Neighbor fires on Burglars

[ZeSpectre]

I swear there must be two sets of posters on this forum. One set roasts a poster for drawing his gun for no good reason, and the other set applauds what the first set would call a reckless shoot. The part I can't figure out is why the two sets never seem to post on the same thread.

Where are the replies asking if someone's life is worth the cost of a TV and PS2? Where are the people asking if it's right to shoot someone while they're running a way?

I just don't get it.

Read my post again...carefully. You'll note that I'm taking no stance at all regarding the actions of the man who fired at the criminals. I'm simply trying to clarify the basis on which any potential actions should have been taken and that is the basis of laws broken not "what might have happened".

I personally have my own set of conflicts to resolve. One part of me thinks that a criminal's life should be made as hazardous as possible then on the other hand I do think the homeowner was being reckless with his firearm but, as I stated before, I don't know enough about the laws of KY to have an opinion about what he should or should not have been charged with. Where and when I grew up, for example, the only charge that could have been placed against the homeowner would have been "destruction of property" for the damage to the truck. Where I live now there are about 8 charges that could have been brought forth some of which are pretty serious.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Good for Mr Kearns and the Sheriff.
That's the way it should go down.

I hope the boys will straighten out, but I doubt it.

 

[Titan6]

trust me, i know of this sheriff department and it in itself is crooked, and into illegal activities, all this was just to get votes and people on it's side.

If you "know" all of this why don't you do something about it?

Often times I see people calling for the heads of thieves on the forum. You don't see this very often:

“I could have shot him between the eyes if I’d have wanted too,” Kearns said of one of the brothers he confronted.

“But I know he’s young and maybe he can get his life turned around. I hope the court system won’t fail us...

So if he was not trying to kill the theives what was his point? He was not shooting to disable the vehicle if he was shooting in the passenger compartment. If they were in the vehicle driving away they were no threat.... So what was he doing? Since no one here knows than it is impossible to determine motives but I am willing to bet he did not know either.

 

[Ithaca37]

What is with all of this some of his shots didn't hit their intended target, therefore he should be charged with something?

Do the cops get charged if they miss when they are involved ina shooting? I don't think so. Everyone should be held to the same standards when it comes to a violent confrontation. If this man is to be held responsible for ntohing happening as a result of misising, then so should law enforcment offficers who miss when they are in a firefight.

trust me, i know of this sheriff department and it in itself is crooked, and into illegal activities, all this was just to get votes and people on it's side.

A charge like that requires evidence to support it. Care to share any info from reputable sources?

 

[Treo]

Let's Think This One Through

First off if the Sherriff didn't arrest Mr. Kearns because no one was hurt, good on ya. Second based on what I read, Mr. Kearns apparently startled the burglars in the act & they ran , ok I can live W/ that. Now for the arm chair quaterbacking . Mr. Kearns presented a firearm that he , by his own admission, had no intention of using,( IMO shooting at someone's truck "just to scare them" doesn't count as "using" a weapon) If the threat isn't bad enough for me to to shoot AT you the threat isn't enough for me to introduce a firearm, I've seen people ROASTED on this forum for that. I've also seen it stated time & again on this forum that we shoot to stop the threat. if bubba's in the truck and gittin' the hell outa dodge, the threat is stopped. There was no possible way Mr. Kearns could have been sure of his target , his backstop or what was beyond it. I have heard it said here time & again that a rifle is a poor choice for home defense, primarily because of the danger posed to neighbors by over penetration. How much more more danger is there when you're standing in the road blazing away at a truck? Now for MY what if, WHAT IF ,about the time Mr Kearns emptied that mag ( which I'll bet my butt he did ) Bubba decided it was time to shoot back? Had it happened I don't think Bubba would have been trying to "scare" anybody. Yes, Mr. Kearns got lucky & no one was hurt. Yes, the bad guys got caught. I still think this was NOT the smartest thing Mr. Kearns could have done.
QUOTE: "That was some of the best flying I've seen yet. Right up to the part where you got killed".
Top Gun

 

[Titan6]

Mr. Kearns presented a firearm that he , by his own admission, he had no intention of using,( IMO shooting at someone's truck "just to scare them" doesn't count as "using" a weapon) I've seen people ROASTED on this forum for that. I've also seen it stated time & again on this forum that we shoot to stop the threat. if bubba's in the truck and gittin' the hell outa dodge, the threat is stopped. There was no possible way Mr. Kearns could have been sure of his target , his backstop or what was beyond it

Yes, he is an idiot.

 

[lawmanofky]

i am back

i am back in this healthy debate, and i am glad that not everyone agrees with me, i didn't tell youin my last submission, but i live in a neighboring county, and i am kin to mr. kearns. i love marian with all my heart. so please don't think i am quater-backing my own kin folk.
and someone wrote about the police firing off shots that don't hit there targets, that is very true, but 99% of the time we are the one's getting fired at first, just defending ourselves, like any of you would, i hope. here is something that i also left out intentinally, if we shoot and kill someone in the line of duty, we ourselves get charged with a crime and are placed on leave, have our weapons stripped from us, and catch all of the turmoil from the media, either tearing us apart about the small what if's and nothing is done to protect us. this is all pending the outcome of whether it was a "good shooting" or unwarranted shooting by the grand jury of the county. some may say that well the city and counties have good attorney's to get you off. i just want to say that i am not putting my career, and my life with my family in the hands of someone who is payed by politicians. i will pay for one out of my own pocket, and take away from my already poor family.
i will say again, that mr. kearns should have been charged, but not arrested. if his neighbors and us family appreciate what he did, then we should help pay his legal defense, and not leave him holding the bag.

 

[HK G3]

Mr. Kearns presented a firearm that he , by his own admission, he had no intention of using,( IMO shooting at someone's truck "just to scare them" doesn't count as "using" a weapon) I've seen people ROASTED on this forum for that. I've also seen it stated time & again on this forum that we shoot to stop the threat. if bubba's in the truck and gittin' the hell outa dodge, the threat is stopped. There was no possible way Mr. Kearns could have been sure of his target , his backstop or what was beyond it

I pretty much came here to say that. Thankfully, a seemingly reckless shoot resulted in no injuries, but I would be somewhat upset if I were a neighbor of Mr. Kearns to know that he was simply firing "at" a moving target on the road, between houses, with no real intention of hitting that target, meaning his bullets could potentially have slammed into my house.

Again, if you could guarantee 100% that the outcome would have been as it was in this article, no property damage, bad guys arrested, no innocents injured, then that's fine, shoot away. But I just don't think any such guarantee existed, and it seems like the chances for a "stray bullet" hitting something it shouldn't have were pretty high in this case.

 

[NG VI]

whatever the right or wrong of the police decisions/ shooter's decisions, there are now two young thugs who will almost certainly see the light and try having an at least more honest life. I think that's a tremendously positive thing, and imagine all the impact it will have on their buddies. I bet Mr. Kearns has single-handedly caused a double digit drop in burglaries for the rest of the year. good for him, and since he lives on the road, I bet he knows better than any forum member what his backstop was. just sayin'

 

[joebogey]

And now we have another twist...
If my information is correct, the lady listed below is the mother of MR Kearnes who did the shooting. Wanna place bets that there's a connection?

http://www.wkyt.com/home/headlines/15978077.html

A 60-year-old Nicholas County woman is recovering after she was shot during a home invasion late Monday night.

After the intruders shot the woman in the stomach with a small caliber handgun, police say they set her home on South Walnut Street in Carlisle on fire.

The victim managed to call 911 for help and was later transported to the University of Kentucky hospital.

There's no information on the woman's condition.

The two male intruders were described as wearing dark clothing, hooded sweatshirts and gloves.

 

[Keegan]

I heard about that this morning. It definitely sounds like they were mad at her for some reason.

 

[TCB in TN]

I've been noticing lately that many of the recent nation-wide news events have involved shooters who ALREADY had long felony records and in one case had a murder conviction. Pray tell why he was out on the street to kill again?

Amen to that.

Further more while we do not talk about shooting to stop the threat that is partially a product of the times we are living in. In the past when LEO's were further spread out the law was most often taken into the hands of the injured party. Now with so many life long crooks being "early released" I will not be surprised to see more and more of it. Also the idea of shooting to defend property has been around MUCH longer than guns, or even shooting (as in bow and arrows). It has been understood for thousands of years that taking what is yours is a risky endeavor. It is only with our more "civilized" world that you are seeing it change (and that is NOT a good thing)!

As for a LEO not arresting this individual, well I say good for them. Doing the right thing is still the right thing no matter what the "law" says.

 

[Wheeler44]

Joebogey, That 60 year old woman can't possibly be that 60 year old mans mom. It just ain't possible

Wheeler44

 

[joebogey]

Wheeler

You may have a point there. I hadn't caught that.
Hmmm.... have to do a little more digging
Thanks

 

[joebogey]

Guess I owe an apology as I got the facts crossed.
The lady in the article was the mother of the the man whose home was robbed. Not the mother of the gentleman who did the shooting.

I'm sorry.....