Fireworks Attack on Our Home, How would YOU respond?

[Blain]

Just felt like posting something that happened to my family and I long ago; I was just a little kid at the time. Yet the events that took place and the way that law enforcement and the legal system handeled the affair was such an abomination and disscrace that it still bothers me to this day, which is why I am going to write about it now.

This was two decades ago in the good old socialist state of Massachusetts. It was night time and my older brother and I had already been put to bed (we were both young at the time, around 4 or 5 or so). Then....it happened....

BANG!!!!!!! POP!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!

There were HUGE flashes of light, and loud noises, as explosives rocked our house. Right outside my window, which was on the right second story bedroom in the front of our house! My brother and I were scared #%$^less as we had no idea what was going on. We were crying and screaming as we thought WWIII had just been declared on our peaceful domicile.

What was happening were teenage punks launching illegal fireworks AT our house. Not by it, or above it, but AT our house! And right by my window!

My father, who was a big yet gun free man, ran out of the house with a vengance to catch the punks who had attacked his home. The little punks ran fast, but my dad, big as he as, was a track runner in highschool and easily caught up to them. He caught and grabbed one of the punks with a rage!

The little dirtball, who was scared out of his witts to be on the recieving end of such a big angry man, was screaming and crying at him. According to my mother he said something to the effect of,

"Please! Take me to the police, but whatever you do, don't take me to my father."

My father, happened to know the boys father, and thought for some reason that the father would/should deal with the boy instead of the police.

Now this is where I really get angry hearing the story (from my mother, my father never tells me anything). Apparently what happened was that the boy's father was VERY upset and angry.....but he was angry at my dad for GRABBING his kid! He said something to the effect of....

"Since you are members of our church we won't press charges on you."

***?!?!?!?!? :banghead:


What the heck is wrong with this fool? If it were my family today and someone was launching an artillery attack AT my kids who were scared out of their wits, they would be facing down the barrel of my 12 gauge supermagnum! And they would be darn lucky if they didn't depart from this dear earth on that very day. Hey! Fireworks are dangerous! They are an explosive and they can start fires, and cause injuries and damage! You don't launch fireworks at people OR houses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway, the story gets even better!

Enter the Mass legal system.....

Remarkible bit of machinery, the MA legal system....

Basically from what I've heard, when my dad tried to do something legally, the police (or the judge) or both said that since my dad physically "grabbed" a kid (for attacking his HOME with illegal fireworks, he can't press charges!!!!


That's MA for you. That is one of the reasons why I hate the state so much. Now, tell me, what do YOU think of that? And what would YOU have done if you were in my fathers situation?

 

[glocksman]

That's MA for you. That is one of the reasons why I hate the state so much. Now, tell me, what do YOU think of that? And what would YOU have done if you were in my fathers situation?

From the Indiana Code:

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in using deadly force only if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling or curtilage.
(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling or curtilage, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person is not justified in using deadly force unless that force is justified under subsection (a).
(d) A person is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or stop the other person from hijacking, attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an aircraft in flight. For purposes of this subsection, an aircraft is considered to be in flight while the aircraft is:
(1) on the ground in Indiana:
(A) after the doors of the aircraft are closed for takeoff; and
(B) until the aircraft takes off;
(2) in the airspace above Indiana; or
(3) on the ground in Indiana:
(A) after the aircraft lands; and
(B) before the doors of the aircraft are opened after landing.
(e) Notwithstanding subsections (a), (b), and (c), a person is not justified in using force if:
(1) the person is committing or is escaping after the commission

of a crime;
(2) the person provokes unlawful action by another person with intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or
(3) the person has entered into combat with another person or is the initial aggressor unless the person withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the other person the intent to do so and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens to continue unlawful action.
(f) Notwithstanding subsection (d), a person is not justified in using force if the person:
(1) is committing, or is escaping after the commission of, a crime;
(2) provokes unlawful action by another person, with intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or
(3) continues to combat another person after the other person withdraws from the encounter and communicates the other person's intent to stop hijacking, attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an aircraft in flight.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.1. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.8; Acts 1979, P.L.297, SEC.1; P.L.59-2002, SEC.1.

My answer is that if I honestly thought they were trying to set the house on fire, I would blow them away without a second thought.

If not, then I wouldn't use a gun, but I certainly would try to ID them (digital cameras are great) and call the cops.

Of course if they tried to gang up on me for taking their pictures, then I can legally draw my G19 with the preban mags.

 

[Sir Galahad]

The region here is a tinderbox. A couple years back, a guy saw some kids playing with fire out in the woods. First time, he warned them not to do it. Second time, he threatened them. Later, the cops caught the kids. In some states, kids are pretty much able to get away with anything.

 

[Blain]

Glockman, that's great! Do you know a site that lists all the legal uses of force for all, or most of, the 50 states? Not only do I want to find out what my resident state is, but since I plan to move, I want to make sure I move into a state that is not so socialist that it prevents me from self defense!

 

[glocksman]

No, I don't.

In fact I have a post here asking if anyone knows Maryland's laws on self-defense. Indiana's are a part of the Indiana Code (Title 35) that deals with criminal law and procedure. God only knows where Maryland's laws on SD are at.

But here's the online Indiana Code if you're interested.

I'd go online to your state's official website and start digging. That's how I found the online Indiana Code.

 

[benewton]

I believe that about 4 rounds of "AD" would occur: 12 guage 9 shot, since while taking the chance is stupid, the likelyhood of a home fire from the illegal fireworks is fairly low, and, in truth, I neither want to shoot, nor to kill.

Still, you do what you must.

Besides, I'd know where to go looking for them...

 

[TarpleyG]

(b) A person is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling or curtilage.

The punk was running away when his Dad caught him, therefore, this would not have applied in thier particular scenario. Shooting them would have applied but would have been the worst alternative. I think the Dad did the right thing. 20 years ago, that coulda been me or my friends doing stupid **** like that. We knew better but we didn't. Know what I mean.

GT

 

[Blain]

I still can't believe that the kids didn't even get in trouble, even though they had illegal fireworks. I mean doing what they did is terrorism!!!!!!

 

[glocksman]

It would depend upon what illegal fireworks were being shot.

If it's just the usual firecrackers and bottle rockets, of course I wouldn't shoot them or pull a gun. I'd call the cops and ID them because the risk to the home is minimal.

If they're shooting Roman Candles at the house, then I would confront them. Then if they shoot a RC at me, it's clear cut self defense when I draw my gun.

 

[PsyWarrior]

As to terrorism, this was long before that was considered a threat her in the US. However, your father should have told the kid that he was under citizens arrest, called the cops (putting them under arrest justifies physically detaining and does not indemnify them of their original crime) and then called the brats jerkoff father.

Posslible charges at the time:
Assault with a deadly weapon
attempted arson
posession of illegal explosives
use of illegal explosives
disturbing the police
vandalism

To the guy thinking about moving, move to Tennessee. This is not a liberal state. We have a right to protect ourselves and our property here. Most of the state is populated by people that understand hunting and fishing and support our troops. This is, IMHO, the best of the 50.

 

[Blain]

Yeah, but a lot of the Southerners are not too friendly/welcoming toward "invading" northerners from what I hear. I also hear they don't like Italians. I was thinking instead of moving to either Vermont, Maine, or New Hampshier!

 

[glocksman]

Most of the state is populated by people that understand hunting and fishing and support our troops. This is, IMHO, the best of the 50.

But Tennessee gave us Al Gore.
Of course it wasn't losing Florida that cost Gore the Presidency, it was losing his home state that cost him (Thank God) the win.

 

[MitchSchaft]

We have a right to protect ourselves and our property here.

Can't use deadly force to protect property, unfortunately.

 

[Azrael256]

Two words: Video Camera. See if you can get it played on the news, too. I would, however, be armed while filming just in case. Of course, I prefer armed grocery shopping, too, so that part isn't important.

 

[Blain]

Well all I know is that I certainly would have did something else/more.

 

[LoneStranger]

When dealing with people who are idiots in places where idiotocy(sic) runs rampant you must learn other ways than the soul satisfying grab and spank.

Your father should have responded with schocked confusion in that he thought that the childs bad behaviour would be corrected by the parent and being told that the parent believed in that kind of bad behaviour, scaring children, totally floors him.

Next, your father should have immediately hit the telephone and called everyone he knew in the church, starting with minister, and explained how he became aware of this information and how he feels that all of his friends and acquaintances at the church should know to guard themselves and their families from this abberent behaviour.

Only tell that you are making phone calls after you have done so. Never warn idiots, its counterproductive.

 

[Blain]

Aye, good advice. If I could go back 20 years into the past, I might have advised him to do just that.