Posted on 09/15/2015 6:53:16 AM PDT by marktwain
Arizona – -(Ammoland.com)- On 8 September, 2015, David Roberts from Owensboro, Kentucky, fired six shots at a vehicle in the crowded parking lot of the Eastland mall in Evansville, Indiana. Roberts had a permit to carry his handgun. The first shot was a warning shot into the dashboard. The next five were at the vehicles front tires.
The shots followed a double purse snatching from elderly women who were attempting to get their property back. The incident was caught on video, which does not seem to have been released to the public, yet. Police and the prosecutor, who was initially skeptical of police reports praising Roberts, both viewed the video.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
Bad presidence. Next they will want LEO’s taking warning shots. Now we will have extra rounds flying around.
Should have shot the driver.
Warning shots are almost always never justified.
If you should pull the gun and then the trigger, you should be justified in shooting the bad guy. If you aren’t justified in shooting someone, the gun should stay holstered.
It doesn’t seem like it’s “warning shots” per se but that he used the pistol to disable the vehicle and not threaten the snatchers with being shot outright. In short, he used the gun on their car and not on them.
Still tricky legal ground.
Shoot to kill. Keep shooting until done.
The first shot, into the dash, seemed a pretty clear “warning shot”.
I found it interesting that the police and prosecutor both praised him.
He was restrained. He did not want to kill the young, female purse snatchers, but he needed to prevent further harm.
It worked, Tough situation.
Its a good thing they are not charging him.
...In short, he used the gun on their car and not on them.Still tricky legal ground....
The legal theory is called transferred intent.
When someone shoots a car, the intent transfers from the intent to shoot the car to the intent to shoot its occupants.
But, this is a perfect example of defense of others.
Waiting until you are justified in shooting before drawing is a bad idea in many cases.
The far and away most common defensive use is the display that stops an escalating situation. Elderly couple, or maybe your wife, alone, on the side of the road waiting for AAA. Creeps won’t leave after being asked repeatedly.
No weapons seen but just that 6th sense going off loud and clear.
A display of being armed can change the whole dynamic.
In probably 80% of the nation the people is question have no legal need to wait to get the gun until the attack begins, or until the suspicious person showed that they are armed.
“Waiting until you are justified in shooting before drawing is a bad idea in many cases.”
That’s why it’s very important to understand the laws of the state. In this case, in Virginia, the shooter would probably go to jail unless he feared for his life, for example, by getting run over by the car. Defense of property is not a sufficient reason to fire.
Also in Virginia, brandishing is such a serious crime that if a CHP carrier draws, he had better be able to prove that he could also have killed the other in self-defense for fear of imminent grevious injury or death. The fact that he didn’t may, in fact, hurt his case.
They were both lucky to survive. He could have shot them dead as they were willing to kill by using that car.
For clarification, Dean Weingarten is the author of the article. David Roberts is the shooter.
Wild Dave Roberts : )
Exactly how I was trained.
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.