Man who shot at alleged purse-snatchers pleads guilty, gets probation

Richard_ wrote:

It's too bad Webb didn't nail a six year old blonde girl in the eye ball with a stray round during his selfish attempt to regain possession of someone else's worn out, stinky, ten dollar purse with lipstick and other inexpensive sundries in it.

Judged:

2

2

2

Richard_ wrote:

It's too bad Webb didn't nail a six year old blonde girl in the eye ball with a stray round during his selfish attempt to regain possession of someone else's worn out, stinky, ten dollar purse with lipstick and other inexpensive sundries in it.

Bubbletoes wrote:

I meant to say, was the lady injured by the purse snatcher? Although it may be a legal moot point, it still may have motivated all this if she was.

Bubbletoes wrote:

Seems a black-eye for the rest of us who carry. Just-what the antis live for.
But this begs some questions:
Is purse snatching a felony at that location, and if-so, were his actions pursuing and shooting at the snatcher technically proper? Did he injure the lady? And, would this outcome be the same if he had scored a hit to the offender?
While most of us may feel this action was unwise considering the scope of the situation, the legal technicalities are what matter. Of-course I am not giving him any gold stars for smarts if he indeed fired toward the bad-guys with no consideration of what was behind his target.
But, did he actually cross the line in textbook terms for basically shooting at fleeing felons? Probably not.

Judged:

2

1

1

Tory II wrote:

<quoted text>

Contrary to what the hoplophobes would say about this, some property is worth some deadly force.

Judged:

1

1

1

Another Voice Heard From wrote:

<quoted text>
I would think that "purse snatching" which amounts to "Strong Armed Robbery" (or howver the local jurisdiction names such an offense)is a felony just about everywhere in this country, even disregarding the value of what may be in the purse.
Is it a "violent" felony justifying the use of deadly force? Probably not.

Judged:

3

2

2

Bubbletoes wrote:

Did he injure the lady?

Judged:

3

2

2

Richard_ wrote:

<quoted text>If the shooter was wearing the purse at the time, or if his wife was wearing the purse at the time and another person stepped out and said, "gimme that purse or I'm gonna stab ya!". Then, shooting the robber is an act of self defense. Shooting hime as he runs away, after the fact, is not self defense.
Additionally, one steps way out on a limb in defense of others, which is not the same as self defense. Therefore, if someone is running away from someone else after stealing their 10.00 dollar, 10 year old purse and you run off after them and commit another felony for some selfish reason, then you commit a crime and the robber commits a crime and you both need to go to jail.

Judged:

2

1

1

Richard_ wrote:

<quoted text>Show me which law that authorizes the first or second person PERSON to mete out retribution to another person for their alleged past tense harm to the first or second person?
It doensn't exist. DEFENSE is not OFFENSE and if you deal with someone else's ALLEGED robber in an OFFENSIVE manner, maybe they will be happy that you did that for them, however the state is going to be mad at you for putting a rip in the moral fabric of society and they will mend that rip with your ass in a sewing machine.
Additionally, if my loved ones or myself were to be harmed by a overly attendant person who may or may not have a ccw, you can kiss your house and anything you own good bye, because the law firm I retain to seek out justice for my harm is going to have some pretty good professional asset finders to find your stuff.
So go ahead, shoot your gun off downtown at some mugger over a 10 dollar, 10 year old purse, just bet the house and everthing you own and roll those dice and bet it all on the come.

Judged:

3

3

2

Highlander wrote:

<quoted text>
In ye olden days, this conversation would not even be taking place.
.
The perp would have been toast, the towns people would celebrate, and the sheriff would remark that the idiot 'needed killing.'

Judged:

3

3

2

Bubbletoes wrote:

You missed my point. I was merely suggesting that IF the shooter had witnessed a brutal act that would rise to the level of a violent felony, then perhaps THAT is what motivated him to chase the bad-guys.

Judged:

3

2

2

Tory II wrote:

The more I think about this the more I believe Webb acted as a good samaritan. On the high seas, no skipper can be prosecuted for being the good samaritan - that's the law.

Judged:

3

3

3

Bubbletoes wrote:

I meant to say, was the lady injured by the purse snatcher? Although it may be a legal moot point, it still may have motivated all this if she was.

Judged:

2

2

1

Punnchy wrote:

Same opinion as here tory II, webb acted as a good Samaritan and did a pretty good job of doing his part.