The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 14, 2008, 06:10 PM   #1
kgpcr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2005
Posts: 946
Its not always clear cut when you shoot someone

http://www.wcco.com/local/firefighte....2.723438.html
Read this story and though i dont agree with it you can see its not always so cut and dried!
__________________
Colt King Cobra .357 Colt Anaconda .44mag
Springfield Armory .45 Double stack Loaded
XD40 service XD45 Taurus 617 .357mag
Smith M&P 40
kgpcr is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 06:31 PM   #2
tplumeri
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,919
It's never cut and dried when you fire a gun in anger.
Unfortunately, it appears these two guys were threatening each other before the incident. which makes the shooter suspect for premeditated.
even if cleared by authorities he will face countless lawsuits and likely lose.
Its taken me almost 6 years to fend off the lawsuits on a self defense shooting!
tplumeri is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 07:04 PM   #3
Boris Bush
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2007
Posts: 921
Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I doubt I would have done diferently. Think about it. A man busts down your door. What next? Does he want a hug?

It does not, from the report, sound like shots fired in anger, rather it sounds like a defence situation.........
Boris Bush is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 07:09 PM   #4
sw_florida
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2007
Location: In the shadow
Posts: 526
I don't think their history of arguing weights in here, or at least it shouldn't. Would you want to be looked upon as a premedative killer just because you may have had to deal with tiring telephone calls from a nut for weeks before he blows your door in and comes at you?
sw_florida is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 07:21 PM   #5
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,920
Remember, this is a newspaper article. We don't have all the information the prosecutor and the police have. And then again, he may be being railroaded for some political reason, and at the end of the day the firefighter may well be exonerated. We just don't know enough.

Last edited by Frank Ettin; May 14, 2008 at 08:43 PM.
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 07:41 PM   #6
dirkk
Member
 
Join Date: January 14, 2007
Posts: 32
Tiring phone calls

I think tiring phone calls from a nut is too distant a comparison to this situation. Not walking away (figuratively) from a conflict contributes to escalation. Exacerbating the situation by adding your own insults and taunts is proactive contribution to escalation. That will be weighed in.

There is no exact way to determine state of mind. But all you can do is examine behavior leading to an incident to determine how to distribute culpability. Yeah, yeah, I know you can't read minds and newspapers never get the facts right. But assuming they did ... it would be hard to show that the shooter wasn't looking for a fight, or even a reason to shoot. Even if that weren't true.

Last edited by dirkk; May 14, 2008 at 07:42 PM. Reason: To be grammatically correct
dirkk is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 07:47 PM   #7
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Sounds to me like the shooter should be charged. He chose to escalate a situation and even antagonize the victim.

I do not see any threats being noted from the victim and I do see where the shooter goes from saying he is a big guy and did not consider the guy a threat and then saying he feared for his life from the same disabled man.

I also see where the shooter decided not to call police and did not see any evidence of the victim presenting a deadly threat. Guys get into fist fights and shooting every guy you have an altercation with is not an option.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 09:05 PM   #8
NotAMonte86
Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2005
Location: FL
Posts: 26
No victims here.

If someone is allowed to kick down a door/break into someone's house because they were insulted, then I better get an alarm system installed (and a reinforced door).

Forcing your way into an occupied dwelling should be viewed as intent to use deadly force. The boyfriend only used deadly force in response to the ex's display of intent and ability to inflict great bodily harm or cause death.

***This is all based on the news article!
NotAMonte86 is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 09:10 PM   #9
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Quote:
If someone is allowed to kick down a door/break into someone's house because they were insulted,
I do not see any evidence in the article of the door being "kicked down."

The only reference to the door that is an actual quote simple says the door "flew open."

If the shooting victim had previous residence there, has a child on the premises, and has until this time been allowed access to the home he did not break in.

The shooter knew the victim and stated he did not consider him a physical threat. Why did that suddenly change?
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 09:22 PM   #10
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Here is another newspaper report on this case, that goes more into why the DA decided to prosecute:


http://www.kare11.com/news/ts_articl...storyid=510781


Apparently the DA must feel that Huggett was somewhat responsible for provoking the attack. He did insult and belittle the man pretty bad. He obviously was trying to humiliate him.

Still, it was Peach who broke into Huggett's home, so this really does not seem right. After all, how was Huggett to know whether Peach was armed or not?? Do you stop and ask the person who has just broken into your dark home at night whether they have a gun on them??

Making that comment about Peach's son was pretty low of Huggett. He should never had said anything like that. It certainly will not win him any points with a jury.

To me, though, I'm doubtful that this will pass the beyond reasonable doubt test. For I think that it would be reasonable to think that Huggett could well have felt in fear of his life under these circumstances.

Wisconsin has become a pretty liberal state. Efforts to pass a "shall issue" CCW law there have failed in recent years. Wisconsin is one of only 2 states with no CCW program of any kind at all. Heck, Wisconsin is even one of only 7 states where even Tasers are outlawed!!

In light of that, Wisconsin's laws regarding use of deadly force may well be more restrictive than in states that we live in. It is really important to know the law in your state regarding the use of firearms.


.

Last edited by LanceOregon; May 14, 2008 at 09:25 PM. Reason: typo
LanceOregon is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 09:40 PM   #11
ssilicon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 5, 2005
Posts: 459
From the second article:

Quote:
Authorities also say Huggett, a Minneapolis firefighter, was in much better physical condition than Peach, and that, combined with the fact that Peach was unarmed, made the use of deadly physical force unnecessary.
I guess in Wisconsin, if you might be tougher or at least as tough as someone breaking into your home unarmed, you are apparently expected to engage in physical hand to hand fighting inside your home, rather than risk killing the poor invader with a firearm. How sad is that? You never know how a fight will go, and even if you WIN, you can still be badly hurt in the process. I don't care what kind of names he was called, if he truly "forced his way in" he should be shot. And if I were on the jury there would be no worry. On the other hand, if the forcing in thing isn't quite as it sounds or seems, then perhaps charges are in order here.
ssilicon is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 10:12 PM   #12
kgpcr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 23, 2005
Posts: 946
Huggert was partly to blame with all his taunting. what the hell was he thinking. I suppose he was being a tough guy and all. Should he have shot him? i am not sure on that one but this i would say is that had he not sent all the text messages and such there would be no charges. Him telling Peach that he was gonig to be his sons father from now on was cold and uncalled for. also giving him such a hard time about being on social security disability was not good either. Should Peach have broke in to his house? No he should not have. Plenty of blame to go around!
__________________
Colt King Cobra .357 Colt Anaconda .44mag
Springfield Armory .45 Double stack Loaded
XD40 service XD45 Taurus 617 .357mag
Smith M&P 40
kgpcr is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 10:25 PM   #13
Boris Bush
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2007
Posts: 921
We can say and speculate all we want. The fact is no matter what he said or text messaged, the guy had no right to breakin to the shooters house. I have had worse said to me and I never was so inclined to kick a door in.
Boris Bush is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 10:35 PM   #14
Sportdog
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2006
Location: Southwestern Michigan
Posts: 369
Not Guilty

Message Deleted

Last edited by Sportdog; May 15, 2008 at 02:39 PM. Reason: Shouted Down By Liberal Left Wing
Sportdog is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 10:52 PM   #15
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
On the facts as stated I agree with PP

WilditsallaboutstateofmindAlaska TM
Wildalaska is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 11:09 PM   #16
BloodyBucket03
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 24, 2005
Location: Northeast Pennsylvania
Posts: 188
Well I agree with the other posts we do not have all the information. I personally would have not traded text messages with some nut. I would have contacted the police and have a restraining order put on that wack job. As for kicking in my door if someone is willing to do that they are willing to be confronted by my Mossberg 500.
__________________
"Better to fight for something than live for nothing."-General George S. Patton
"He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and "if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buyone.'' Luke 22:36
BloodyBucket03 is offline  
Old May 14, 2008, 11:17 PM   #17
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,920
If nothing else, this thread should reinforce the notion that whether or not the use of lethal force is justified is not always clear. We seen in other threads folks making the assumption that if the use of lethal force is justified, certain things don't matter. But the point that tends to be ignored is that the justification is not always obvious and may be debatable.

Here's a case in which a number of members here think that the shooting was justified. Others are skeptical. There are arguments and factors on each side of the question. Based on what's been presented so far, if it comes to trial, a jury could go either way, A lot will depend on how good the prosecutor is and how good the defense lawyer is. A lot will depend on exactly what the evidence on each side is and how it's presented. And the character and reputation of the firefighter defendant will probably also be an important factor.

So sure, maybe somethings aren't an issue if it's a "good shoot." But as this case shows, everyone agreeing that it's a good shoot is not a foregone conclusion.
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 12:38 PM   #18
primlantah
Registration in progress
 
Join Date: November 2, 2007
Posts: 110
If the 'victim' really needed social security disability why was he going to head across town to engage in a physical fight? sounds like a lowlife mooching off tax payers.

If he breaks into a home with it being clear a fight is about to happen its murder to kill him if he is smaller than you and pretending to be disabled? Glad I live in TEXAS where things make sense... The firefighter would have been no billed here.

OTOH if a person is ever desperate they should head north with crutches and plunder away with impunity. :barf:
primlantah is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 01:01 PM   #19
Sportdog
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2006
Location: Southwestern Michigan
Posts: 369
Hey primlantah!

Beautiful to see that you cut through the political correctness and used most likely the reality of the situation. I pretty much feel the same way but tried to tiptoe around and not just say it. My bad.....Good for you!
Sportdog is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 01:14 PM   #20
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
This wasn't a "break in" where the shooter was taken off guard and surprised in his home by any means. This was a dispute he encouraged and incited with someone he had personal ties with and who he clearly stated he did not consider a physical threat. He was also able to see the victim pull up, get out of his car, and approach the door. There were many other things he could have done but chose to sit and wait with the intention of shooting the other man. That is the definition of premeditated.

The victim made mistake which, even though provoked, he should not have made; but none of them were worth being killed over. If you think different I would highly question you competence to make a good decision as to when to shoot someone and I understand why so many people would use example like you as a reason why people should not have guns.

Last edited by Playboypenguin; May 15, 2008 at 01:45 PM.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 01:25 PM   #21
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
HEAR HEAR!!!!!

WildehwotAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 01:40 PM   #22
Sportdog
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2006
Location: Southwestern Michigan
Posts: 369
Pp & Wa

Message Deleted

Last edited by Sportdog; May 15, 2008 at 01:57 PM. Reason: Shouted Down By Liberal Left Wing
Sportdog is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 01:49 PM   #23
Playboypenguin
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2006
Location: Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 11,515
Sportdog

Until you learn to differentiate between "PC" and just plain "the right thing to do" you might want to do everyone a favor and leave the guns at home.

PS: Using negative buzz words like "PC" is pretty lame and really does not incite anyone other than people who allow themselves to be told by the far right what words are offensive.
Playboypenguin is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 02:25 PM   #24
tplumeri
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
It's never cut and dried when you fire a gun in anger.
Unfortunately, it appears these two guys were threatening each other before the incident. which makes the shooter suspect for premeditated.
part of my post (#2)

Quote:
It does not, from the report, sound like shots fired in anger
I use "in anger" as a generic term meaning that drawing or firing a gun with the intent to shoot another human being is "in anger". as opposed to pleasure or sport shooting.

Quote:
Unfortunately, it appears these two guys were threatening each other before the incident. which makes the shooter suspect for premeditated.
From post #2

Quote:
This was a dispute he encouraged and incited with someone he had personal ties with and who he clearly stated he did not consider a physical threat.
OK, so playboy said it better. But the point is the same.

Quote:
even if cleared by authorities he will face countless lawsuits and likely lose.
Thats the bottom line!
been there, done that.
well, almost, the lawsuit was thrown out, but it cost me alot in lawyers fees and appearances.

JMHO
tom
tplumeri is offline  
Old May 15, 2008, 02:40 PM   #25
Wildalaska
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: In my own little weird world in Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 14,174
Quote:
Last edited by Sportdog : Today at 02:57 PM. Reason: Shouted Down By Liberal Left Wing
Shouldnt that be...Shamed by mature, rational gun owners

WildHELOOOOKIMSHOUTINGAlaska ™
Wildalaska is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:31 AM.


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 0.12361 seconds with 7 queries