Disgruntled man shooting tires and engine block of utility truck in front of his home

[hr636]

https://www.local10.com/news/crime/h...ome-police-say

A buddy of mine showed me this video tonight. He's not a concealed carrier, I am. We started talking about what we would do in this situation if we were armed; My response was that I would draw to low ready, retreat to cover, most likely behind an engine block of a nearby vehicle, call 911 leave them on the line on speaker phone let them know I have a CHP and there's an active shooter. I'd let dispatch know he's not yet threatened anyone, he's only shooting at a vehicle. I would then give verbal commands to the suspect to drop the weapon.

My friend said he wouldn't do anything because the old man appeared to be calm and only interested in the vehicle. I agree, but I also disagree in that he's not in a rational frame of mind, is firing a deadly weapon in a residential street, and even if he's only intending to damage property, you never know what his next target will be. I'd feel responsible if I didn't intervene, and he decided to make his next objective an innocent human.

I don't live in Florida, and I'm not familiar with the laws there. I know in my State of Colorado that it's considered Felony menacing if you draw your weapon only in protection of personal property. However, does the suspects use of a deadly weapon against a vehicle in a populated residential area warrant your giving verbal commands and matching deadly force in return?

Chances are, as civilians we will never encounter something as zany as this, and luckily it ended peacefully. What are your thoughts?

[xandi]

When I worked for the city I had a gun flashed at me once so I can see this happening to some oen
I wasn't allowed to carry a gun or anything btw

[NateKirk]

I would have just retreated to someone's back yard, taken a short video of what was going on out of sight, make a note of what house he went into, and called the police.

Obviously I'd be ready to use my gun if he started shooting people, but I wouldn't have unholstered it or engaged the guy.

Not that I'm an expert, but part of situational awareness is making a logical assumption on what is going on around you, and my interpretation of the video is some stupid suburban puke was upset that a truck was parked in front of his yard. I can imagine it quickly turning into a gunfight if one was to engage him weapon in hand.

As far as the legality of a situation where you shouted for him to disarm and he engaged you, I think it would depend on a lot of things. On the one hand a lawyer could argue that you and others felt threatened by an armed stranger shooting vehicles in a public place, but they could also argue that you needlessly sought conflict, you escalated the situation by shouting for him to disarm, what authority do you have to attempt to disarm, why did you not wait for the police to apprehend the man, etc.

It would be a big court battle over 4 flat tires.

The irony is that the truck is now going to be sitting in front of his house a lot longer than he expected

[44 AMP]

While we have the right to use deadly force for self defense, there's a huge difference between being able to, needing to, and being required to.

And, I would point out that if someone is shooting things, PEOPLE might also be things, in their view. You, I and the cops don't know, can't know, only the shooter knows, and we should always act in a manner prudent with the worst possible case.

The arguments (after the fact) are going to be "he was only shooting a truck" on one side, and "he hadn't shot anybody YET (and needed to be stopped before he did)" on the other.

This is one of those kinds of things where the law can bite even the best intentioned "civilian".

Absent a "clear and present danger" (a direct threat to yourself or others), that other people can recognize AFTER the fact, you might be charged, and even convicted for what YOU believe is a justifiable act.

It's a decision that must be made in seconds, or less, and one that will be reviewed over hours and days by others. If the physical evidence is less than crystal clear you won't get a pass because you're a "good guy".

Its a subject we've discussed many times, many ways. Personally, I'm not the police, so I'm not going to act like one. IF the shooter hasn't shot at anyone, SO FAR, and it seems likely he isn't going to, then I think discreet observation, UNTIL the police arrive is the most prudent course of action.

Because these things can change in the blink of an eye the situation must be re-evaluated, literally moment by moment. Remember also that when the police arrive, they don't know what is going on, exactly. They MAY have all the info you gave 911, they may not. "Man with a gun shooting things in the vicinity of Elm and 2nd might be all the info they have, and standing around with your pistol at low ready (just in case) might NOT be a very prudent thing to do...

Your call, and good luck if you ever do get caught in something like that.

[CalmerThanYou]

I would observe from a safe distance, and wait for one of his rounds to ricochet back to him, and then call for EMS to save the crusty coot. I guess that did not happen so he gets to cool off in jail.

[FrankenMauser]

While we have the right to use deadly force for self defense, there's a huge difference between being able to, needing to, and being required to.

That has been a big subject in my mind today.
This week, there have been several car-jackings / kidnappings / hostage-takings that involved a man with a box cutter demanding rides from people, and holding them at knife point until he got to his requested destination. But... no one was hurt - just delayed and scared.

Though the situations I mention did involve personal threat of grievous injury, the utility truck shooting still somewhat falls into the same category for me.
I have to be able to think, in that exact moment, "Will a jury think I was justified?"

"Better to be tried by twelve than carried by six" is a fun quote to throw around, but it really isn't a good approach to 'borderline' situations.


As for the utility truck:
I would have remained in my house, monitoring the situation, with a rifle handy.
Why the rifle? Because I'm not a handgunner, I'm distanced from the shooter, and I want my shots to count if he starts lobbing lead at myself or my family.

[JoeSixpack]

Hard to say, I'd probably know him if I was on scene Im likely his neighbor.
(No he's not my neighbor I mean If I was their I'd have a better idea what his mentality was)

They didn't want to show much video but it looked like he was interested in just the vehicles.

Given my disdain for ATT I'd probably have just stood their, alert, but with a smile on my face.

Anyone who ever spends any time on DSL reports you'll sometimes find telecom utility workers who DO NOT care one bit about your property if it's within the utility easement, infact some don't even care if it's OUTSIDE the easement.

I don't know what happen here but such installers actually get a power drunk attitude when anyone challenges their right to do the work.. and the sad reality is the law is on their side even when they're butchers about it.
It's like some of them actually enjoy ripping up flower beds and tearing out fencing in the pursuit of their job.

If that happen in this incident I can see how it could easily and quickly escalate into something like this.

I would have been ready to act if it moved beyond venting on the vehicles but as far as stopping him? Nah, I'd just watch.

[hr636]

https://youtu.be/BZpqXdSyaVo

Here's the full video. I forgot to mention there's a utility worker in the boom on top of the truck in the fetal position fearing for his life. The guy on the phone with police is an employee as well. Obviously he didn't see the man as a current threat, but what happens when if his aggression progresses from the vehicle to people? I don't know. You can't predict a lunatics behavior. In my mind, I would rather stop a threat as quickly as possible, even if it's a passive threat, than risk the loss of human life.

I'm obviously not going to use deadly force unless there is an immanent threat, but hindsight is 20/20, and there's no way if you were on the street you could know that this guy was only interested in damaging the vehicle. There's nothing sane about firing a handgun into a vehicle parked in front of your home, and there's no reason I should assume the suspect's actions won't escalate.

I can't say for sure what I would do, because I wasn't there, but I definitely wouldn't be passive. I feel like verbal commands with a weapon drawn would deescalate the situation without any further violence. This is the outcome that was achieved when police arrived. Again, hindsight. You don't know if this guy is going to turn and kill someone, and if you're confident in your skill sets why wouldn't you intervene.

[JoeSixpack]

After watching the video that was shot on a 2005 flip phone.

Not 100% sure what I would have done.. On one hand him firing the gun in a crowded neighborhood isn't exactly safe.. on the other hand his body language says he's in no hurry and despite his activity is not intending to harm people.

Could that change? of course, But based on the video he did not point it at anyone, the employee on the phone sounds pretty calm.

I think I'd probably stick with my first assessment and just watch.. let the police handle it.. if he decided shooting the trucks wasn't enough then I'd get involved but im not seeing enough on video for me to react to it.

If I was to get invovled at all at that point it would be without a gun in my hand.
Another gun might actually escalate the situation.

He's mad, he's venting, maybe you can talk him down, maybe you can't but he sees you're armed maybe he takes that as a challenge now we've got him made AT YOU, now you have to defend your self, and it just gets ugly from there.

Kinda like couples fighting, don't get involved in that you'll suddenly find one or both of them directing their rage at you instead of each other.
This guy is a having a domestic dispute with those trucks.. don't get between him and it.

[armoredman]

Observe and report, let the armed, on duty, professionals handle it. I would stay in the home and be a good witness, unless directly threatened.

[HiBC]

I have no credentials ,just an opinion.I live in Colorado.
There is a time and place for everything. There may be a time and place for a CCW to intervene.
With all due respect to law enforcement,they don't always regard an intervening armed citizen as "a good buddy one of us" Sometimes amateur intervention is a really bad idea.
I suggest that if your CCW provides you with ENTHUSIASM to get involved...
You take a deep breath and slow down.
Knowing you likely will be cuffed,arrested,and in need of an attorney ...should dampen enthusiasm.
You have no idea what this shooter's reaction would be to your command.Odds are good it will not be what you intend or expect.
The guy is shooting property.Yell at him? He may shoot at you.He might be good,or lucky.OK,lets say you win!! He is dead. Or,paralyzed for life.
Your life does not get happy from here.

Pulling a gun to take control of a situation and give commands is ,IMO,not what our CCW is for.

IMO,you might find cover and observe. Keep you gun holstered and out of the situation. Wait for the LEOs. No hollering. Be invisible.
The situation that "might happen" exists only in your head

[thallub]

HiBC covered it all very well.

You ain't a cop or the Lone Ranger. In a situation like the one presented, simply take a deep breath and call 911.

[TXAZ]

Stay out of the line of fire.
Don't start a gun battle if you aren't the target.
AT&T trucks are an excellent way to (hopefully) have this needy person unload his weapon without hurting people. They will likely be back on the streets soon.

Be clear when you are asked about this "gun shooting". This gentleman needs mental help and had he had only a baseball bat likely would have gone 3 innings with each truck.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by hr636

In my mind, I would rather stop a threat as quickly as possible, even if it's a passive threat, than risk the loss of human life.

Respectfully, I doubt the law recognizes anything like a "passive" threat. Laws providing for the use of deadly force in self defense speak of your being in fear of "imminent" loss of life or serious bodily injury. To me that doesn't cover a "passive" threat.

I'm obviously not going to use deadly force unless there is an immanent threat, but hindsight is 20/20, and there's no way if you were on the street you could know that this guy was only interested in damaging the vehicle. There's nothing sane about firing a handgun into a vehicle parked in front of your home, and there's no reason I should assume the suspect's actions won't escalate.

When his attention shifts from shooting the truck to shooting at you, then you are in imminent danger. Until then ... you're a bystander, not a victim.

I can't say for sure what I would do, because I wasn't there, but I definitely wouldn't be passive. I feel like verbal commands with a weapon drawn would deescalate the situation without any further violence. This is the outcome that was achieved when police arrived.

You are not the police. When the guy is shooting at the truck, there is one deadly weapon involved. You consider introducing a second deadly weapon to be DEescalating? I respectfully disagree. Introducing yourself and a second deadly weapon into a situation that doesn't involve you is IMHO clearly escalating, not deescalating.

[Don P]

ddy of mine showed me this video tonight. He's not a concealed carrier, I am. We started talking about what we would do in this situation if we were armed; My response was that I would draw to low ready, retreat to cover, most likely behind an engine block of a nearby vehicle, call 911 leave them on the line on speaker phone let them know I have a CHP and there's an active shooter. I'd let dispatch know he's not yet threatened anyone, he's only shooting at a vehicle. I would then give verbal commands to the suspect to drop the weapon.

My friend said he wouldn't do anything because the old man appeared to be calm and only interested in the vehicle. I agree, but I also disagree in that he's not in a rational frame of mind, is firing a deadly weapon in a residential street, and even if he's only intending to damage property, you never know what his next target will be. I'd feel responsible if I didn't intervene, and he decided to make his next objective an innocent human

Oh, so you have a CCW and you want to assume the roll of law enforcement. Bad idea, you taint the police.
To answer your question call 911 and let them handle it. The only thing that I see that you stated that is the right move is to RETREAT, vacate the scene.
Think about the do gooder in Walmart that intervened when he saw a man with a gun, and didn't know the mans girlfriend was behind him. Well he's 6 under because she shot him in the head and now he be dead. Leave Rambo to the movies

[rwilson452]

One thing I heard and sounds likely. If you use your cell phone to take video of the guy. The law just might take your cell into evidents and you won't see it again until the case is over, if then.

[JN01]

I would stay behind cover and report it. I think the utility worker recording the incident used poor judgement staying that close to someone who was obviously unhinged. After the guy finished with the vehicles, he might have gone after the company representative.

[TheDevilThatYouKnow]

Two counts of Felony Vandalism 806.13 (3rd degree felony)

(1)(a) A person commits the offense of criminal mischief if he or she willfully and maliciously injures or damages by any means any real or personal property belonging to another, including, but not limited to, the placement of graffiti thereon or other acts of vandalism thereto.
...
(b) 3. If the damage is $1,000 or greater, or if there is interruption or impairment of a business operation or public communication, transportation, supply of water, gas or power, or other public service which costs $1,000 or more in labor and supplies to restore, it is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Two counts of Aggravated Assault with a firearm 784.021 (3rd degree felony)

(1) An “aggravated assault” is an assault:

(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or
(b) With an intent to commit a felony.

(2) Whoever commits an aggravated assault shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Mr Jove was released on $30,000 bail.

ETA - I'm somewhat surprised he wasn't charged with 790.15 Discharging firearm in public or on residential property.

[FITASC]

However, does the suspects use of a deadly weapon against a vehicle in a populated residential area warrant your giving verbal commands and matching deadly force in return?

No.

Obviously he didn't see the man as a current threat, but what happens when if his aggression progresses from the vehicle to people? I don't know. You can't predict a lunatics behavior. In my mind, I would rather stop a threat as quickly as possible, even if it's a passive threat, than risk the loss of human life.

We can play that game a bazillion times a day - if you can't predict. You are not a cop, he is not posing a threat to you, nor can you read his mind. A pre-emptive shot on your part would land you in trouble - even in Florida.

[tony pasley]

The man was 100% wrong. Stay safe, stay prepared, wait for the police. Be honest with yourself, how many here have felt like doing that to what ever had you frustrated to no end on a day that nothing went right for you?

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by hr636

I'd feel responsible if I didn't intervene, ...

You might want to do some work on why you would feel responsible for what someone you don't even know does.

[Evan Thomas]

This is more about tactics than legal questions, so I'm moving it to T&T.

[T. O'Heir]

"...what we would do..." Simple. You call police. Having a CCW permit does not make you part of a posse or LEO.
And you cannot act because of what you think the guy might do. Nor do you get to determine his state of mental health.
"...a fun quote to throw around..." Doesn't pay the 5 or 6 figure legal fees either.

[TailGator]

What I see when I watch the video is ample opportunity to walk away and find a safe place. The shooter is focused on the truck. It seems that he had opportunity to target the workers and didn't. I would not want to be the catalyst in changing his intent from targeting property to targeting people. This is one of those times it is wise to ask "Must I shoot?" rather than "May I shoot?"

[SIGSHR]

Very stupid and totally unacceptable, the sort of publicity we DON'T need. I wonder if he somehow thought he could get away with it. Jail time at 64, not exactly a good retirement plan.