Man shot in back by coward
Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
walking away from the car when this coward shot him in the back. the man
died at the hospital. this car owner with a licensee to carry a gun is a
punk ass coward. there was NO! threat towards his life. the man was walking
away. the man should be charged with murder.
-Man
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
CAP...@webtv.net
BULLSHIT
BOUGHT AND PAID FOR WHEN HE BROKE INTO CAR
Why should an honest (had legal permit)
hard working car owner have his quality of life disrupted by some punk.
Tex executed Karla Fay do you really think "they" are going to find this
citizen guilty of anything? Well, maybe in polit co9rrt Austin but no
where else!
Thank you for your time and consideration:
With GODS' LOVE Capt JOHN "V"
Michael Newton
>
> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back. the thief was
> walking away from the car when this coward shot him in the back. the man
> died at the hospital. this car owner with a licensee to carry a gun is a
> punk ass coward. there was NO! threat towards his life. the man was walking
> away. the man should be charged with murder.
>
> -Man
And the loss to society was ... what, again?
mn
Vegard
And your point is . . . that everyone should be allowed to shoot car-thiefs
in the back on the assumption that they're no "loss to society"?
Vegard
seven_...@my-dejanews.com
THE BACK WHILE HE WAS WALKING AWAY! the guy didn't have the BALLS
to hold the thief until the police got there. that's why he carries
a gun, because he is a PUNK ASS COWARD.
Michael Newton
>
>
> And your point is . . . that everyone should be allowed to shoot car-thiefs
> in the back on the assumption that they're no "loss to society"?
>
> Vegard
Well, gee ... um ... since you put it that way: Yes. Burglars too, while
they're at it. Toss in a mugger and make it a triple-play. I won't miss
'em a bit.
mn
Mr. Mike
> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
True crime books for sale (all w/cover pix) -- http://www.mjq.net/books
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Also ... visit the Jack Olsen Home Page -- http://www.mjq.net/jackolsen
R. J. Dunnill
>
> On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
>
> The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
Much of the Texas population takes a dim view towards criminals, holding
little sympathy for them. It's not recommended to shoot car thieves
there,
though, even if legal under criminal law, as one can still be sued in
the
civil courts.
Take care.
Tom Scalf
wrote:
>On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
>
>The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
>
Actually the operative words are "owner" and "thief".....If i catch
someone trying to steal my car, he's toast! trying to walk or run
away from the scene of the crime isn't going to help him! If he needs
a frontal entry wound for it to be legal, I'll be sure he gets
one....let someone else prove which came first!
Tom
Mark Denman
>
> Mr. Mike wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > > A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
> >
> > The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
>
> little sympathy for them. It's not recommended to shoot car thieves
> there,
> though, even if legal under criminal law, as one can still be sued in
> the
> civil courts.
You know, cops shoot criminals under these situations. Couldn't see his
hands, thought he had a weapon and was turning around to use it, & c., &
c....
The man shot was a criminal caught in the act of breaking the law. It is
reasonable and prudent to assume he is armed. It is reasonable and
prudent to defend yourself from assault. Saying "freeze asshole!" and
then firing when he starts turning around can be a reasonable act of
self-defense. Anyone know of civil case law in Texas for similar
situations? Seems to me the self-defense argument is pretty tight,
unless there are eyewitnesses who can state that they saw the man
surrender.
--
Mark Denman ~E Aho Laula~ <"wider is better">
=======================================================================
the ALARUMS-L mailing list - a chatty forum about pencil and paper RPGs
For info, send message INFO ALARUMS-L to MAJO...@ICAN.NET
=======================================================================
I have the body of a Greek God --- Bacchus!
*unsolicited e-mail advertising will lead to a complaint to your
postmaster*
Vegard
OK then. I think your opinion is reprehensible, but I'll let it slide.
I guess I should go do something that benefits society instead, in case
somebody finds it pertinent to apply that relativistic view on the worth
of human life to *me*. Wasting time here with self-proclaimed
good people, who make a living out of producing what some percieve as
pornography for prospective killers, might not look too good.
Vegard
The Old Sarge
says...
>
>In article <335-35A...@newsd-144.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> CAP...@webtv.net wrote:
>> SEVEN
>> BULLSHIT
>> BOUGHT AND PAID FOR WHEN HE BROKE INTO CAR
>> Why should an honest (had legal permit)
>> hard working car owner have his quality of life disrupted by some punk.
>> Tex executed Karla Fay do you really think "they" are going to find this
>> citizen guilty of anything? Well, maybe in polit co9rrt Austin but no
>> where else!
>>
>> Thank you for your time and consideration:
>> With GODS' LOVE Capt JOHN "V"
>>
>>
> Oh, gezz, another twisted point of view. the guy shot the man in
> THE BACK WHILE HE WAS WALKING AWAY! the guy didn't have the BALLS
> to hold the thief until the police got there. that's why he carries
> a gun, because he is a PUNK ASS COWARD.
Man, we're getting exactly one point of view here -- yours.
I sense you are not a disinterested party here; that you have some emotional
involvement -- hence the "punk ass coward" crack.
So tell us -- what *is* your involvement here? What were the circumstances
behind the shooting, what time of day was it, what did the shootee say as he
was walikng away, did he make any kind of threatening movement or a grab at a
concealed firearm, -- details, Man, details.
Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
eyeo...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> Vegard wrote:
> >
> >
> > And your point is . . . that everyone should be allowed to shoot car-thiefs
> > in the back on the assumption that they're no "loss to society"?
> >
> > Vegard
>
> Well, gee ... um ... since you put it that way: Yes. Burglars too, while
> they're at it. Toss in a mugger and make it a triple-play. I won't miss
> 'em a bit.
>
>
Listen, I don't like criminals either, but when one is gunned down
in that fashion that's just wrong. any way you look at it the shooter
is a PUNK ASS COWARD. case closed!
The Old Sarge
says...
>
> Listen, I don't like criminals either, but when one is gunned down
> in that fashion that's just wrong. any way you look at it the shooter
> is a PUNK ASS COWARD. case closed!
>
> -Man
No it ain't, Man. Details, Man, details. *You* have reached a conclusion but
the rest of us haven't been given enough evidence to decide if you're right or
not.
Mr. Mike
>> > A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
>>
>> The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
>
>Much of the Texas population takes a dim view towards criminals, holding
>little sympathy for them.
Much, but not all... ";-/
Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
read the story at CNN. COWARD SHOOTS MAN IN BACK!
Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
olds...@xgi.com (The Old Sarge) wrote:
> In article <6o5587$39l$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
> says...
> >
> > Listen, I don't like criminals either, but when one is gunned down
> > in that fashion that's just wrong. any way you look at it the shooter
> > is a PUNK ASS COWARD. case closed!
> >
> > -Man
>
> No it ain't, Man. Details, Man, details. *You* have reached a conclusion
but
> the rest of us haven't been given enough evidence to decide if you're right
or
> not.
>
the car owner was charged with murder. and it shows a map of
the details too. check it out at www.Austin360.com
-Man
Mark Denman
A question of justification
Austin police charge shop owner with murdering a would-be
thief
By Bob Banta
American-Statesman Staff
Published: July 10, 1998
The man who pursued and shot
to death a would-be car thief on
the streets of downtown Austin
was charged Thursday with
murder.
Police charged Paul Anders
Saustrup, 33, in the shooting
death of 20-year-old Eric Demart
Smith, whom Saustrup found
breaking into his girlfriend's truck
early Wednesday. Smith was hit
in the back by two rounds from a
.380 handgun after Saustrup
chased the man for more than
two blocks, police say.
"He pointed the gun and pulled
the trigger intending to kill the
man," said Assistant District
Attorney Buddy Meyer.
Meyer said Smith did not display a weapon during the incident and
there was
no weapon or property from the vehicle
found on Smith's body. "At the time
the shots were fired, the deceased was
not facing the defendant," Meyer said.
"We believe the evidence will show the shooting was without
justification."
Saustrup's attorney, Joe Turner, said he hopes a grand jury will
determine that there is no reason to try Saustrup. The murder charge
carries a punishment of five to 99 years in prison.
The incident began shortly before 2 a.m. Wednesday when Saustrup and his
girlfriend, Sasha Sessums, returned to Sessums' truck, parked near the
intersection of East Fourth Street and San Jacinto Boulevard.
When the couple found a man, identified as Smith, inside the truck,
Saustrup tried to detain the man by pulling a gun, but Smith ran.
Sessums phoned 911 on a cell phone and told them her boyfriend was
chasing a man who was breaking into her truck, according to an arrest
affidavit.
At 1:59 a.m., the affidavit said, Sessums reported over the phone that
Saustrup had just shot the man and said Saustrup was defending himself.
Investigators said Smith was shot in the 300 block of East Third Street.
He was taken to Brackenridge Hospital, where he was pronounced dead at
2:29 a.m.
According to court records, Smith was convicted of drug possession and
attempted burglary of a home in 1997. He had also been convicted of five
misdemeanors, including the 1995 burglary of a vehicle, records show.
Saustrup, who has a permit to carry a concealed handgun, spent nearly 40
hours in jail before being released on $100,000 bail Thursday afternoon.
Turner said he believes his client has been treated unfairly. On June 4,
a Travis County grand jury cleared Georgetown police officer Lamont
Navarrette, who shot 18-year-old Omar Llanos to death after finding
Llanos inside the officer's truck near a South Austin nightclub on May
20. Navarrette said that during the confrontation, Llanos claimed to
have a gun.
"That Georgetown officer was not arrested, he didn't have to put up
$100,000, and he didn't have to go through the ordeal of jail like Mr.
Saustrup had to," Turner said Thursday, standing next to Saustrup in his
law office. "I think there's been a double standard here."
Saustrup declined to discuss the case on Turner's advice.
"We are hoping to get justice at the grand jury level," Turner said.
Meyer said a Travis County grand jury could review the case in about a
month.
After his release, Saustrup, who owns an auto and motorcycle repair
business, was greeted at Turner's office by his brother, Steffen
Saustrup, a geophysical technician at the University of Texas.
"You can't imagine the number of calls I've had from people supporting
Paul," said Steffen Saustrup. "He has friends everywhere."
Steffen Saustrup said the family has lived in Austin for five
generations. He said his brother attended Zilker Elementary School, O.
Henry Middle School and Austin High School before dropping out to study
auto and motorcycle repair. "Our mother died suddenly from cancer when
Paul was about 17," said Steffen Saustrup. "It hit him at a vulnerable
age."
At Saustrup's repair shop on North Interstate 35, employees said they
were shocked at his arrest.
"Just a few days after I started working for Paul last year, I told him
I was behind on my mortgage," said mechanic Jesus Serna, 34. "I told
Paul, and he handed me a check and said: 'Here. Go pay your mortgage.'
He's that kind of guy."
Phillip Nunn, 21, who said he had worked for Saustrup in the garage
since he was 16, described his boss as "a very good person who takes
good care of his customers and the people who work for him."
"I've seen Paul in stressful situations," Nunn said. "And he has always
been levelheaded."
<Same paper July 09>
Man to face charges in gun death
Victim shot in back; Texas law
allows
use of force against burglars
at night
At what point does self-defense and
protection of property become
murder? See what other readers
had to say.
By Kelly Daniel and Bob
Banta
American-Statesman Staff
Published: July 9, 1998
An Austin man who pulled a
concealed weapon and killed a
20-year-old man with a history
of burglaries whom he says he
found sitting in his girlfriend's
car near East Fourth Street
early Wednesday morning will
face a murder indictment,
Travis County prosecutors
said.
Buddy Meyer, an assistant
district attorney with the Travis
County district attorney's
office, said prosecutors made
the decision to pursue the
indictment against Paul A.
Saustrup, 33, of Austin late
Wednesday afternoon. Police
say Saustrup, who had a
permit to carry a concealed
weapon, shot Eric Demart
Smith of Austin twice in the
back after following him for
about two blocks.
"Whether or not that is justification for
the use of deadly force will be
resolved in the courts," Meyer said.
Saustrup and his girlfriend were returning
to the woman's Suburban
parked on San Jacinto Boulevard, just off
the 400 block of East Fourth
Street, a few minutes before 2 a.m. when
they saw someone sitting inside,
police said. Saustrup pulled a .380
handgun he was carrying and tried to
keep the intruder, identified Smith,
inside the truck, said Assistant Police
Chief Mike McDonald.
But Smith hopped out and began to "walk
briskly" away, toward the 300
block of East Third Street, police said.
The couple followed, and as the
woman called 911 on her cell phone,
Saustrup warned Smith to keep his
hands visible, said his lawyer, Joe
Turner. Smith kept saying he'd have
"his homeboys" shoot Saustrup and then he
dropped his hands and
started "to turn around or come at him,"
Turner said.
That's when Saustrup fired, Turner said.
Smith was shot once behind the left
shoulder blade and once behind the
right shoulder blade, said Travis County
Medical Examiner Robert
Bayardo. Both shots, fired from a distance
of at least three feet, entered
Smith's heart, Bayardo said. He collapsed
among weeds, broken bottles
and crumpled trash in an alley across from
the Austin Convention and
Visitors Center.
Smith was pronounced dead at Brackenridge
Hospital at 2:29 a.m.
"The guy who shot him still has his car,
but my brother is gone," said
Charlotte Sledge, Smith's sister, who
lives in Dallas. She said Smith
moved to Austin three weeks ago in hopes
of straightening out his life.
"If all he wanted to do was gun him down,
he had plenty of opportunity to
do that," Turner said of Saustrup. "He
only (fired) when he felt it was
absolutely necessary to protect himself."
Smith was not armed, McDonald said. No
property from the Suburban
was found on Smith's body, homicide Sgt.
Ken Cavett said.
Because of those facts, plus the distance
Saustrup followed Smith and the
location of the Smith's wounds,
prosecutors decided to pursue the
indictment, Meyer said.
"That is too much," said Gabriel Giwa, a
Houston attorney who was
married to Smith's mother from 1986 to
1991, when told of Smith's
death. "If they said that Eric was
threatening to kill him, then they can say
self-defense, but it was not that. He was
not armed -- or that hasn't been
confirmed. You don't defend your property
with excessive force."
But in Texas, you can. State law allows
the use of deadly force as a
matter of defending property when someone
believes he has no other
way to stop a crime from being committed
or to prevent the person
committing the crime from escaping, said
Rob Kepple, general counsel
for the Texas District and County
Attorneys Association. Such force is
allowed only to prevent arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery,
theft during nighttime, or criminal
mischief. Deadly force also is allowed as
a means of self-defense.
So if someone is attempting to break into
a vehicle and tries to flee once
spotted, "Can you shoot them? You bet,"
Kepple said.
It does not matter where on the body you
shoot someone, nor does it
matter if the person actually has any of
your belongings as they are
fleeing, in cases of burglaries, Kepple
said. If it's a matter of theft, which
is stealing something without breaking
into someone else's property, it
must be at night, and the thief must have
some of your belongings with
him if you are to use deadly force without
breaking the law, Kepple said.
"These cases are difficult for both
sides," Turner said. "The prosecutors,
I'm sure, don't want to give the wrong
signal that people can start
shooting people because someone is
stealing their stereo out of their car.
On the other hand, the law allows you to
use deadly force to protect your
property at nighttime."
The last time the Legislature tinkered
with the laws governing deadly
force, it strengthened homeowner's
protections by making it clear a
property owner does not first have to
retreat from his home before he can
fire upon an intruder, Kepple said.
Generally, the thinking in Texas has
been it is more unreasonable to expect a
homeowner to do nothing when
he finds someone breaking in or otherwise
damaging his property at night.
"I think in the totality of the
circumstances that a jury is going to find that
this was reasonable if it gets that far,"
Turner said of Wednesday's
shooting.
The next step in a case against Saustrup
is to present the evidence to a
grand jury. If the grand jury indicts
Saustrup, he faces from five to 99
years in prison or life in prison.
But once the trigger is pulled, the
shooter typically winds up being
cleared. Kepple said he knew of no grand
jury that had indicted someone
in cases like Wednesday's shooting.
For example, a grand jury in Dallas
decided in March 1996 that Gordon
Reid Hale III of Grand Prairie was
justified in pulling a concealed weapon
and killing Kenny Tavai after a minor
traffic incident. Hale testified he
thought Tavai, who held him by the shirt
collar and punched him several
times in the head as he sat in his truck
unable to drive off, was going to
kill him.
What has worried opponents of the
concealed weapons law, which took
effect in 1996 and requires 10 hours
minimum of training to obtain a
permit, is the level of individual
judgment that comes into play.
"Generally you wouldn't use that level of
force on someone who is not a
threat," said Bruce Elfant, a Travis
County constable who is also a
member of Texans Against Gun Violence.
"We're expecting citizens with
as little as 10 hours of training to be
out the public exercising the same
level of judgment as police officers."
As of July 3,184,282 concealed-weapons
permits had been issued in
Texas since the law took effect, Texas
Department of Public Safety
records show. In that time, 122 permits
have been suspended and 505
revoked statewide.
Smith, also known as "Blue Devil" and
"Eloc," was convicted of
possession of a controlled substance and
attempted burglary of a
habitation on Feb. 18, 1997, according to
court records.
He received 10 years of probation for the
burglary and four years of
probation for possession of a controlled
substance, the records said. The
probation sentence for the burglary was
reduced to 8 years on Oct. 31,
1997, according to the records.
Smith was also convicted of five
misdemeanors including a conviction on
Dec. 21, 1995, of burglary of a vehicle,
the records said.
Sledge said her brother had had a troubled
life, illustrated by a Crips gang
tattoo on his stomach, but thought he
could change once he moved to
Austin.
"He wasn't perfect," Sledge said. "If he
was trying to burglarize (the
man's) car, then he was wrong. But the man
could have shot him in the
leg or shot him in the arm. He didn't have
to shoot my brother in the
back."
Smith spent much of his childhood in state
protective custody, having
been removed from his mother's care when
he was a child, Giwa said.
Marla Sheely, a spokeswoman for the Texas
Department of Protective
and Regulatory Services confirmed Smith
was in state care as a youth
and was released from state custody when
he turned 18.
Smith was Sledge's only brother, and he
had lived with her in Dallas since
last October until he moved to Austin. The
two, raised in separate
families, were reunited when their mother
died five years ago, Sledge
said.
"We made a promise that, since we were
separated when we were little,
now that we were grown up we were going to
stick together," Sledge
said, "but now he's gone."
American-Statesman staff writers Claire
Osborn, Clara Herrera and
Harry Thomas contributed to this report.
The Old Sarge
hours I work.
Reading these two articles, we learn several things:
1) Contrary to -Man's statement Mr. Saustrup tried to perform a citizen's
arrest upon the thief he found in Ms. Sessums' vehicle. He did not open fire
as Mr. Smith fled; rather, he opened fire when Mr. Smith committed an overtly
hostile act.
2) Mr. Smith uttered several threats against Mr. Saustrup's life and/or
safety -- perhaps causing Mr. Saustrup to become *more* determined to capture
this fugitive and hold him accountable for his actions.
3) The prosecuting attorney, the assistant police chief and Mr. Smith's
stepfather all blame Mr. Saustrup for not being prescient enough to know that
Mr. Smith was not then armed. For not knowing this, Mr. Saustrup now could
conceivably face five to 99 years in prison.
4) The county constable -- a member of an anti-RKBA group -- states that
permittees are "out the public exercising the same level of judgment as police
officers (sic)", but this official failed to note that the current rate of
permittees shooting the wrong party is 2% while the rate of police officers
shooting the wrong party is 11%.
5) Ms. Sledge is operating under extreme stress based upon the loss of her
brother, so I will not comment further upon her remarks except to say she was
as much a victim of her brother's actions as Mr. Saustrup or Ms. Sessums.
So -Man, we now have some facts and we see that Mr. Smith was not, as you so
vociferously claimed, shot by a "punk ass coward". We see that a reasonable
person under the same conditions as Mr. Saustrup would perceive a serious
threat to his or her life. Further, we see that, despite your claims to the
contrary, the case is not closed. Mr. Saustrup will have two chances to be
freed from this miscarriage of justice: The Grand jury and, should they vote
to indict, the trial jury. From where I sit and with the information
available to me, it looks like a justifiable homicide and that the killing of
Mr. Smith by Mr. Saustrup was self-defense.
In article <35A6AC...@pacbell.net>, mde...@pacbell.net says...
left...@my-dejanews.com
tsca...@dc.net (Tom Scalf) wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 17:49:51 GMT, a02...@giant.mindlink.net (Mr. Mike)
>
> >On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> >> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
> >
> >The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
> >
>
> someone trying to steal my car, he's toast! trying to walk or run
> away from the scene of the crime isn't going to help him! If he needs
> a frontal entry wound for it to be legal, I'll be sure he gets
> one....let someone else prove which came first!
>
> Tom
>
Tom, just a point of advice: if you ever borrow anyone's car, make *sure*
everyone they are acquainted with is aware of it.
--
"This is not a man who is leaving with his head between his legs."
-Dan Quayle on Sununu's ouster
seven_...@my-dejanews.com
left...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <35aa8404...@newsreader.cais.com>,
> tsca...@dc.net (Tom Scalf) wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 17:49:51 GMT, a02...@giant.mindlink.net (Mr. Mike)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > >
> > >> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
> > >
> > >The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
> > >
> >
> > Actually the operative words are "owner" and "thief".....If i catch
> > someone trying to steal my car, he's toast! trying to walk or run
> > away from the scene of the crime isn't going to help him! If he needs
> > a frontal entry wound for it to be legal, I'll be sure he gets
> > one....let someone else prove which came first!
> >
> > Tom
> >
in the joint one day. and you won't like the joint unless you're one
tough dude. you won't have your gun in there. there are a lot of
trigger happy dudes in the joint in this country. THINK! MAN.
Tom Scalf
>In article <6oagds$les$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> left...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> In article <35aa8404...@newsreader.cais.com>,
>> tsca...@dc.net (Tom Scalf) wrote:
>> > On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 17:49:51 GMT, a02...@giant.mindlink.net (Mr. Mike)
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
>> > >
>> > >The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
>> > >
>> >
>> > Actually the operative words are "owner" and "thief".....If i catch
>> > someone trying to steal my car, he's toast! trying to walk or run
>> > away from the scene of the crime isn't going to help him! If he needs
>> > a frontal entry wound for it to be legal, I'll be sure he gets
>> > one....let someone else prove which came first!
>> >
>> > Tom
>> >
> Yeh! you're a real killer. that pistol in your hand might land you
> in the joint one day. and you won't like the joint unless you're one
> tough dude. you won't have your gun in there. there are a lot of
> trigger happy dudes in the joint in this country. THINK! MAN.
Yawn!! There are times,places and circumstances where the use of
deadly force is the only viable option; I will aim for the center of
mass.
>
>> Tom, just a point of advice: if you ever borrow anyone's car, make *sure*
>> everyone they are acquainted with is aware of it.
Actually, all i need to do is avoid rummaging through it while it is
parked in a dark alley and not panic and run away like a thief if I am
approached by the rightful owner. (^:
>> --
>> "This is not a man who is leaving with his head between his legs."
>> -Dan Quayle on Sununu's ouster
>>
Tom
Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
tsca...@dc.net (Tom Scalf) wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jul 1998 13:59:39 GMT, seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >In article <6oagds$les$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> > left...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >> In article <35aa8404...@newsreader.cais.com>,
> >> tsca...@dc.net (Tom Scalf) wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 09 Jul 1998 17:49:51 GMT, a02...@giant.mindlink.net (Mr. Mike)
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >On Wed, 08 Jul 1998 23:40:15 GMT, Seven_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> A car owner in Austin Texas shot a car thief in the back.
> >> > >
> >> > >The operative word in this sentence is "Texas." ";-/
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Actually the operative words are "owner" and "thief".....If i catch
> >> > someone trying to steal my car, he's toast! trying to walk or run
> >> > away from the scene of the crime isn't going to help him! If he needs
> >> > a frontal entry wound for it to be legal, I'll be sure he gets
> >> > one....let someone else prove which came first!
> >> >
> >> > Tom
> >> >
> > Yeh! you're a real killer. that pistol in your hand might land you
> > in the joint one day. and you won't like the joint unless you're one
> > tough dude. you won't have your gun in there. there are a lot of
> > trigger happy dudes in the joint in this country. THINK! MAN.
>
> Yawn!! There are times,places and circumstances where the use of
> deadly force is the only viable option; I will aim for the center of
> mass.
>
Yeh! YAWN! hell, man, if your life is in danger unload a couple of
magazines. but I don't think chasing a car thief two blocks and shooting him
in the back is a life threatening situation. YAWN!
> >
> >> Tom, just a point of advice: if you ever borrow anyone's car, make *sure*
> >> everyone they are acquainted with is aware of it.
>
> Actually, all i need to do is avoid rummaging through it while it is
> parked in a dark alley and not panic and run away like a thief if I am
> approached by the rightful owner. (^:
>
> >> --
> >> "This is not a man who is leaving with his head between his legs."
> >> -Dan Quayle on Sununu's ouster
> >>
>
> Tom
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
The Old Sarge
says...
You must have missed my analysis of this matter.
Mr. Saustrup tried to hold Mr. Smith under a citizen's arrest, but Mr. Smith,
not wanting the loss of stature that he would suffer at being captured by a
citizen, fled. Mr. Saustrup pursued, and Mr. Smith uttered threats against
Mr. Saustrup's life and/or safety, then lowered his hands (out of sight? I
don't know -- that information wasn't in either of the stories I've seen
posted here and I haven't seen any followup stories anywhere) and started
turning toward Mr. Saustrup.
It's easy to sit back *after* the fact and say that this was not a
life-threatening situation -- but you weren't there, were you? And you
haven't put yourself in Mr. Saustrup's shoes,have you?
Why do you suppose Mr. Smith started turning toward Mr. Saustrup? Why do you
suppose he dropped his hands? Could it have been because he was initiating a
drawstroke with a concealed handgun? Oh yeah -- Mr. Smith was not armed, was
he. Did Mr. Saustrup have X-ray vision to discern that for himself? Or was
Mr. Saustrup a mind-reader?
seven_...@my-dejanews.com
was in danger. don't try to sell me that shit.
The Old Sarge
says...
Mr. Saustrup chased Mr. Smith for two blocks *trying to effect a citizen's
arrest* -- *exactly* what you claimed he should have done when you first
announced this. It is apparently your contention that, in the face of Mr.
Smith's threats and refusal to stop, Mr. Saustrup should have said, "Okay,
you've threatened to have me murdered and you undoubtedly will return to my
girlfriend's vehicle and quote greet unquote her some night and harm her now
that you know the vehicle belongs to a woman, so I'm going to quit chasing
you." Would you do this, or would you keep trying to catch the thief? And
what would you do if the thief's hands dropped and he turned toward you --
with you not knowing whether the thief was armed or not?
Seven_...@my-dejanews.com
Mr. Saustrup charged with murder? anyway, he'll get a slap on the wrist
and that will be the end of it. but a little jail time will make him think
about his happy trigger finger. but I understand where you're coming from.
you have a lot of good points. but the cops did charged the guy with MURDER.
-Man
The Old Sarge
says...
>
>In article <6okarp$f4u$1...@news.goodnet.com>,
> olds...@xgi.com (The Old Sarge) wrote:
>> In article <6oh972$od$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, seven_...@my-dejanews.com
>> says...
>> > YEH! right! that's why the guy chased him for two blocks--because his
life
>> > was in danger. don't try to sell me that shit.
>>
>> Mr. Saustrup chased Mr. Smith for two blocks *trying to effect a citizen's
>> arrest* -- *exactly* what you claimed he should have done when you first
>> announced this. It is apparently your contention that, in the face of Mr.
>> Smith's threats and refusal to stop, Mr. Saustrup should have said, "Okay,
>> you've threatened to have me murdered and you undoubtedly will return to my
>> girlfriend's vehicle and quote greet unquote her some night and harm her
now
>> that you know the vehicle belongs to a woman, so I'm going to quit chasing
>> you." Would you do this, or would you keep trying to catch the thief? And
>> what would you do if the thief's hands dropped and he turned toward you --
>> with you not knowing whether the thief was armed or not?
>>
>>
> He shot the guy from 3 FEET away! also, if it was self-defence why is
> Mr. Saustrup charged with murder? anyway, he'll get a slap on the wrist
> and that will be the end of it. but a little jail time will make him think
> about his happy trigger finger. but I understand where you're coming from.
> you have a lot of good points. but the cops did charged the guy with
MURDER.
>
The news story said that Mr. Smith was shot from at least three feet away.
I can see how it might have played out. Mr. Saustrup trails Mr. Smith by 10
feet. Mr. Smith finally stops, and Mr. Saustrup takes two steps -- moving him
five feet closer to Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith drops his hands -- maybe even
leaning back to add to the force of his lunge -- and starts to pivot. Mr.
Saustrup knows he is in the danger zone and, recognizing from his training the
potential threat has become an actual threat, acts to neutralize the threat.
You will note Mr. Saustrup didn't stand over the downed Mr. Smith pumping
rounds into him; rather, Mr. Saustrup stopped shooting when the threat ceased.
Mr. Saustrup stands charged with murder either because the news reports were
incomplete and the police are in possession of information regarding "bad
blood" between Mr. Saustrup and Mr. Smith or because we have a politically
ambitious prosecuting attorney and a heavy-handed police chief who is of the
belief that only the police and military should be armed. Of course, the
police have no obligation to protect the individual and we will always have
the aspirants to higher office who will attempt to get there by climbing over
the backs of the populace. If Mr. Smith and Mr. Saustrup were acquainted
before this confrontation and Mr. Saustrup used the occasion of Mr. Smith's
breakin to Ms. Sessums' vehicle as an excuse to eliminate a rival or settle
old scores then he should go down hard.
Mr. Saustrup's fate is now in the hands of the grand jury.
seven_...@my-dejanews.com
> He'll get a slap on the wrist, and some community service.