Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

On Feb 16, 10:16*am, Ben wrote:
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

"RangersSuck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 10:16 am, Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to see if he is charged with the shooting. He should
be, and it should be well publicized. Anyone with a concealed carry license
should know better. He is actually damn lucky he didn't hit him.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:25:53 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 16, 10:16*am, Ben wrote:
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.


Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:16:18 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"RangersSuck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 10:16 am, Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to see if he is charged with the shooting. He should
be, and it should be well publicized. Anyone with a concealed carry license
should know better. He is actually damn lucky he didn't hit him.

Monday morning quarterbacking is soo much fun, particularly when you
have almost zero data, isnt it?

Gunner





"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:16:18 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"RangersSuck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 10:16 am, Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to see if he is charged with the shooting. He
should
be, and it should be well publicized. Anyone with a concealed carry
license
should know better. He is actually damn lucky he didn't hit him.

Monday morning quarterbacking is soo much fun, particularly when you
have almost zero data, isnt it?


Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:03:09 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:16:18 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"RangersSuck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 10:16 am, Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to see if he is charged with the shooting. He
should
be, and it should be well publicized. Anyone with a concealed carry
license
should know better. He is actually damn lucky he didn't hit him.

Monday morning quarterbacking is soo much fun, particularly when you
have almost zero data, isnt it?


Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

That is actually a matter of state law. It varies from state to state.

Some allow one to shoot a fleeing felon, others do not.

Are you allowed to shoot a fleeing arsonist? And why or why not?

Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Ill give you a hint though...
"demonstratably a danger to the public at large"

You can go from there....

Gunner





"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Feb 16, 5:25 pm, RangersSuck wrote:

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

The robber would have been at very close range. More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.


Dan

On Feb 16, 2:30*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:25:53 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:16*am, Ben wrote:
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner


Dude, the guy escaped, so I think it's safe to assume that the
backstop wasn't impervious to penetration by a human, much less a
bullet.

wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 5:25 pm, RangersSuck wrote:

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

The robber would have been at very close range. More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.


Dan

The news stories say the police are praising the guy, calling him a good
Samaritan, so he likely didn't do anything illegal.

--
Ed Huntress

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:03:09 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:16:18 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"RangersSuck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 10:16 am, Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to see if he is charged with the shooting. He
should
be, and it should be well publicized. Anyone with a concealed carry
license
should know better. He is actually damn lucky he didn't hit him.

Monday morning quarterbacking is soo much fun, particularly when you
have almost zero data, isnt it?


Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense
only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

That is actually a matter of state law. It varies from state to state.

Some allow one to shoot a fleeing felon, others do not.

Are you allowed to shoot a fleeing arsonist? And why or why not?

Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Ill give you a hint though...
"demonstratably a danger to the public at large"

You can go from there....

Gunner


You're the one that needs a hint, wise ass, and it doesn't matter how much
unrelated dust you try to kick in the air. No one can shoot a person in the
back under those circumstances in any state.

"Ben" wrote in message
...
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

What in the hell are you talking about now, Gunner, that the story was
"buried by the liberal media"? It was carried at least by MSNBC, CBS 4 in
Florida, the Miami Herald, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, and the Palm
Beach Post.

Given the number of armed robbery attempts there are in the US, how many
news outlets do you expect to carry one in Florida, when there wasn't even
any blood?

Get real.

--
Ed Huntress

Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Bad play. In most states, after a person ceases to be a threat, shooting at him is a no
no. Those are the rules. CCW doesn't make you a cop. What if Sandovaz was an undercover
cop and what you saw wasn't what was really happening?


Wes (who carries)

On Feb 16, 3:59*pm, " wrote:
On Feb 16, 5:25 pm, RangersSuck wrote:



So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

The robber would have been at very close range. *More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. *The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. *If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.

Dan

You can't possibly know all of that (except for "Newspapers are not
always super accurate.").

On Feb 16, 2:30*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:25:53 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:16*am, Ben wrote:
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

If the only bone you've got to pick here has to do with my knowledge
of the backstop and not with the fact that the guy was shooting at the
back of an unarmed man, you're a bigger ass than I previously thought.

Yep, this story was "Buried" on the 6:30 news in Ft.Lauderdale friday
evening. They interviewed the guys that caught him and the cops...

And they teased it for an hour before they ran it.

What more did you want Moron?

On Feb 16, 10:35 pm, RangersSuck wrote:

The robber would have been at very close range. More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.

Dan

You can't possibly know all of that (except for "Newspapers are not
always super accurate.").

You really need to learn to read with comprehension. The robber would
have been at close range because the story said it took place in the
drveway of the security store.

I said " more likely " because if Moulton had wanted to shoot the
robber, he probably would have fired more than one shot.

I did not say that the reporter did not talk to Moulton, I said
"probably". And then gave one reason why that might be true.
Another reason would be that the reporter was probably not on the
scene within half an hour of the incident, and Moulton is likely to
have left the scene by the time the reporter arrived.

It is possible that Moulton did try to shoot an unarmed man in the
back. But as Eliot said anyone with a permit to carry should know
better.

Dan

On Feb 17, 8:52*am, " wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:35 pm, RangersSuck wrote:



The robber would have been at very close range. *More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. *The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. *If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.

Dan

You can't possibly know all of that (except for "Newspapers are not
always super accurate.").

You really need to learn to read with comprehension. *The robber would
have been at close range because the story said it took place in the
drveway of the security store.

I said " more likely " *because if Moulton had wanted to shoot *the
robber, he probably would have fired more than one shot.

I did not say that the reporter did not talk to Moulton, I said
"probably". * And then gave one reason why that might be true.
Another reason would be that the reporter was probably not on the
scene within half an hour of the incident, and Moulton is likely to
have left the scene by the time the reporter arrived.

It is possible that Moulton did try to shoot an unarmed man in the
back. *But as Eliot said anyone with a permit to carry should know
better.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *Dan

OK, I have my guesses and you have yours. But take a look at google
maps street view of that address. Their "driveway" appears to be a
block long. This is not a driveway like the one next to a house, but
one that runs in front of a strip of office buildings along a major
road.

And yes, the entire point of my post was that Moulton should have
known better. Maybe he fired one shot, missed, and then realized that
this was not a good idea.

For the record, I'm not entirely against owning guns. I am a former
NRA member (didn't quit over issues, just lost interest), but lines
have to be drawn somewhere. Shooting an unarmed man in the back would
certainly be a good place to draw such a line.

On Feb 17, 3:02 pm, RangersSuck wrote:
On Feb 17, 8:52 am, " wrote:



On Feb 16, 10:35 pm, RangersSuck wrote:

The robber would have been at very close range. More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.

Dan

You can't possibly know all of that (except for "Newspapers are not
always super accurate.").

You really need to learn to read with comprehension. The robber would
have been at close range because the story said it took place in the
drveway of the security store.

I said " more likely " because if Moulton had wanted to shoot the
robber, he probably would have fired more than one shot.

I did not say that the reporter did not talk to Moulton, I said
"probably". And then gave one reason why that might be true.
Another reason would be that the reporter was probably not on the
scene within half an hour of the incident, and Moulton is likely to
have left the scene by the time the reporter arrived.

It is possible that Moulton did try to shoot an unarmed man in the
back. But as Eliot said anyone with a permit to carry should know
better.

Dan

OK, I have my guesses and you have yours. But take a look at google
maps street view of that address. Their "driveway" appears to be a
block long. This is not a driveway like the one next to a house, but
one that runs in front of a strip of office buildings along a major
road.

And yes, the entire point of my post was that Moulton should have
known better. Maybe he fired one shot, missed, and then realized that
this was not a good idea.

For the record, I'm not entirely against owning guns. I am a former
NRA member (didn't quit over issues, just lost interest), but lines
have to be drawn somewhere. Shooting an unarmed man in the back would
certainly be a good place to draw such a line.


I did not google the address but did google Everol Moulton. And found
several more accounts of the incident. None of which agreed exactly
with the one posted. One said Moulton fired a shot, while the
robber was armed. So I think we are left with newspaper articles are
an approximation of what happened. And we agree that shooting a
unarmed man in the back is a bad idea.

Dan

On Feb 17, 4:33*pm, " wrote:
On Feb 17, 3:02 pm, RangersSuck wrote:



On Feb 17, 8:52 am, " wrote:

On Feb 16, 10:35 pm, RangersSuck wrote:

The robber would have been at very close range. *More likely Moulton
fired one round to try to frighten the robber into not running.
Newspapers are not always super accurate. *The reporter probably did
not talk to Moulton. *If the reporter had talked to Moulton, there
would likely have been at least one quoted remark.

Dan

You can't possibly know all of that (except for "Newspapers are not
always super accurate.").

You really need to learn to read with comprehension. *The robber would
have been at close range because the story said it took place in the
drveway of the security store.

I said " more likely " *because if Moulton had wanted to shoot *the
robber, he probably would have fired more than one shot.

I did not say that the reporter did not talk to Moulton, I said
"probably". * And then gave one reason why that might be true.
Another reason would be that the reporter was probably not on the
scene within half an hour of the incident, and Moulton is likely to
have left the scene by the time the reporter arrived.

It is possible that Moulton did try to shoot an unarmed man in the
back. *But as Eliot said anyone with a permit to carry should know
better.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *Dan

OK, I have my guesses and you have yours. But take a look at google
maps street view of that address. Their "driveway" appears to be a
block long. This is not a driveway like the one next to a house, but
one that runs in front of a strip of office buildings along a major
road.

And yes, the entire point of my post was that Moulton should have
known better. Maybe he fired one shot, missed, and then realized that
this was not a good idea.

For the record, I'm not entirely against owning guns. I am a former
NRA member (didn't quit over issues, just lost interest), but lines
have to be drawn somewhere. Shooting an unarmed man in the back would
certainly be a good place to draw such a line.

I did not google the address but did google Everol Moulton. *And found
several more accounts of the incident. *None of which agreed exactly
with the one posted. * *One said Moulton fired a shot, while the
robber was armed. *So I think we are left with newspaper articles are
an approximation of what happened. *And we agree that shooting a
unarmed man in the back is a bad idea.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dan

Newspaper articles are ALWAYS an approximation - when google news
first started, it was interesting to read the same story as covered by
different papers. It seems, though, that recently things have become
more homogeneous.

You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

RS

In article
,
RangersSuck wrote:

You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

Shooting an unarmed innocent man in the back is bad. Shooting a felon
anywhere anytime is good

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

nick hull writes:

Shooting an unarmed innocent man in the back is bad. Shooting a felon
anywhere anytime is good

After all, who really needs a judge and jury anyway....

In article ,
Maxwell Lol wrote:

nick hull writes:

Shooting an unarmed innocent man in the back is bad. Shooting a felon
anywhere anytime is good

After all, who really needs a judge and jury anyway....

.....for those not caught in the act

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/

On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:29:39 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:03:09 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 12:16:18 -0600, "Elliot G"
wrote:


"RangersSuck" wrote in message
...
On Feb 16, 10:16 am, Ben wrote:

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to see if he is charged with the shooting. He
should
be, and it should be well publicized. Anyone with a concealed carry
license
should know better. He is actually damn lucky he didn't hit him.

Monday morning quarterbacking is soo much fun, particularly when you
have almost zero data, isnt it?


Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense
only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

That is actually a matter of state law. It varies from state to state.

Some allow one to shoot a fleeing felon, others do not.

Are you allowed to shoot a fleeing arsonist? And why or why not?

Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Ill give you a hint though...
"demonstratably a danger to the public at large"

You can go from there....

Gunner


You're the one that needs a hint, wise ass, and it doesn't matter how much
unrelated dust you try to kick in the air. No one can shoot a person in the
back under those circumstances in any state.


You are in error. Or you are a liar. Which is it?

Gunner



"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:43:25 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:


You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

I see your reading comprehension sucks as badly as St..pids does.

Pity

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:03:17 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:


So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner


Dude, the guy escaped, so I think it's safe to assume that the
backstop wasn't impervious to penetration by a human, much less a
bullet.

How so? Use as much whitespace necessary to show your logic train.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:48:59 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 16, 2:30*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:25:53 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:16*am, Ben wrote:
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

If the only bone you've got to pick here has to do with my knowledge
of the backstop and not with the fact that the guy was shooting at the
back of an unarmed man, you're a bigger ass than I previously thought.


I see more blather on your part. In still waiting for an answer about
shooting an arsonist btw.

Is there some reason you and yours are ignoring it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Feb 21, 6:00*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:03:17 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

Dude, the guy escaped, so I think it's safe to assume that the
backstop wasn't impervious to penetration by a human, much less a
bullet.

How so? *Use as much whitespace necessary to show your logic train.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Go to maps.google.com. Enter the address of the establishment. Look at
the street view picture. Then tell me about how safe it was to be
shooting guns in that neighborhood.

On Feb 21, 6:01*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:48:59 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 16, 2:30*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 09:25:53 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:16*am, Ben wrote:
Gun-toting good Samaritan foils Pompano Beach robbery
BY DAVID SMILEY


Police say Fabrizzo Sandovaz might want to work on his planning and
execution.

First, he forgot to put his Jeep in park when he allegedly pulled
behind Walid Hamad's car and jumped out to rob the 48-year-old Palm
Beach County man.

Second, the spot he chose for the armed robbery happened to be in the
driveway of a Pompano Beach surveillance and securities retail store
where employees are particularly active in exercising their Second
Amendment rights.

''Friday the 13th wasn't a lucky day for this robber,'' said Mike
Jachles, a spokesman with the Broward Sheriff's Office.

As Sandovaz held a gun to Hamad and told him to hand over a bag in his
car, the gunman's own vehicle slowly cruised into two parked cars
belonging to employees of IC Realtime Security Solutions, 3050 N.
Andrews Ave. extension

Hearing the crash, several employees ran outside, where they saw the
armed robbery taking place.

''We all ran outside and it so happened that one of our customers had
a license to carry and had a weapon on him,'' said Frank Fishman, a
sales representative at the store.

Within seconds, Sandovaz, 21, found himself taking orders with a gun
to his head as Everol Moulton, a store customer with a concealed
weapons permit, told Sandovaz to drop the gun and kick it toward him.

Sandovaz dropped the firearm and ran. Moulton fired one shot and
missed, and then he and several store employees gave chase.

Fishman said they caught up to the suspect about 150 yards down the
road, tackled him and then held him down until the Broward Sheriff's
Office arrived.

Adding insult to injury, the incident was recorded on the store's
surveillance cameras.

''This guy piked the worst place in the world,'' Fishman said,
``because most of us carry and we're security guys.''

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

If the only bone you've got to pick here has to do with my knowledge
of the backstop and not with the fact that the guy was shooting at the
back of an unarmed man, you're a bigger ass than I previously thought.

I see more blather on your part. *In still waiting for an answer about
shooting an arsonist btw.

Is there some reason you and yours are ignoring it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Q: What the **** does shooting an unarmed, hapless stickup man have to
do with arson?

A: When Gunner backs himself into a corner, he changes the subject.

On Feb 21, 5:59*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:43:25 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:

You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

I see your reading comprehension sucks as badly as St..pids does.

Pity

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

OK, then suppose you take a couple of minutes and explain things to
me. My understanding is that you don't have a problem with shooting at
the guy who, after dropping his gun, tried to run away from the scene
of the crime. Further, you don't think this puts bystanders in danger,
as long as there's a suitable backstop.

That is, at least, what I thought you wrote. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:41:10 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 21, 5:59*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:43:25 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:

You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

I see your reading comprehension sucks as badly as St..pids does.

Pity

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

OK, then suppose you take a couple of minutes and explain things to
me. My understanding is that you don't have a problem with shooting at
the guy who, after dropping his gun, tried to run away from the scene
of the crime. Further, you don't think this puts bystanders in danger,
as long as there's a suitable backstop.

That is, at least, what I thought you wrote. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.

First of all...several of the reports claim the perp was STILL holding
the firearm when he was shot at.

Secondly...you havent proven to us that there were 1. Bystanders, 2. An
unsafe backstop.

In fact...as I mentioned in my original post..you have given us few if
any details of any kind. Just your opinion.

And thirdly...you have as yet failed to clarify when and when its not
proper to shoot a fleeing felon. I made mention that its largely a
state issue and depends on various circumstances. You as yet have
refused to refute that in any meaningful way, attacking me, rather than
that I stated clearly.

So I ask again, are you normally this stupid or do you have to work at
it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:33:18 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 21, 6:00*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:03:17 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

Dude, the guy escaped, so I think it's safe to assume that the
backstop wasn't impervious to penetration by a human, much less a
bullet.

How so? *Use as much whitespace necessary to show your logic train.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Go to maps.google.com. Enter the address of the establishment. Look at
the street view picture. Then tell me about how safe it was to be
shooting guns in that neighborhood.

Present the data or a link. I asked you for the data. Its up to you to
provide it, its not my job to do your research for you.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:37:23 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:


I see more blather on your part. *In still waiting for an answer about
shooting an arsonist btw.

Is there some reason you and yours are ignoring it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Q: What the **** does shooting an unarmed, hapless stickup man have to
do with arson?

A: When Gunner backs himself into a corner, he changes the subject.

So you admit to being a liar. Thats not surprising given your nick.

"
Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense
only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

That is actually a matter of state law. It varies from state to state.

Some allow one to shoot a fleeing felon, others do not.

Are you allowed to shoot a fleeing arsonist? And why or why not?

Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Ill give you a hint though...
"demonstratably a danger to the public at large"

You can go from there....

Gunner

The above is my original post. Yet you claim Im changing the subject.
A proven lie on your part.

So, now what are you going to claim? That I forceably backed you into a
corner and you are trying to change the subject?

Snicker

Still waiting for the answers to my very reasonable questions above btw.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Feb 21, 2:39*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:33:18 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 21, 6:00*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:03:17 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

Dude, the guy escaped, so I think it's safe to assume that the
backstop wasn't impervious to penetration by a human, much less a
bullet.

How so? *Use as much whitespace necessary to show your logic train.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Go to maps.google.com. Enter the address of the establishment. Look at
the street view picture. Then tell me about how safe it was to be
shooting guns in that neighborhood.

Present the data or a link. *I asked you for the data. Its up to you to
provide it, its not my job to do your research for you.

Gunner


Gunner, I had already done the research for myself and gave you pretty
easy to follow instructions on how to see the data. Since you've
proven unwilling, or incapable of doing that yourself, I'm tempted to
just tell you to **** off. However, in the interest of completeness,
take a look at this:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...249671798,,0,5

Does this look to you like a safe area to be shooting at a moving
target?

On Feb 21, 2:44*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:37:23 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:

I see more blather on your part. *In still waiting for an answer about
shooting an arsonist btw.

Is there some reason you and yours are ignoring it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Q: What the **** does shooting an unarmed, hapless stickup man have to
do with arson?

A: When Gunner backs himself into a corner, he changes the subject.

So you admit to being a liar. * Thats not surprising given your nick.

"



Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense
only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

That is actually a matter of state law. It varies from state to state.

Some allow one to shoot a fleeing felon, others do not.

Are you allowed to shoot a fleeing arsonist? *And why or why not?

Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Ill give you a hint though...
"demonstratably a danger to the public at large"

You can go from there....

Gunner

The above is my original post. *Yet you claim Im changing the subject.
A proven lie on your part.

So, now what are you going to claim? *That I forceably backed you into a
corner and you are trying to change the subject?

Snicker

Still waiting for the answers to my very reasonable questions above btw.

Gunner


First of all, I do not admit to being a liar.

Second, your question about shooting an arsonist is a non-sequiter

Third, your question about shooting an arsonist was directed to Eliot
G. (not me)

Fourth, your question about shooting an arsonist would be better
directed to someone who gives a **** (again, not me).

You know nothing about me. If you did, you'd know that RangersSuck is
about the New York hockey team - I have no idea how you think that
makes me prone to telling lies.

You really need to learn to read with comprehension. *The robber would
have been at close range because the story said it took place in the
drveway of the security store.


You need to look at a picture of the "driveway."


http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...=17&iwloc=addr

On Feb 21, 2:38*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:41:10 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 21, 5:59*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:43:25 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:

You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

I see your reading comprehension sucks as badly as St..pids does.

Pity

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

OK, then suppose you take a couple of minutes and explain things to
me. My understanding is that you don't have a problem with shooting at
the guy who, after dropping his gun, tried to run away from the scene
of the crime. Further, you don't think this puts bystanders in danger,
as long as there's a suitable backstop.

That is, at least, what I thought you wrote. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.

First of all...several of the reports claim the perp was STILL holding
the firearm when he was shot at.

Secondly...you havent proven to us that there were 1. Bystanders, 2. An
unsafe backstop. *

In fact...as I mentioned in my original post..you have given us few if
any details of any kind. *Just your opinion.

And thirdly...you have as yet failed to clarify when and when its not
proper to shoot a fleeing felon. *I made mention that its largely a
state issue and depends on various circumstances. *You as yet have
refused to refute that in any meaningful way, attacking me, rather than
that I stated clearly.

So I ask again, are you normally this stupid or do you have to work at
it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Firstly, the ONLY report I have read of this incident was the one
posted in this group, in which it clearly said that the peroetrator
dropped his gun and ran.

Secondly, I don't need to prove that there were bystanders or an
unsafe backstop in order to ask you whether it's OK with you to shoot
an unarmed man in the back as long as it doesn't present a danger to
bystanders, which appears to be your position.

Thirdly, for the third time, here is a link to a photo of the
neighborhood. I really don't know what else you expect me to provide
by way of evidence.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...=17&iwloc=addr

Fourthly, what are the laws concerning shooting fleeing felons in the
back in the State of Florida? Please provide cites.

Am I normally not this stupid. I usually wouldn't spend this amount of
time arguing with the likes of you.

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 14:38:28 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 21, 2:39*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:33:18 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 21, 6:00*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:03:17 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:

So, Moulton shot at the back of an unarmed man and missed,
jeopardizing bystanders. Brilliant.

Do you have any cites as to what the backstop was? *Or are you simply
talking out your ass?

Brilliant

Gunner

Dude, the guy escaped, so I think it's safe to assume that the
backstop wasn't impervious to penetration by a human, much less a
bullet.

How so? *Use as much whitespace necessary to show your logic train.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Go to maps.google.com. Enter the address of the establishment. Look at
the street view picture. Then tell me about how safe it was to be
shooting guns in that neighborhood.

Present the data or a link. *I asked you for the data. Its up to you to
provide it, its not my job to do your research for you.

Gunner


Gunner, I had already done the research for myself and gave you pretty
easy to follow instructions on how to see the data. Since you've
proven unwilling, or incapable of doing that yourself, I'm tempted to
just tell you to **** off. However, in the interest of completeness,
take a look at this:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...249671798,,0,5

Does this look to you like a safe area to be shooting at a moving
target?


Now that you ACTUALLY provided some data, where is the diagram of how
the shot was fired and in which direction?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 15:07:45 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 21, 2:44*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:37:23 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:

I see more blather on your part. *In still waiting for an answer about
shooting an arsonist btw.

Is there some reason you and yours are ignoring it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Q: What the **** does shooting an unarmed, hapless stickup man have to
do with arson?

A: When Gunner backs himself into a corner, he changes the subject.

So you admit to being a liar. * Thats not surprising given your nick.

"



Don't need much data. Conceal carry is for the purpose of self defense
only.
If someone is unarmed and running away, you don't need to defend yourself.

Even the police would have no right to fire on someone under the
circumstances as described.

That is actually a matter of state law. It varies from state to state.

Some allow one to shoot a fleeing felon, others do not.

Are you allowed to shoot a fleeing arsonist? *And why or why not?

Use as much whitespace as necessary.

Ill give you a hint though...
"demonstratably a danger to the public at large"

You can go from there....

Gunner

The above is my original post. *Yet you claim Im changing the subject.
A proven lie on your part.

So, now what are you going to claim? *That I forceably backed you into a
corner and you are trying to change the subject?

Snicker

Still waiting for the answers to my very reasonable questions above btw.

Gunner


First of all, I do not admit to being a liar.

Of course you dont. Few liars make that admission.

Second, your question about shooting an arsonist is a non-sequiter

You are now trying to weasel. Pity.

Third, your question about shooting an arsonist was directed to Eliot
G. (not me)

You call me on my post..you cant pick and choose after the fact what you
want from the post.

Fourth, your question about shooting an arsonist would be better
directed to someone who gives a **** (again, not me).

Another liar perhaps?

You know nothing about me. If you did, you'd know that RangersSuck is
about the New York hockey team - I have no idea how you think that
makes me prone to telling lies.

As a former Army Ranger...never mind..I can see how "sports" can effect
some peoples..limited peoples lives.

Which of course is a digression from your buffoonery in your posts.

Hockey...doesnt that involve a ball and a bat? Maybe a head injury on
your part....?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 16:01:21 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck
wrote:

On Feb 21, 2:38*pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:41:10 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck



wrote:
On Feb 21, 5:59*am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 07:43:25 -0800 (PST), RangersSuck

wrote:

You and I agree that shooting an unarmed man in the back is a bad
idea. Gunner, on the other hand, appears to think it's OK, as long as
there's a good backstop to keep bystanders safe. Sheesh.

I see your reading comprehension sucks as badly as St..pids does.

Pity

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

OK, then suppose you take a couple of minutes and explain things to
me. My understanding is that you don't have a problem with shooting at
the guy who, after dropping his gun, tried to run away from the scene
of the crime. Further, you don't think this puts bystanders in danger,
as long as there's a suitable backstop.

That is, at least, what I thought you wrote. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.

First of all...several of the reports claim the perp was STILL holding
the firearm when he was shot at.

Secondly...you havent proven to us that there were 1. Bystanders, 2. An
unsafe backstop. *

In fact...as I mentioned in my original post..you have given us few if
any details of any kind. *Just your opinion.

And thirdly...you have as yet failed to clarify when and when its not
proper to shoot a fleeing felon. *I made mention that its largely a
state issue and depends on various circumstances. *You as yet have
refused to refute that in any meaningful way, attacking me, rather than
that I stated clearly.

So I ask again, are you normally this stupid or do you have to work at
it?

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""

Firstly, the ONLY report I have read of this incident was the one
posted in this group, in which it clearly said that the peroetrator
dropped his gun and ran.

So you admit to making grand pronounciations based on exceptionally
limited data. Im not surprised.

Secondly, I don't need to prove that there were bystanders or an
unsafe backstop in order to ask you whether it's OK with you to shoot
an unarmed man in the back as long as it doesn't present a danger to
bystanders, which appears to be your position.

You dont need me at all. You have your overly inflated opinion to keep
you warm.

Thirdly, for the third time, here is a link to a photo of the
neighborhood. I really don't know what else you expect me to provide
by way of evidence.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...=17&iwloc=addr

Fourthly, what are the laws concerning shooting fleeing felons in the
back in the State of Florida? Please provide cites.

Good question. You mean you dont know..and yet you made further grand
prounociations based on your ignorance of the subject?

Am I normally not this stupid.

Oddly...I figured this was normal for you. Maybe took a hockey puck to
the skull recently?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited to non-lethal force in
most cases by Tennessee v. GarnerTennessee v. Garner

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1, was a case in which the Supreme Court
of the United States held that under the Fourth A...
, . The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless
necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to
believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious
physical injury to the officer or others."

Note...this ONLY applies to police officers. However tort law usually
applies the same rules to civilians..the Reasonable Man criteria.

Now perhaps you can put 2+2 together and see that you were wrong, and
why I made the comment about shooting a fleeing arsonist and so forth.

"unless....has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a
significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or
others."

"feels that the felon represents a continuing threat to the community"

Hence arsonists, bombers, serial rapists and so forth can be considered
a Continuing threat.

And of course in Texas and several other states, one may shoot a felon
to recover property, no threat to ones person needed.

When you get your JD...and some street experience both in Case and Tort
Law..get back to me, ok?

Until then..you are simply an ignorant and inflated Opinion half beaten
sensless by a hocky ball.

Gunner

"Upon Roosevelt's death in 1945, H. L. Mencken predicted in his diary
that Roosevelt would be remembered as a great president, "maybe even
alongside Washington and Lincoln," opining that Roosevelt "had every
quality that morons esteem in their heroes.""