Knoxville Homeowner Not Charged For Shooting At Thief's Vehicle

[hso]

He wasn't charged and only received a reprimand for shooting at the vehicle to disable it. Lucky fellow considering he obviously wasn't shooting to defend himself much of the time and TN law is pretty clear that SD is the only acceptable reason for firing on another person. The article is pretty good (excepting the "AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifle" mistake).

The article is well balanced and well written (save for the "AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifle" mistake).

I can understand Mr. Harris's frustration, anger and fear and am sympathetic with his actions. On the other hand, use of a firearm in any other situation than self defense is a huge issue in the RKBA community.

Many people support using deadly force to protect property, arguing that theft of property represents theft of that part of their life needed to earn the property and theft of that part of their life to replace it. The equivalent of the threat of "grave bodily harm" in their minds and justifying the use of deadly force. I'm not sure taking ALL the days of a thief's life is warranted when they're only taking days or weeks of our effort spent on the item being stolen.

Others argue that deadly force only applies directly to the threat to a person of death or grave bodily harm.

Mr. Harris shooting at the vehicle to disable it in the belief that no one was in it isn't as clear an issue for some. Since he had no reason to believe that anyone was in the vehicle and he stopped shooting as soon as he was alerted to the fact that someone was in it I think his actions were justified.

Shooting at the vehicle with someone in it wouldn't have been defensible if not for the fact that the driver tried to run him down. Even then he didn't shoot at the driver, but instead shot to disable the vehicle. Admirable restraint under the circumstances. Most of us in that situation might have fired at the driver in self defense.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/may/17/boundaries-of-defense/

Boundaries of defense
Man reprimanded for shooting at thieves trying to steal metal

By Don Jacobs (Contact)
Saturday, May 17, 2008

After repeated thefts of copper and aluminum from his business and future home, Lonnie Harris decided he needed an armed guard to protect his interests.

For the next two weeks, the 65-year-old North Knox County man spent the night sitting in a patio chair draped with a layer of foam rubber. The chair on the second floor of the home he is building offered a panoramic view of the property. His only companions were an AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifle and a handgun.

"I'd like to froze some nights, but I didn't mind because they had pissed me off," Harris said. "I've worked too hard to have the things I've got."

At 11:30 p.m. Tuesday, Harris got the encounter he wanted, but not the results. In fact, he says, he ended up on the receiving end of a lecture from Knox County Sheriff's Office deputies.

The silent alarm Harris installed after the thefts at the Bent Tree Farms nursery, 2535 Old Callahan Road, alerted the family to another break-in. Harris' wife, Kelly Harris, owns the business.

The alarm sounded in the family's residence above the nursery, where they are living until Harris completes the new home. Because Harris hadn't encountered any thieves, he had resumed sleeping in his own bed.

Someone tripped the alarm when they smashed open a locked metal gate that faces Clinton Highway that leads to the nursery.

As Kelly Harris called E-911 and stayed with the couple's two children, her husband drove his F-350 crew cab truck to the gate to block the thieves inside the property. Lonnie Harris said he grabbed his AK-47 with a 30-round clip and searched the dark lot for the interlopers.

He located a black Chevrolet pickup truck stopped near pallets of aluminum supports for new greenhouses.

"I introduced myself with bam, bam, bam into the truck," Harris said. "I was trying to disable the truck."

Harris said his rounds toward the truck radiator and tires, however, elicited screams of, "Don't shoot! Don't shoot!" from a man at the rear of the truck.

Harris said he ordered the man to lie down, but the man bolted. Harris darted after the man, but 10 yards into the chase he noticed the pickup truck moving. Harris opted to challenge the truck driver and ran to stand in the path of the truck's route to the smashed gate.

"He saw me and gunned it," Harris said.

Harris opened fire on the truck in an attempt to shoot out the tires and then dove out of the way. As the truck fled, Harris said he continued shooting at the rear bumper and tires.

"I wasn't protecting my property; I was protecting myself," he said.

Harris said he was unable to get a good look at the truck driver.

"I couldn't see him," he said. "I was too busy getting out of the way and he was too busy ducking."

Harris said he aimed all of his rounds low so he didn't "hit the passenger compartment." He found later he had discharged 20 rounds from the assault rifle, chipping concrete from the roadside curb at the nursery.

The pickup truck sped toward the gate on Clinton Highway, where Harris had blocked the way with his large pickup truck. The smaller Chevrolet pickup rammed the rear of Harris' truck, shoving it out of the way and allowing the thief to escape.

"I should have shot at them instead of the truck," he said. "It wouldn't bother me to shoot them - as much trouble as they've caused me being up every night watching my property."

During the commotion, a third man also sprinted from the nursery, Kelly Harris said.

By the time Knox County deputies arrived, all the suspects and the black truck were gone. No arrests have been made.

Thefts of metal for sale to scrap dealers has become so prevalent the Sheriff's Office and Knoxville Police Department created teams of investigators to battle the growing crime.

While thefts of copper and scrap metal continue to be a problem, KPD Investigator Ron Linkins said thieves have shifted their sights in recent months.

"Our No. 1 focus right now is the theft of catalytic converters," Linkins said. The catalytic converter along a vehicle's exhaust system contains platinum metals that can garner "$40 to $50 to several hundred dollars" each, he said.

So far this year, Linkins said, KPD has investigated 30 theft reports involving the loss of more than 100 catalytic converters.

Harris, who said he's lost more than $15,000 in wire stripped from the home under construction, aluminum greenhouse supports and damage to his truck, was cautioned by sheriff's deputies about shooting at thieves.

"If I had been shooting at them, I would have hit them," Harris said defiantly.

Knox County Sheriff Jimmy "J.J." Jones, in a written statement said:

"A person has a right to defend themselves if they feel in fear for their safety or the safety of their family. Once that danger has been removed, meaning the suspect(s) are no longer a threat, then the incident is over."

Knox County District Attorney General Randy Nichols said instances of using deadly force have to be reviewed on an individual basis.

"The general rule in Tennessee is you are allowed to use as much force as necessary to repel an attack," Nichols said. "The question is, are your actions reasonable in light of all the circumstances? It is a gray area."

Nichols cautioned that even if a homeowner doesn't face a criminal charge when shooting at thieves, they may have to endure a civil lawsuit filed by the criminal.

"I would strongly advise citizens to try to avoid such confrontations," he said. "At the same time, I don't think anyone would stand there while someone kicked the door down and attacked their loved ones."

Don Jacobs may be reached at 865-342-6345.

 

[Treo]

I'm sorry but I think the homeowner was in the wrong on soooo many leves. he's lucky he's not dead or in jail.

 

[xjchief]

Somehow I don't think those thieves will be back.

 

[texas bulldog]

yeah, not the best handling in my opinion, though i can understand the temptation to protect his property at whatever cost after multiple thefts.

1. he might have been better off spending those first moments of the encounter getting the license plate and perps' descriptions.
2. by opening fire at someone who was not an imminent threat, he seemingly violated tennesee SD law, though i won't claim to be an expert on that.
3. he hastened their departure by initiating contact. if he wanted them arrested, he might have been better off letting them "work" while he observed. might have given time for police to arrive. of course, he'd still be armed in case they became a threat.

just some thoughts. i'd like to hear some others.

 

[General Geoff]

Given this gentleman's specific circumstances (repeated thefts of property following specific patterns), I think he was certainly justified in keeping a midnight watch with his Kalashnikov pattern rifle. As for the shooting itself, well, if I were in his situation and under the same stress and mental state, I'd probably have shot up the truck too.


The main operating difference here is that if it were me, I'd have binoculars, and preferably night vision goggles to help make absolutely sure of my target(s), and then shoot out the tires of the truck from a distance. Much less confrontational that way. I also wouldn't have bothered to try to block the gate with my own vehicle, because of the likelihood of them trying to ram it.


In any case, I believe the guy when he says he wasn't aiming for the people.

 

[scrat]

im pretty sure these theives wont be back. as for the guy. he needs to rethink his tactics

 

[texas bulldog]

geoff:

i agree about the blocking of the gate with his vehicle. as soon as i read that, i thought, "hell, they'll just ram it. why get damage to your vehicle on top of the theft."

'bout a hundred words later..."yep, they rammed it..."

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

glad its not worse for him. in some ways hes lucky they escaped. otherwise the bad guys lawyers would be attacking him

 

[scrat]

you know if anything i would have driven in fast and blocked them in that way. but then i wasnt there.

 

[KelVarnson]

Shooting at the vehicle with someone in it wouldn't have been defensible if not for the fact that the driver tried to run him down. Even then he didn't shoot at the driver, but instead shot to disable the vehicle. Admirable restraint under the circumstances. Most of us in that situation might have fired at the driver in self defense.

I'm pretty sure most cops would have shot to kill under those circumstances. Trying to run someone over with a vehicle is certainly assault with a deadly weapon and/or attempted murder.

 

[The Tourist]

While I agree that you are reponsible for every round you shoot and all of your additional conduct as a "good guy," I'm frustrated by the issue that bad guys are not.

For example, when a bad guy is arrested and a trial is set, sometimes minor crimes are bargained away. Sometimes dropped altogether in a plea agreement. The felon might have squeezed off a few rounds, but perhaps "reckless endangerment" never makes it to the trial.

If I were king (heretofore known as "The Reign of Terror), a good guy trying to protect himself, his family or his business would be given the same latitude or benefit of the doubt under law.

For example, in one of Elmer Keith's books he states that there wasn't a porch in his neighborhood that didn't have a bullet hole in it. The bad guy decides you are prey, you shoot back, case closed.

And let's be pragmatic here. A bad guy is a bad guy because at his core values he's lazy. If he knew in advance that I was going to empty a full magazine into his Escalade and receive no penalty, he might re-think his profession.

I do not care for this trend in making the good guy look like the bad guy because he sometimes has to fight back.

 

[JerryM]

While current laws normally prohibit deadly force to protect property, and I will obey such, we fight wars and millions are killed over liberty. Part of that liberty is the freedom to own property.

Yet, if some guys are stealing the battery from my truck, and they are stronger than me, I have no way of preventing them taking what they want, and even tearing up my truck. I cannot use deadly force, and the police are not going to get here fast.

I am glad the guy was not charged. How did we get into such a mess that we cannot protect our property, and even families from threats and stalking?

Regards,
Jerry

 

[chris in va]

Here's what gets me though. He gets crucified in TN, but if that was a couple states over in TX, he'd probably have a much easier time with it.

Same thing with CC permits. What's the real difference if it's in TN or TX or any other state? Really.

 

[The Tourist]

Modern times, my friends.

In 1954, a student on the honor roll in Custer High School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin was caught with a switchblade and an old set of brass knuckles. As was done at that time, he was taken to the school's disciplinary administrator, their vice-principal.

When asked why he carried the weapons, the student replied that he as getting beaten up by bullies in the school.

The urban legend ends with the vice-principal returning the weapons with the remark, "Happy hunting."

Whether or not true, that school was one of the toughest in our area, and just about everyone had some sort of weapon. The reign of a bully was quite short. Either the cops, their victims or ever more complicated school work finally would get them.

My point is that "natural selection" took care of a societal problem. When we weaken or admonish the good guys, it creates a larger area for the bad guys to operate. In a very real sense, we are creating the very situation we claim to dislike.

I took some flak recently for the love I have for my dog. Recently, another dog was dognapped--and thankfully returned--from a local owner. The thief is uninjured. My guess is that lazy crooks will now start a new enterprise. And we ourselves are to blame.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

How many times do I have to say it...Geography matters...I live near where this happened.

 

[jakeswensonmt]

Knoxville Homeowner Not Charged For Shooting At Thief's Vehicle

On Slashdot we call this "A Sudden Outbreak of Common Sense."

not the best handling

Legally, not the best. Morally...? I approve of his actions. In his shoes, I truly believe that I would have been aiming at the center of the driver's seat. He's got a cooler head than most I think.

 

[Sans Authoritas]

Kids have learned the best lesson that they'll ever get at public school: they can't trust "the authorities" to protect them or to do what is just, because "the authorities" fear losing their jobs if they do.

-Sans Authoritas

 

[hso]

I was talking with one of the Sheriff's deputies yesterday about this. He said that they'd have rather Mr. Harris just blocked the entrance and waited, but they didn't have any problem with what he did in principle. He did say Mr. Harris should have taken better aim and shot at the tires while the vehicle was stationary instead of just shooting the truck up.

 

[22-rimfire]

People are stealing HVAC units these days at homes. I strongly urge criminals (there is no age requirement) to restrain themselves if I'm home. They may not get a chance for another $150 score of copper as I would be in fear of my life. My first choice would be to hold them however until the authorities arrive if that were possible.

 

[kentucky_Dave]

Now the perps can dig the copper out of the truck....and sell that!

We have seen some insane thefts of wiring on new construction sites here lately, and bold incidents too.

Several of the homes here are under renovation, and those homes are situated atop pilings that allow access to the underside of the home.

This particular contractor was in the final stages of his refurbishment, and waiting for the power company to bring his meter. In other words, He was done with the job.
He received all his inspections and approvals...power co notified, etc.
Then the call from the power company..."There is no wiring on this site, we cannot connect"
***?
We get to the property and find that the crooks had crawled under the house, cut the conduits, yanked the feeder lines from the bottom of the panel and the same at the meter can, taking all the wiring from beneath the home.
This home was set up with overhead service from the pole +/- 10' above the meter in conduit with a weather head (seal)
They took the time to also remove the wiring from the overhead side of the service...including the weatherhead.
This wasn't the first time they hit the house, but the first time they were so bold. The house is located on a main street about 20 feet back from the pavement.
And nobody saw anything? RIGHT!
Insult to injury, the contractor had installed a security camera on the power pole…the suckers took the camera too.
They had to climb the pole to get it, yet nobody sees anything?

That said…
I can sympathize with the owner somewhat.
He has been afforded great inconvenience and significant expense; which, can push many people to the brink of irrationality.
I cannot justify what he did, but I sure can understand his thought process.
At least the local LEO’s were cool.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

I had a couple of Tennessee officers (city police detectives actually) tell me that one successful armed robbery leads to repeats (same perp or copycats). Armed robber shot by victim or cop ends armed robbery for months (this in a small city ~40,000 population).

Tennessee SD law test is the "imminent threat of death or greivous bodily harm" as perceived by the hypothetical "reasonable person". The shooter was "reprimanded" but punishing him further would send the wrong message to the criminal element.

This sounds like a good exercise of discretion by authority.

 

[RX-178]

Having not been in the situation that Mr. Jacobs was in, I am not qualified to judge whether he was justified or not. But going over the situation in my mind, I have a decent idea of what /I/ might have done in the circumstances.

One option at the start would have been to call the police when the alarm was tripped, then leave it at that. With my personal feelings on the likely outcome of that decision, I probably would've done the same as Mr. Jacobs, arming myself, and driving to the property in question. Upon reaching the property, I would've blocked the gate with my vehicle, just as Mr. Jacobs did.

Going on the assumption that the gate was the only exit, I'm left with another decision to make on how to proceed. My most likely choice at this point would be to exit the vehicle, leaving the AK in the truck, within reach, with my handgun in a pocket, or otherwise on my person without being in my hand. And then waited for the police. If the thieves approached the gate before the police arrived, I would be armed and able to deal with that situation as it developed.

As I see it, entering the property to confront the thieves would just increase the probability of an unfavorable outcome.

 

[22-rimfire]

The concept of confronting a grizzly bear strikes me as a similar kind of potentially violent situation. The experts say never to run or it will trigger an aggressive response.

RX-178, that sounds like a very reasonable approach. I would hope that cool heads prevail.

 

[RX-178]

The problem with my reasonable approach, is that the likelyhood of coming up with a reasonable approach diminishes the less that you run through potential scenarios in your mind.

I end up using almost any amount of free time to envision self-defense scenarios in my mind (and if really bored, ponder my sanity for going through these scenarios all the time). People who don't are still going to have to make decisions when faced with a situation like Mr. Roberts was. I don't consider any of these decisions to be right or wrong, as in my mind, the only completely wrong decision would be a complete failure to act. Mr. Roberts decided to act, he responded to a threat to his property, and then to his person. Unfortunately in this case, the outcome seemed to be unfavorable to Mr. Roberts, but still infinitely better than the outcome had he not taken any action at all.