Armed Citizen: Teen Shot by Homeowner - Page 2

Wildalaska · June 18, 2009, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Come on Ken, do you honestly believe that while you are on your own property, you should not be armed while confronting a trespasser?

Depends on the circumstances. Here the guy had already been told to leave and he came back. At that time, it should have been cover, conceal, cell phone as opposed to confront, conflict and fire........

The guy shouldnt have walked out with a rifle

Let me ask you....what would be the first response of a cop to this scenario......?

Sure as heck isnt going to be lethal force. Why should an untrained citizen be held to a lesser standard......

Why didnt the homeowner retreat...O yes I know, its his "property"....

WEildigotthelardreadyAlaska ™

Brian Pfleuger · June 18, 2009, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Why should an untrained citizen be held to a lesser standard......

Curiously, I often hear that police should be held to a "higher standard". The implication, of course, being that an "untrained civilian" would indeed be held to a lower standard.

Secondarily, it would seem logical to me that lack of training would seem to imply a lower standard.

Should we otherwise hold everyone to the SAME standard? That would seem unreasonable considering the relatively formidable armament available to a trained police officer, starting with hand-to-hand, pepper spray, a baton, handcuffs, body armor and certainly a gun. A civilian may be excused for stepping up the response level, considering.

MLeake · June 18, 2009, 07:41 PM

First response of a cop would have been a verbal warning, followed by an attempt to use cuffs, followed by non lethal (pepper spray, taser, bean bag depending on equipment) followed by PR24, followed by firearm.

Depending on what the BG did, some of these steps might be skipped.

However, the homeowner in this case was a 69 year old man. I don't know any 69 year old patrol guys, though there are probably some someplace...

Whether it was wise of the homeowner to go outside, he did. It wasn't illegal, and it wasn't immoral for him to go outside. However, once he was out there, he lacked the capability the police have for graduated levels of response. He probably had no level available between verbal and firearm, suitable for dealing with a 17yo.

Donn_N · June 18, 2009, 08:31 PM

Quote:

I bet almost everyone has confronted someone on their property, and asked 'What are you doing here? Selling Jesus? Subscriptions? Not interested, get off my property?"

Yes, but in this case, the shooter knew the guy was not selling Jesus or subscriptions and knew he was dealing with a drug user. Why risk a confrontation?

My original question stands. How has the shooter benefited by confronting and shooting someone to death as opposed to simply staying inside and calling the police?

easyG · June 18, 2009, 08:36 PM

I think the old guy should have went back inside his home and called the police.
And IF the crack-head tried to enter the home, then would be the time to shoot the crack-head.

Having said that, if I were on the jury I would not convict the old guy of any crime.

Hank15 · June 18, 2009, 08:48 PM

Wildalaska,

I use the word "gangsta" pretty broadly, as I do with many other slang. Where I grew up, the term "gangsta" is used to describe any person acting as if he is part of a gang or are into that type of stuff. It's also used to describe people affiliated with activities involving gangs. Like I said, it's used to describe a broad range of people.

But to answer your question, I labeled him a "gangsta" because he is a 17 year old hispanic teenager with a crack pipe living in a less than desirable environment.

It's just a label. But if it bothers you, feel free to PM me and I'll gladly edit or remove it.

Double Naught Spy · June 18, 2009, 09:28 PM

Quote:

1. Homeowner shouldnt have confronted
2. If he felt the need to confront, he shouldnt have done it armed.

That's funny. Every confrontation I have had with folks in the last 10 years, except my wife, has been armed. I am always armed when dealing with strangers, especially around my home. It has always struck me as silly those people who could carry, but don't, and then end up complaining about being unarmed at the time of an incident.

As for not confronting the crackhead, I see no reason to turtle up every time somebody does something on my property that I don't like. I see no reason to call the cops to handle such matters either when they are simple verbal exchanges...which the initial confrontation was, after which, the crackhead and homeowner apparently went their separate ways.

Quote:

Let me ask you....what would be the first response of a cop to this scenario......?

Sure as heck isnt going to be lethal force. Why should an untrained citizen be held to a lesser standard......

Uh, because they aren't cops. Because as in this case, they are defending their own property and selves whereas the situation isn't the same for the cops. Because the cops are trained, carry all sorts of weapons, don't usually have to wait the 8-33 minutes (average 10.3 minutes 4 years ago) for a response to a priority 1 emergency call like citizens. When we call 911, the dispatcher decides how to rate the call and what response to send. When an officer calls for assistance (officer needs help), every local officer who isn't otherwise engaged will respond.

Quote:

Why didnt the homeowner retreat...O yes I know, its his "property"....

There is no reason for the homeowner to have to retreat in Texas, legally or morally. It might be best tactically, however.

Trooper Tyree · June 18, 2009, 09:54 PM

When I read the first story the image painted in my mind was that of a 69 year old "grandfather" sort with "construction equipment" in his shop. So I'm thinking he's a pretty fit guy, I know people his age who are still working family construction companies and are pretty able bodied people.

After a bit of research on the subject however, and a lot of head shaking at the sensationalism that today's "news" feels compelled to use, I found that a 69 year old cancer patient who wheels about an oxygen tank "gunned down a teen".

Apparently 1 shot is considered "gunning someone down" nowadays.

From what I read, Mr Austgen confronted the young man breaking into his truck, teen left leaving his crack pipe on the truck, teen apparently then came back for his crack pipe, Mr. Austgen once again confronted him, told him to leave, teen approached Mr. Austgen then turned and walked away then turned and came at him again at which point Mr. Austgen fired a single shot into the young man. It's my understanding that Mr. Austgen was actually on his porch when he fired the shot. I do not know if Mr. Austgen's "confrontations" all occurred from the porch or not.

If any of this is correct which unfortunately we don't know because it's source is the news :barf:

But if Mr. Austgen really is a 69 year old cancer patient on an oxygen tank
And Mr. Austgen really does reside in Texas

Then I'm going to have to say although I think it was a poor choice on Mr. Austgen part if he really is in the shape he is, to confront, I don't see Texas giving him any trouble over this. If he is in the physical shape reported, then I can see him being in legitimate fear of his life from the teen, particularly if he came at him after not responding to multiple orders to leave.

From the information available though, I don't know that it's possible to say good shoot/bad shoot. It's a pity that the news is such unreliable sensationalized lying croup anymore. It's one thing to make mistakes or report out of ignorance, but to deliberately twist and skew things to upset and provoke people is just yellow journalism.

The rifle shown being handled by the police in one news video was a bolt action .22.

**OldMarksman** · June 18, 2009, 10:02 PM

Quote:

If I remember correctly, Texas may be unique among all of the states in that the law provides that a property owner may use deadly force to protect his/her property.

irrelevant here, I think, because the shooting occurred at 10:30 AM and the law that allows the use of deadly force to protect property in Texas applies only at night.

Texas does have a provision in the law that obviates the requirement to retreat in a self defense shooting. I think that is likely what was operative here.

None of us have enough information to really opine.

But--the fact of a current decision to not charge does not mean that he cannot be charged later. Best that the shooter stay mum and not give the authorities additional statements to use against him.

Double Naught Spy · June 18, 2009, 10:07 PM

Houston slow police response times blamed on all sorts of things such as training and manpower...
http://www.click2houston.com/news/7881025/detail.html
http://www.click2houston.com/news/4512431/detail.html
http://www.aframnews.com/html/inters...get/Page1.html
http://www.americanconservativedaily...on-law-stance/ (claimed to be around 5 minutes here in 2008 by the chief)

I find this last citation a bit ironic given that it is claimed here...
http://dailyuw.com/2008/1/9/faster-s...-police-force/
that the national average for major cities is 7 minutes and I just don't see Houston beating the national average given all of their previous problems. Even so, the claimed averages are from 5-10.3 minutes with many calls going way beyond that amount for emergency priority 1 calls.

Calling the police is just wishful thinking if you are expecting them to save your life in an immediate crisis. Most such events are over long before the cops ever arrive, not because the cops are doing anything wrong, but because of how the process works. There simply aren't enough well trained personnel to response to each an every priority 1 crisis in the small amount of time to actually effect the outcome of that crisis in a positive manner. Those cops don't exist because tax payers aren't willing to pay to have them and many folks would fear a police presence that powerful. A cop on every corner is almost what is needed only it would be extremely costly and create paranoia of a police state.

skydiver3346 · June 18, 2009, 10:10 PM

Hey Hank,
That is exactly the description (Gangsta) I would give some crack head dirt bag like that (if they came at me in my own yard). I don't have a problem with calling it like it is. In fact, I might even think of harsher words than that.

You know what, with the way the economy is going down the tubes, layoffs, terminations, unemployment going through the roof, etc. I believe that we are going to start seeing a lot more of these type instances in the news. Peolple are getting sick of being screwed with, robbed, threatened, etc. and they are going to react to the situations. Maybe more forcefully than they normally would. Watch out. Its getting to be a really dangerous world out there for all of us....

Donn_N · June 18, 2009, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Calling the police is just wishful thinking if you are expecting them to save your life in an immediate crisis. Most such events are over long before the cops ever arrive, not because the cops are doing anything wrong, but because of how the process works.

The shooter was not in an immediate crisis, so time was not the issue here. The shooter was secure in his home and decided to leave the security of his home and confront the BG.

If the shooting went down the way we think it did, I'm not saying the shooting was not justified, I'm simply saying that it was very poor judgment to confront someone that you know is a drug user who might be high and dangerous.

So now the shooter is worrying about whether or not he will be charged, he may be concerned about retaliation from the BG's buddies, he may be traumatized by having taken a life (I know that is a foreign concept to some, but it happens frequently) and God knows what else. Somehow I just keep missing the up side for this guy.

supergas452M · June 18, 2009, 10:34 PM

Insufficient evidence for me to make a meaningful judgement. If it went down the way Trooper Tyree described then its a justifiable shoot and I have no tears to cry for the 17 year old crackhead.

I can tell you this, If I find someone in my driveway breaking into my car, they will be confronted and I will be armed. Depending on the circumstances, I or my wife may have already or may be currently calling 911. If the BG decides to run away he will not be shot. I have no desire to hold a BG at gunpoint as I wait for police.

I can also tell you that if the criminal makes a move towards me while being confronted, he will be shot.

If the BG comes back to my house looking for his crack pipe and makes a move toward me he will be shot.

There are many different scenarios of how this confrontation could play out, those are for a different thread perhaps but one thing I'm not going to do is hide in my house while someone is breaking into my property.

Wild, I always see you lecturing others about use of their guns and in this instance your opinion is that this gentleman should be charged with manslaughter. You are wrong. Way wrong.

OH, give me a break here

Wildalaska · June 18, 2009, 10:40 PM

Another sticks and stones interchange

Carne Frio · June 18, 2009, 10:53 PM

Remember, this happened Texas.

Zilmo · June 18, 2009, 10:54 PM

Some of these "tough guy" responses remind me a lot of the young tuffy in that Clint Eastwood movie Unforgiven. And then he puked his guts out.

supergas452M · June 18, 2009, 11:01 PM

Inappropriate personal noise - Nuked

GEM

Wildalaska · June 18, 2009, 11:09 PM

Response to noise

KLRANGL · June 18, 2009, 11:22 PM

Quote:

I'm one of the good guys making my way through life in a F'ed up world You want to live the life of a coward, running and hiding, that's your choice. I choose to protect me and mine. No amount of chiding on your part is gonna change that. While you run for cover, I will attack. Maybe the life I save will be yours by some weird quirk of fate.

I fail to see how anything Wild said even implied what I quoted above...
Wild is smart, he plays the odds. Running outside and confronting a crack head increases the chances of an escalated situation. An escalated situation increases the chances of you being hurt or killed. Forget the legality, forget the morality, forget the bravado... Staying inside is just the smart call...

Unfortunately I cannot vouch that I'd follow my own advice, but I'd like to think that I would...

Donn_N · June 18, 2009, 11:34 PM

Quote:

You want to live the life of a coward, running and hiding, that's your choice. I choose to protect me and mine. No amount of chiding on your part is gonna change that. While you run for cover, I will attack. Maybe the life I save will be yours by some weird quirk of fate.

Yes, or maybe the life you lose will be your own. Where will you and yours be then?

supergas452M · June 18, 2009, 11:44 PM

If I lose my life protecting me and mine, I'll be dead. My family knows my make up. They love me as I am. I'll take a death of bravery over a life of cowardice.

I don't look for trouble but if it finds me, I'm prepared to face it. I'm not Chuck Norris but I like his attitude.

Donn_N · June 19, 2009, 12:08 AM

Quote:

If I lose my life protecting me and mine, I'll be dead. My family knows my make up. They love me as I am. I'll take a death of bravery over a life of cowardice.

Explain the up side to you and your family if you die in a confrontation that could have been avoided.

supergas452M · June 19, 2009, 12:20 AM

Maybe you are confused? I'm not discussing upsides. The scenario we were discussing before we got off topic was this man that was protecting his home against a criminal and a druggie. The criminal not only refused to leave, he made a move on the homeowner. A fatal mistake. I fail to comprehend where the homeowner was at fault.

The "do not escalate" folks were not there and it was not their house and home. Maybe the old man was just tired?

Southern Rebel · June 19, 2009, 12:59 AM

To each his own. What is "morally right" to some may be repugnant to others. It is enough of a challenge to figure out what is "legally right". I look upon life as I would upon wine - quantity will never override quality and both life and wine are not infinite and will eventually be gone.

"A coward suffers many deaths - a brave man only one."

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”

Yeah, I am still bitterly clinging to my religion and my gunnypoo - whatever the heck that is supposed to be?????????

cloud8a · June 19, 2009, 01:06 AM

This is for WILDALASKA (His name ID said in that thriller movie trailer voice).

Philosophically I think most responsible gun owners agree with your opinions on SD situations. I have read some of your posts and do not see much fault in them.

BUT! why do you have to add ridicule and smack talk to what would normally be a decent philosophy? That seems to be a form of chest thumping as well. And is actually counter productive to the forum. If you take a good philosophy and smear it with poop no one is going to want to hear it. Everyone loses.

There is not enough information in the story to form a good opinion. In fact there is such little information this could be a scenario.

June 18, 2009, 07:41 PM	#28
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	First response of a cop First response of a cop would have been a verbal warning, followed by an attempt to use cuffs, followed by non lethal (pepper spray, taser, bean bag depending on equipment) followed by PR24, followed by firearm. Depending on what the BG did, some of these steps might be skipped. However, the homeowner in this case was a 69 year old man. I don't know any 69 year old patrol guys, though there are probably some someplace... Whether it was wise of the homeowner to go outside, he did. It wasn't illegal, and it wasn't immoral for him to go outside. However, once he was out there, he lacked the capability the police have for graduated levels of response. He probably had no level available between verbal and firearm, suitable for dealing with a 17yo.

June 18, 2009, 10:07 PM	#35
Double Naught Spy Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX Posts: 12,717	Houston slow police response times blamed on all sorts of things such as training and manpower... http://www.click2houston.com/news/7881025/detail.html http://www.click2houston.com/news/4512431/detail.html http://www.aframnews.com/html/inters...get/Page1.html http://www.americanconservativedaily...on-law-stance/ (claimed to be around 5 minutes here in 2008 by the chief) I find this last citation a bit ironic given that it is claimed here... http://dailyuw.com/2008/1/9/faster-s...-police-force/ that the national average for major cities is 7 minutes and I just don't see Houston beating the national average given all of their previous problems. Even so, the claimed averages are from 5-10.3 minutes with many calls going way beyond that amount for emergency priority 1 calls. Calling the police is just wishful thinking if you are expecting them to save your life in an immediate crisis. Most such events are over long before the cops ever arrive, not because the cops are doing anything wrong, but because of how the process works. There simply aren't enough well trained personnel to response to each an every priority 1 crisis in the small amount of time to actually effect the outcome of that crisis in a positive manner. Those cops don't exist because tax payers aren't willing to pay to have them and many folks would fear a police presence that powerful. A cop on every corner is almost what is needed only it would be extremely costly and create paranoia of a police state. __________________ "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 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange

June 18, 2009, 10:10 PM	#36
skydiver3346 Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 1,222	Hank15: Gangsta definition Hey Hank, That is exactly the description (Gangsta) I would give some crack head dirt bag like that (if they came at me in my own yard). I don't have a problem with calling it like it is. In fact, I might even think of harsher words than that. You know what, with the way the economy is going down the tubes, layoffs, terminations, unemployment going through the roof, etc. I believe that we are going to start seeing a lot more of these type instances in the news. Peolple are getting sick of being screwed with, robbed, threatened, etc. and they are going to react to the situations. Maybe more forcefully than they normally would. Watch out. Its getting to be a really dangerous world out there for all of us.... Last edited by skydiver3346; June 19, 2009 at 08:06 AM.

June 18, 2009, 10:34 PM	#38
supergas452M Junior member Join Date: December 7, 2008 Location: New Mexico Posts: 309	Insufficient evidence for me to make a meaningful judgement. If it went down the way Trooper Tyree described then its a justifiable shoot and I have no tears to cry for the 17 year old crackhead. I can tell you this, If I find someone in my driveway breaking into my car, they will be confronted and I will be armed. Depending on the circumstances, I or my wife may have already or may be currently calling 911. If the BG decides to run away he will not be shot. I have no desire to hold a BG at gunpoint as I wait for police. I can also tell you that if the criminal makes a move towards me while being confronted, he will be shot. If the BG comes back to my house looking for his crack pipe and makes a move toward me he will be shot. There are many different scenarios of how this confrontation could play out, those are for a different thread perhaps but one thing I'm not going to do is hide in my house while someone is breaking into my property. Wild, I always see you lecturing others about use of their guns and in this instance your opinion is that this gentleman should be charged with manslaughter. You are wrong. Way wrong. OH, give me a break here Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; June 19, 2009 at 01:32 PM. Reason: Noise

June 18, 2009, 10:40 PM	#39
Wildalaska Junior member Join Date: November 25, 2002 Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska Posts: 14,172	Another sticks and stones interchange Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; June 19, 2009 at 01:33 PM. Reason: This is getting boring

June 18, 2009, 08:36 PM	#30
easyG Junior member Join Date: August 30, 2004 Location: Right here! Posts: 972	I think the old guy should have went back inside his home and called the police. And IF the crack-head tried to enter the home, then would be the time to shoot the crack-head. Having said that, if I were on the jury I would not convict the old guy of any crime.

June 18, 2009, 08:48 PM	#31
Hank15 Senior Member Join Date: April 18, 2009 Location: California Posts: 437	Wildalaska, I use the word "gangsta" pretty broadly, as I do with many other slang. Where I grew up, the term "gangsta" is used to describe any person acting as if he is part of a gang or are into that type of stuff. It's also used to describe people affiliated with activities involving gangs. Like I said, it's used to describe a broad range of people. But to answer your question, I labeled him a "gangsta" because he is a 17 year old hispanic teenager with a crack pipe living in a less than desirable environment. It's just a label. But if it bothers you, feel free to PM me and I'll gladly edit or remove it.

June 18, 2009, 09:54 PM	#33
Trooper Tyree Senior Member Join Date: April 5, 2009 Posts: 167	When I read the first story the image painted in my mind was that of a 69 year old "grandfather" sort with "construction equipment" in his shop. So I'm thinking he's a pretty fit guy, I know people his age who are still working family construction companies and are pretty able bodied people. After a bit of research on the subject however, and a lot of head shaking at the sensationalism that today's "news" feels compelled to use, I found that a 69 year old cancer patient who wheels about an oxygen tank "gunned down a teen". Apparently 1 shot is considered "gunning someone down" nowadays. From what I read, Mr Austgen confronted the young man breaking into his truck, teen left leaving his crack pipe on the truck, teen apparently then came back for his crack pipe, Mr. Austgen once again confronted him, told him to leave, teen approached Mr. Austgen then turned and walked away then turned and came at him again at which point Mr. Austgen fired a single shot into the young man. It's my understanding that Mr. Austgen was actually on his porch when he fired the shot. I do not know if Mr. Austgen's "confrontations" all occurred from the porch or not. If any of this is correct which unfortunately we don't know because it's source is the news :barf: But if Mr. Austgen really is a 69 year old cancer patient on an oxygen tank And Mr. Austgen really does reside in Texas Then I'm going to have to say although I think it was a poor choice on Mr. Austgen part if he really is in the shape he is, to confront, I don't see Texas giving him any trouble over this. If he is in the physical shape reported, then I can see him being in legitimate fear of his life from the teen, particularly if he came at him after not responding to multiple orders to leave. From the information available though, I don't know that it's possible to say good shoot/bad shoot. It's a pity that the news is such unreliable sensationalized lying croup anymore. It's one thing to make mistakes or report out of ignorance, but to deliberately twist and skew things to upset and provoke people is just yellow journalism. The rifle shown being handled by the police in one news video was a bolt action .22.

June 18, 2009, 10:53 PM	#40
Carne Frio Senior Member Join Date: August 28, 2008 Location: Near Fairbanks Alaska Posts: 829	Remember, this happened Texas.

June 18, 2009, 10:54 PM	#41
Zilmo Senior Member Join Date: May 30, 2009 Location: At home. Posts: 369	Some of these "tough guy" responses remind me a lot of the young tuffy in that Clint Eastwood movie Unforgiven. And then he puked his guts out.

June 18, 2009, 11:01 PM	#42
supergas452M Junior member Join Date: December 7, 2008 Location: New Mexico Posts: 309	Inappropriate personal noise - Nuked GEM Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; June 19, 2009 at 01:30 PM. Reason: Let's not get personal.

June 18, 2009, 11:09 PM	#43
Wildalaska Junior member Join Date: November 25, 2002 Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska Posts: 14,172	Response to noise

June 18, 2009, 11:44 PM	#46
supergas452M Junior member Join Date: December 7, 2008 Location: New Mexico Posts: 309	If I lose my life protecting me and mine, I'll be dead. My family knows my make up. They love me as I am. I'll take a death of bravery over a life of cowardice. I don't look for trouble but if it finds me, I'm prepared to face it. I'm not Chuck Norris but I like his attitude.

June 19, 2009, 12:20 AM	#48
supergas452M Junior member Join Date: December 7, 2008 Location: New Mexico Posts: 309	Maybe you are confused? I'm not discussing upsides. The scenario we were discussing before we got off topic was this man that was protecting his home against a criminal and a druggie. The criminal not only refused to leave, he made a move on the homeowner. A fatal mistake. I fail to comprehend where the homeowner was at fault. The "do not escalate" folks were not there and it was not their house and home. Maybe the old man was just tired?

June 19, 2009, 12:59 AM	#49
Southern Rebel Senior Member Join Date: February 4, 2009 Posts: 165	To each his own. What is "morally right" to some may be repugnant to others. It is enough of a challenge to figure out what is "legally right". I look upon life as I would upon wine - quantity will never override quality and both life and wine are not infinite and will eventually be gone. *"A coward suffers many deaths - a brave man only one."* “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!” Yeah, I am still bitterly clinging to my religion and my gunnypoo - whatever the heck that is supposed to be?????????

June 19, 2009, 01:06 AM	#50
cloud8a Senior Member Join Date: April 27, 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 399	This is for WILDALASKA (His name ID said in that thriller movie trailer voice). Philosophically I think most responsible gun owners agree with your opinions on SD situations. I have read some of your posts and do not see much fault in them. BUT! why do you have to add ridicule and smack talk to what would normally be a decent philosophy? That seems to be a form of chest thumping as well. And is actually counter productive to the forum. If you take a good philosophy and smear it with poop no one is going to want to hear it. Everyone loses. There is not enough information in the story to form a good opinion. In fact there is such little information this could be a scenario.