Posted on 11/30/2012 2:24:58 PM PST by DogByte6RER
California Police Wish Gun Owners Would Just Comply with Robbers
If a couple of thugs break into your place of business and point a gun in your face, then you would be perfectly justified in opening fire on them, right? Well, maybe not. San Jose police are giving one gun owner a stern tsk-tsk after she defended her property from a pair of armed thieves.
According to ABC Local 7 News, a pair of thieves wearing masks and hooded sweatshirts burst into a San Jose jewelry store at 10:15 a.m. on Monday. At least one of the would-be thieves was armed.
The thieves probably thought that they were going to make off with a bag full of bling, but instead they nearly caught a bullet. The store owner, who was reportedly a woman, drew a pistol and leveled it at the two would-be thieves. She fired at least one shot but did not strike either of them – it is unclear whether that was a warning shot or if she simply missed.
Either way, the bullet did its job. The two thieves quickly fled the store and made their escape in an SUV. Cops are currently looking for leads on the two suspects. According to Yahoo News, they are examining video surveillance and other tapes for clues.
In the meantime, the police are giving gun owners a piece of their mind. Albert Morales, the San Jose Police spokesman, said, "We don't recommend (drawing a gun or firing). We would have preferred that they just go ahead and comply with the request or demands of the robbers. Again they were after material items that could be replaced and again our biggest fear is that somebody would have gotten hurt, injured and possibly even died."
You know who else would have preferred that the jewelry store owner had just complied? The thieves. Who would’ve thought that cops and robbers would ever be able to agree on something?
Despite this, the police have not pressed charges against the gun owner – probably because all she did was exercise a perfectly legal Constitutional right. The police agree that it's OK to open fire, but they're just expressing how much they dislike it. That isn't a big deal, right?
The problem is that when a statement like that comes from police, the subtle implication is that there’s something inherently immoral or illegal about using a gun in self-defense. It could give people the wrong impression about firearms -- whether that’s intentional or accidental is an entirely different debate.
If Morales should be scolding anybody, it should be the pair of thieves who threatened that woman. The fact of the matter is that there's nothing wrong with using a gun in self-defense as long as you comply with the laws in your locality. The opinion of the San Jose police is simply that -- an opinion.
Why don't you weigh in with your opinion? Did the store owner do the right thing, or should people across America put up their hands and do whatever robbers say? We know that thieves could get behind that slogan, but what do you think?
I have trouble believing you ...
I see stupid people. They’re everywhere ... and they don’t even know they’re stupid.
Farrah Fawcett was in a very interesting movie about women who capture and torture a rapist/killer, who wanted to rape and kill one of them, called Extremities (1986).
The movie was very low budget, but made a good box office, and it left me wondering how a “revenge fantasy” movie would do, based on some store owner who captures, tortures and threatens to kill an unsympathetic armed robber.
There is an awful lot of animosity out there to armed robbers, and I bet that if the screenplay pushed some good dramatic buttons, it could be much like the Dirty Harry series.
What part of what I have said makes you think I am lying? I will freely admit I’ve never fired a gun in anger at another person, but I have fired plenty of guns at targets, and I know from that that my aim was pretty good when I had total focus, but sucked when I was faced with distractions and other stresses. Faced with a situation where I felt I had to use a gun on another person, I know from other violent situations I’ve been in with a high adrenaline level and consequent decline in fine motor skills that my aim would have sucked badly in that situation, and I’m pretty damn sure I wouldn’t be the only one whose shots would be going wild.
There it is: IACP. That says it all right there. I’ve been warning people about that organization. Gun grabbing liberal bed wetters that have infiltrated law enforcement agencies across the country.
Seems like a sensible idea. Personally, if someone shot me or someone in my family because they were using penetrative ammo that came flying through the wall, I would prosecute them to the full extent of the law, regardless of the reasons why they fired the gun. I might be more sympathetic if they used a shotgun or the type of ammo you’ve posted, because at least it shows they were trying to be responsible.
Don’t think “bullseye” or “head shot”. Think “center of mass”. And use a target sized such that a hit of any sort represents a torso hit, X-ring or not.
Hey Sins:
You’ve been around FR for a while. You appear to be an “abstract” thinker. Which is all well and good.
But until you have been by yourself, surrounded by bad guys, there is another side to life.
Let me ask you one simple question: Have you ever had the overwhelming taste of a copper penny in your mouth, when NO copper penny is IN your mouth?
This is not a trick question, not an attempt at humor, not sarcasm, and not a means to ridicule you.
Those who know what I am talking about, need no explanation. Those who don’t, can’t. Until that day they taste it. Then they know, and can never explain it to those who don’t.
The street has no mercy.
Shut up, you’re just digging a deeper hole.
>> “Personally, if someone shot me or someone in my family because they were using penetrative ammo that came flying through the wall, I would prosecute them to the full extent of the law” <<
.
You mean your heirs would sue?
I appreciate your polite and respectful response. The only reason I question ‘weapons management’ is that for reasons already stated, I question how it is practical it is to really train the average person to handle a gun responsibly and safely (especially with regards to bystanders). I’m trying to visualise putting granny through a ‘stress training’ exercise where a big burly instructor gets in their face and starts shoving them and swearing at them and threatening to f*** them. That is the kind of training I that I believe someone should submit themselves to in order to learn how to handle the stresses of using a gun for self-defence in a situation where there are likely to be bystanders, but I doubt most people would be willing to undergo that kind of thing...
“Good weapons management would be to brandish it only, or only open fire when there was a direct threat to her life, not her property”
An armed robber and an accomplice was in the store, how much threat to her life do you require? A statement of “I’m going to kill you?”
And brandishing weapons in non lethal force situations is very dicey business. And you are in for the dissappointment of your life if you think brandishing a gun is like some kind of obedience ray. It’s obvious that you have no practical or legal expertise here and are simply opining on what sounds acceptable to a housewife watching the TV news.
But lets let a couple of home invaders gang types come into your living room, (while you are there). At least one armed with a gun, and you can tell us if you think your life is under “direct threat”.
Or the bullet could ricochets off the metal window frame and maybe down to the street and maybe then off the bumper of a 1936 Cord convertible and then maybe, its energy almost spent, hit little Myron Goldsmuckerstein in his left pinky causing a rash that discourages him from violin and he goes on to a life of petty crime and letters to the editor writing thus breaking his mothers heart.
Or not.
As one of the gun nuts around here, teach the children well and start young. Then only the bad guys catch any bullets. They tell me I started at age 3. I really don’t remember the details myself.
Sins,
Come on, granny ladies have been blasting away at bad guys for a few centuries.
Look at the news for the last few years. Grannies have been doing quite well for themselves IN SPITE OF doogooder nannycrats who think granny ladies should give up the old man’s shotgun and rely on 911.
I can dredge up about 100 stories of granny ladies dusting off perps. How many stories can you dredge up about granny ladies accidentally whacking their kin?
At one point I was ready to give you a benefit of the doubt, but with this post, I think you are pulling stuff out your butt and throwing it against the wall to see what sticks.
Fartgas all.
Cops: Proof you never can be too stupid to get a job.
Spoken like someone that has never been there.
I doubt it is possible for you to be a bigger fag.
***********
When seconds count...
.... your local LEO's are only minutes away!
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.
