Man arrested for firing gun into ground while catching burglar at neighbor's house

EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News

A New Hampshire man who fired his handgun into the ground to scare an alleged burglar he caught crawling out of a neighbor's window is now facing a felony charge -- and the same potential prison sentence as the man he stopped.
Dennis Fleming, 61, of Farmington, was arrested for reckless conduct after the Saturday incident at his 19th century farmhouse. The single grandfather had returned home to find that his home had been burglarized and spotted Joseph Hebert, 27, climbing out of a window at a neighbor's home. Fleming said he yelled "Freeze!" before firing his gun into the ground, then held Hebert at gunpoint until police arrived.
I'm really torn. I live in Florida where we have extended castle laws, a "Stand Your Ground" law that doesn't require you have to attempt to retreat or diffuse the situation. Still, in this intance him drawing the gun and even yelling freeze is somewhat iffy. The guy is climbing out of a neighbor's window, not in any way threatening the old man. The flip side is, had the old man put a bullet through the guy's skull, he could have claimed self defense fear for his life and not had a problem at all.
 
ManBeast

ManBeast

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Yay for good samaritans getting assf*cked...
 

Thatguy_603

Active member
Awards
0
Wow I live in nh and find this Bullsh**. He was only being a good Samaritan. I could see if maybe he fired it up in the air since that's illegal and dangerous but in the ground are u fing kidding me. What was he supposed to do ? Let his neighbor get robbed ? Let the guy run free and then try to describe him to the cops. As if they would find him ? Ha why bother if u have the means to stop the dumba$$ and put him where he belongs.. The old man is innocent plain and simple. Nh needs to change some gun laws. What if his neighbor was a bank ? Should he of not done anything, when he had the means to stop it ?
 
mikeg313

mikeg313

Well-known member
Awards
0
City prosecuting attorneys are the biggest piles of shît in existance! They'll prosecute anyone for any reason just to put money in their system and raise their prosecution rates. "politicians and lawyers , scumbags to the end!".
 
prld2gr8ns

prld2gr8ns

Idiot Savant
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News



I'm really torn. I live in Florida where we have extended castle laws, a "Stand Your Ground" law that doesn't require you have to attempt to retreat or diffuse the situation. Still, in this intance him drawing the gun and even yelling freeze is somewhat iffy. The guy is climbing out of a neighbor's window, not in any way threatening the old man. The flip side is, had the old man put a bullet through the guy's skull, he could have claimed self defense fear for his life and not had a problem at all.
Kinda like this BS

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2012/feb/22/no-headline---ev_castledoctrine/?*********popular

Guy could face charges after he chased people who held him at gunpoint in his house, they wrecked and one of them died, and one other one probably will.. How this man will face charges is beyond me, I just hope that he doesnt.
So if you get robbed and held at gun point, the perp is the victim?

 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
well, thats it though. In this scenario, the man was not at any risk of harm when he fired the gun, regardless of whether it was into the ground or not. And I'm not sure what NH's law is like as to whether he was supposed to attempt to retreat inside first. Here in florida if it were me, I would have yelled "hey you" and as soon as he was looking at me i would have shot him through the head (cause shooting them in the back sure isn't self defense) and if he didn't have a weapon i would have put a kitchen knife in his hand before the cops got there. But even police don't shoot warning shots. At most i think the guy should be charged with the "unlawful discharge of a firearm within city limits" sort of thing, not assault with a deadly weapon.
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
well, thats it though. In this scenario, the man was not at any risk of harm when he fired the gun, regardless of whether it was into the ground or not. And I'm not sure what NH's law is like as to whether he was supposed to attempt to retreat inside first. Here in florida if it were me, I would have yelled "hey you" and as soon as he was looking at me i would have shot him through the head (cause shooting them in the back sure isn't self defense) and if he didn't have a weapon i would have put a kitchen knife in his hand before the cops got there. But even police don't shoot warning shots. At most i think the guy should be charged with the "unlawful discharge of a firearm within city limits" sort of thing, not assault with a deadly weapon.
I think your being a little over zealous in your thinking. Commit murder to stop a burglary of your neighbors property, might want to rethink that.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
I think your being a little over zealous in your thinking. Commit murder to stop a burglary of your neighbors property, might want to rethink that.
have you ever been held at gunpoint in an armed robbery? Looked down the barrel of a revolver and been able to tell the bullets were hollow points because you can see them? To find out afterwards that the guy who did it was out on probation serving 3 years probation simultaneously for 24 counts of robbery? Well, I have. There is no excuse for violating someone elses privacy rights, our legal system deals with it terribly poorly. Killing them means they certainly won't do it again. And per the laws, you have justifiable self defense if you believe your life was in danger, as I would with anyone who was willing to break into houses that people live in.
 
Bolanrox

Bolanrox

Well-known member
Awards
0
if you remember the Night Stalker.. he would have been shot dead if the woman who had the drop on him hadn't removed the shells from the shot gun becuase her grandkids were over the day before...
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
have you ever been held at gunpoint in an armed robbery? Looked down the barrel of a revolver and been able to tell the bullets were hollow points because you can see them? To find out afterwards that the guy who did it was out on probation serving 3 years probation simultaneously for 24 counts of robbery? Well, I have. There is no excuse for violating someone elses privacy rights, our legal system deals with it terribly poorly. Killing them means they certainly won't do it again. And per the laws, you have justifiable self defense if you believe your life was in danger, as I would with anyone who was willing to break into houses that people live in.
Regardless, no excuse to commit one crime to stop another. Murder to stop a burglar, pretty messed up. What next you going to wait outside a bar and shoot the first person who gets into a car.
 
Bolanrox

Bolanrox

Well-known member
Awards
0
i dont think he ever even hinted at that....
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
i dont think he ever even hinted at that....
At what?


" would have yelled "hey you" and as soon as he was looking at me i would have shot him through the head (cause shooting them in the back sure isn't self defense) and if he didn't have a weapon i would have put a kitchen knife in his hand before the cops got there"
 
Bolanrox

Bolanrox

Well-known member
Awards
0
shooting people walking out of bars to cars..
 
Bolanrox

Bolanrox

Well-known member
Awards
0
and yet some how alcohol is still legal. yet I cant get ECA fat burners anymore.. but that is another story...
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
What's the difference, they could be getting behind the wheel drunk.
and thats not directly a crime against other person's property unless they hit someone else. It may be a violation of traffic laws, but it doesn't directly violate anyone elses rights the way a robbery or assault does.
 
fadi

fadi

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Using deadly weapon when no one was in danger is the problem. Firing in the ground or at the guy sets precedent for others to do the same. Here in San Antonio cops will not even chase car jacker to avoid innocent people being hurt in the car chase let alone firing a weapon. Let the insurance handle it.

The guy had good intentions. However, if they do not take measures against him, other cases could popup citing this case.
 
mikeg313

mikeg313

Well-known member
Awards
0
Regardless, no excuse to commit one crime to stop another. Murder to stop a burglar, pretty messed up. What next you going to wait outside a bar and shoot the first person who gets into a car.
You come in my house unwelcome to do harm you won't be leaving alive. That's a promise and my right to protect my family and home. Nuff said!
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
and thats not directly a crime against other person's property unless they hit someone else. It may be a violation of traffic laws, but it doesn't directly violate anyone elses rights the way a robbery or assault does.

your probably right they should make it home without killing someone.
 
Bolanrox

Bolanrox

Well-known member
Awards
0
Ya your right all they are doing is putting the public lives at danger. your probably right they should make it home without killing someone.
usually its the drunk driver that walks away with out a scratch and the victim that is killed or crippled....
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
Ya your right all they are doing is putting the public lives at danger. your probably right they should make it home without killing someone.
the enormous difference there is in one case there is a somewhat enhanced possibility they could cause someone harm, but a .08 blood alcohol level is less distracting than someone drinking a coffee, eating a sandwich or applying makeup while they are driving. If they cause an accident then they are liable for it.

In the case other the person has already violated my and my neighbor's private property, its not an enhanced potential of harm, harm has already been committed.

Just simple logic there.
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
semantics. still putting people lives in danger. In the other scenario your still commiting a crime to stop another crime. If you cant see that your solution is little excessive I dont know what to ntell you.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
semantics. still putting people lives in danger. In the other scenario your still commiting a crime to stop another crime. If you cant see that your solution is little excessive I dont know what to ntell you.
And if you can't see how "maybe this person could unintentionally cause some harm" vs "this person has already intentionally caused multiple people harm" I don't know what else to tell you.
 
fadi

fadi

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
And if you can't see how "maybe this person could unintentionally cause some harm" vs "this person has already intentionally caused multiple people harm" I don't know what else to tell you.
How about we allow mall cops shoot shop lifters if they attempt to run away?

or cops shoot at drivers who refuse to pull over because they may harm someone in a chase?

or ordinary people shoot at drunk drivers because they may cause harm to someone while driving?

The fact that property was lost is no reason to fire a weapon when no one is in danger. Yes if he is inside your house and he attempts to harm you or your family, shoot him. That should be the only reason to shoot someone.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
How about we allow mall cops shoot shop lifters if they attempt to run away?

or cops shoot at drivers who refuse to pull over because they may harm someone in a chase?

or ordinary people shoot at drunk drivers because they may cause harm to someone while driving?

The fact that property was lost is no reason to fire a weapon when no one is in danger. Yes if he is inside your house and he attempts to harm you or your family, shoot him. That should be the only reason to shoot someone.
again, all apples to oranges - mall security + police are officials hired to do a particular job, that involves not shooting people and in both cases those are misdemeanor or traffic issues, not felonies. And as I've stated numerous times above, a drunk driver hasn't caused anyone harm until they hit someone. Again, there is less impairment at the .08% blood alchohol level than there is from someone talking on a cellphone, eating a sandwich, drinking a coffee, putting on makeup etc. The person breaking into a home has already directly committed a felony against you and your neighbor in this instance and very well may be armed. Its far safer for you as an individual to shoot first. Depending on the distance as well, up to maybe 20 feet a knife is considered as dangerous as a gun in police training as they can close that distance in as short of a time as many people's reaction time, particularly if you hadn't taken the safety off beforehand.
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
again, all apples to oranges - mall security + police are officials hired to do a particular job, that involves not shooting people and in both cases those are misdemeanor or traffic issues, not felonies. And as I've stated numerous times above, a drunk driver hasn't caused anyone harm until they hit someone. Again, there is less impairment at the .08% blood alchohol level than there is from someone talking on a cellphone, eating a sandwich, drinking a coffee, putting on makeup etc. The person breaking into a home has already directly committed a felony against you and your neighbor in this instance and very well may be armed. Its far safer for you as an individual to shoot first. Depending on the distance as well, up to maybe 20 feet a knife is considered as dangerous as a gun in police training as they can close that distance in as short of a time as many people's reaction time, particularly if you hadn't taken the safety off beforehand.

Your missing the point, your comparing a crime to a crime, thats not what were doing. Im pointing out that you are committing murder to stop a burlgary, and that doesnt set off any redflags. Your judgedredd in this case. Its not your right to stp a felony because your there.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
Your missing the point, your comparing a crime to a crime, thats not what were doing. Im pointing out that you are committing murder to stop a burlgary, and that doesnt set off any redflags. Your judgedredd in this case. Its not your right to stp a felony because your there.
Thats perfectly fine for you to feel, I feel differently. I'm not disagreeing that it in theory is illegal, but in practice nobody would be able to prove it was not a legal self defense shooting.
 
lukehayd

lukehayd

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Your missing the point, your comparing a crime to a crime, thats not what were doing. Im pointing out that you are committing murder to stop a burlgary, and that doesnt set off any redflags. Your judgedredd in this case. Its not your right to stp a felony because your there.

You are correct, it is not a RIGHT, IMO it is your obligation to try to stop a crime. I'm not saying kill the violator (unless they make a threatening move) but stop them none the less. In the messed up world we live in these days, with meth addicts breaking in stealing and killing to support their habits, extreme caution must always be used. The older man firing into the ground, I would not have done that. It leaves one less bullet in my gun if need be. Say for instance, the burglar wasn't alone. Discharging a firearm with-in city limits should be his only charge if any.
 
rugger48

rugger48

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • First Up Vote
  • Established
You are correct, it is not a RIGHT, IMO it is your obligation to try to stop a crime. I'm not saying kill the violator (unless they make a threatening move) but stop them none the less. In the messed up world we live in these days, with meth addicts breaking in stealing and killing to support their habits, extreme caution must always be used. The older man firing into the ground, I would not have done that. It leaves one less bullet in my gun if need be. Say for instance, the burglar wasn't alone. Discharging a firearm with-in city limits should be his only charge if any.
If the guy is coming out I let him go and try and get the best description I can and when I report it to the police all I can do is hope he gets caught. If he's going in I might feel obligated, but make no mistake I have my own family whos relying on me to be alive
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
It is safer to shoot at a person than to shoot the ground,,, shooting the ground can ricochet , go through a wall and kill a sleeping baby or other innocent,,, if I'll shoot, you can bet my bead is on a target
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
In texas you can kill a man committing a felony and it is reasonable to believe he will no be identified later
 
fadi

fadi

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
like many stated, the guy was not breaking into a home. He was leaving. There are many options other than using a gun to stop someone from running away, even if they get away with some cash and gold. There was no self defense in this case. There was a case of a citizen thinking he has the right to shoot his gun at a person who was of no risk to anyone.

Doesn't matter how you feel about someone breaking into a home, and yes I had my home broken into, using a deadly weapon for any reason other than self defense is wrong.
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
like many stated, the guy was not breaking into a home. He was leaving. There are many options other than using a gun to stop someone from running away, even if they get away with some cash and gold. There was no self defense in this case. There was a case of a citizen thinking he has the right to shoot his gun at a person who was of no risk to anyone.

Doesn't matter how you feel about someone breaking into a home, and yes I had my home broken into, using a deadly weapon for any reason other than self defense is wrong.
I would kill a man trying to steal my memories, my sense of security or anything at all,,, my wife would make me move if we got robbed,,,, I keep a loaded, chaimbered, safety off, '45 next to my bed,,, I carry a legally licensed concealed 380 pocket pistol everywhere I go,,, and I will use it within my legal rights to do so!!!
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
I work in corrections,,, I see and hear the horror stories every day of people who lost everything ... lives are destroyed by burglars,, and burglars keep stealing until caught,,, and heaven forbid someone be home or come home to be killed by a burglar scared to go to prison,,, this is not a no harm, no foul situation!!!
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
like many stated, the guy was not breaking into a home. He was leaving. There are many options other than using a gun to stop someone from running away, even if they get away with some cash and gold. There was no self defense in this case. There was a case of a citizen thinking he has the right to shoot his gun at a person who was of no risk to anyone.

Doesn't matter how you feel about someone breaking into a home, and yes I had my home broken into, using a deadly weapon for any reason other than self defense is wrong.
and he is obviously a criminal and if he sees that you got a look at him and maybe can identify him its quite believable he could come back at a later time to kill you while you are sleeping. Lack of respect for a person's property is not far off from lack of respect for a person's life.
 
fadi

fadi

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I would kill a man trying to steal my memories, my sense of security or anything at all,,, my wife would make me move if we got robbed,,,, I keep a loaded, chaimbered, safety off, '45 next to my bed,,, I carry a legally licensed concealed 380 pocket pistol everywhere I go,,, and I will use it within my legal rights to do so!!!
Like you said, within legal rights. Shooting someone in the back, or trying to run away is not within your legal rights. If your family is at risk, shoot the bastard. If he is getting away with some cash and a DVD player, there is no justification to take away a life or even come close to it.

While we are at it, why don't we implement Iranian and Saudi laws and cut their hands since they are stealing someone's memories. Life at risk is completely different than a theft. I had my home broken into, but I would not kill a person over material. Not unless he was a threat, and I would be damn sure he was a threat.

You are killing someone's child. Someone's brother. Someone's sister. Someone's husband. Someone's father. Do they have the right to come after you for killing their child? You would.
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
and he is obviously a criminal and if he sees that you got a look at him and maybe can identify him its quite believable he could come back at a later time to kill you while you are sleeping. Lack of respect for a person's property is not far off from lack of respect for a person's life.
This ^^^^^ 100% agree!!
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
Like you said, within legal rights. Shooting someone in the back, or trying to run away is not within your legal rights. If your family is at risk, shoot the bastard. If he is getting away with some cash and a DVD player, there is no justification to take away a life or even come close to it.

While we are at it, why don't we implement Iranian and Saudi laws and cut their hands since they are stealing someone's memories. Life at risk is completely different than a theft. I had my home broken into, but I would not kill a person over material. Not unless he was a threat, and I would be damn sure he was a threat.

You are killing someone's child. Someone's brother. Someone's sister. Someone's husband. Someone's father. Do they have the right to come after you for killing their child? You would.
It is legal in texas!!!
 
fadi

fadi

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
and he is obviously a criminal and if he sees that you got a look at him and maybe can identify him its quite believable he could come back at a later time to kill you while you are sleeping. Lack of respect for a person's property is not far off from lack of respect for a person's life.
That is a far fetch speculation. How often do thieves get identified and how often do they come back to kill their witness? Someone going for some cash does not make them killers by nature.
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • Established
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
While we are at it, why don't we implement Iranian and Saudi laws and cut their hands since they are stealing someone's memories.
I'm all for that. Our current legal system is not a disincentive nor punishment for stealing or most other crimes against person + property.
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
Like you said, within legal rights. Shooting someone in the back, or trying to run away is not within your legal rights. If your family is at risk, shoot the bastard. If he is getting away with some cash and a DVD player, there is no justification to take away a life or even come close to it.

While we are at it, why don't we implement Iranian and Saudi laws and cut their hands since they are stealing someone's memories. Life at risk is completely different than a theft. I had my home broken into, but I would not kill a person over material. Not unless he was a threat, and I would be damn sure he was a threat.

You are killing someone's child. Someone's brother. Someone's sister. Someone's husband. Someone's father. Do they have the right to come after you for killing their child? You would.
I'm saving someone's father, mother, sister, brother, son or daughter from becoming another victim!!!
 
grngoloco

grngoloco

Well-known member
Awards
0
I live in Texas. It is not legal to shoot someone escaping. Only for self defense.
It is legal to shoot anyone on your property, coming or going,, it is also legal to kill a felon if it is believed you will not be able to identify them later,,, I work in corrections,,, I know my laws
 

Similar threads


Top