Posted on 01/17/2015 8:21:56 AM PST by rktman
In Lancaster County, PA, an alert and armed woman stopped a crime spree. One of the things that destroys the sense of security in a neighborhood is the proliferation of burglaries and thefts of personal property from vehicles. That is what the pair of suspects were involved in when an alert woman stopped Robert LaFleur from breaking into her car at 2:30 am and held him at gunpoint until the police arrived.
It seems unlikely that LaFleur would have obeyed the woman's commands if she had not been armed. The police report that he resisted arrest when they arrived, and that they used a taser on him. They then turned their attention on LaFleur's accomplice, who was in a vehicle. The vehicle turned out to be stolen. From lancasteronline.com:
(Excerpt) Read more at gunwatch.blogspot.com ...
How did she not shoot up an elementary school? She had a gun!
Maybe she wasn’t a brain washed liberal IPOS. Just sayin’. :>}
Or .. maybe she’s just smarter than a “brain-washed liberal”.
That would only require an IQ of ONE point zero.
If Nancy Pelosi had a son... Oh wait she does, but he and his friends have been too busy these days swindling “green” investors out of their money, to break into people’s cars.
LaFleur and Lynch, a pair of lovely young white boys who’re about to “celebrate diversity” with all the charming young Trayvons with whom they are about to live happily for the next few years.
They’re old enough to know better. Hang em high.
And a few miles away the citizen took it too far - shot the miscreants. DA states he will face charges.
One thing is certain, thesee lads felt reasonably sure she would fire if they pushed the issue.
Uh, yeah. As I remember from my class in FL, it’s okay to shoot if you fear for your life. Shooting them from your 2nd floor window kinda sounds like it doesn’t meet that criteria. The shooter may end up supporting the two IPOS for the rest of their useless lives.
I think he was morally justified in shooting the thieves.
If I was on the jury I would have a hard time convicting the man.
He may be morally justified but, the LAW will not see it as a justified use of deadly force - neither SYG or Castle Doctrine can be invoked for this one.
No doubt they deserved it but the chances of him getting off seem slim based on what I read. But then, I don’t know how PA law works as far as defending your property. Sucks that some folks work to attain something and others assume they ought to be able to take whatever they like. Makers and takers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.