The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 16, 2012, 06:17 PM   #26
Colorado Redneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 6, 2008
Location: Northeast Colorado
Posts: 1,061
Better make clear what I meant

If you are endangered, that is a different animal. IMO. If the danger is passed, shooting at a fleeing criminal is over the top.
Colorado Redneck is offline  
Old September 17, 2012, 12:42 AM   #27
jimpeel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 1999
Location: Longmont, CO, USA
Posts: 4,464
Guys!!!

What I said was "I actually have no problem with shooting a fleeing violent armed perpetrator...."

I didn't say I would do so.

In the case DNS cited there were extenuating circumstances beyond what was necessary to stop the perpetrator. In that case, it seems the shooter stood over the perp and executed him. He wouldn't get a pass from me if I were on his jury.

What I mean is that I would not be personally against bringing down a perp who is fleeing if they had already shown violent armed criminal behavior.

Look at the case of Luke Woodham. He walked into the high school in Pearl, MS and killed a couple of people. When the vice principal, Joel Myrick, stopped him he was about to head up a road that dead ended into the middle school. Woodham surrendered.He had 36 rounds of .30-30 ammo left and had killed his mother with a knife prior to going to the school.

He was already in his car when the vice principal confronted him. If he had tried to drive away up that road to the middle school, even though he was fleeing and presented no further threat to Myrick, would anyone here have had any problem with Myrick putting one in the back of his head?

(Believe it or not, there were those who castigated Myrick for pointing a loaded firearm at one of his students.)
__________________
Gun Control: The premise that a woman found in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is morally superior to allowing that same woman to defend her life with a firearm.

"Science is built up with facts, as a house is with stones. But a collection of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house." - Jules Henri Poincare

"Three thousand people died on Sept. 11 because eight pilots were killed"
-- former Northwest Airlines pilot Stephen Luckey
jimpeel is offline  
Old September 17, 2012, 02:31 AM   #28
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
In the case DNS cited there were extenuating circumstances beyond what was necessary to stop the perpetrator. In that case, it seems the shooter stood over the perp and executed him. He wouldn't get a pass from me if I were on his jury.
You completely have misunderstood the case. The perp Ersland chased out the door and shot at while in pursuit was stated by the DA to be 100% legal. The perp Ersland killed didn't run anyway. He was downed when Ersland legally shot him in self defense during the initial robbery and then was murdered by Ersland after he chased the other robber. UNTIL pumping rounds into the unconscious robber on the floor of his pharmacy, Ersland had been within legal bounds to do what he did and to discharge the shots he discharged...according to the DA.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 17, 2012, 01:59 PM   #29
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,950
Quote:
The perp Ersland chased out the door and shot at while in pursuit was stated by the DA to be 100% legal.
That is true. But it does not mean that it was legal.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old September 20, 2012, 09:55 AM   #30
Patriot86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
Not smart to chase someone down like that; but even here in anti-gun Illinois they do not often charge people for it. A few years ago a Clerk up in Waukeegan IL (about an hour north of Chicago) chased a criminal outside and shot him while he tried to peddle away on a bike.

No charges filed

http://wauktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=63
Patriot86 is offline  
Old September 20, 2012, 10:32 AM   #31
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
But it does not mean that it was legal.
Sorry, I was defaulting to the local authority. A look at the law itself indicates that if Ersland believed anyone was endangered by the robber at the time, then he was legal. It falls under the guise of defense of others in self defense. It may not be smart in most cases, but whether or not something is smart isn't really part of the purview of the law.

The comment reminds me of those folks that think it is wrong to shoot somebody over property. They refuse to use lethal force against a guy with a knife robbing them of their wallet because to shoot the robber would be over protecting property. It isn't the property that is in question. It is the threat to life.

It was legal, as was the shooting of the original suspect that occurred during the commission of a felony attempted robbery.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 20, 2012, 10:45 AM   #32
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy
Quote:
But it does not mean that it was legal.
Sorry, I was defaulting to the local authority.
Sorry, but that doesn't quite work with the Ersland case.

It's true that Ersland was prosecuted (and convicted) for shooting the robbery on the ground, not shooting at the one running out the door. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the prosecutor concluded that Ersland's chasing and shooting at the robber running out the door was justified.

It's entirely possible that the DA decided that the shooting of the incapacitated robber lying on the floor was by far the most obvious and strongest case. Therefore he might not have wanted to complicate the case by adding the other one. That's a kind of tactical decision that prosecutors make all the time.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old September 20, 2012, 11:36 AM   #33
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Frank, IIRC, the prosecutor in the Ersland case made a press statement saying that everything Ersland had done prior to retrieving the second pistol and shooting the downed robber had been justifiable.
MLeake is offline  
Old September 20, 2012, 11:43 AM   #34
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLeake
Frank, IIRC, the prosecutor in the Ersland case made a press statement saying that everything Ersland had done prior to retrieving the second pistol and shooting the downed robber had been justifiable.
I don't recall that, but if that is the case, I stand corrected.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old September 20, 2012, 08:40 PM   #35
war_elephant
Member
 
Join Date: June 29, 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 70
The problem with the story change that the pharmacist drew his legally concealed firearm... is that there is NO possible way for the pharmacist to have a legally concealed firearm in NJ, unless he is a Law Enforcement Officer, or a Retired LEO. Look for the pharmacist to be charged very soon, NJ also has a duty to retreat law. When he ran to the back room to get his gun, under NJ law he had to stay there or go out back door. NJ laws require you to be a victim unless you are in your home.
__________________
Marine, Retired LEO, Firearms Instructor, Life Member NRA Tea Party Member, and general all around trouble maker.
war_elephant is offline  
Old September 21, 2012, 07:46 PM   #36
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,425
Quote:
Sorry, but that doesn't quite work with the Ersland case.

It's true that Ersland was prosecuted (and convicted) for shooting the robbery on the ground, not shooting at the one running out the door. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the prosecutor concluded that Ersland's chasing and shooting at the robber running out the door was justified.
Sorry Frank, but the procecutor certainly doubted there being any sort of problem. He specifically stated this in the video concerning charging Ersland.
http://www.news9.com/Global/category...clipId=3804065

...not only giving chase and shooting, but even shooting the fleeing suspect in the back.

Looking at Oklahoma law, as noted by the prosecutor in the case and the events, Ersland's chasing of the robbery suspect and attempt to shoot him certainly can be legal. The prosecutor and the law are not divergent on this.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old September 21, 2012, 08:09 PM   #37
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy
...Sorry Frank, but the procecutor certainly doubted there being any sort of problem. He specifically stated this in the video concerning charging Ersland.
http://www.news9.com/Global/category...clipId=3804065...
And I already addressed that in post 34.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10702 seconds with 9 queries