The Armed Citizen... (Video)

[italianppf2]

"A NY shopkeeper who shot 4 men during a robbery was back on the job Friday, one day after the confrontation. Charles "Gus" Augusto, Jr. killed two of the robbers and wounded the other two. No charges have been filed."

Sad story, at the sametime, good for this guy!

 

[Underwhere]

I feel sorry for him. But good job.

 

[TimMcG74]

It's great to know that in NYC, this guy broke the law by defending his life and the lives of his employees. Where is Bloomberg on this incident? I am sure he is preparing a statement as we speak. F'n coward.

 

[pbearperry]

We have to get these businessmen off the streets.

 

[Terminator03]

I wonder if they will confiscate his weapons, and revoke his license, as they would in MA, once you actually have to use the gun for self-defense?

 

[garandman]

I wonder if they will confiscate his weapons, and revoke his license, as they would in MA, once you actually have to use the gun for self-defense?

Citation needed.

 

[Terminator03]

I don't have anything to cite, other than what we were led to believe in basic pistol course that I attended. Not sure if there is any case law to support it, or not, but as I said, we were basically told that if you actually use it in self defense, it's a 1 shot deal, because you will most likely loose your ltc. Hopefully it is just unsubstantiated bs, but do you know anyone that has put it to the test yet?

 

[italianppf2]

I wonder if they will confiscate his weapons, and revoke his license, as they would in MA, once you actually have to use the gun for self-defense?

They said in the video that the police had his gun and were running tests on it. I believe it was a glock. Whether or not he'll get it back or loose his license is another story. It's NY so who knows.

 

[garandman]

I don't have anything to cite, other than what we were led to believe in basic pistol course that I attended. Not sure if there is any case law to support it, or not, but as I said, we were basically told that if you actually use it in self defense, it's a 1 shot deal, because you will most likely loose your ltc. Hopefully it is just unsubstantiated bs, but do you know anyone that has put it to the test yet?

What organization taught the course you took?

You missed HKDrummer19's reporting of the attempted robbery of his father?

 

[BIG1PUN]

I feel sorry for him. But good job.

+2

 

[Broc]

Good for him. NY should let it go, let people forget about him and let him keep his license. He was defending himself and his employee.

The kids homies might come back looking for revenge.

I don't have anything to cite, other than what we were led to believe in basic pistol course that I attended. Not sure if there is any case law to support it, or not, but as I said, we were basically told that if you actually use it in self defense, it's a 1 shot deal, because you will most likely loose your ltc. Hopefully it is just unsubstantiated bs, but do you know anyone that has put it to the test yet?

if you use it the wrong way, then they will take it away from you.

example: a dude brakes into your house: you shoot, miss, he runs away and you follow him to the street and keep shooting. Then they might take it away.

Or, you shoot at someone in the city, and you also hit one or two parked cars. Then the owners of the cars might be able to press charges. (not 100% sure on this one, someone correct me)

 

[Terminator03]

Good for him. NY should let it go, let people forget about him and let him keep his license. He was defending himself and his employee.

The kids homies might come back looking for revenge.



if you use it the wrong way, then they will take it away from you.

example: a dude brakes into your house: you shoot, miss, he runs away and you follow him to the street and keep shooting. Then they might take it away.

Or, you shoot at someone in the city, and you also hit one or two parked cars. Then the owners of the cars might be able to press charges. (not 100% sure on this one, someone correct me)[/QUOTE]

I think in that situation, the insurance companies representing the owners would have a vested interest in pursuing legal recourse, even if the owners didn't. This is my opinion only, as I have never heard of this type of thing actually occurring, but it would make for a really interesting situation to follow.

 

[fbirdquik6]

This thread is going downhill fast


Terminator, who the hell taught "your course"?

 

[TWtommers]

I wonder if they will confiscate his weapons, and revoke his license, as they would in MA, once you actually have to use the gun for self-defense?

To my understanding, this mentality is taught less as an absolute and more as mental preparation. In other words, because MA is not particularly friendly to self help, you should expect that you will be treated as a suspect in any shooting and likely arrested. However, that does not mean you will be. While the laws regarding lethal force in MA are pretty l limiting, they still allow for self defense.

Paul Langone (sp?), the man who shot the knife wielding patient who was repeatedly stabbing his doctor, performed a nearly text book example of justifiable use of force but was subjected to an investigation of nearly 6 months. He was cleared but if he had done this in Texas he would have been cleared before he went home that day.

 

[Terminator03]

To my understanding, this mentality is taught less as an absolute and more as mental preparation. In other words, because MA is not particularly friendly to self help, you should expect that you will be treated as a suspect in any shooting and likely arrested. However, that does not mean you will be. While the laws regarding lethal force in MA are pretty l limiting, they still allow for self defense.

Paul Langone (sp?), the man who shot the knife wielding patient who was repeatedly stabbing his doctor, performed a nearly text book example of justifiable use of force but was subjected to an investigation of nearly 6 months. He was cleared but if he had done this in Texas he would have been cleared before he went home that day.

Thanks for posting this. This was almost exactly the way the self defense situation was described in my class. It wasn't said that you would ABSOLUTELY lose your license, or guns (permanently), but that you could count on at least having the weapon confiscated as part of the investigation, and that it would be tough to get back without spending a bunch of money in attorney's fees to do so. I probably shouldn't have just thrown out that blanket statement earlier in the thread - sorry if I misled anyone.

 

[Terminator03]

To my understanding, this mentality is taught less as an absolute and more as mental preparation. In other words, because MA is not particularly friendly to self help, you should expect that you will be treated as a suspect in any shooting and likely arrested. However, that does not mean you will be. While the laws regarding lethal force in MA are pretty l limiting, they still allow for self defense.

Paul Langone (sp?), the man who shot the knife wielding patient who was repeatedly stabbing his doctor, performed a nearly text book example of justifiable use of force but was subjected to an investigation of nearly 6 months. He was cleared but if he had done this in Texas he would have been cleared before he went home that day.

I am not aware of this particular case, but do you know what his personal legal costs were to defend himself during the 6 month investigation? Something tells me that it would not have been an insignificant amount.

 

[TWtommers]

I am not aware of this particular case, but do you know what his personal legal costs were to defend himself during the 6 month investigation? Something tells me that it would not have been an insignificant amount.

I don't. I'm sure there were countless hours of attorney's fees involved during that period but he did not go to court I don't believe. That was just the BPD investigation. I am not aware of the civil litigation he may be facing either but I do know that the family (wife and sons) of the deceased (notice the absence of the word victim) had retained a bloodsucker, I mean lawyer.

The cost of your defense really shouldn't enter your mind in a self defense situation so it shouldn't be a qualifier but it is a reality you have to deal with after the fact.

 

[italianppf2]

I don't. I'm sure there were countless hours of attorney's fees involved during that period but he did not go to court I don't believe. That was just the BPD investigation. I am not aware of the civil litigation he may be facing either but I do know that the family (wife and sons) of the deceased (notice the absence of the word victim) had retained a bloodsucker, I mean lawyer.

The cost of your defense really shouldn't enter your mind in a self defense situation so it shouldn't be a qualifier but it is a reality you have to deal with after the fact.

They just did a special on that story this morning. It highlighted the nurse who was stabbed. Good think for Paul!

 

[Tooth]

Hope I would react as he did. He sounds like he gave the punks a chance to leave and they pushed the wrong dude.

 

[italianppf2]

I am not aware of this particular case, but do you know what his personal legal costs were to defend himself during the 6 month investigation? Something tells me that it would not have been an insignificant amount.

look it up, it's a great case.. text book!

 

[speedy]

Are you sure it was not a nerf gun? Get them armed shop keepers from trying to protect themselves form arm robbers off the streets. How dare them interfere with the robbers line of work. It sounds like harrasment or discrimination against robbers. They are only trying to earn a living so they can go "Christmas shopping". Wait, they were Christmas Shopping. This is worst. Now they have no "Christmas" to celebrate.