Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

It's a good shoot, I think, because the bogie suddenly presented his gun. But I wonder about one citizen detaining another. (If possible, FIRST call 911, THEN intervene.)

And how did the shooter let the bogie get that close to him? 3 feet is way too close unless you're pretty confident the bogie is disarmed.

I don't like this story 100%

1 posted on 01/15/2005 6:50:12 AM PST by Mad Dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Mad Dawg

He's a Dumbass. He better have a good self defence argument.


2 posted on 01/15/2005 6:54:23 AM PST by MarshallDillon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg
Three problems here:

1) He was carrying a Smith & Wesson. Get rid of that piece of crap and buy a real pistol.
2) He only shot him five times. The magazine probably held at least eight. Three should have gone in the trashbag's skull.
3) He feels bad about shooting this piece of garbage. It would make sense to feel bad if he MISSED, but he didn't.

But all in all, a story with a happy ending.

3 posted on 01/15/2005 6:58:14 AM PST by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg
Winkelman couldn't explain why Hughes' girlfriend later said Hughes wasn't raping her.

Maybe he wasn't. Winkelman didn't see anything. He just had someone else's description of what happened.

"I'm not a police officer, but I'm certainly not going to let someone accused of a crime like that go wandering off,"

The guy wasn't "wandering off" until Winkelman went to his house.

If the other guy had shot Winkelman would it have been a "good shooting" since he was being threatened by a man with a gun? Of course Hughes is described as having long hair so that may make it OK.

4 posted on 01/15/2005 7:02:48 AM PST by FreePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg
I don't like this story 100%

I agree. Seems the first rule of self defense is to not needlessly place yourself in danger in the first place. I think he overstepped his bounds and responsibilities. He knew who the man was, he was perfectly capable of identifying him, and he knew where he lived. Once he knew all those things he should have simply made himself available to testify once the man had been apprehended by the police. I think he should be charged with manslaughter.

5 posted on 01/15/2005 7:03:44 AM PST by Cornpone ((Aging Warrior))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

Knowing the identity of the suspect, he should have waited for police and told them his story. Intervening with deadly force in a crime is only permissible when life or limb is in imminent danger. Here, the danger had passed. A citizen's right to stop and detain a criminal is subject to question, although a citizen would not be constrained by the 4th Amendment. This incident is very interesting legally, but I'm sure the man realizes there were other options. Deadly force is permanent. 'It's a helluva thing to kill a man.'


6 posted on 01/15/2005 7:07:44 AM PST by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg
Winkelman apparently learned his CCW training quite well, and is a smart, cool guy. This article reads like a lawyer's self defense shooting scenario. Except for the citizens arrest aspects, which are not something CCW training advises on, he said (and presumably did) all the right things:

"I don't feel happy and proud," Winkelman said Thursday. "I feel like I killed a human being. I caused a lot of pain for his family, and I caused a lot of pain for my family. We're devastated."

He stuck his hands in his pockets and was fumbling around. I said, `Get your ... hands out of your pockets.' " That's when Winkelman drew his gun from its holster. He had the safety on and his finger was on the frame, not the trigger, he said. He said he ordered the man four times to put his hands where he could see them.

"I kept shooting until he dropped the pistol."

(Of course, someone needs to explain why cops need to keep a gun "for evidence" in a case like this, where the only question is the justification for the shooting, not the identity of the shooter or the gun.)
8 posted on 01/15/2005 7:08:47 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

.


11 posted on 01/15/2005 7:13:21 AM PST by ThreePuttinDude (Plumbers for Bush....We flushed the Johns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

Oh no! He killed Carrot Top.


15 posted on 01/15/2005 7:16:23 AM PST by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

Whether he was wrong or right, he was stupid. I was taught in my CCW class never to use your weapon unless you are prepared to spend the next 10 years in prison to prevent what you are trying to prevent. In other words, if someone is about to seriously hurt or kill your child, I'd be willing to spend 10 years in prison to save their life. I would not be willing to spend 10 years in prison to "detain" this guy the cops could have found anyway. Also, this guy pulled the first gun. Whose to say the dead guy wasn't defending himself. In this state, they would prosecute.


22 posted on 01/15/2005 7:56:53 AM PST by gjbevil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

Whether he was wrong or right, he was stupid. I was taught in my CCW class never to use your weapon unless you are prepared to spend the next 10 years in prison to prevent what you are trying to prevent. In other words, if someone is about to seriously hurt or kill your child, I'd be willing to spend 10 years in prison to save their life. I would not be willing to spend 10 years in prison to "detain" this guy the cops could have found anyway. Also, this guy pulled the first gun. Whose to say the dead guy wasn't defending himself. In this state, they would prosecute.


23 posted on 01/15/2005 7:57:30 AM PST by gjbevil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All

Hey folks, a lot of you are missing the point - he went to the house, not to aprehend the guy, but hung around outside to make sure the guy was there when the police came. The guy started getting nervous - understandable when you see somebody hanging around outside your house - so he tells him just to stay in the house, that the police are coming....what would you do at that point? I know what I would do, I'd nervously await the arrival of the police, and probably call my lawyer - because you know there is an accusation (unfounded if you're innocent) and you want your attorney there ANYTIME you are accused and being questioned.

This guy starts heading for the exit - not the "normal" response, it wasn't until the guy started reaching into his pockets that he drew his gun....and he warned him several times to take his hand out of his pockets. My impression was that he was trying to get the guy to just go back into his house.

This sounds solid all the way around. The more citizens we have that take the "I'll just wait at home until the police come" attitude, the more crime we'll have. The more citizens who decide they aren't going to be passive about the crime around them, the less we'll have.

BTW - some 13 year olds I wouldn't believe if they told me the sun would rise in the east tomorrow....some I would believe if they told me an albino gorilla, smoking a cigar was coming at me with a Tommy gun. It depends on the 13 year old - and he obviously knew his daughter and her honesty quotient better than any of us; and it is pretty presumptuous for anybody to dismiss her testimony based on her age.


24 posted on 01/15/2005 8:01:10 AM PST by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

This was one incident where the shooter was WRONG! He should never have confronted the man since there was no crime IN PROGRESS - he had his identity, and address know - allow the police to do their jobs.

I am wondering a bit now if this person had experience with the police and knew that they would not respond or that they had let this rapist go in the past? There are a few details missing here also to cause the shooter to act this way. (( IF he had a reason, that is ))

If not, he should be charged with murder.


28 posted on 01/15/2005 9:05:30 AM PST by steplock (http://www.outoftimeradio.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg

Do I have this right? The shooter goes onto the property of another man, orders man around his property, draws a gun on him, points it at him, threatens him with gun, before shooting and killing the man on his property because he thought the man had commited rape based on heresay eveidence?

Shooter belongs in jail if you ask me.


39 posted on 01/15/2005 1:09:46 PM PST by Diplomat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg
Methinks Mr. Winkelman is in trouble (civil and possibly criminal), even if the police did let him go home that evening.

I would like to [Paul Harvey voice] hear the rest of the story.

5.56mm

40 posted on 01/15/2005 1:26:21 PM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson