Castle Doctrine Upheld

This is a discussion on Castle Doctrine Upheld within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by Janq Borden kicked at the car to start _before_ Araujo choose to loop back around toward Borden's home to "surprise him". As ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 41 of 41

Thread: Castle Doctrine Upheld

  1. #31
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    Borden kicked at the car to start _before_ Araujo choose to loop back around toward Borden's home to "surprise him".



    As I'd said a person walking on a sidewalk would not be able to kick at a car driving in the road. Sidewalks are generally set back 3' from the edge/border of a road. Even for those that do abut right up against the side of the road it would require alot from even a long legged person it would be kind of difficult. Not impossible, but require effort. To be able to kick at and actually impact a car driving by he'd likely have to have been in the road, unless he's got legs like Shaq and/or is quite limber. Seriously go outside yourself and try to imitate same/similar on any given sidewalk.
    Also most folk who have a car driving up on them at any rate of closing speed think to move themselves away from the vehicle using distance as a safety buffer. Not to stand there ground and kick at it in defiance. Especially considering just moments prior the same trio of up to no good types were in it harassing you and yelling unpleasantries, at 2AM no less when everybody knows no good types tend to be out.
    I think the states attorney here was wondering what I am too; reasonableness.

    Of course I could be off and/or wrong.

    - Janq
    I read some reader comments when this story first emerged. Apparently, Borden was a jerk who had a reputation for provoking the gangbangers. From my understanding Borden kicked the car after it stopped and someone was trying to get out of the car (presumably to attack Borden.)

    I tend to have confidence in the justice system so I trust the jury. They had the facts and reached the conclusion that Borden's actions were justified.

    The result is good enough for me and more scum is cleaned up. The survivor will certainly think twice about the violent life he began.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array teknoid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Lower Slobovia
    Posts
    226
    Was this guy a CCW holder?

    http://www.topix.net/content/trb/013...61473363582114

    Since 1980, Borden has had run-ins with the law, including arrests for aggravated assault, damage to private property, disorderly conduct and drug possession.

  4. #33
    Ron
    Ron is offline
    Distinguished Member Array Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    West Linn, Oregon
    Posts
    1,628
    Quote Originally Posted by azchevy View Post
    8 months in jail is better than 6 feet undergorund
    No quarrel with that. My point, however, was that if he could have avoided the confrontation, then that is what he should have done.
    "It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."

    J. R. R. Tolkien

  5. #34
    Ron
    Ron is offline
    Distinguished Member Array Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    West Linn, Oregon
    Posts
    1,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Miggy View Post
    So, If I get home after work around 1 am and I have to walk my dogs, I should not do it because some punks decide it is not the USA but some low-life central american neighborhood all of the sudden and where they own the night?

    So what happens when the gangbangers decide it is also cool to own the day? You gonna stay home? Not go out?
    That is an interesting and disturbing question for me. If I know that they are out on my street or neighborhood, likely with guns, do I take my dogs and gun and go out at 1am, knowing that I might well wind up in a gun fight with gang bangers? To be perfectly honest, I am not sure what I would do, and it disturbs the heck out of me because I know exactly what you are saying, and I don't like that for me the answer is probably no, I would not go out.

    Ron
    "It does not do to leave a dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him."

    J. R. R. Tolkien

  6. #35
    Senior Member Array rmarkob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    535
    Quote Originally Posted by teknoid View Post
    Was this guy a CCW holder?

    http://www.topix.net/content/trb/013...61473363582114

    Since 1980, Borden has had run-ins with the law, including arrests for aggravated assault, damage to private property, disorderly conduct and drug possession.
    And if he was, a) does he still have his CCW license, and b) does he still have his gun(s)?
    Clinging to guns and God in PA...

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by teknoid View Post
    Missed that part, but looking at the picture of the neighborhood, there may or may not be sidewalks. If there are, I can't make them out. Were sidewalks mentioned in the story?
    Teknoid,

    Sidewalks were not mentioned in the story, I'd offered that component within my own posting.

    The picture as featured in the article from the court case is a satellite image via Google maps.
    That same image can be seen by anyone and unlike in the court pic one can zoom in further to show the ground/terrain which does in fact indicate that like most average neighborhoods there are sidewalks all over his adjacent to the street.

    Google Map of 'Hiawatha Avenue and Osceola Drive, West Palm Beach, Florida'
    http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...wloc=addr&om=1

    I have the above map set to maximum zoom showing very clearly the sidewalks.
    Zoom out one or two points and the sidewalks remain in view albeit less clear/obvious. Roam around on the map and you'll note all areas in and around have sidewalks too.
    I sourced the above location information from the news link you posted which states...

    ...Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office spokesman Sgt. Pete Palenzuela said Borden, 44, shot the three men in the 1987 Jeep Cherokee at Hiawatha Avenue and Osceola Drive west of West Palm Beach. Borden fired through the windshield, then approached the driver's window and fired several more shots, officials say.

    Borden walked about 80 yards back to his house, called 911 and waited for deputies....
    Again this, for me, comes back to a question of reasonableness.
    I'm not saying he caused himself to be attacked. But I am wondering why he felt it reasonable to act as he did prior to the threat becoming eminent by kicking (!) a moving car filled with hoodlums. Doing so in the middle of the night when anyone not born yesterday knows that this is the prime time for 'trouble' to show it's teeth. When the hoodlums ambush Borden for the third time attempting to get the better of him near his home, 80 yards from it, he sensing an eminent threat fires on the as stated in the article moving vehicle. But that moving vehicle having hit a fence _prior_ to being on top of Borden gave him enough time to sense/hear the surprise attack, turn, assess that it was the same boys from the prior two run ins moments earlier and for him to unholster and fire not once but as reported five to seven times into the vehicles windshield. With that the vehicle still was not on top of him because as reported Borden wlaked over and up to the vehicle assumedly now no longer in motion, and thus no longer an eminent threat, and he choose to fire additional rounds into the front seat passenger (the surviving witness) and a single shot into the heart of the rear seat passenger as well. That is a heck of alot of actions to make and they all required time.

    The state attorney no doubt looked at this similarly and wondered as I am, how reasonable is it to do all of the above as opposed to say placing the ultimate safety net of distance between yourself and the BGs rather than closing distance with persons of unknown ability to bite back?
    Then tonight as you mentioned this other stuff comes up in regard to Borden's own past and active track record which if it's true/factual gives one insight to his own individual thoughts toward reasonableness as based on results.
    I'm not an attorney though. I'm just a citizen wondering outloud about how little of this makes any sense beyond the surface.

    Again I would not look to this case as an exemplar toward citizen use of the Castle Doctrine as to my eyes it appears to be an ironic case of criminal mentality on criminal mentality crime where one cagier snake just happened to turn the tables on a trio of snakes ever so slightly less cagey than he. Better criminals would have hit the road packing and in that case Borden would have died that night.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  8. #37
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,134
    Quote Originally Posted by ron8903 View Post
    Tuesday, June 26, 2007

    WEST PALM BEACH Norman Borden became the first defendant in Palm Beach County to beat murder charges under the state's Castle Doctrine law...
    This is what gets my goat, that every newsrag wants to tell us that people are getting away with murder. Murder is a criminal act as defined in the state code, if it's not in the code, then it's not murder! It's not a crime! How hard is that to understand?
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array ron8903's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    This is what gets my goat, that every newsrag wants to tell us that people are getting away with murder. Murder is a criminal act as defined in the state code, if it's not in the code, then it's not murder! It's not a crime! How hard is that to understand?
    The bottom line, he was charged with 1st degree murder.
    And the jury found him not guilty.

    BTW that is why he stayed in jail, no bond for that charge.
    "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
    - Sir Winston Churchill

  10. #39
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    I'm not sure if I read all the statement correctly but I thought I read where he kicked the car door in an attempt to keep it shut and keep a guy from getting out and assaulting him.

    Not sure about that... too tired to go back and dig through posts and articles... I may be mistaken about that.... but if so, I can see the logic behind that.

    Not saying it was right to do as gang bangers really have hair triggers and if you sneaze in their direction you're liable to be shot.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    I'm not sure if I read all the statement correctly but I thought I read where he kicked the car door in an attempt to keep it shut and keep a guy from getting out and assaulting him.

    Not sure about that... too tired to go back and dig through posts and articles... I may be mistaken about that.... but if so, I can see the logic behind that...
    Lets say that was exactly the case, he kicked the door to prevent it from being opened by a potential attacker. That's fine.
    That incident following the reported time line occurred before any shooting developed. The attackers did not attack him at that time, they left to drop off the one kid and pickup Araujo for additional muscle toward handling Borden who following the above assumption or possible fact would then not have been an instigator but defending himself. Totally fine.

    The core of the question toward reasonableness does not lie with the door kicking or he walking in the street versus the sidewalk or he exercising his dogs in the middle of the night.
    The question is with shooting the driver seven times in the face. Not once but seven times (!). After stopping the operator of the possible eminent threat, rather than fleeing to gain distance toward being safe he instead closed distance toward the remaining passengers in the vehicle who at this stage were not threats as the vehicle was not moving...because as reported by the witness who survived the shooting Borden walked over and up to the car they did not drive/coast up to or into him. Once there at their Jeep he shot the passenger multiple times in the legs and shot the rear seat passenger in the heart. Afterward he walked 80 yards to his own home and called 911 to report the incident.

    Is it reasonable to run into danger when opportunity allows you to flee toward safety? There was no person he was going toward at the Jeep to save. Further he exposed himself to great additional danger and potential for being killed by engaging the passengers, who were unarmed and not a threat to him. He did not know they were unarmed though and thus again reasonableness. Would an average reasonable person choose to engage a danger with unknown offensive arms capability especially when it's a known to the person that he will be outnumbered 2:1? Or is it more/most reasonable that an average reasonable person would see the nullifying of the driver and thus the vehicular based threat as an opportunity, a window if you will, to flee/escape and place distance between he and his multiple attackers increasing his odds for survival to the highest degree.

    Both of the CCW classes I've taken have had police instructors that adamantly emphasized using multiple examples to not do what Borden did. Further pretty much all that I've read toward as much, that is not on gun-fu forums, preach same. Borden nullified his direct threat while the other two, they were involved associates to him but in a functional view were not able following the driver being shot 7 times in the face to take the reigns and begin attacking a new. Borden did not know this though from a distance and that is the key here, he was at a distance and chose to close it which for me if I were a juror in this case would not be reasonable. Atleast as based on the reported facts in the three articles cited in this thread.

    Folks we have to look at this case and others like it with a critical eye without emotion, sentimentality, or personal political bent.
    This is the exact same thing we ask of those amongst Brady and associates as well as antis in general in addition to prosecutors who might string we civilians up for legal review and possible penalty.
    If we do not do this, looking at events with a critical non-emotional, apolitical bent, without sentimentality then we are no better than those on the other side of the 2A fence who use those exact items to justify attacking us and stripping us of our rights.

    It's completely reasonable to me as based on the reported facts that the state attorney chose to bring charges against Borden. Reasonableness of his immediate actions are in question and no doubt they were also aware of his past assuming of course that as reported is even 50% factual that he'd had a history of being violent and making unreasonable choices resulting in legal investigation.

    One thing I wonder is how does a guy who reportedly has "Since 1980...[Borden] had run-ins with the law, including arrests for aggravated assault (!), damage to private property, disorderly conduct and drug possession" get approval for a CCW license anywhere? Additionally if he did not have a license then why are no gun charges filed against him and was that information provided to the jurors toward their decision making in this case? Maybe he's a guy who turned his life around as relative to his youth, I can buy that. But still how does a person with a record like that get a CCW license, assuming of course he had one which I'm inclined to doubt.

    - Janq
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing

  12. #41
    VIP Member Array Blackeagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by teknoid View Post
    Was this guy a CCW holder?

    http://www.topix.net/content/trb/013...61473363582114

    Since 1980, Borden has had run-ins with the law, including arrests for aggravated assault, damage to private property, disorderly conduct and drug possession.
    It says arrests, not convictions. Arrests don't keep you from getting a CCW permit.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Castle Doctrine
    By kapnketel in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 20th, 2010, 09:52 AM
  2. NY castle doctrine
    By bgcole in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: July 28th, 2009, 01:37 PM
  3. Castle Doctrine in NC
    By Deb in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: May 5th, 2009, 09:17 AM
  4. castle doctrine
    By python2 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: January 3rd, 2007, 09:19 AM
  5. Castle Doctrine in WA?
    By Benjaminm0110 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 5th, 2006, 03:20 PM

Search tags for this page

castle doctrine mn

,

castle doctrine upheld

,

florida castle law norman borden

,

has the castle doctrine been upheld in mn

Click on a term to search for related topics.