and a good story to brighten the day!

[Palladin]

http://fox2now.com/2014/04/08/suspe...employee-during-attempted-robbery/?hpt=ju_bn2

 

[shapiroeric]

Excellent!!....Dumbass

 

[Lukes83]

“Everybody knows he’s got weapons and that,” neighbor Dennis Spratt said. “You don’t rob that man. No one around here, they know better for years. He’s been a retired police officer and firefighter.”

Hilarious

 

[cockpitbob]

Gutshot. Nice!

 

[cthorne98]

Nice story - Happy ending

 

[EJFudd]

Feel good story of the day. I love this part:

Back in Richwoods, neighbors are shocked, not so much that a crime happened, but that anyone would be foolish enough to try to rob Cobb’s. “Everybody knows he’s got weapons and that,” neighbor Dennis Spratt said. “You don’t rob that man. No one around here, they know better for years.

But then the obligatory liberal BS part:

Just the same, police aren’t saying one way or another if he might face any charges.

 

[LuvToGoFast]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Quiet]

You don't never rob Cobb. He ain't got time for that.

 

[mikelawtown]

We need many, many more stories like this.

 

[MAGG]

im all for a feel good story...what would they charge him with tho if they were to do so? Would it be because the guy was fleeing?

 

[Quiet]

im all for a feel good story...what would they charge him with tho if they were to do so? Would it be because the guy was fleeing?

In MA it would absolutely, positively be charged as he "wasn't a threat" at that point, assuming the door is more than a few feet away. Then as a defense you'd have to introduce all of that 21 foot knife vs gun stuff and prove that you were in fear of imminent bodily harm, and maybe you'd be acquitted. But prosecuting you wasn't the point, the point would have been to keep others from using a gun in self defense.

 

[Palladin]

im all for a feel good story...what would they charge him with tho if they were to do so? Would it be because the guy was fleeing?

the guy turned (and for the shooter's belief) acted in a menacing manner toward him. Bang

 

[GPP]

In MA it would absolutely, positively be charged as he "wasn't a threat" at that point, assuming the door is more than a few feet away. Then as a defense you'd have to introduce all of that 21 foot knife vs gun stuff and prove that you were in fear of imminent bodily harm, and maybe you'd be acquitted. But prosecuting you wasn't the point, the point would have been to keep others from using a gun in self defense.

Absolutely AND positively! You have any prior case to cite?

 

[Dadstoys]

Another weed in societies garden pulled.
Nice.

 

[Quiet]

Absolutely AND positively! You have any prior case to cite?

Well, let's see... there was this guy with a knife killing people and the guy who shot him dead and saved the lives of others was harassed, under threat of prosecution and disarmed for what, 6 or 12 months?

I guess they realized that the actual prosecution wasn't needed, and a likely acquittal would damage their goal of scaring anyone from using a gun in self defense (of others).

I could probably find similar ones.

So what's good for the goose is good for the goose-stepping-apologizer...(LOL just kidding)

...you got a (non)case to cite where a civilian shooting a perp was given an attaboy and had his gun back in say, under a month?

 

[HKdrummer]

Jesus, this sounds like it could be my dad. Same godamned type story, only he didn't shoot the guy "brad, nah you don't mess with brad"

 

[GPP]

Well, let's see... there was this guy with a knife killing people and the guy who shot him dead and saved the lives of others was harassed, under threat of prosecution and disarmed for what, 6 or 12 months?

I guess they realized that the actual prosecution wasn't needed, and a likely acquittal would damage their goal of scaring anyone from using a gun in self defense (of others).

I could probably find similar ones.

So what's good for the goose is good for the goose-stepping-apologizer...(LOL just kidding)

...you got a (non)case to cite where a civilian shooting a perp was given an attaboy and had his gun back in say, under a month?

I haven't goose stepped in a long time lol.
i don't know what case you're talking about tho in regards to the disarmed for 6 to 12 months one you mention above,

The latest one I can think of that was non processed was the guy in Boston, December 2013 ish. Shot the 2 guys trying to break into his apt. When he got his gun back tho, I have no idea.

 

[Quiet]

I haven't goose stepped in a long time lol.
i don't know what case you're talking about tho in regards to the disarmed for 6 to 12 months one you mention above,

The latest one I can think of that was non processed was the guy in Boston, December 2013 ish. Shot the 2 guys trying to break into his apt. When he got his gun back tho, I have no idea.

Took me a bit to find it. They investigated the hero for FIVE MONTHS before announcing there would be no charges. The shooting was at the end of October (28th? give or take) and the no charges decision was at the end of March.

Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel Conley said Wednesday that Paul Langone (lan-GOHN') acted in self-defense and the defense of Dr. Astrid Desrosiers (deh-ROH'-zhurs) when he fired at 37-year-old Jay Carciero (car-see-EH'-roh).

Conley made his decision after a five-month probe.

Authorities said Carciero stabbed Desrosiers numerous times in October 2009 before being shot by Langone in an office leased by Massachusetts General Hospital.

Police said Langone shot at Carciero with his personal firearm, hitting him twice, after Carciero ignored the officer's order to drop his weapon

Desrosiers was released from the hospital the following month.

 

[GPP]

Took me a bit to find it. They investigated the hero for FIVE MONTHS before announcing there would be no charges. The shooting was at the end of October (28th? give or take) and the no charges decision was at the end of March.

Hmmm. So, the real question isn't when they gave him his gun back, but whether his LTC was or was not ****ed with for that period.

 

[Quiet]

Hmmm. So, the real question isn't when they gave him his gun back, but whether his LTC was or was not ****ed with for that period.

Not really! LOL

The issue is that if you shoot someone in MA it doesn't come with an attaboy, it comes with major legal hassles no matter how freaking righteous the shoot.

So if the guy has retreated to the door and turns around, I'm guessing that's at least twice as along an investigation as a guy who kills someone actively stabbing a doctor... whattaya think?

 

[Claybreaker!]

Never bring a knife to a gunfight!

 

[GPP]

Not really! LOL

The issue is that if you shoot someone in MA it doesn't come with an attaboy, it comes with major legal hassles no matter how freaking righteous the shoot.

So if the guy has retreated to the door and turns around, I'm guessing that's at least twice as along an investigation as a guy who kills someone actively stabbing a doctor... whattaya think?

I don't agree that if it's a " good" shoot , you don't get an attaboy. If you're in a shooting, and your goal is to get a gold star on your forehead, or a frame worthy piece of card stock paper saying " wicked ****ing excellent job there Rambo!" for your fridge, you're on the wrong planet. Your goals shoul be the safety/preservation of you and your family etc. The " attaboy" is the fact that you saved the day, and the lives of your family, and possibly some harp seals.

Anybody, in any state, involved in a shooting, no matter how righteous, will be ensconced in legal hassles. That part is a given.

if you explain ( articulate) that the guy " retreated" to the door, and turned around and you blasted him, yup, you may have some splaining to do Lucy.

If you explain that the guy ran to the door and spun around, and you felt he had " regrouped" and began to come at you with his knife/sword/mace in a renewed and aggressive fashion, causing you to fire your gun at him because you felt he was going to kill/hurt/blind you and/or young Hansel and Gretel, it's a bit different then just turning around.

 

[Quiet]

I don't agree that if it's a " good" shoot , you don't get an attaboy. If you're in a shooting, and your goal is to get a gold star on your forehead, or a frame worthy piece of card stock paper saying " wicked ****ing excellent job there Rambo!" for your fridge, you're on the wrong planet. Your goals shoul be the safety/preservation of you and your family etc. The " attaboy" is the fact that you saved the day, and the lives of your family, and possibly some harp seals.

Anybody, in any state, involved in a shooting, no matter how righteous, will be ensconced in legal hassles. That part is a given.

if you explain ( articulate) that the guy " retreated" to the door, and turned around and you blasted him, yup, you may have some splaining to do Lucy.

If you explain that the guy ran to the door and spun around, and you felt he had " regrouped" and began to come at you with his knife/sword/mace in a renewed and aggressive fashion, causing you to fire your gun at him because you felt he was going to kill/hurt/blind you and/or young Hansel and Gretel, it's a bit different then just turning around.

The attaboy was figurative and what this clerk got, he was back behind his counter in three hours.


The whole point, my dear GPP (may I call you "G"?) is it would be a bad day compounded by an seemingly endless nightmare of investigation by the MA.gov prosecutor-politician who believes his political and financial fortunes rest on the back of being tougher on the law abiding gun owner than on bad guys.

 

[GPP]

The attaboy was figurative and what this clerk got, he was back behind his counter in three hours.


The whole point, my dear GPP (may I call you "G"?) is it would be a bad day compounded by an seemingly endless nightmare of investigation by the MA.gov prosecutor-politician who believes his political and financial fortunes rest on the back of being tougher on the law abiding gun owner than on bad guys.

You may indeed call me me "G" or you could just call me Glen lol.

The seemingly endless nightmare of investigation by the MA.gov prosecutor-politician is coming no matter who the hell you are; cop, shire reeve, or civilian. If you're involved in a shooting, you are gonna get the superscope in your butt.

The bigger question is if your right to 2A is suspended or revoked during the buttscope.

The fact that he was behind the counter 3 hours later is excellent, but it's a minuscule point in the big picture

 

[Rob Boudrie]

They investigated the hero for FIVE MONTHS before announcing there would be no charges.

A five month investigation would almost certainly include perusal of on-line forums to see if you ever wrote anything that could indicate you were predisposed to a "kill em all and let God sort em out" mentality rather than adopting the position "use of a gun to be avoid at any cost except death or grevious injury to yourself or an innocent". Something to keep in mind when posting on NES.

The seemingly endless nightmare of investigation by the MA.gov prosecutor-politician is coming no matter who the hell you are; cop, shire reeve, or civilian.

Yes, but if you are a cop, it may not be an "endless nightmare". An excellent example was the Framingham SWAT raid where a cop shot an innocent in the neck. Before ANY facts were in, the DA was already saying "may be an accident in which case no charges would be appropriate".

The bigger question is if your right to 2A is suspended or revoked during the buttscope.

Depends on your badge status more that the circumstances of the shooting.

under threat of prosecution and disarmed for what, 6 or 12 months?

And under threat of civil litigation for something like 3 years.

 

[GPP]

A five month investigation would almost certainly include perusal of on-line forums to see if you ever wrote anything that could indicate you were predisposed to a "kill em all and let God sort em out" mentality rather than adopting the position "use of a gun to be avoid at any cost except death or grevious injury to yourself or an innocent". Something to keep in mind when posting on NES.

Meh. A good shoot, is a good shoot.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Meh. A good shoot, is a good shoot.

Any you probably believe that innocent people are never convicted.

All those people freed by DNA exoneration - the tip of the iceberg.

 

[GPP]

Any you probably believe that innocent people are never convicted.

All those people freed by DNA exoneration - the tip of the iceberg.

Im not sure how you got to DNA exoneration.

I'm talking about a shooting.

Criminally speaking, it's pretty cut and dry.

Civilly speaking, totally different story. Lawyers get ahold of civil cases where shootings are involved, and it's game on, the only thing in the crosshairs is $$$$$.

Criminal case? Not so much. Either it's good, or it isn't. Depending on what kind of law you practice, you should already know this.

where does DNA enter in this?

 

[GPP]

A five month investigation would almost certainly include perusal of on-line forums to see if you ever wrote anything that could indicate you were predisposed to a "kill em all and let God sort em out" mentality rather than adopting the position "use of a gun to be avoid at any cost except death or grevious injury to yourself or an innocent". Something to keep in mind when posting on NES.


Yes, but if you are a cop, it may not be an "endless nightmare". An excellent example was the Framingham SWAT raid where a cop shot an innocent in the neck. Before ANY facts were in, the DA was already saying "may be an accident in which case no charges would be appropriate".

Depends on your badge status more that the circumstances of the shooting.

And under threat of civil litigation for something like 3 years.

I assure you, if the shoot is in question, whether you're a cop or civilian, you're looking at an " endless nightmare". I refer back to the Boston shooting in 2013, December-ish. Within a week or so, the civilian shooter was exonerated, no charges ( criminal) filed. I don't know the status of his LTC.

The Framingham SWAT shooting of the friendly being shot in the neck is ridiculous. I don't even know the outcome of what happened to the retard that did the shooting, but if he's still on the job, he shouldn't be. And I'm sure he took it rectally in regards to the civil suit ($$$$$$$$$$$) as well as the city/town of Framinghqm too.

You fall right into the media thought process with this. " Before ANY facts were in, the DA was already saying "May be an accident in which no charges would be appropriate"

Do you know the outcome? Criminally? Civilly? Or are you just spouting?

 

[economist]

Im not sure how you got to DNA exoneration.

I'm talking about a shooting.

Criminally speaking, it's pretty cut and dry.

Civilly speaking, totally different story. Lawyers get ahold of civil cases where shootings are involved, and it's game on, the only thing in the crosshairs is $$$$$.

Criminal case? Not so much. Either it's good, or it isn't. Depending on what kind of law you practice, you should already know this.

where does DNA enter in this?

The point is that no matter how obvious it may seem that self defense was justified, the legal system can't be trusted. Innocent and decent people are in jail -- lots of them. The criminal justice system is biased, driven by selective prosecution and hidden plea bargains, and in many cases corrupt. Being right and acting legally may not be enough to keep a man free.