How was this woman's life, in imminent danger?

[RicInOR]

Police: Aliquippa Woman Thwarts Robbery By Running Over Suspect « CBS Pittsburgh

She ran over a guy in her car.
She used a deadly weapon, to wit the car
She was not threatened
There is no evidence anyone else (the children, the shop) were threatened

Only irrational fear that something might have happened.

Could I run down the next person I see open carrying? (it would be a cop no doubt, but still)


The victim may have been up to no good, but where is the evidence?

Read More

 

[Certaindeaf]

Well that'll teach him to use an airsoft.
Any cop'll shoot you dead if you even think about getting close to running him over.

 

[unklekippy]

How would they have known he was going to rob the convenience store if he didn't tell them himself?

I can't say how I would have reacted in her shoes. If this "group of children" was truly close and looking like his target, I can't say I would act any differently.

If I were there and the situation allowed, I would have confronted him with my own firearm and given him the opportunity to stand down or whatever. I would hate to shoot him and find out the kids had nothing to do with his plan. I would also hate to know that I waited until a child died before I acted.

In my opinion there are too many variables to pass judgment. She's either a hero or a felon.

 

[FreedomNW]

Here is the worst part of this from the last line of the article:

"The Beaver County District Attorney says they are not going to charge her with running White over."

This situation demonstrated far worst judgement than the Zimmerman case but what is the chance this will get any significant media coverage or be a national "outrage?"

 

[ArgyleAdams]

“He turned and pointed this at her, and she thought it was a real weapon and that she was about to be shot or that the kids were in danger, so she gunned her car and struck him.”

If he really pointed the thing at her then it seems pretty clear cut.

Sent from a phone; typos likely

 

[FreedomNW]

The original story I saw on this did not include the part about the gun being aimed at her. It just referenced her thinking the kids "might" be shot. If he did indeed point it at her, then yes, it was a justified action.

I would just hate to think that society is at a place that deadly force could be used upon a person for merely displaying a firearm, which is how this was originally reported.

 

[Misterbill]

Let's see:

Carrying a weapon forbidden by State and Federal law, openly, at night, in his hands, ready to fire (I agree I'm inserting some things here) Sounds like a reasonable belief in her mind that a felony upon a person was imminent.

How many people here want to bet that the defendant doesn't have a long history of LE contact or criminal record?

Sounds to me like a dirtbag taken out for what was reasonably threatening behavior.

Since none of us were there and there doesn't appear to be video, I guess we'll never know. The fact that the cops are saying it was solid use of force would tend to indicate to me it's probably solid.

Until we get a LOT more information, I'm inclined to go with the cops.

ETA: The threat didn't have to be to HER life. It could have been to someone else. Read the RCWs, they are quite explicit on this issue.

 

[pchewn]

Here is the worst part of this from the last line of the article:

"The Beaver County District Attorney says they are not going to charge her with running White over."

This situation demonstrated far worst judgement than the Zimmerman case but what is the chance this will get any significant media coverage or be a national "outrage?"

Would we have different response from the media and the police if she ran over Mr Black, rather than Mr White?

 

[nwbobber]

It sounds like in this case there were a lot of witnesses. I have to believe the police were satisfied that the woman had just cause for her fears.

 

[FreedomNW]

Again, if he pointed the weapon at her in a threatening manner, yes, it would be justified force.

BUT, let's look at it this way - It would NOT be justified for some freaked out anti-gun person to run down someone merely because they saw that the person was carrying a gun, for example, a permit holder picking their kid up from school (or an off-duty LEO for that matter) whose jacket brushed open revealing their sidearm.

Or what if it was your teenage son on his way to his buddy's house with his airsoft gun?

Without some sort of threatening action, we cannot let people use deadly force upon someone merely out of fear, or being freaked out by the sight of a firearm in public.

 

[thereddog]

Where I come from, her life doesn't have to be in any danger at all. She felt that she was preventing the commission of a felony, and she might have been.

Any clown running around with an airsoft gun cut down to look like an actual weapon deserves a severed ear for being a full on stupid assclown.

I realize that she might have killed the person she aimed her car at, but, she didn't.


This is why women should not have loaded cars.

 

[FreedomNW]

She felt that she was preventing the commission of a felony, and she might have been. Any clown running around with an airsoft gun cut down to look like an actual weapon deserves a severed ear for being a full on stupid assclown.

So then, at the next open carry rally in Salem should the PD just open fire on the crowd and claim that an armed mob was closing in on the legislature?

While I don't personally think it is productive to be carrying a rifle around the city like your on patrol in Afghanistan, we can't let the anti-2nd crowd continue to perpetrate the notion that any firearm seen in public is cause for panic and hysteria.

 

[Misterbill]

You weren't there and neither was I.

There WERE, however, according to the report, numerous witnesses present.

Why do you automatically presume that this was a (TOTALLY FING ILLEGAL) OC idiot as opposed to someone obviously about to do harm?

SBRS's are incredibly uncommon. Someone carrying one on the street is even MORE uncommon.

-Occam's Razor: which is more likely: A) This is a scumbag more likely to do harm than "make a jackass statement."

or B: It's a totally legit firearms owner who only LOOKS like he's too young to have an SBR under federal law, who's exercising his constitutional rights?

You decide. You have 3 seconds and you will be right or people will die.

 

[FreedomNW]

I very well understand the principles of justifiable uses of force but that is not my point here.

The point I am trying to get across is that there is a trend of people freaking out whenever they see a gun in public, most of the time on the hip of a law abiding citizen. They then go on to call 911 in a panic, which causes the police to make a show of force in response, which leads to a "serious incident" story on the evening news, which then further invites panic in the public.

So good citizens, responsibly armed, are more and more being harassed over something that shouldn't be an issue. And I can not blame LE in these cases because when a call comes in of a "man with a gun" they must take it seriously until it can be determined that no threat exists (of course some agencies antagonize the public more than others).

So when I read this story as it was originally reported as a woman running over a man carrying a gun who she feared would do harm with it, it was another example of the hysteria the public is being worked up into over the gun issue.

That point is still valid beyond whether or not this particular incident was justifiable which it very well may have been.

 

[Misterbill]

The point I am trying to get across is that there is a trend of people freaking out whenever they see a gun in public, most of the time on the hip of a law abiding citizen. They then go on to call 911 in a panic, which causes the police to make a show of force in response, which leads to a "serious incident" story on the evening news, which then further invites panic in the public.

Actually you are dead WRONG.

There is no such trend and I challenge you to provide any verifiable data to the contrary.

On the other hand, we have NUMEROUS LE agencies being specifically trained to deal with O/C and treat it as meaningless 1st amendment-protected speech. (SPD among many others).

What was once unheard of (O/C is now common-place in many of our cities (Seattle,, Mercer Island, Yakima, Sunnyside, Selah, Ellensburg, Richland), just to mention a few that I have personal experience with.

I've never had ONE encounter with LE in any of these cities. Nor have I EVER had someone say something about my O/C. which I have been doing for months now.

So I must have missed this rash of phone calls. Perhaps it was because I wasn't O/Cing an AR with a chest rig and looking like I was going to go Columbine at a moment's notice?

If you act and look like a psycho, people are going to call the cops. So would I. Otherwise, for the most part, no one gives a damn.

 

[FreedomNW]

Maybe in your locale that is true, but that isn't the case in my experience in the Portland metro area. While I won't take the time to pull news stories I have seen and I certainly don't have the time to do an analytical study to provide "verifiable data," it does happen. People I know on the anti-gun side of the debate are indeed worked up and freaked out over the issue, largely as a result of the media and politicians relentlessly pursuing the issue after last year's shootings. Just look at the heated fight in the OR legislature this term to see the level the debate has risen to and the hysterical arguments that were presented in order to justify some very abusive laws. And some anti-gun groups are even encouraging their people to call in every time they see a gun even if they know that no threat exists.

Someone on the other side I know (mature and clean cut non-LEO) who was open carrying for a while was "investigated" (albeit politely) multiple times by LE for having his Glock 19 on his hip. While the officers were respectful and understanding, they still gave the "someone had called it in" response and sent him on his way. Spend a little time on YouTube and you will find countless videos showing similar encounters.

But back to the point - what message is the media sending when they headline a story (at least initially) as a woman runs over a man with a gun who she thinks might do harm? Without the actual details of the encounter, without a proper discussion of use of force theory, is it not planting a seed in the mind of the public (particularly the non 2nd amendment people) that the mere sight of a gun is something to be irrationally feared?

Look at how the Zimmerman case was covered by the media, discussed by the politicians, and even discussed amongst your non-LE or non-2nd friends and tell me honestly you don't see a growing hysteria over the gun issue. Then compare that to a proper and rational evaluation of the case ( <broken link removed> as one example).

"If you act and look like a psycho, people are going to call the cops." Of course and so would I. But that is far removed from just running them down. And if you think "no one gives a damn" about open carrying, take a walk through downtown Portland and I would be surprised if you make it more than two hours without at least a friendly conversation with an officer.

 

[Misterbill]

VERIFIABLE. As in, NOT anecdotal.

Anything less is an undocumented CLAIM, not a proof. Not even kinda.

I'm not calling you a liar. And I agree that in some cities, people are more likely to call the cops than in others.

All that matters is how the COPs treat these allegations. And again, I'm interested in current, documented facts, not in anyones who's been rousted's 1/2 arsed opinion.

 

[FreedomNW]

I'm just voicing a legitimate point and you seem more interested in an argument, but such is the way of the internet.

That said, you say, "VERIFIABLE. As in, NOT anecdotal" while not actually addressing my point. Yet in making your point you say, "I've never had ONE encounter with LE in any of these cities. Nor have I EVER had someone say something about my O/C. which I have been doing for months now."

Isn't this just a tad bit hypocritical?

This is a forum for people interested in firearms related issues to casually discuss them. If you are seeking scholarly research and expecting people to provide a written report accompanied by their CV, I am afraid that you will be constantly disappointed. And while I can dance in that arena, that is not my intention in occasionally posting here.

 

[deadeye]

I'm just voicing a legitimate point and you seem more interested in an argument, but such is the way of the internet.

That said, you say, "VERIFIABLE. As in, NOT anecdotal" while not actually addressing my point. Yet in making your point you say, "I've never had ONE encounter with LE in any of these cities. Nor have I EVER had someone say something about my O/C. which I have been doing for months now."

Isn't this just a tad bit hypocritical?

This is a forum for people interested in firearms related issues to casually discuss them. If you are seeking scholarly research and expecting people to provide a written report accompanied by their CV, I am afraid that you will be constantly disappointed. And while I can dance in that arena, that is not my intention in occasionally posting here.

Welcome to the mr. bill show.

 

[Stomper]

Althogh Misterbill tends to get a bit "Sluggo" at times, he makes some good points ever now and then, so take it with a grain of salt.