PDA

View Full Version : pursuing robbery suspects


wayneinFL
December 4, 2007, 10:48 PM
From:http://www.palmbeachpost.com/local_news/content/local_news/epaper/2007/12/04/1204AMIGOS.html?cxntlid=inform


Bullet from wild car chase imbeds in child's room

By Kevin Deutsch

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

One of the bullets fired by the Three Amigos armed robbers during Friday's high-speed chase on Atlantic Avenue ripped through the window of a home and came within 20 feet of a two-year-old boy having his diaper changed, the toddler's mother said Tuesday.

At least three bullets were fired by the robbers as they tried to elude the grocery store's owner, but instead of hitting Sian Kiat Koh , one round struck his Mercedes, a second killed 70-year-old Samuel Salomon, and another sliced through the window of the toddler's nine-year old sister's room, imbedding in a cabinet door, said her mother, Gloria Lozano-Figueroa.


Figueroa and her daughter were not home, but a babysitter was in the next room, changing Figueroa's two-year-old son in front of another window. The babysitter, who is in her 60s, heard what sounded like a "bomb," but thought it was just a car crash on Atlantic Avenue, Figueroa said.

"An angel was certainly watching over them," said Figueroa, 38, who lives in Delray Lakes Estates. "I am sorry to hear that Mr. Salomon was not as lucky." The men accused of Salomon's killing were in court Tuesday, where a judge ordered them held without bond. One of their lawyer's placed blame on Koh for pursuing the suspects, saying his decision to chase the robbers led to Salomon's "unnecessary death." "What's he, like, Robo-cop? There's a person dead because a storeowner chased after these ... suspects," said Gordon Richstone, the attorney for one of the accused robbers, Roger Rodriguez.

Figueroa said her son very nearly became the second casualty caused by a stray bullet Friday.

She had been at work when the shooting happened, and came home to find helicopters buzzing overhead. She and her daughter noticed the blinds in her room were disturbed. They saw a small hole in the wall.

"Mommy, is that a bug?" her daughter asked. Figueroa read reports of the shooting and manhunt, then realized the tiny hole had come from a stray bullet. She called the sheriff's office, which is investigating her report.

"What could have happened is very scary," said Figueroa, whose back yard faces Atlantic Avenue. "It was a freak thing." Luis Alfonso Reyes Castillo, 22, and Rodriguez, 29, were ordered held without bond Tuesday on first-degree murder charges for the armed robbery and chase that ended with Salomon's death.

Castillo and Rodriguez were allegedly caught on video robbing the Three Amigos store and its customers of up to $30,000 in cash. Friday is the day that laborers come in to cash their checks at stores like Three Amigos and the gunmen might have been involved in at least three other similar robberies in the county.

As Koh chased their getaway car at speeds over 100 miles per hour, the suspected robbers fired back, accidentally shooting into a Ford Windstar and killing Salomon, who was driving with his wife, making last minute preparations for Hanukkah.

Richstone said he was appointed to the case Monday and did not have the opportunity yet to go over the details with Rodriguez or watch the surveillance video.

"I just talked to my client. He's in tears. Obviously there's an unnecessary death," Richstone said.

But he also placed blame on Koh for pursuing the suspects on Florida's Turnpike to the west Atlantic Avenue exit, west of Delray Beach. Salomon was driving east on Atlantic when the bullet struck him.

"If somebody's robbing somebody with a firearm you let them take the money and leave. This was totally an unnecessary death. It does not justify what these idiots did during the robbery, but the store owner should be held responsible," said Richstone. "You can't be chasing after people with guns." Castillo's mother, girlfriend and other relatives drove up from Miami to support him in court. They declined to talk about him after the hearing.

They hired lawyer Alan Glueck to represent Castillo in the case.

"Obviously in these kind of cases, everyone is a victim. Their heart goes out to the family (of Salomon)," Glueck said.

He said his client was traumatized by the situation and sorry that someone died.

"It's my understanding he did take part. It's my understanding he was not the shooter," Glueck said after the hearing.

A third suspect, Victor Salastier Diaz Estevez, 19, is also in jail without bail.

Two more suspects, known only as George and Choco, are being sought.

Anyone with information is asked to call the Palm Beach County Violent Crimes Task Force at (561) 688-4000 .


Something to think about before chasing after, or shooting at, someone who stole something.

P.S. slimy lawyers make me :barf:.

James K
December 4, 2007, 11:10 PM
I agree about lawyers, but there is a point here. Defending yourself and your family from an immediate threat or protecting your property from an intruder is one thing, chasing crooks is another. There is no way anyone can warp the "castle doctrine" or "self defense" to cover this situation. Even if no gun were involved, the potential for a car crash is so great that I can't see the justification.

Sure, it goes against the grain to say that he should have left the BG's escape and called the cops, but what happened, and what nearly happened, simply is not justified by any "need" to apprehend the crooks, which is not the store owner's duty. The store owner would have been insured, so his loss would have been recovered. The loss of a life can't be.

Jim

MyGunsJammed
December 4, 2007, 11:50 PM
Store owner shoulda shot the robbers dead right in the store....

then there would be no need for a chase...

W.E.G.
December 5, 2007, 12:06 AM
...As Koh chased their getaway car at speeds over 100 miles per hour...

Always a bad decision.

kgpcr
December 5, 2007, 07:16 AM
we are not cops so dont act like them!! Our job is not to persue but to defend from an imediate threat!

Spade Cooley
December 5, 2007, 08:34 AM
When you were a kid and someone decided to steal your bicycle, would you chase him? Sure you would unless you were a big fat wimp.

If anyone steals from me and runs, I'll be in pursuit and shooting if necessary. There comes a time when we all have to stand up for what is right. To hell with the courts and doctrine. "Thou shalt not steal"!

rampage841512
December 5, 2007, 09:12 AM
Criminals shoot at me and hit someone else and I'm responsible because I'm chasing them after they have stolen from me? That's bull. Total and complete. Is chasing after them the best idea? I don't think so, but I don't think it is unjustified either.

I understand the defendants' lawyers position, but you cannnot justify a criminal act because someone is after you for committing another criminal act. IMO, the lawyer would be blaming police if they had been in pursuit. It's the old childhood "you made me do it, so it's not my fault" defense. It doesn't make much sense when put under even a little scrutiny, but it might represent mitigating circumstances that mean life with out parole instead of death (assuming Florida has mandatory capitol murder charges filed when the death occured during the commission of a felony).

rampage841512
December 5, 2007, 09:23 AM
Luis Alfonso Reyes Castillo, 22, and Rodriguez, 29, were ordered held without bond Tuesday on first-degree murder charges for the armed robbery and chase that ended with Salomon's death.

Well, it appears Florida does have such a law.

zbordas
December 5, 2007, 09:45 AM
I think Koh should be charged with reckless injury and death. He put a lot of people into risk in the community and it was absolutly unnecessary. If he did not stop the robery in his own store he cannot turn the streets and the community to the wild west.

Safety first!!!

If anyone in my family would loose his life because of an idiot like him I would be very ******. Certainly would file civil lawsuit for damages.

jrinne0430
December 5, 2007, 10:22 AM
While I am new to this site, I have a question/comment about this thread. I would agree that chasing the suspects was very poor decision by the victim however; if I or any of my family was injured by this chase, I would be seeking criminal and civil actions against the instigators...the suspected robbers.

TexasSeaRay
December 5, 2007, 10:22 AM
I think Koh should be charged with reckless injury and death. He put a lot of people into risk in the community and it was absolutly unnecessary. If he did not stop the robery in his own store he cannot turn the streets and the community to the wild west.

Safety first!!!

If anyone in my family would loose his life because of an idiot like him I would be very ******. Certainly would file civil lawsuit for damages.

Why, hell. If the guy only hadn't had the check-cashing business (that served hundreds of law-abiding customers), then the poor, disadvantaged pukebags that ROBBED HIM and SHOT AT HIM wouldn't have had to worry about a ****** off BUSINESS OWNER chasing them because the POLICE weren't ANYWHERE AROUND.

Spare me the "unnecessary risk" BS. You take a risk every time you get in your car or step outside the door. Criminals ENHANCE THAT RISK to us but you're whining about a business OWNER and not the p.o.s. CRIMINALS that precipitated the whole damn event.

Oh, that's right. If we'll all become sheep and simply hand over anything and everything a criminal demands, life will be good and nobody will be hurt.

I think the business-owner exercised bad judgement taking the chase as far as he did. But I also think a whole lot of Americans are sick and damned tired of all the excuses that sheeple make for not doing a damned thing about it.

Blame the freaking criminals. They're the start, root and origin of the problem.

Sheesh.

Jeff

zbordas
December 5, 2007, 11:05 AM
Unfortunately I cannot 100% agree with my fellow Texan.

You take a risk every time you get in your car or step outside the door.
There are different levels of risks. Obviously getting in your car and playig Russian Rulette hold different level of risks.

The business owner escaleted the risk level to an unacceptable level (to me) for innocent bystanders.

Lets assume you go to SeaWorld and somebody takes your wallet out of your pocket. You start chasing him and he stops and pulls out a gun and tells you let him go.
1. If you keep chasing the guy he might start shooting and hits you and a couple of kids waiting for the dolphin show.
2. You pull out your gun (not sure if SeaWorld is an "ammusement park" and you can legally take your gun) and get into a gun fight risking that even more kids get hurt or killed.
3. Stop chasing the guy.

This is a bit extreme but my choice would be definitely opt. 3. The owner should have justified his act and give it up and not trying to recover the stolen money at all cost and turn it into a tragedy and lossing innocent live(s).


But I also think a whole lot of Americans are sick and damned tired of all the excuses that sheeple make for not doing a damned thing about it.

I 100% agree and I'm also sick and tired of it.


Not sure if you follow Houston news but couple of months ago HPD changed its car chase policy after several innocent people died in accidents caused by evading criminals. In this case I guess even HPD would have stopped the pursuit.

I did not want to **** you off by the way just exposed my opinion. I am 110% anti criminal agreeing that criminals should have no rights at all and would 100% agree the business owner if he simply "executed" the "suspects" on the spot.

Spade Cooley
December 5, 2007, 11:23 AM
Some of the thinking on this board makes me understand why our country is in the shape it is in. We have more criminals in jail than any other country in the world yet we are the greatest with the most opportunity.

Once police give up chasing criminals in vehicular pursuits, no one is going to stop. Why should they?

zbordas
December 5, 2007, 11:35 AM
Because once a suspect gets into a suburb living community where kids play on the streets and sidewalks a 100 miles per hour carchase is a definite danger to innocent bystanders. There are other ways to capture the suspect; following from air, capturing license plate and track him down etc.

I am not sure what would you say if a 18 years old would run over your 3 kids playing in front of your house because he had a bag of pot in his pocket and running from the police. Or slam into the minivan your wife is driving with the 3 young kids on the back seat tip them over and killing all four of them.

Would you say: Good job? I doubt any reasonable human being would do.

Glenn E. Meyer
December 5, 2007, 12:23 PM
The shop owner was foolish to chase them. Is he legally cupable in the innocents' death and injury - not a lawyer here so I don't know.

I just think he was an idiot as his action went beyond risking his own life to spread the risks to others.

His sense of personal violation and loss is not sufficient to engage in behavior that can put innocents in the line of fire.

I don't know if he should go to jail (have to think about that) but if he is a decent and thinking person, his psychological health will be at serious risk now.

Edward429451
December 5, 2007, 12:30 PM
hup, that settles that. One horror story / scenario with the children in it can't be argued against. Nice, playing that for the children card. If the suspect in your scenario killed your kids then the police would not be held responsible, for they were ...in the course of their duties blah blah blah.

It wasn't the store owners bullets that killed the guy. He didn't initiate the course of events leading up to the incident, and shouldn't be held responsible. Yes, it's a tragedy what happened. What would you have us to do, Mr. Champion of the children, lay down and die? Not resist any crime? My god man, there's children everywhere. If we never resist because there might be a child around...soon thugs will be taking their kids to work with them.

zbordas
December 5, 2007, 12:43 PM
Hehe! Good idea. I'll take a few kids with me to my next bank robbery:D.

Glenn E. Meyer
December 5, 2007, 01:04 PM
What are you talking about, folks?

Resistance isn't a car chase that risks others. It's very simple to understand.

Capt Charlie
December 5, 2007, 01:25 PM
Once police give up chasing criminals in vehicular pursuits, no one is going to stop. Why should they?
Agreed Spade, but a responsible officer will call off the pursuit when things get too hairy.

People say that domestics and traffic stops are the most dangerous things a cop can do. Baloney, and I say that from experience. It's vehicle pursuits. They're terrifying and they're dangerous. I've been in a lot of 'em over the last 25 years, and the most serious injury I've ever sustained in this business was the result of a vehicle pursuit gone bad. I was off work for four months and in substantial pain for years afterward.

Lots of cops get hurt or killed during pursuits, and they have the benefit of extensive training in offensive/defensive high speed driving, skid pan, PIT maneuvers, etc. Do you think the average motorist can do better?

This guy had every right to be angry, but when he put others at risk to satisfy his own rage, he stepped over the line.

scottz0369
December 5, 2007, 01:33 PM
That's just BS--it's unfortunate someone got killed, but what's the root cause of it? The storeowner chasing? I think not. He chased after being threatened. The BG's pulled the trigger. He wouldn't have chased had they not robbed him in the first place. Unintended consequence-people will think twice about robbing his store again, or any other that has an owner that may be like him.
Just hand over the money if the BG's have a gun? Then what? Hope they don't kill you on the spot? May as well put a sign on the door that says "I won't resist".
It's hard to tell ethnicity from the name, but he's more than likely asian. When I was in the LA Riots in '92 (I was with one of the two Marine Battalions sent up there), the Korean store owners were the only ones that didn't need our help. They were patrolling the areas around thier homes and businesses, and had OP's (for lack of a better term) on the roofs of their stores. They were almost as well armed as we were. End result: they didn't get messed with in the chaos that was erupting all around them. I felt very safe in their area of influence.

Scott
MSgt USMC

Edward429451
December 5, 2007, 01:41 PM
Yeah, I know Glenn. I'm just sick of hearing don't resist criminals, give em what they want, stand down. It might overpenetrate, miss, be a drunk neighbor, or a girl scout. Then the law goes after the real victim. Wronged by the law? Offer no resistance, let em have thier way, go and beg mercy from the court. And it's always for the children...:barf:

We citizens are stuck between a rock n a hard place with LEO's and thugs. When we do nothing, we lose on both fronts. It's not right. The worst thing is that some of us citizens buy into it and espouse standing down as a proper thing to do. Maybe the guy went too far and maybe he didn't.

Glenn E. Meyer
December 5, 2007, 02:39 PM
Excuse me - the issue was not resistance. Why do folks keep banging this drum?

The issue was engaging in a high speed chase that had the probability of harming innocents.

One has to look at the totality of possible outcomes. As Capt. C said, a civilian chasing armed criminals puts others at significant risk.

Risk you own butt but not everyone else on the highway.

I have no problem with resisting but being stupid is another thing.

markj
December 5, 2007, 04:14 PM
Lots of cops get hurt or killed during pursuits

My neighbor growing up had no dad, he was killed chasing bank robbers in Omaha in 1961, his pic is on the wall of the Police Union hall with the others killed in the line of duty.

Guy robs ya, leaves you alive, so you chase him and he shoots at ya and kills others. Hmmmmm I see it as both have a little fault here, not all but some. He is lucky he didnt get shot.

If anyone steals from me and runs, I'll be in pursuit and shooting if necessary.

Another scary thought. Old days houses were not as close together. Not as many folks around, real life isnt a western. Be responsible.

Sigma 40 Blaster
December 5, 2007, 05:26 PM
This is a pretty tough one...if the guy hadn't pursued them, the robbers would have likely not been shooting while making their getaway right? To a reasonable person that's a fair statement right?

So did his actions result in escalating the situation and exposing himself, the robbers, and others to injury and death? I think a reasonable answer is yes. I don't care what happened beforehand, his act of chasing led to death. It should be reckless endangerment or something similar, he did what he did with no malice or pre-meditation but we are all held to be responsible for our actions. The other guys get charged with murder during the commission of a robber...maybe a capital crime depending on how much was stolen.

Chasing and resisting/self defense are not in the same category. For all the good he did a description of the car and a license plate number would have been far better. Should he have been armed and stopped the robbery in progress? I would if I owned a business dealing with cash...I'd like to think I would anyway.

I've said several times already...I'm really afraid that if I am ever in a situation where I have to use my handgun for self-defense I am more afraid of some of our resident cowboys than the BG's...I hope I am never around when one of them is chasing a mugger or robber through a crowded area while shooting a 1911 in one hand, a S&W J-Frame in the other, with at least one polymer subcompact in a SOB holster ready for use next.

Spade Cooley
December 5, 2007, 06:35 PM
I've been in pursuits. Have you seen the Cop shows showing pursuits? They are all hairy! None of them are safe and they all put lives in danger. The street is a rough place.

There is no such thing as a safe pursuit. There will always be a kid somewhere during it or people on the sidewalk. Police can back off when an air unit is available but sooner or later you have to close in and take the suspect down. No fare saying the guy just might have a roach in his pocket or be driving without a license because he just as well might have kidnapped your daughter. I say chase down the bad guys and be relentless. I'll chance the colateral damage in order to get them off the street.

IdahoG36
December 5, 2007, 06:55 PM
Criminals shoot at me and hit someone else and I'm responsible because I'm chasing them after they have stolen from me? That's bull.

I agree. The store owner did not make the criminals start shooting. That was a decision made on their part. That being said, I don't believe he made a wise choice in chasing the robbers. Although, quite a few crimes like this go unsolved. The police investigate and say that they will be in touch, and usually that is all a store owner will hear about it. Maybe he felt that was a good enough reason.

1911 fan
December 5, 2007, 07:22 PM
Mr Koh Should have shot those scumbags while they were in the store.

hogdogs
December 5, 2007, 07:44 PM
I could well be wrong... if so blame a Volusia County sheriffs deputy. I was told that in florida a citizen has the right to pursue and detain a person involved in a felony crime. If that is the case the store owner was within his rights. He did not shoot to defend his property so it is not a castle doctrine dispute. If we do have the right to exceed the speed limit than he was wrong but since no one recorded his speed he is not chargeable for speeding.
Brent

Thunderhawk88
December 5, 2007, 07:54 PM
I'll chance the colateral damage in order to get them off the street.

How very brave of you. Tell that to the family of the victims of that "collateral damage".
Resisting the robbery itself was one thing, but playing "ADAM 12" or "COPS" is not what he should have done. Too many gun owners keep trying to play "Rambo" and prove they "won't stand for it"!

BikerRN
December 5, 2007, 08:02 PM
Geez, there's a lot of crap in here. Somebody please pass me the shovel.

I'll state my viewpoint, and mine only. Some of you may agree with me, some won't, I don't care. I will do what I have to do to face myself in the mirror each day when I shave.

The store owner was wrong to pursue the pieces of human dreck. He needlessly endangered others, resulting in an innocent bystander being needlessly killed. His time to fight back was when they were in his store. Once they turned and left the store they were no longer a threat to him.

Some of the crap I see spouted online makes me want to :barf:. It sounds more like a teenage locker room after Gym Class than reasoned and intelligent discussion about concealed carry and the responsibility we have to society if we are going to carry a gun in public.

Biker

Spade Cooley
December 5, 2007, 09:12 PM
I wish we had a Rambo in Omaha at the mall today before all those innocent people were killed.

Thunderhawk88
December 5, 2007, 09:32 PM
I wish we had a Rambo in Omaha at the mall today before all those innocent people were killed.

Totally different situation, but I think we all agree with that thought.

rb4browns
December 6, 2007, 07:26 AM
It's hard to tell ethnicity from the name, but he's more than likely asian. When I was in the LA Riots in '92 (I was with one of the two Marine Battalions sent up there), the Korean store owners were the only ones that didn't need our help. They were patrolling the areas around thier homes and businesses, and had OP's (for lack of a better term) on the roofs of their stores. They were almost as well armed as we were. End result: they didn't get messed with in the chaos that was erupting all around them. I felt very safe in their area of influence.

I'm originally from L.A. and we all felt safe once you guys made the drive up the 5. With that said, Koreatown was a full on free fire zone during the first couple days of the riot. I don't fault those guys for shooting back in any way, but that was a different situation than this. In times of civil insurrection the rules change a bit.

I was involved in a nother similar thread last week that got shut down, but had the same gist. People think that in the name of "resisting crime" anything and everything is ok to do and no matter what happens only the criminal is responsible for any and every decision made by every person involved. At the point in which someone chooses to escalate the situation beyond what is required to defend your life (or property in many cases), the culpability for someone getting hurt is shifted at least in part to the person who went overboard.

That doesn't excuse the criminal for his actions in any way. But it does no give us carte blanche to play Rambo. Part of the responsibility of a gun owner is to understand how we can excercise control over a situation by how we choose to react or to not react in any given situation. Here the guy had control over the situation when he chose to escalate it and it resulted in an innocent death. He did not pull the trigger but his actions had a direct connection to someone getting killed and it did not have to happen. One the criminals fled it and he chose to pursue the ball went to his court, and IMO he has some liability.

divemedic
December 6, 2007, 07:43 AM
"If somebody's robbing somebody with a firearm you let them take the money and leave. This was totally an unnecessary death. It does not justify what these idiots did during the robbery, but the store owner should be held responsible," said Richstone. "You can't be chasing after people with guns." Castillo's mother, girlfriend and other relatives drove up from Miami to support him in court. They declined to talk about him after the hearing.

Poor little bank robber, just trying to feed his kids, and some idiot got in his way. Totally ignoring the fact that armed robbers used guns to rob the store owner in the first place.

When did we get to the point in this country when an attorney could espouse this kind of crap? "Just give them what they want, and maybe they won't hurt you."

Spade Cooley
December 6, 2007, 10:08 AM
Some of you should consult your attorney before you think about getting involved or resorting to violence. This way you would be protected from making a mistake.

For those of you who think calling 911 is the answer, think again. Help might show up 20 minute later if you are lucky. By that time the bad boys are long gone and innocent people could be dead. I'm not saying every incident requires a deadly response but if you want to get anything done, most likely you will have to be the one who takes care of business. Some people are fed up with crime and I don't blame them for taking action. Injuries that result should be the fault of the felon starting it.

Mr. James
December 6, 2007, 12:15 PM
Unless they've snatched up my kid, no way am I getting in a high-speed pursuit of any criminal. I have not the training or the inclination. I'm at that dangerous age where I'm still young enough to want to go toe-to-toe with some bad guy (and just old enough to have my derriere handed to me), but no way in God's earth would I do what Mr. Koh did.

Still, the scumbag criminals are the ones who loosed the rounds. Mr. Saloman didn't die in a car crash arising from the ill-advised high speed chase. He was murdered by the robbery suspects fleeing the scene.

markj
December 6, 2007, 12:33 PM
I'll chance the colateral damage in order to get them off the street.

You post as if you are LEO. You would break policy and accept "collateral damage"? I will let my cousins know of this, they are LEO here in Omaha and may want to let a super know a LEO is posting this kind of statement on the internet.




I wish we had a Rambo in Omaha at the mall today before all those innocent people were killed

You in Omaha? My office is in Old Mill, I can see westroads from here. Bad situation. What would a Rambo do? First instinct is to run and hide as all did there. CC is just gettin on here, not many that would risk death to confront a shooter with a rifle.

Spade Cooley
December 6, 2007, 04:07 PM
Any time a Police Officer chases or confronts a felon, there is a chance of colateral damage and some innocent person could get hurt. The only way to erase that chance would be for LEOS to allow them to escape and not confront them. Watch the show about police pursuits on TV and you will see what I mean. As I said before, the street is not always a friendly place and agressive action is often needed.

I would not have any respect for a law enforcement agency that would not be agressive in chasing down crooks. I wouldn't want them protecting my neighborhood.

JBriggs
December 6, 2007, 04:46 PM
Never pursue the robbers. When I was a prosecutor, we all always looked to see if, at the time of the shooting, the shooter was in imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury. If you chase down a robber, you are now the aggressor and will end up being charged with attempted murder or worse.

As to the incident of the bullet entering the child's room, it goes to show you how important it is to recognize where your bullet is going to go if it misses its intended target. A person using a sidearm or other weapon must always consider what is behind and to the sides of the target. Otherwise, an innocent may be seriously injured or killed.

kgpcr
December 6, 2007, 08:43 PM
How tough a guy you are to be willing to accept collateral damage!!! You must be one bad dude! in 91 there was an army A team holed up in a spider hole watching a road junction by day and running recon at night. During the day a 9yr old girl discovered them. They were under orders to kill anyone with thier silenced 9mm and drag them into the spider hole with them. Being in the remote desert they would not have been discovered had they dont that. They took the high road and let her go. She alerted the people wiht her and soon they were under heavy attack. They stayed and fought it out untill they could get air cover and get pulled out. Several were seriously wounded. They to a man would do it the same all over again. Collateral Damage what a cool word you use. Is there a time and place for it? you bet! I caused some myself but that was when there was no other choice in a war.

BikerRN
December 7, 2007, 02:51 AM
Collateral Damage: A word used by those who have not been there or done that to make others think they have.

If you miss your intended target and your bullet strikes another person, guess what, you just shot a human being that you didn't intend to. I hope you have a real good attorney on retainer. That person your bullet struck, they are not "collateral damage" they are a living breathing human being with hopes, dreams, loves and even family.

Make no mistake, I will shoot to stop a threat to me and mine, either in the performance of my duties as an LEO on duty or as a member of society out walking around. I try to live by the truism that Clint Smith said, "Every bullet you fire has a lawyer attached to it." You would do well to keep that in mind.

Biker

kgpcr
December 7, 2007, 07:13 AM
So true Biker!!

Spade Cooley
December 7, 2007, 07:31 AM
No one wants to see an innocent person die as the result of a shooting or vehicular pursuit.
This is a given.

Glenn E. Meyer
December 7, 2007, 10:30 AM
Not if you are posturing on the Internet! :barf:

dukenukum
December 7, 2007, 11:06 AM
I have been robbed twice at work first time I was not armed as my state did not have concealed carry just gave them what they wanted and good riddance .
second time I was armed they fled from the scene criminals do not like armed citizens , I did not give chase police caught them next day they got life as habitual offenders no innocents hurt .

Thunderhawk88
December 7, 2007, 12:18 PM
Any time a Police Officer chases or confronts a felon, there is a chance of colateral damage and some innocent person could get hurt. The only way to erase that chance would be for LEOS to allow them to escape and not confront them. Watch the show about police pursuits on TV and you will see what I mean. As I said before, the street is not always a friendly place and agressive action is often needed.

So then Spade, you are a Leo?

Art Eatman
December 7, 2007, 12:50 PM
Seems to me the subject of the thread is about the storekeeper's tactics. It's surely not supposed to be about a bunch of backing-and-forthing about machismo and personal training and skills...

Art

markj
December 7, 2007, 01:00 PM
So then Spade, you are a Leo?

I doubt it, LEO dont talk about policy and policy here is not to pursue from what I been told. Cousin works crash investigation, he was quoted in the World Herald the other day on an accident he was on. If Spade is LEo my cousin would know him.

Wildalaska
December 7, 2007, 01:02 PM
Ths Storekeeper should not have chased

WildbottomlineAlaska ™

pax
December 7, 2007, 01:10 PM
People think that in the name of "resisting crime" anything and everything is ok to do and no matter what happens only the criminal is responsible for any and every decision made by every person involved. At the point in which someone chooses to escalate the situation beyond what is required to defend your life (or property in many cases), the culpability for someone getting hurt is shifted at least in part to the person who went overboard.

That's an excellent note on which to end this thread, which has devolved from useful discussion into fairly empty bickering.

pax