The next Ward Bird?

[Pineedles]

Dennis Fleming came home to find his home burglarized and went outside to find the burglar crawling out of his neighbor's basement window. Fleming safely shot his gun into the ground and held the burglar for police. When the Farmington, NH police arrived they arrested both men.

Will Mr. Fleming become the next Ward Bird of the Lakes Region?


http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...939/-1/FOSNEWS

[AC2717]

what a joke, he did not use deadly force
he used a warning

[RailroadJoe]

What's with these policeman arresting someone for protecting property that they should be watching. Give him a medal for aiding the local police.
Time for the law to think logically and act accordingly.

[Jonas Pilot]

I bet he got the "perps" attention!

[upthesaukee]

I have no problem with Mr Fleming having a gun in his possesion to attempt to stop the thief. I cannot condone the discharge of the gun into the ground, nor can I agree with that action being safe.

With that being said, I would hope that if any charges continue, that they will be reduced to either a misdemeanor or a violation level, and not remain as a felony.

Also, the police did not arrest both men when they arrived. The arrested the thief. It was later that evening / night that the warrant was drawn up for Mr. Fleming's arrest after consulting with the attorney general's office.

[Coolbreeze]

Is it a crime to discharge a firearm into the ground? It may be poor judgement to do in the presence of others but I did not know it was illegal to do.

[dva]

Let the perp get away and he will be back.I don't think he will be back to Mr Fleming's house. I would like a neighbor like that next door.

[NoBozo]

I guess I'm having a problem with this. I apologize for my inability to GET It. Let me try to understand..WHAT Actions WILL BE Permitted..to apprehend the DIKHEAD who broke into my house AND another house down the street....???

The thief could get 7 years..AND the person defending his house...AND apprehending the thief ALSO could get 7 years.

The NH Attorney General..Appointed by the Governor says go ahead. Arrest him. The NH Attorney Generals BIO says nothing about his political party. Of course: That's irrelevant. I wonder if the AG want's a NEW JOB at DOJ in Washington....working for Eric Holder. ......... NOT a happy NB.

PS: Anybody see a pattern...?? "NO: Absolutely NOT...Not At All".....Ever hear that before...?

[Pineedles]

Originally Posted by upthesaukee

I have no problem with Mr Fleming having a gun in his possesion to attempt to stop the thief. I cannot condone the discharge of the gun into the ground, nor can I agree with that action being safe.

With that being said, I would hope that if any charges continue, that they will be reduced to either a misdemeanor or a violation level, and not remain as a felony.

Also, the police did not arrest both men when they arrived. The arrested the thief. It was later that evening / night that the warrant was drawn up for Mr. Fleming's arrest after consulting with the attorney general's office.

Thank you for the clarification as to when Mr. Fleming was arrested, after consulting with the AG. In my opinion, that makes it even worse! Thanks for pointing it out!

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

Dennis Fleming came home to find his home burglarized and went outside to find the burglar crawling out of his neighbor's basement window. Fleming safely shot his gun into the ground and held the burglar for police. When the Farmington, NH police arrived they arrested both men.

Will Mr. Fleming become the next Ward Bird of the Lakes Region?


http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...939/-1/FOSNEWS

In my opinion Ward Bird's poor judgement led to his problems. In this case, Fleming's actions seem well thought out and perhaps even courageous. The next time instead of firing into the ground and risking that a ricochet hit an innocent bystander, Fleming should shoot the burglar between the blinkers! The Fleming fiasco seems like something that might only happen in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Hopefully, common sense prevails and the cops drop the charges quickly. I nominate Mr. Fleming for New Hampshire Man of the Year.

[SAMIAM]

The police should APPRECIATE civilian help.They can't be everywhere at once and gun owners stop thousands of crimes every year in this country.It is not reported in the mainstream media because they are mostly anti-gunners.
Every able bodied person would be smart to get a permit and learn to safely use firearms.
Remember,when seconds count,the police are minutes away.

[shoppes on the bay]

this should all end well as soon as mr flemings lawyer explains that as his client exited his violated residence with his firearm (he wasnt sure if the perp was in fact no longer in his home) to protect himself he at that time observed a person exiting his neighbors house in a suspicious manner. approaching this person to hold him until the local police arrived - mr flemming, not being a professional peace officer and extremely nervous being in this situation, accidently discharged his firearm into the ground (where it was pointed as a manner of safety) - seriously though ill bet this AG is having a really bad press day today - great fodder for a challenger.

im not sure how it works in NH - will this go before a grand jury and possibly thrown out or does this poor guy go right to court?

[geordie]

Tough situation. Does NH have a defense of property law? The law doesn't seem to favor self help much.

[Belmont Resident]

The two really don't compare and thankfully Bird can no longer own a firearm.
He had anger issues which is why he never took the stand.
Thankfully the Governor did not do as full pardon.
The other guy was all set until he discharged the firearm off his property.

[JMR]

I have learned the hard way to not make decisions based upon press reports. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I urge caution when it comes to reaching conclusions in these matters.

Just my two cents

[SAMIAM]

Noticed this morning that the Associated Press picked up the story and it's all over the country.Makes the Farmington police and the AG look real smart before the nation.

[Grandpa Redneck]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

Noticed this morning that the Associated Press picked up the story and it's all over the country.Makes the Farmington police and the AG look real smart before the nation.

Yeah its popped up on several other forums I am a member of, and the overwhelming majority of the responses are in support of Mr Flemming, and saying what idiots the AG and Farmingtyon PD are, including quite a few responses from other LEO's also supporting Mr. Flemming.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by JMR

I have learned the hard way to not make decisions based upon press reports. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I urge caution when it comes to reaching conclusions in these matters.

Just my two cents

In a live interview he described exactly what happened and it is pretty much as the report said.
To bad he didn't catch the guy in his house in the act. There would be one less criminal sitting in jail while WE pay for his room & board.

[bclaker]

The police and AG should say "THANK YOU", not "YOU"RE UNDER ARREST". It sounds like the police were ready to let it go at that.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by geordie

Tough situation. Does NH have a defense of property law? The law doesn't seem to favor self help much.

NH just passed laws allowing for use of deadly force outside the home. I’m not sure of how the law is worded but chasing down an unarmed burglar off your property probably doesn’t fall under it.
As mentioned before, to bad he didn't catch him in the act. One less lowlife in jail for us to pay for.

[joann721]

Originally Posted by shoppes on the bay

this should all end well as soon as mr flemings lawyer explains that as his client exited his violated residence with his firearm (he wasnt sure if the perp was in fact no longer in his home) to protect himself he at that time observed a person exiting his neighbors house in a suspicious manner. approaching this person to hold him until the local police arrived - mr flemming, not being a professional peace officer and extremely nervous being in this situation, accidently discharged his firearm into the ground (where it was pointed as a manner of safety) - seriously though ill bet this AG is having a really bad press day today - great fodder for a challenger.

im not sure how it works in NH - will this go before a grand jury and possibly thrown out or does this poor guy go right to court?

In theory I agree with you - but why should this man have to pay to hire an attorney - lose time from his job to go to court - to defend himself, for protecting himself. If he had a permit for the gun and was on his own property, in my opinion, case closed.

[BroadHopper]

Many of us in Laconia who lives near 'the projects' on Blueberry Lane put up with multiple burglaries through the years. The basic repsonse from the local police is to have a 'neighborhood watch'. That's the end of it. No one is caught and the culprits returns again and again. We have to keep all doors and widows locked as well as our garage and autos year around. Those who have burglar alarms installed had their share of burglars. The burglars are smart! The police don't even bother to check for fingerprints etc. They just write their reports and head to the donut shop!

I bet if the word is out that the citizens around the projects are armed, that will reduced the crime rate!

[Grandpa Redneck]

Last summer here in Warren, there were multiple thefts and break ins, several atvs, snowmobiles, and lawn mowers were among the things stolen. The local trash man recieved some of the parts to them as scrap and recognized they were parts from the stolen goods. He called the NH State Police, as we had no police chief in town at that time, and and when they finally showed up he told them exactly who had sold him the pieces. The officer point blank told him they were not going to do anything about it, because they had more important things to do.

[nicole]

I have to say-growing up I was taught to respect police and I always did have much respect for them. However, in the last 10 years or so-between personal experiences, friends experiences, Ward Bird, Mr Flemming and other stories-it seems as though there has been a lot of changes. Not much support for victims and if victims try to protect themselves, possesions or other people-they are the ones who are treated like criminals. I don't know if I was naive and this has always gone on but I find myself not trusting of the police/judicial system anymore. Please let me say that I know there are very good law enforcement officers out there but I just don't like how more and more victims receive little assistance and more and more are treated like criminals if they try to protect themselves or their possessions.

[tis]

Good is not good anymore. We reward bad.

[old coot]

Way back when I was a kid, this would simply have been classified as a citizen's arrest, not a felony.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by joann721

In theory I agree with you - but why should this man have to pay to hire an attorney - lose time from his job to go to court - to defend himself, for protecting himself. If he had a permit for the gun and was on his own property, in my opinion, case closed.

According to the article, he went to his house, got his gun and walked down the street to talk with neighbors, thats when he saw the idiot climbing out his neighbors window. So I don't think he was on his property. Being a victim of theft in the past, I am all for nailing this guy.....maybe shoot him in the leg and then pull the "I didn't see anything officer" ok, maybe a bit harsh but I bet with a bullet in his leg he wouldn't be jumping out windows for a while

[secondcurve]

I think the general consensus of the Forum members is: I AM MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!!

[AC2717]

opinion:
Case closed
he was defending his and his neighbor's property and people from bad. SO now I am just to watch what happens, call the police and watch the guy run away while we wait for the cops to come, becuase no matter how good the cops are, and they are do not get me wrong, they will not get there in the 2 minutes or seconds it takes for this guy to dissappear.

what a joke

[BroadHopper]

Funny thing if you report a heart attack, the police are at your house in seconds! Go figure.

[Resident 2B]

I'm in Florida and I'm watching American Idol on Fox. They just had a spot with the 10 PM news headlines. This story is one of the lead stories and the anchor said, 'you will not believe this one'. Maybe not a exact quote, but that was the message.

Can't wait to see and hear the story with a local Florida spin.

R2B

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by AC2717

opinion:
Case closed
he was defending his and his neighbor's property and people from bad. SO now I am just to watch what happens, call the police and watch the guy run away while we wait for the cops to come, becuase no matter how good the cops are, and they are do not get me wrong, they will not get there in the 2 minutes or seconds it takes for this guy to dissappear.

what a joke

I think many are straying from the reason he was detained. From my understanding there was never a problem with him catching and holding the guy at gunpoint.
It was his discharging of the weapon on someone else’s or public property that is the issue. There are all kinds of rules as to discharging a weapon and how far you have to be from a house or residential area.
Heck when I’m shooting squirrels in out my back window I’m probably in violation even though there are acres of woods around me. But the one and only house near me is within 100 feet of my house on the other side.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

I'm in Florida and I'm watching American Idol on Fox. They just had a spot with the 10 PM news headlines. This story is one of the lead stories and the anchor said, 'you will not believe this one'. Maybe not a exact quote, but that was the message.

Can't wait to see and hear the story with a local Florida spin.

R2B

It is pretty sad when Florida is making fun of US! Every time we go to Orlando and watch the news I shake my head and ask why people would want to live there. Some of the stuff that goes on there is mind boggling...

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by codeman671

It is pretty sad when Florida is making fun of US! Every time we go to Orlando and watch the news I shake my head and ask why people would want to live there. Some of the stuff that goes on there is mind boggling...

I beats having to listen to them whine about how much they hate winter and the snow.
My wife has travel to Florida and she can’t figure out why anyone would want to live there. Heat, humidity, constant rain, hurricanes. Oh but it’s nice during the winter just not the other 9 months out of the year. I suppose it is the same as owning a second home on the lake and paying for it all year and only using it part time.
Ok I might be getting off topic.

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

I think many are straying from the reason he was detained. From my understanding there was never a problem with him catching and holding the guy at gunpoint.
It was his discharging of the weapon on someone else’s or public property that is the issue. There are all kinds of rules as to discharging a weapon and how far you have to be from a house or residential area.
Heck when I’m shooting squirrels in out my back window I’m probably in violation even though there are acres of woods around me. But the one and only house near me is within 100 feet of my house on the other side.

Valid point, but if I am on my neighbors property and discharging a weapon to either hault or prevent a crime, don't you think it should be up to the neighbor to say that what I did on his property was wrong?? I understand general laws but there has to be a common sense rule.
At what point should we take to the reason that when you commit a crime the rules change from common society laws to protection laws

[Grandpa Redneck]

CHARGES DROPPED, really shouldn't have been charged in the first place though.

http://www.wmur.com/news/30524687/detail.html

[NoRegrets]

Looks like the "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave" has turned into a source of revenue for and debate in the judicial and legal fields.

Technicality of the law now over-rides the intent of the law. Inconsistent application of punishment has given suspicion that processes are corruptible. The inability to take action against "bad and criminal" activity makes the individual victim feel vulnerable or at risk so when we feel right about protecting our small little parcel of earth we risk becoming the "next Ward".

I find it sad that we are evolving into a society that isn't driven by morals with leadership that focuses on social responsibility and contribution. We have leaders fanning class wars and encourage or celebrate tolerance for activities that decay our society.

Hope this situation clears up and the crook's name, crime, and punishment are all that is head lined!

Keep the heat turned on and enjoy an Early ICE OUT for 2012!!!!

[Slickcraft]

Sanity returns:

From WMUR
http://www.wmur.com/news/30524687/detail.html

FARMINGTON, N.H. -- The county attorney's office is dropping charges against a man who tracked down a burglary suspect and held him at gunpoint until police could arrive.

Dennis Fleming said he tracked down the man in his Farmington neighborhood and fired his gun into the ground to get the burglar to stop.

He held 27-year-old Joseph Hebert at gunpoint until police arrived and arrested him.

Hebert was charged with two counts of burglary and one count of possession of a controlled drug.

Fleming was originally charged with reckless conduct for firing the gun.

"The facts available at the scene on Saturday supported the charge of felony reckless conduct, but subsequent facts discovered since have led me to believe that such a charge under these circumstances would be unjust," the Strafford County attorney said in a statement.

The attorney's office said firing a "warning shot" around or near other people or homes can result in police involvement or a charge.

[RailroadJoe]

About time the attorney Generals office got smart. Maybe they are thinking logically.

[hilltopper]

Originally Posted by RailroadJoe

Maybe they are thinking logically.

Ha! Good one! I'd say they succumbed to public outcry. Or, in their own words "...but subsequent facts discovered since have led me to believe that such a charge under these circumstances would be unjust".

[NoBozo]

Ya really gotta hate it when those Pesky "subsequent facts" rear their ugly heads in the middle of an otherwise airtight case. NB

[Lakepilot]

Was it the NH Attorney General or the Stafford County Attorney that exercised such poor judgement in this case? What office and what individual in that office?

[bclaker]

Originally Posted by RailroadJoe

About time the attorney Generals office got smart. Maybe they are thinking logically.

Maybe they checked the survey on FOX 25. When I checked last night, about 94% favored not pressing charges.

[Jonas Pilot]

What ever they did, they fixed it and got it right.

[Pineedles]

I am very glad the charges were dropped. I also want to issue a big thank you to Dennis Fleming for his actions. This man is a true hero! Think about it folks, do you have inside of you, what it took Mr. Fleming to do? I don't know whether I have it. I hope I don't ever have to find out. Holding a gun on someone, is something that is not easy to do I would imagine.

[jeffk]

While I agree with the common sense outcome I think the actions that happened are not clear cut.

Are you "defending your property or yourself" when you hunt someone down that has left your property?

Discharging a firearm is serious. So is threatening with a firearm. It doesn't sound like the burglar, although committing a felony, had a weapon. I'm not sure what a person's rights are to detain a person using a gun when that person isn't a direct threat. Suppose Fleming found the guy a couple days later and somehow identified him. Could he pull a gun on him?

In comparing it to the Bird case. Ward says that he did NOT threaten the woman with his gun, and she WAS on HIS property illegally, a misdemeanor. He certainly did not discharge his weapon. He did not try to detain her for the police. He just told her to leave. Ward's actions were much more restrained than Mr. Fleming and yet Ward's case was pursued as a felony. It shows the people at the start of the case make decisions that have a significant impact on the outcome.

[SIKSUKR]

Homerun on that post Jeff.

[Pineedles]

Although the title of the thread may have been disjointed from the Bird affair, as a 2nd amendment advocate I wanted people to look at, think, and respond to a man's actions in defending his home and his neighbor's home; and of course most important, the action of the government in arresting him.

I worry about this country's future and the legacy that we will leave our children. Are we our neighbors keepers? No, but we must be willing to stand up and protect them if the situation presents itself. This is why I believe Mr. Fleming is a hero. Damn the torpedoes (gun laws) and full steam ahead. Or in other words, restrain the perpetrator despite the noise ordinances with a shot to ground, to get his attention, and let him know you mean business.

[NBR]

Better to let the guy know the gun is loaded and you are serious than be forced to shoot him if he decides to go for you!

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by NBR

Better to let the guy know the gun is loaded and you are serious than be forced to shoot him if he decides to go for you!

Except that if you've taken any basic gun safety or home defense legality courses you'll know that this is the opposite of the truth.

You don't fire off "warning shots". Ever.

[Slickcraft]

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

Except that if you've taken any basic gun safety or home defense legality courses you'll know that this is the opposite of the truth.

You don't fire off "warning shots". Ever.

Correct. You can never be sure where that round will go especially when under stress. Also the warning round might result in return fire from a panicked bad guy turning the incident into a gun fight. Police have to account for every round fired and are trained to not fire warning shots. They fire only at an imminent deadly threat and then shoot to kill.

[tis]

But if he killed the guy, there is no doubt he would be in jail. Good thing it WAS a warning shot only……..

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by tis

But if he killed the guy, there is no doubt he would be in jail. Good thing it WAS a warning shot only……..

No, it's really not a "good thing". We don't know the exact details of the scenario, but most people who specialize in training for these sorts of scenarios would tell you that by firing a "Warning" shot he had about a 50/50 chance of causing bodily harm or lethal harm to himself and/or the burglar.

[Pineedles]

To be completely fair, brk-Int is correct that it is not recommended to fire a warning shot. I'm not sure about the 50% chance thing, but I wouldn't want anyone to get the wrong idea. Bottom line is that the perp is in jail and Mr. fleming is not, and that's a good thing.

[jeffk]

As much as I strongly agree with the sentiment of stopping criminals and helping neighbors, the law is full of land mines for citizens taking actions against criminals.

I poked around a bit and found the law seems nebulous and expanding as cases are settled. That makes it very dangerous since you can never be sure exactly how things will end up.

Here is a link to a California site.
California Legal Opinion

In essence, it says that a criminal being arrested that THINKS excessive force might be used against him has a right to defend himself. In Fleming's case, that might mean the burglar, feeling threatened by a warning shot, could have legally defended himself by shooting Fleming. It sounds crazy and I don't agree with it. But it is law in California.

I even understand it a bit. We have a presumption of innocence. You see a guy doing something illegal, you pull your gun for a citizen's arrest, he bolts and you shoot him. The problem is that he turns out to be innocent. The law addresses this issue by saying that only required force may be used. There's even a question whether you can restrain a person you suspect of a crime. You tell him to stop, he refuses and walks away, you wrestle him down and hold him. You may have used excessive force and illegally restrained him. As Ward Bird found out, this process can be a nightmare.

The law can be a nasty thing. Consider that a person stopping to help an injured person could have been sued for accidentally causing more damage. We had to write "Good Samaritan Laws" to specifically protect them from legal assault.

As I said, some of these interpretations of the law seem to fly in the face of common sense but if you have a police department and prosecutor that lean in that direction you can run into big trouble.

[SIKSUKR]

I do like your posts Jeff but I was refering to jeffk's post.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

I'm not sure about the 50% chance thing

Bullets can ricochet in some amazing ways, especially off of frozen ground. They may also fragment, with the fragments each ricocheting in their own direction.

Additionally, most people have relatively poor trigger control even in controlled situations in calm environments (eg: at a gun range). By this is mean anticipating the shot and trying to pre-compensate for recoil, which will send the bullet not in the intended direction. There are THOUSANDS of documented cases of trained police officers accidentally discharging their weapons in high stress environments, causing unintended injuries to themselves or others.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of the 2nd amendment, try to stay up to speed on various local self-defense and property defense laws, have sent thousands of rounds down the shooting range in various practice scenarios and so forth. My concern in cases like this is that these are EXACTLY the kinds of actions that go awry and lead pansy-assed politicians to pass MORE laws protecting us from ourselves and ultimately inhibiting us from protecting ourselves.

If you want to "shoot" something in a scenario like this, get your camera phone and snap a couple of pics. Sure, do your best to detain the person, but a few cellphone pics will be better than trying to play vigilante if you don't understand the basics around legal and proper use of lethal force and displays of weapons.

[ishoot308]

To expand a little further, it is unlawful to threaten to or to take another persons life over material goods plain and simple. If you see someone stealing your car and you go out and attempt to stop them by threatening their life with your firearm or if you shoot at them, you are going to jail, no ifs, ands, or buts. Even states with the castle doctrine do not allow you to kill someone for stealing.

You are only allowed to use lethal force if yours or another persons life is in imminent and immediate danger and you better be able to prove it!

I could go on and on about this issue but to sum it up, even if justified be prepared for a six figure defense fund if you kill someone. You want to do everything you can to NOT pull the trigger.

I highly recommend to anyone who doubts this to take an NRA certified home defense course. It will be the best money you ever spent and will teach you how to protect your home and what the legal repercussions are if you are in a situation where you have no choice to defend yourself and your family with your firearm.

Heaven forbid any of us are ever put in that situation.

Dan

[VitaBene]

I was OK with his story until he fired the warning shot. He ratcheted it up at least 3 levels past what would be acceptable. I learned that the first step (firearm related) would be to show and/or state he is armed. The second would be to present or draw his firearm. Only if he were directly threatened, should he have fired.

I am not much of a fan of warning shots. If I present my handgun, I have been threatened. If I fire it, it will be to protect my life or my family, friends or innocent strangers. Also, if I fire it it will be for effect and not as a warning.

I will google and look for updates, but I think the DA is OK on this one, legally and common sensically (I think the Bird case fell down on common sense).

[Pineedles]

OK Bill, I understand. To the rest of the of you guys and gals, it's over. If you want to be unarmed, then that is a right you have. If you want to have a way to protect yourselves when the police are minutes away and you only have seconds then, good luck! I am just very pleased that protecting your or your neighbor's home is not a crime, so far in the best state in the USA, New Hampshire.

[SteveA]

Mr. Fleming must be happy with this news!

Looks like common sense, which is often not "common", prevailed.

http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll...938/-1/FosNEWS

[AC2717]

its amazing how much money it cost him with the lawyer, not saying I know how much it cost, but that it had to cost him money ie court fees and lawyer fees to get it the way it should have been in the first place!

[Grandpa Redneck]

Originally Posted by AC2717

its amazing how much money it cost him with the lawyer, not saying I know how much it cost, but that it had to cost him money ie court fees and lawyer fees to get it the way it should have been in the first place!

I actually read an article that said the Lawyer volunteered to take the case for free.

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by Grandpa Redneck

I actually read an article that said the Lawyer volunteered to take the case for free.

I also read it, and went back and read it again, but for some reason must of sped over that part as I did nto see that part and have to say it is not there other than to file to not pay the petition fee

[Grandpa Redneck]

Originally Posted by AC2717

I also read it, and went back and read it again, but for some reason must of sped over that part as I did nto see that part and have to say it is not there other than to file to not pay the petition fee

Here is the article I read it in.
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=3504

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by Grandpa Redneck

Here is the article I read it in.
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=3504

that is different for the article that was posted

I am happy to know that it was done pro-bono

[ChocolateGypsy]

so now that the Treyvor martin case has come up... what do you all think if the burglar had come up behind Fleming, confronted and attacked him?

[Grandpa Redneck]

Originally Posted by ChocolateGypsy

so now that the Treyvor martin case has come up... what do you all think if the burglar had come up behind Fleming, confronted and attacked him?

Flemming would have been fully within his rights to shoot the dirtbag.

[winniboy]

Originally Posted by ishoot308

To expand a little further, it is unlawful to threaten to or to take another persons life over material goods plain and simple. If you see someone stealing your car and you go out and attempt to stop them by threatening their life with your firearm or if you shoot at them, you are going to jail, no ifs, ands, or buts. Even states with the castle doctrine do not allow you to kill someone for stealing.

You are only allowed to use lethal force if yours or another persons life is in imminent and immediate danger and you better be able to prove it!

I could go on and on about this issue but to sum it up, even if justified be prepared for a six figure defense fund if you kill someone. You want to do everything you can to NOT pull the trigger.

I highly recommend to anyone who doubts this to take an NRA certified home defense course. It will be the best money you ever spent and will teach you how to protect your home and what the legal repercussions are if you are in a situation where you have no choice to defend yourself and your family with your firearm.

Heaven forbid any of us are ever put in that situation.

Dan

along with the castle doctrine there is "stand your ground" which also includes your vehicle, and also, isn't the perp still alive, therefore why are u saying the castle doctrine doesn't give you the right to kill someone, whether it does or does not, no one was killed so that doesnt even play in. You sir are like the people who defend the killer of trayvon martin. saying that these defense tactics work/ dont work even when it has nothing to do with that.

[Pineedles]

The Treyvor Martin case is an evolving case. I will not condem the actions of George Zimmermen. All the facts have not come out, despite the proported "facts" the main stream media has foisted on the American Public. Of course the usual rabble rousers already "know" the facts, including the President of the United States, who was quick to weigh in with a comment before the facts were known. Barack Obama said, "he kinda looks like he could of been my son". Talk about a way to try and stir the pot! Oh Boy!

[Grandpa Redneck]

Originally Posted by Pineedles

The Treyvor Martin case is an evolving case. I will not condem the actions of George Zimmermen. All the facts have not come out, despite the proported "facts" the main stream media has foisted on the American Public. Of course the usual rabble rousers already "know" the facts, including the President of the United States, who was quick to weigh in with a comment before the facts were known. Barack Obama said, "he kinda looks like he could of been my son".

Absolutely correct, and very well said

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by ChocolateGypsy

so now that the Treyvor martin case has come up... what do you all think if the burglar had come up behind Fleming, confronted and attacked him?

That's a much easier question to answer as everyone has a right to defend themselves. Really what this comes down to is simply as Grandpa Redneck says, shoot the dirt bag or not. I agree that if you feel threatened then any use of force including lethal may be permissible under the law, but for me personally, I would only play that card as a last resort. Owning a firearm comes with some serious responsibility and the ability to be cool in a tense situation. I for one would not want the death of another on my conscience unless I was absolutely convinced at the time I had no other choice. I sincerely believe that is the intent of law.

Anyone that decides to play vigilante and the situation ensues/escalates to the point of a fatality, well that's a different story. Far as that Martin case goes, it's easy to play on emotion, nobody wants to see a kid get killed needlessly no matter their race. Is that what really happened? Who knows, with any luck the cops will make a decision to prosecute or not based on the evidence, not because of the pressure put on by the lunatics running around convicting the shooter without even having any first hand knowledge of what really happened. Lynch mob mentality is every bit as wrong as vigilantism.

[winniboy]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

That's a much easier question to answer as everyone has a right to defend themselves. Really what this comes down to is simply as Grandpa Redneck says, shoot the dirt bag or not. I agree that if you feel threatened then any use of force including lethal may be permissible under the law, but for me personally, I would only play that card as a last resort. Owning a firearm comes with some serious responsibility and the ability to be cool in a tense situation. I for one would not want the death of another on my conscience unless I was absolutely convinced at the time I had no other choice. I sincerely believe that is the intent of law.

Anyone that decides to play vigilante and the situation ensues/escalates to the point of a fatality, well that's a different story. Far as that Martin case goes, it's easy to play on emotion, nobody wants to see a kid get killed needlessly no matter their race. Is that what really happened? Who knows, with any luck the cops will make a decision to prosecute or not based on the evidence, not because of the pressure put on by the lunatics running around convicting the shooter without even having any first hand knowledge of what really happened. Lynch mob mentality is every bit as wrong as vigilantism.

i agree i would also only KILL if it was a last resort, but like the ward bird case and this case. NO ONE IS DEAD, ward bird never fired a shot, and fleming only fired one into the ground. therefore by a legal standpoint, both are totally fine by law. as long as fleming had a permit for the gun. hell he can say he was doing some target practice or what ever, last time i checked, with proper permits, you can fire a gun on your own property. so what the hell was he arrested for? i shake my heads at the officer who did the arresting and at the AG, you are a fool.

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by winniboy

i agree i would also only KILL if it was a last resort, but like the ward bird case and this case. NO ONE IS DEAD, ward bird never fired a shot, and fleming only fired one into the ground. therefore by a legal standpoint, both are totally fine by law. as long as fleming had a permit for the gun. hell he can say he was doing some target practice or what ever, last time i checked, with proper permits, you can fire a gun on your own property. so what the hell was he arrested for? i shake my heads at the officer who did the arresting and at the AG, you are a fool.

You cannot fire a gun on your own property if you are within 300 feet of any other permanently occupied residence unless you have permission from the owner. You cannot discharge a firearm win the "compact" part of a town or city. You also cannot shoot over a road or within 15 feet of one. The list of limitations goes on. It sounds to me that Fleming did not comply with this which is why he was in hot water. Even the pd seemed to side with him, but the laws are the laws.

Nh does have permits, licenses or registrations for firearms themselves, just a license to carry in a concealed manner so you were incorrect here too. You can carry a loaded weapon as long as it it is not concealed in public with a few exceptions such as federal buildings, near schools, etc. Nh law actually specifies only none in courtrooms, federal law is more strict.

Owning, carrying or using a gun is a privilege and a right, not to be taken lightly.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by winniboy

i agree i would also only KILL if it was a last resort, but like the ward bird case and this case. NO ONE IS DEAD, ward bird never fired a shot, and fleming only fired one into the ground. therefore by a legal standpoint, both are totally fine by law. as long as fleming had a permit for the gun. hell he can say he was doing some target practice or what ever, last time i checked, with proper permits, you can fire a gun on your own property. so what the hell was he arrested for? i shake my heads at the officer who did the arresting and at the AG, you are a fool.

I agree with you on the Ward Bird case he was well within his rights, although once again I would go back to my statement of confrontation and mixing firearms with that. I certainly do not find fault with him confronting a trespasser, showing he was packing probably wasn't necessary but again well within his rights to do so. Had I been in that situation I would not have shown any iron unless I was prepared to use it. In NH you don't need a permit for a gun unless you are carrying concealed.

Fleming on the other hand did fire a shot into the ground, I'll give him credit for not shooting the robber, but that is IHMO at minimum irresponsible and I would dare say border line reckless discharge of a weapon. Should he have gotten arrested, no, but I think his actions were not exactly smart either. What if the perpetrator was packing and next thing you know we've got a shootout between those guys? Over what, a burglary? Again I point to the idea that the situation could have escalated when it wasn't really a situation of life or death. Don't get me wrong here I'm happy that the robber was busted but the outcome could have been much different and I think that is the lesson to come out of a case like this.

[winniboy]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

I agree with you on the Ward Bird case he was well within his rights, although once again I would go back to my statement of confrontation and mixing firearms with that. I certainly do not find fault with him confronting a trespasser, showing he was packing probably wasn't necessary but again well within his rights to do so. Had I been in that situation I would not have shown any iron unless I was prepared to use it. In NH you don't need a permit for a gun unless you are carrying concealed.

Fleming on the other hand did fire a shot into the ground, I'll give him credit for not shooting the robber, but that is IHMO at minimum irresponsible and I would dare say border line reckless discharge of a weapon. Should he have gotten arrested, no, but I think his actions were not exactly smart either. What if the perpetrator was packing and next thing you know we've got a shootout between those guys? Over what, a burglary? Again I point to the idea that the situation could have escalated when it wasn't really a situation of life or death. Don't get me wrong here I'm happy that the robber was busted but the outcome could have been much different and I think that is the lesson to come out of a case like this.

i agree it may have been a bonehead move, but by law, i dont see anything wrong with what he did. and to the poster above. when did i say anything about concealed weapons?

[codeman671]

Originally Posted by winniboy

i agree it may have been a bonehead move, but by law, i dont see anything wrong with what he did. and to the poster above. when did i say anything about concealed weapons?

Your statement included "as long as Fleming had a permit for the gun". This is what I was speaking to, since nh does not require permits for guns themselves. Permits to carry concealed are required in nh, I was elaborating on the law.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by winniboy

i agree it may have been a bonehead move, but by law, i dont see anything wrong with what he did. and to the poster above. when did i say anything about concealed weapons?

You didn't I was just pointing out that in NH you do not need a permit to have or purchase a gun, nor is it necessary to register them. You do need a permit to carry concealed.

That doesn't preclude any federal laws such as a mandatory background check at the time of purchase.

[winniboy]

Originally Posted by codeman671

Your statement included "as long as Fleming had a permit for the gun". This is what I was speaking to, since nh does not require permits for guns themselves. Permits to carry concealed are required in nh, I was elaborating on the law.

yes im sorry for the misunderstanding, i guess i meant not permit persay but as long as the gun was legal (permits, licence, registered) etc... for what ever the weapon was.

[ChocolateGypsy]

I didn't mean to start a debate on the Florida situation, but the situation with Fleming could have gone down the same way. If Fleming hadn't fired his gun, I'm sure the burglar would have brought charges against Fleming for something. Or maybe he should have just gone up and slugged Fleming? According to the media that's the thing to do when someone is pointing a gun at you -- hit them. (I'll try that the next time I'm mugged.)

As they say, the laws are written to protect the criminals -- and the criminals know the laws. Unfortunately, law-abiding citizens have no rights to defend themselves and no support until they are in a coma in the hospital and have become a statistic.

[Belmont Resident]

Originally Posted by ChocolateGypsy

I didn't mean to start a debate on the Florida situation, but the situation with Fleming could have gone down the same way. If Fleming hadn't fired his gun, I'm sure the burglar would have brought charges against Fleming for something. Or maybe he should have just gone up and slugged Fleming? According to the media that's the thing to do when someone is pointing a gun at you -- hit them. (I'll try that the next time I'm mugged.)

As they say, the laws are written to protect the criminals -- and the criminals know the laws. Unfortunately, law-abiding citizens have no rights to defend themselves and no support until they are in a coma in the hospital and have become a statistic.

I could be wrong but I believe the law was passed to give us more ways to protect ourselves when we are on our own property.
Most of us do not walk around with a gun shoved into our belt, legal or not.
Legal or not can you imagine the outcome of a road rage incident that had both drivers carrying hand guns? I do not believe the law should allow for use of guns in public even for self defense.
I am glad the guy up here was set free and no charges pressed.
The case in Florida has so many things wrong with it and who do you believe? First he did this then he did that. It looks like a case of another punk who was on his way to a life of crime is no longer around to hurt someone else.
Then there is the story of the guy who was beat up showing no signs of it on the arrest video, looks like it could have been murder more then self protection.
The problem is the story keeps changing for both involved, on top of that the news people always seem to add their feelings into the story that helps sway it one way or the other.
It will be interesting to see what finally comes out of this one.

[ChocolateGypsy]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

The problem is the story keeps changing for both involved, on top of that the news people always seem to add their feelings into the story that helps sway it one way or the other.
It will be interesting to see what finally comes out of this one.

I agree -- no one will really know anything until it goes to court. I used to live in that town and feel badly for both families. But I also know that if the 911 call proves that it was Zimmerman yelling for help in the background, people will claim the report was "doctored." The racial tension between the police and the black neighborhoods there is really bad and goes back many years. (Sanford has a rural "deep south" character to it -- It's not a stereotypical Florida "tourist" community.)

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by Belmont Resident

I do not believe the law should allow for use of guns in public even for self defense.

I vehemently disagree with you on this.

If you choose not to protect yourself that's cool more power to ya. That's your decision. Call 911 and hope the cops show up in time to help you out. Roll the dice.

I feel just the opposite and at the end of the day one thing is for sure. Criminals that get guns don't care about the law or anything else other than whatever crime the are hell bent to commit. Them having a gun in hand gives them the upper hand in any situation why else would they have them? If you or anyone else chooses to allow yourself to be in that situation fine, but how dare you suggest taking away my choice to see things a little differently. BTW you would probably be surprised at how many people do carry all the time.

[ishoot308]

Originally Posted by winniboy

along with the castle doctrine there is "stand your ground" which also includes your vehicle, and also, isn't the perp still alive, therefore why are u saying the castle doctrine doesn't give you the right to kill someone, whether it does or does not, no one was killed so that doesnt even play in. You sir are like the people who defend the killer of trayvon martin. saying that these defense tactics work/ dont work even when it has nothing to do with that.

I have no idea what you are talking about...

[NoRegrets]

Originally Posted by ChocolateGypsy

I agree -- no one will really know anything until it goes to court. I used to live in that town and feel badly for both families. But I also know that if the 911 call proves that it was Zimmerman yelling for help in the background, people will claim the report was "doctored." The racial tension between the police and the black neighborhoods there is really bad and goes back many years. (Sanford has a rural "deep south" character to it -- It's not a stereotypical Florida "tourist" community.)

I am not sure if everything will be known about the situation via a court room show. Look at the OJ Simpson case as well as other situations where legal maneuvers kept information away from the jury. The mainstream media has edited the stories to lead the headlines. NBC is now being investigated for editing the 911 call to show Zimmerman was a racist. Rev. Sharpton and the Black Panthers have already tried and convicted Zimmerman. There is something sinister on how this made it to this level in the main stream media when there were 441 murders in Chicago alone last year that were unreported. LA, New York, Philli, and all other cities have similar horror stories yet this one was used by media, the President, and activists. What is the real story????

To stay on track on the Lakes region issues....I believe the headlines are snipets of biased information and the posts in the Winni forum actually add some balance to the stories.

[MAXUM]

Originally Posted by NoRegrets

To stay on track on the Lakes region issues....I believe the headlines are snipets of biased information and the posts in the Winni forum actually add some balance to the stories.

With all due respect to the fine people in the media, ain't a one of them as smart or informed as the forum members on here. Even the ones I may disagree with. At least all of us are honest enough to share our opinions as that, opinion not sit behind a news desk, hatchet the daily news, and claim to be unbiased!

[Grandpa Redneck]

Originally Posted by MAXUM

I vehemently disagree with you on this.

If you choose not to protect yourself that's cool more power to ya. That's your decision. Call 911 and hope the cops show up in time to help you out. Roll the dice.

I feel just the opposite and at the end of the day one thing is for sure. Criminals that get guns don't care about the law or anything else other than whatever crime the are hell bent to commit. Them having a gun in hand gives them the upper hand in any situation why else would they have them? If you or anyone else chooses to allow yourself to be in that situation fine, but how dare you suggest taking away my choice to see things a little differently. BTW you would probably be surprised at how many people do carry all the time.

I completely agree with ya on this MAXUM!

[ChocolateGypsy]

I meant that I agreed that no one really knows what happened based on the media reports. But we do know that in both cases only one person had a gun.

Now with that said, I believe that most people don't really understand what happens in a fist fight. It's not like what's seen on tv -- one person throws a punch, then there's a pause, then there's a return punch. Or in a sport where there are "rules" and a measured time frame. In real life, it's more like being attacked by a rabid dog. It's fast, intense, ferocious and PAINFUL! The other person clearly wants to beat you to death. In that situation, most people can't think clearly (severe pain does that to one's mind) -- they just want it to STOP! And I believe that, under such circumstances, most people will use the first thing they can get their hands on and strike back with a large rock, a bat, or a knife... the attacker could still end up dead... depending on how freaked out their victim is. ("she stabbed him twenty times... it's insane!")