
    Location:
    Florida
    I can hear the perp's lawyer now:

    "Your Honor I move for dismissal on grounds of unlawful imprisonment, and my client will be suing the homeowner in Civil court for 50 million dollars for mental anguish".
     
  24. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    I agree - poor idea legally and tactically.

    Poor idea legally, because the legal use of lethal it not to force someone else to do your will, or to punish them. The legal use of lethal force is to prevent someone from causing you or someone else serious bodily injury or death. If the burglar had refused to do the cleanup, and the homeowner had shot him, ...

    If the homeowner said anything like, "Sit there until I decide what to do with you!", let's hope those words don't come back to haunt him in a court of law. Now he'll have to deal with the word of his wife in print that he threatened to use the gun against the burglar when there was absolutely no further threat to he or his wife.

    Tactically, it's hard to think of a worse idea than ordering a criminal who you've got sitting on the ground to get up and walk around with items in hand hand. When I have seen police in person (and on Court TV :) ) dealing with a suspect, they want him on the ground in a hurry - with nothing in hands. And they cuff as fast as possible. They don't even want him moving until they have he cuffs on him. Even then, the seem to keep at least one had on the cuffs - I think to establish control.

    The last thing they way - apparently - is a suspect up and walking around, out of control. And they sure don't want anything his hands.

    Looks to me like they want to establish physical control quickly and maintain it until the suspect in locked in a vehicle of some kind. Maybe a LEO who read this can comment on the protocol for detaining a suspect?

    Asking someone to pick up books and drawers and a mop or broom doesn't seem like a good idea tactically. Any item can be thrown as the commencement of an attack.

    This sort of makes sense - though LEO friends in the past have told me that "holding" someone at gunpoint who is not cuffed is far more difficult and dangerous than it looks. Evidently people who do crime for a living can move very fast.

    I am not a career criminal - if someone points a gun at me, I'd crap in my pants. A career criminal may be thinking, "That's a nice gun. I can get top dollar for that. I can take that wussy guy, gun or no gun. I can get me a gun."

    [QUOTE"The police officer laughed at him when he complained and said anybody else would have shot him dead."[/QUOTE]

    Let's hope the police officer has the last laugh. My guess is not. My guess is that an attorney make a plausible case that the homeowner was in fact seeking to punish the criminal, not just detain him. Forced labor is illegal, etc.

    I hope a jury would not find in favor of the criminal - but getting to that point could very very expensive for the homeowner. He probably could have hired the most expensive clean up crew in the city, and remodeled his house for what a suit will cost him - even if he loses.

    Mike
     
  25. RPCVYemen

    RPCVYemen Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    1,937
    I agree - poor idea legally and tactically.

    Poor idea legally, because the legal use of lethal it not to force someone else to do your will, or to punish them. The legal use of lethal force is to prevent someone from causing you or someone else serious bodily injury or death. If the burglar had refused to do the cleanup, and the homeowner had shot him, ...

    If the homeowner said anything like, "Sit there until I decide what to do with you!", let's hope those words don't come back to haunt him in a court of law. Now he'll have to deal with the word of his wife in print that he threatened to use the gun against the burglar when there was absolutely no further threat to he or his wife.

    Tactically, it's hard to think of a worse idea than ordering a criminal who you've got sitting on the ground to get up and walk around with items in his his hands. You are asking him to pickup potential weapons, aren't you?

    When I have seen police in person (and on Court TV :) ) dealing with a suspect, they want him on the ground in a hurry - with nothing in hands. And they cuff as fast as possible. They don't even want him moving until they have he cuffs on him. Even then, the seem to keep at least one had on the cuffs - I think to establish control.

    The last thing they way - apparently - is a suspect up and walking around, out of control. And they sure don't want anything his hands.

    Looks to me - and I don't know this - like they want to establish physical control quickly and maintain it until the suspect in locked in a vehicle of some kind. Maybe a LEO who read this can comment on the protocol for detaining a suspect?

    Asking someone to pick up books and drawers and a mop or broom doesn't seem like a good idea tactically. Any item can be thrown as the commencement of an attack.

    This sort of makes sense - though LEO friends in the past have told me that "holding" someone at gunpoint who is not cuffed is far more difficult and dangerous than it looks. Evidently people who do crime for a living can move very fast.

    I am not a career criminal - if someone points a gun at me, I'd crap in my pants. A career criminal may be thinking, "That's a nice gun. I can get top dollar for that. I can take that wussy guy, gun or no gun. I can get me a gun."

    Let's hope the police officer has the last laugh. My guess is not. My guess is that an attorney make a plausible case that the homeowner was in fact seeking to punish the criminal, not just detain him. Forced labor is illegal, etc.

    I hope a jury would not find in favor of the criminal - but getting to that point could very very expensive for the homeowner. He probably could have hired the most expensive clean up crew in the city, and remodeled his house for what a suit will cost him - even if he wins.

    Mike
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page