Lets see if this gun owner gets treated like a MSP

[Lucas McCain]

FAIL

 

[Larry Legend]

If he was able to shoot the guy when/if the robber pulled a gun on him during the robbery, then the clerk would be all set. The fact that he was no longer in a situation of "unavoidable risk of grave bodily injury of death" (or whatever the wording is) is why he will be penalized.

We carry a firearm to respond with equal force when encountering specific situations. Chasing a criminal down the street is not one of them.

 

[drgrant]

No different than a straw buyer.

What does a straw purchase have to do with someone borrowing a
firearm? Nothing.

If the "user" was unlicensed, then yes, his possession is illegal.

It's also telling however, that all this safe storage/license BS wouldn't
come up in like 40+ other states.

I agree that the guy broke the law but it's worth mentioning that the law
is a terrible one.

If the clerk feels the need to carry, he should get his own LTC and his own handgun.
Wildly firing down a sidewalk is assanine.

That much I can agree with, he didn't accomplish much other than add to
his legal liability.

-Mike

 

[45collector]

FAIL

+1

 

[Pilgrim]

The most obvious is that Heller deals with storage in your residence which is what the circumstances with the Trooper also involved.

The OP deals with a retail establishment.

No comparison! Apples to oranges.

""The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self defense in the home."

- U.S. Supreme Court Justice J. Scalia, June 26, 2008"

It doesn't limit self defense to the home only.

It is ILLEGAL to leave a loaded (or unloaded) gun unlocked and out of your control.

And that should not be.

 

[drgrant]

Remember the liquor store owner in Worcester who shot an armed robber dead? I don't think he got charged.

Completely different ballgame. In that case, a guy shot the BG who was pointing a gun at his brother, IN the store. There was a "clear and imminent threat of serious bodiily harm."

-Mike

 

[FunYun]

FAIL

Such enthralling discussion....

 

[jcr]

[I'm a bit troubled that the OP posted an article verbatim, and didn't even cite the source, let alone provide a link.]

 

[appraiser]

I believe it was from the Lawrence Eagle Tribune on Saturday IIRC

http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_051225448.html

 

[Half Cocked]

""The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self defense in the home."

- U.S. Supreme Court Justice J. Scalia, June 26, 2008"

It doesn't limit self defense to the home only.

The whole premise of Heller was possession of a handgun in the home.... hence the comment by Scalia as you so conveniently highlited.

The issue I was discussing had nothing to do with self defense. It was a response to the post about the application of Heller in this case to the storage issue (i.e. The MSP Trooper).

 

[George D]

What does a straw purchase have to do with someone borrowing a
firearm? Nothing.

Buying a gun for someone else not qualified to purchase one and buying one for the use of an unqualified person are pretty similar IMHO.
If the clerk shot a bystander, the owner would be in all sorts of trouble.

 

[DickWanner]

He didn't get charged because he shot the guy in the process of robbing him, with a weapon pointed at him. If he had given the robber the money, the robber had left and he chased him out the door and shot him, the outcome would have been very different for the shooter.

I don't see what is morally wrong with this, dead criminal (scumbag) either way. Too bad it's still illegal.

 

[DickWanner]

Buying a gun for someone else not qualified to purchase one and buying one for the use of an unqualified person are pretty similar IMHO.
If the clerk shot a bystander, the owner would be in all sorts of trouble.

Uhh, one deals with buying and selling/giving. The other deals with usage.

Why does this thread seem to be full of weird ass, head scratching comparisons?

 

[MasterShinken]

Bad choice on the store owners part, never shoot unless theres no other option in these cases. if he could get a shot off safely while the guys were in the store then that would have been a good tactical move... Chasing them down shooting down a populated sidewalk was definitely a wrong move. as much as I hate to say it, he messed up and will have to pay the price for it, thank god no outside person was hurt.

 

[xring]

Lucas sounds like he should run for governor.

 

[George D]

Uhh, one deals with buying and selling/giving. The other deals with usage.

Why does this thread seem to be full of weird ass, head scratching comparisons?

I don't see it as weird. Buying a gun and giving it to someone else to use and buying a gun and giving it to someone else to use seem pretty similar to me.

 

[DickWanner]

I don't see it as weird. Buying a gun and giving it to someone else to own and buying a gun and giving it to someone else to use seem pretty similar to me.

Fixed it for ya

 

[Brigante]

I remember a case last year in MN where two guys broke into this guys house. The homeowner opened fire, one of the guys took off in a car and the homeowner ran out and fired at the car driving down the street. Different state but similar stupidity. PS: The homeowner was not charged.

 

[terraformer]

Apparently this guy will be charged, but there is no link to a story yet. See this closed thread.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=57324

 

[ztp]

In 1995, an armored car making a bank pickup was robbed in Harvard Square. After the money was taken at gunpoint, the guard pursued and shot the would be robbers. He was not charged, but rather hailed as a hero. How is this different? (Besides the whole gun storage issue)

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=237622

 

[MaverickNH]

In 1995, an armored car making a bank pickup was robbed in Harvard Square. After the money was taken at gunpoint, the guard pursued and shot the would be robbers. He was not charged, but rather hailed as a hero. How is this different? (Besides the whole gun storage issue)

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=237622

For the same reason banks are guarded with firearms but schools are not - as a Nation of Cowards we're supposed to do the right thing and let the criminals walk away.

 

[Palladin]

UPDATE!

No charges against bodega clerk who fired shots at fleeing robbers

http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_098225448.html


By Jim Patten
[email protected]

LAWRENCE — A bodega clerk who grabbed his brother's gun and fired shots at two fleeing robbers will not be charged in connection with the shooting.

Ruben Veras, 35, the clerk at La Esperanza Market at 64 Milton St., and brother of store owner Felix Veras, could have been charged with discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a building.

About 8:28 p.m. on Feb. 19, Ruben Veras was behind the counter of the store helping customers when two masked men entered the store, one of them with a gun and the other with a knife.

The men robbed the store and fled, and Veras grabbed the 9 mm pistol his brother kept under the counter and ran after the robbers, firing three rounds at the fleeing men.

Police Chief John Romero said the robbers had threatened Ruben Veras that they would come back, and in Veras' mind the threat was continuing, and that was why he fired the shots.

"The interests of justice would not be served by prosecuting him," Romero said yesterday. "This guy was somebody at work, doing his job."

He said the decision not to charge Ruben Veras was made during consultations with District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett's office.

Store owner Felix Veras, 37, was licensed to be in possession of the pistol, but Romero said his license to carry the weapon was revoked because he stored it in such a way that unauthorized persons could have access to it.

Romero said Felix Veras, who was not at the store when the robbery took place, will be able to reapply for his gun license at a later date, and faces no charges in the case.

ÔÇæÔÇæÔÇæ
Join the discussion. To comment on stories and

 

[Jose]

The MSP guy had an entirely different set of circumstances and hired excellent representation..this pair is likely screwed.

Best justice money (and the thin blue line) can buy, eh?

 

[terraformer]

No charges against bodega clerk who fired shots at fleeing robbers

http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_098225448.html

For a state where protecting property is not supposedly allowed, businesses seem to be getting some significant leeway in these cases. Not that I mind the outcome per se, I am highly surprised of it.

 

[appraiser]

the guy who was unlicensed gets a free pass, and the guy who left the gun unsecured in the store was not charged but had his permit pulled.

I'll be scratching my head for a while on this one...

I guess they almost got the same treatment as a MSP

 

[MichaelJ]

Shooting at someone running AWAY is NOT a good idea. I hope he gets fried...that is an asshat move. I am willing to bet he doesn't have much training/range time under his belt either. He is LUCKY he didn't hit someone else. But jesus...shooting someone as they are running away?..my department has regs against that...and we would most likely be facing suspension if we did something like that.

 

[Realtor MA]

No charges against bodega clerk who fired shots at fleeing robbers

Good. The clerk and owner screwed up but after all they were the victims.

 

[ztargetshooter]

With this guys license publicly pulled the BG's now know there is no gun under the counter.

 

[Palladin]

With this guys license publicly pulled the BG's now know there is no gun under the counter.

I was thinking that same thing.

The LEO most likely didn't charge him on the storage issue, because he didn't want to be the test case for Heller in MA.

 

[Friday]

For a state where protecting property is not supposedly allowed, businesses seem to be getting some significant leeway in these cases. Not that I mind the outcome per se, I am highly surprised of it.

well, when they hold up your store, they point the gun (or knife) at you, not your cash register. It seems easy enough to justify being in fear of bodily harm or death to me.