Surprise, surprise

[HardChrome]

imported post

HankT wrote:

HardChrome wrote:

Obviously every case is unique and not all details can be presented in a forum like this. My big concern was that he be captured lest he do it or something else again. I was protecting my home, my family, and my neighbors.

There was no way I could have known that he was unarmed. I carry to Taco Bell so I'm definitely going to carry while confronting some guy bigger than me at 1:00 in the morning who's obviously looking for trouble.

I see your points.

But since you didn't see a weapon of any kind, you could see he was a kid, and it was a misdemeanor crime.....you really didn't need a gun to be brought to bear.

You didn't need to point a gun at him. Not based on what you described the situation as.

Luckily, everything turned out reasonably OK.

99% of the time when I carry, nobody sees mine so I had no idea whether he was armed or not. He could have had a knife. And when I first confronted him I had no idea in which year he was born. He was bigger than me and as far as I was concerned he had big knuckles. There was no way I could see that he was a kid until he got close to me and I could hear his voice. Even so, a big kid like that can do some damage. It's in the news every day.

I'd rather have the bad guy see that I am well-armed and willing to use my weapon rather than wait until I end up in a situation where I know I'm in need of it and wished I could have avoided it. In this case he knew he was off guard and I was in control at all times.

As far as pointing my gun at him, I think I said that I held him at gunpoint. Specifically, I always had the gun pointed at the ground, about 5 feet in front of him but at no point did it ever sweep him. I know he got a good look at the business end of it.

 

[Fox]

imported post

Motion-sensor lights & cameras.

 

[AbNo]

imported post

Fox wrote:

Motion-sensor lights & cameras.

Which end up getting ignored nowadays.

Especially IR-activated lights.

Cameras, while helpful, aren't always a deterent.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fFzKQ4kO79M

 

[Fox]

imported post

I meant to scare off and record individuals who are outside the premise for later apprehension by police.

If they ignore them and stick around, they'll be there long enough for the cops to show up. If they ignore them and enter the house...well, Mossberg.

 

[sccrref]

imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:

HankT wrote:

Imagine the situation the OP described...

Maybe the conversation is a bit off course, but I wasn't aware you were moderating this discussion. However, I'll take this as an invitation to comment on the OP.

I agree with how this was handled. This guy was prowling around on private property in the middle of the night. Maybe he was just trying to get a glimpse of some skin... maybe he was staking the place out to burglarize later. In any case, he was up to no good.

The cops didn't fault the way this was handled. The kids parent(s), who came by the next day, didn't fault him. Sounds to me like it was well handled. If you don't like that, then don't move to wherever HardChrome lives, because you will not fit in.

Sounds like resonable cause to make a Terry stop to me. Do you need to be a LEO to perform a Terry Stop? Also, the gentleman never left his private property. I am not aware of the statute that says your firearm must be in a holster all of the time. All of the statutes I have seen only say that you can carry on your property. My only question would be if pointer your weapon at the ground in the general direction of the peeping tom caonstitutes brandishing. Obviously the responding LEOs did not.

 

[sccrref]

imported post

HankT wrote:

compmanio365 wrote:

But you can't KNOW if that person is unarmed or not.....if that person is concealing well, he could be hiding a damn shotgun in his pants and you wouldn't know until it was too late.

Well, you have to be very observant. That's for sure. And you have to be correct. And if there is any doubt, then, well, that's that.

Not everybody is armed. So to have the same protocol for every misdemeanoring fool--pull out the gun makes no sense at all.

Discrimination is what is required.

If I decide he is unarmed, then my gun does not come out. He is not a danger to me. If he runs, I let him. If he wants to fight, I don't. If he tries to ride away on his little bike I just grab it so he doesn't go anywhere.

Guns aren't needed for unarmed teenage-committed misdemeanors, in my view. Guns are for dangerous attackswhenI have a reasonable fear of death or severe bodily injury.

YMMV.

Well unfortunately for us mere mortals, we do not all possess your acute sense of observation and the ability to determine what is hidden underneath someone's clothes in the dark of night. Hopefully you know what happens to those who assume. IMHO someone trolling around someone elses house in the dark of night looking into windows is up to no good. If all you do is wait inside, call 911 andHOPE that they respond, maybe the BG goes away and then breaks in to another house and commits who know what. I think it was handled correctly.

 

[sccrref]

imported post

Fox wrote:

Motion-sensor lights & cameras.

Make sure is okay in your state to take pictures without everyone knowing you are doing so. It would be a shame to go to jail for unathorized recording of events.

 

[Fox]

imported post

sccrref wrote:

Fox wrote:

Motion-sensor lights & cameras.

Make sure is okay in your state to take pictures without everyone knowing you are doing so. It would be a shame to go to jail for unathorized recording of events.

If someone is skulking around my backyard without my permission or knowledge whether or not I'm permitted to take their picture is the least of my concerns.

I assume you mean "Make sure the camera isn't pointing into other property"? We're in the same state. What's VA's laws on this?

Lotta hooey if ya ask me. If you're in a public location you've made yourself available to have your picture taken.

Now, posting said pictures somewhere in public, that's another story.