Two local news stories

This is a discussion on Two local news stories within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; I happened across these two local news stories of recent shootings by homeowners. I have no idea about the accuracy or ultimate outcome of either. ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: Two local news stories

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,078

    Two local news stories

    I happened across these two local news stories of recent shootings by homeowners. I have no idea about the accuracy or ultimate outcome of either. I would consider this first story barely a "success". I wasn't there so I really can't say. The second story is apparently a tragic failure on the homeowners part. I post these here as an informative learning tool.


    Homeowner kills suspected burglar

    A homeowner shot and killed a suspected burglar this morning after finding him breaking into a car and a storage shed in his townhouse development.

    Police said the homeowner tried to hold the burglar at bay until officers arrived, but the burglar tried to attack him.

    The 49-year-old homeowner was questioned by police and released with no charges filed. The case will be sent to the district attorney for a decision on whether charges should be filed.

    The shooting happened about 2:30 a.m. on Carlsbad Drive in far southeast Shreveport.

    Killed was Jonathan Sternitzky, 19, who lived on nearby Monet Drive in the same development.

    The homeowner said he saw the break-ins in progress, got a gun and went outside. He told police he tried to hold Sternitzky until officers got there but Sternitzky tried to attack him.

    Police said the homeowner fired one shot, hitting Sternitzky in the chest.

    Police said the mortally wounded man ran around the corner of the building before he collapsed and died.

    Authorities did not release the name of the homeowner.

    Clay Carroll backed his neighbor's action.

    "Let people know that this ain't gonna be an area where it's tolerated," Carroll said. "We need to keep the crime out."

    ************

    Man irritated by rock throwing shoots 9-year-old boy

    A man aggravated by children throwing rocks at his house shot and killed a 9-year-old boy in El Dorado, Ark., police said.

    The man has been arrested and formal charges are pending.

    Police were called shortly before 5 p.m. Monday and found Demotric Moore shot in the neck. He was pronounced dead at a local hospital.

    Inside the home, officers saw 50-year-old Jonathan Watts. They ordered him to the ground and arrested him.

    El Dorado police spokesman Capt. David Smith said Watts told officers, "I've had it with these kids and the rock throwing."

    Smith said police had been called to the home on East Street on several occasion and that Watts had once thrown a brick at a small child.

    Watts is held pending a formal charge to be decided by prosecutors.
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by ppkheat View Post

    The homeowner said he saw the break-ins in progress, got a gun and went outside. He told police he tried to hold Sternitzky until officers got there but Sternitzky tried to attack him.

    Police said the homeowner fired one shot, hitting Sternitzky in the chest.

    Police said the mortally wounded man ran around the corner of the building before he collapsed and died.
    This is where I have a problem. For the most part, holding a suspect (i.e. citizens arrest) is problematic. Obviously, when Sternitzky attacked the homeowner was fully justified in stopping the threat. On the other hand, this was a burglary and stuff simply isn't important enough to escalate into a deadly force encounter.

    As usual we don't have all the facts. We don't know if the BG was armed. We don't know if the homeowner was in fear for his life. We don't know if he was simply outraged that he was the victim of a burglary.

    I think he should have called 911 and gotten a good description of the BG, his vehicle and hs direction. As long as he and his family were not in danger he should never have drawn his weapon.

  4. #3
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,078
    I thought the same thing too. Of course it's too late now, but a dog, an alarm system, motion lights, etc anything that makes your property undesirable would go a long way in preventing this.

    Recently my daughter and husband built a new house with security cams outside, and outside lights, but they weren't motion-operated. I highly encouraged them to convert their lights to motion-detect, and they did. Not too long ago their neighborhood had a rash of burglaries, though not their house. Afterwards they were reviewing the camera HD and clearly saw two bad guys walking up their driveway at night, their movement triggered the motion lights on and the two guys did a 180 and headed off in another direction, probably to another house that they deemed an easier hit.
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Tom G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,375
    I agree with PPKHEAT. there are a lot of things the home owner could have done to make his property a less desirable target. It's a shame that a young life had to end over stolen property. I would have yelled out the door to scare him off after I called 911. Sinse I wasn't there I can only guess what happened.

  6. #5
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,563

    Let Me Approach From Another Point of View...

    Of the two scenarios, the rock throwing young boys were certainly doing 'nasty' things, but nothing to get shot over. That shooter deserves a long jail sentence.

    However, the first BG got his just rewards...

    Now I don't believe we should go out looking for the BG's trying to break into our cars and sheds, but I shouldn't be afraid to check on a noise behind my house either.

    In some states, one may protect his property just as he would his person, and I believe, 'rightly so'.

    What if we just let the theives steal anything they desire...where does it stop? I'll only shoot if you try to hurt me, but you can steal all my 'stuff'. I worked very hard to get that 'stuff'...

    I'm sick and tired of the justice system that has let 'BG stuff takers' off the hook time after time...27 B & E's reduced to one...no reimbursement, no apology, nothing...just released to continue doing the SAME thing...ENOUGH!

    The individual in the first scenario had the right to stop that punk thief from his late at night 'snatch and run'...he got EXACTLY what he earned. Less garbage on the streets...

    I would not try to detain, or shoot a running felon in the back, but one step towards ME?...well, read my signature...

    I'm a relatively peaceful old man who has worked very hard to make a life for my children (still doing that, too!), and grandchildren. I will do all that is necessary to 'protect and serve'...the family!

    Do I have motion lights?...YES...they are also called night sights and are located on each of my .45's.

    These are my views only and may or may not reflect the views of others on this forum.

    I hope that I do not ever have to prove what I may be capable of...

    Stay armed...stay alert...stay safe!

    ret
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Agreed SelfDefense...these two are another case of unreasonableness.

    The first guy definitely should have dialed 911 and observed from a distance. He is not a LEO and does not have LEO powers and citizens arrest is largely bogus in the real/modern world state to state. The citizen cannot detain the person or take further action if the other person chooses to just walk off from them. The BG going after the citizen would not have occurred if the citizen had not knowingly placed himself directly into danger to do what, save his neighbors Sony TV or X-Box? Life, even BG life and especially ones own GG life is much more valuable than a pilfered flat screen TV or some other purchased at retail products within the average home. See stuff go down, dial 911 and make a continuous detailed report, remain an on observer from a distance, and obey the law.

    As to the second guy, he's got mental problems if he thinks that shooting a human being muchless a child is reasonable and justifiable because they tossed rocks at his home. Unless those rocks were boulders and the kids Baby Hulks that guy is completely off his rocker and should be tossed under a jail.
    Persons like him are used as justification by antis to strip us all of our rights. :|

    - 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. #7
    Member Array Ben B.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    Agreed SelfDefense...these two are another case of unreasonableness.

    The first guy definitely should have dialed 911 and observed from a distance. He is not a LEO and does not have LEO powers and citizens arrest is largely bogus in the real/modern world state to state. The citizen cannot detain the person or take further action if the other person chooses to just walk off from them. The BG going after the citizen would not have occurred if the citizen had not knowingly placed himself directly into danger to do what, save his neighbors Sony TV or X-Box? Life, even BG life and especially ones own GG life is much more valuable than a pilfered flat screen TV or some other purchased at retail products within the average home. See stuff go down, dial 911 and make a continuous detailed report, remain an on observer from a distance, and obey the law...- Janq
    I couldn't disagree more. As reported here, he shot the burglar when he attacked him while "holding him at bay", whatever that means. The citizen is not liable for the BG's actions, nor is he required to let a BG escape from his property. He might have a duty to retreat in his state, which may or may not apply here.

    I don't want a society where citizens are required to cower in their house while a burglar robs their garage. Other people do want such a society, in which case I suggest that most of Western Europe has what they need.

    If the citizen had walked out and shot the guy for burglary, that is different and a criminal action. If he shot the burglar while trying to escape, that also is a criminal action. If he investigated an apparent burglary of his property while armed, and pointed a gun at an actual burglar in the course of this, he should be within the law. If the burglar endangers the citizen/homeowner by charging or attacking the citizen/homeowner, in an attempt to escape arrest for his felony-level activity, then the burglar has earned his ticket to the Great Beyond as a result of his own behavior.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Ben,

    The story states the shed and car was not his property but that of someone else in his neighborhood.
    The citizen is not at all liable for a BGs actions, I didn't say or imply that. The ciizen is though liable for his own actions and the consequences of as much if there are any such as a guy dying. Just the same as the sketchy guy/burglar is.
    He should have dialed 911 and observed from a distance as breaking into a shed or stealing a car is not worth the end result, a humans life.

    - 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

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array Free American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    749
    I have said this before and I will say it again...when and ONLY when we are willing to take ACTION and stop being a "good witness" will criminals get the picture. The Justice system is designed to set them free, same for all of us. That is why we must work together to take the streets back! If it was your family being victimized would you want me to help or "be a good witness?" I know in a situation like that, if I said "I was trying to be a good witness." I would kick my ass!

    Moderate if you must...

    We have a responsibility to our neighbors...criminals are cowards and respond to a challenge to their preceived superiority. Challenge them and they WILL stop! The government has abandoned property crime and simple assault as prosecutable offenses. It is up to US to stop it. Only 100 years ago stealing a horse got you hung. Today stealing a car gets you probation...government acceptance of crimes against citizens. It doesn't cost them anything. By the way, steal the value of a car from Social Security or the IRS....20 years. As long as the crackheads take our money and not theirs it's ok.
    They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin


    Previously known as "cjm5874"

  11. #10
    Member Array Ben B.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    Ben,

    The story states the shed and car was not his property but that of someone else in his neighborhood.

    The citizen is not at all liable for a BGs actions, I didn't say or imply that. The ciizen is though liable for his own actions and the consequences of as much if there are any such as a guy dying. Just the same as the sketchy guy/burglar is.
    He should have dialed 911 and observed from a distance as breaking into a shed or stealing a car is not worth the end result, a humans life.

    - Janq
    The OP says "breaking into a car and a storage shed in his townhouse development". I didn't catch that "development" part, and I don't know what that means in this case, maybe a community shed, maybe not. Probably a bad idea for me to speculate and hold forth opinions without specifics, but what else is the Internet good for?

    You say "...as breaking into a shed or stealing a car is not worth the end result, a humans life." I think in this sentence you are merging the burglar's crime/behavior with the citizen's behavior, and blaming the outcome upon the citizen. If the citizen executed a death sentence for burglary and GTA, he is a criminal. If the citizen confronts a burglar in commisson of burglary, and the burglar charges/assaults him, resulting in a shot burglar, I say the citizen acted like a citizen should, and therefore he should not be charged with anything.

    I myself would probably not charge into a similar situation over other's property, because I'd be concerned about both my own liabilty/legal exposure from prosecutors or police, and also about taking personal risk over property. Not because it is the wrong thing to do. I would investigate over my own property, and if my property was within a communal storage shed/garage, I'd check it out.

  12. #11
    Member Array jackofspades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    He should have dialed 911 and observed from a distance as breaking into a shed or stealing a car is not worth the end result, a humans life.

    - Janq
    He did dial 911.. he was trying to detain the BG until the cops showed up. I disagree with you about his actions being unreasonable. How many of us have asked someone to 'keep an eye on' our houses/cars/stuff while going out of town?
    Isn't one reason that we carry (or plan on carrying, for those who don't have permits yet) because we KNOW that the police cannot (generally) arrive in time to do anything except write a report? This individual caught a BG committing a crime, he stopped the crime. Only when the BG made the decision to attack him, did he fire. In my opinion we've really got two separate incidents in the one story (about the townhouse guy... I fully agree the dude who shot the kid for throwing rocks is off his rocker).
    1 - Good citizen notices crime in progress, calls 911, steps outside to halt criminal actions. Criminal stops (at least initially). Resolution - Crime stopped, BG detained. A citizen's arrest (very much legal, at least, here in CO).
    2 - BG decides he no longer wishes to be detained..makes the very bad decision of attacking an obviously armed individual...ends up getting shot. Resolution - BG no longer committing crimes


    Isn't the 'stick your head in the sand and let the police deal with it' attitude part of what we say is the standard reaction? Unless I'm misunderstanding you (and its possible I am).. you seem to be advocating that this individual should have done pretty much that. Citizens need to work together to clean up their neighborhoods (yes, working with the LEOs if necessary) look at TN_Mike's neighborhood problem.. that would not have been resolved the way it was/is if TN_Mike, and the rest of his neighbors, only looked out for theirselves and didn't all work together to get the bad apples pulled from the tree..
    Last edited by jackofspades; June 27th, 2007 at 04:12 PM. Reason: because I spel gud

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Ben,

    In the end we are agreeing as per your summation.

    Me too, I'd let the guy break in and rummage around in a tool shed whilst dialing 911 and keeping my eye on him.
    My life and liberty are more valuable than a lawnmower or whatever other relatively low value easily repairable/replaceable things might be stored in a shed. Same goes for an automobile, they too are repair & replaceable by insurance which most all of us are compelled by law to invest in toward just such contingencies.

    If the criminal had not attempted to break into other peoples stuff then he'd have no problem. But on the flip side say he was not burglarizing but there to borrow stuff from a friend? Or say he was locked out of his own vehicle having been there as a visitor. Or say he was having a mental illness episode off his meds and not fully himself. This happens.
    Joe the citizen neighbor peering out his window and deciding to go for his. 45 to apply his thoughts toward street justice might not be aware of this or able to detect as much with accuracy. He runs out, starts issuing cease & desist commands which may or may not be legal in his state & county, followed by the 'BG' saying in so many words "Who the hell are you? Barney Fife? Go pound sand ya bastid! What? You gunna shoot me?!".
    Next thing you know Joe finds himself with a belligerent fellow citizen, because that is what the BG is until properly arrested and adjudicated...a citizen, who is not complying to his commands because well he doesn't by law have to and Joe doesn't have any sort of badge to counter that. What happens next is largely predictable...conflict escalated by the neighbor playing the role of Captain Sav-A-Ho.
    Even if the BG were actually there in his neighborhood to do nothing but rob, steal, and pillage, he still by law has rights....and we citizen neer do well minded types still have to follow the law even as we might not like it, agree with it, or find as much to be distasteful and counter to our own feelings/emotions/sentimentality.
    Don't take me to be espousing crime and criminality or the letting of criminals off the hook for their unlawful actions because that could not be further from the truth.

    Free American for example spoke of citizens taking action to disuade criminals. I'm all for it, within reason and as per following the law. Once we ignore the laws that are in place for our own immediate situational reasoning then we become no better than the criminals we despise who do and are doing the exact same thing. As soon as we allow and support skipping past laws and reasonableness toward our own desire of the minute we then will slide backward to the times and ways of 100 yrs. ago or more when effectively anyone could accuse anyone of anything and if they didn't run off and apply their own form of street justice they might capture a person be he right or totally in the wrong and guilt and hold a banana republic style community trial running rough shod over law because hey well it felt like the right thing to do. Actions might not have been prudent or lawful but hey it felt damn good and well justice was meted out so all is well. Or is it?

    There is a good reason why many states do not allow lawful shooting of persons over property. A car is not a horse and a shed is not ones own home. There is a big difference amongst these and the law today better understands that as in the days and centuries past it was not so clearly understood or practiced. Results of which included as noted folk being lynched for all manner of reasoning under the guise of 'justice'. The ironic thing is crime was just as bad if not worst in the day including theft even as folk might have followed an applied their own laws. It's not like America was a low crime nirvana prior or for that matter ever has been.

    One takes many chances seeking out and confronting criminals in general. Ask a cop they'll tell you same as they do as much professionally; http://www.psfights.com/fight-video-1772.htm
    Criminals largely are not respectful of uniformed police with badges, batons, tasers, pepper sprays, bullets, and even dogs. Why should one respect the commands of a neighbor guy with no backup, no radio, no witnesses, and possibly no stomach for trouble. It's not suprising nor unusual that the BG would choose to roll the dice and play on than fold.
    My neighbor has home owners insurance and his snow blower or tractor or even his horse is not worth my own life nor my time & money defending my actions in court. Folks scoff at the thought but it is a reality, one can only hope to be no billed but expect to go to court be it criminal if not civil. Neither are easy nor cheap, like a car or tools in a tool shed.
    If I'm going to pay it's going to be for something worth the stretch and of high if not priceless value. That's just me though and as usual other folks mileage may and will vary.

    - 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

  14. #13
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,563

    Amen, Brother...

    Quote Originally Posted by Free American View Post
    I have said this before and I will say it again...when and ONLY when we are willing to take ACTION and stop being a "good witness" will criminals get the picture...
    It is up to US to stop it. Only 100 years ago stealing a horse got you hung. Today stealing a car gets you probation...government acceptance of crimes against citizens. It doesn't cost them anything.
    My thoughts exactly...more people have to take 'responsible action'.

    I'm no cop, nor do I intend to play that role, but I will watch cautiously over me and mine...and our stuff too! I will always remain within the law(s) of the State in which I reside...that's why I love Florida!

    Stay armed...stay safe!

    ret
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  15. #14
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Lots of good opinions here on this thread... I can see both sides of the view that seems to be the bottom line here.

    This is just my opinion and my opinion only.

    You absolutely have the right to investigate anything on your property.

    You have the absolute right to intervine and disrupt a crime being committed on your property.

    You are not required ONLY to call the police and then stand by and watch the crime continue to transpire while waiting for the police to respond. Hell, in some jurisdictions that could take more than an hour. We all know that! Again, you have the Right to intervene and attempt to stop a crime being perpatrated against you or your property.

    If you choose not to excersise that right, to just call 911 and then watch whatever happens, that is certainly your choice, and may even be the right thing to do in some circumstances, but it is not REQUIRED that you do that.

    Almost every justisdiction in the land has provisions for a citizens arrest in the law. You may think it's antiquated, bogus, not really a binding act or whatever, but it is still "On The Books" in almost every jurisdiction and it is there for a reason. And it is utilized by citizens frequently and is accepted by LE.

    Anytime you say "stop" and attempt to detain someone for police, you are in effect, making a citizens arrest and it is legal to do so.

    Now comes the use of deadly force. I do not advocate the use of deadly force to protect property. The laws are very sketchy and scattered across the country regarding this. In some narrowly defined instances and locations it is justified. I don't know if I personally could justify to myself morally to end a life over property and in fact, I would venture to say that in Most jurisdictions, use of deadly force to protect property isn't justified.

    So now we come to shooting a burgler and how it is justified. It is justified if the burgler threatens you, has the ability and opportunity to kill or cripple you. Those actions of the burgler towards a lawful citizen is what counts.

    What he was doing there, and the property he was attempting to steal at the time is not part of the equation at that point.

    Years ago, unwitting, but well intentioned police officers used to advise home owners, If you shoot a bad guy not inside your house, drag them inside afterwards! It's ok to shoot someone in your house but not shoot someone in your front yard or on your porch.

    That information proved "disasterous" for lots of folks who believed they were doing the right thing and may have been a justifiable shooting to begin with depending on the circumstances. But what they did was alter the crime scene and tamper with evidence and in the eyes of the court, and most juries... tampering with evidence equals guilt.

    So, if you see someone committing a crime on your property and lawfully try to put a stop to it, and the criminal now turns on you, places you in jeopardy, has the intent, the ability and the opportunity to kill or cripple you, you are justified in shooting the guy.

    You are not shooting him over stealing your property, you are shooting him because "his" actions, and "his" poor decision making, placed you in jeopardy and in fear of your life. That is, if he also had the means and opportunity to hurt or kill you while you had every legal right to be doing what you were doing.

    You have every legal right to investigate a crime happening on your property and have every legal right to intervene and stop the crime on your property. His attacking you is a totally seperate act initiated by the criminal, not the homeowner.

    This is just my opinion and what my understanding how the law reads.

    YMMV
    -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."

  16. #15
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Janq View Post
    ....Criminals largely are not respectful of uniformed police with badges, batons, tasers, pepper sprays, bullets, and even dogs.

    Why should one respect the commands of a neighbor guy with no backup, no radio, no witnesses, and possibly no stomach for trouble. - Janq

    Because when interviewed in prison, most burglers, robbers, rapists state exactly that while they usually don't fear the police, what they fear MOST is the ARMED CITIZEN.

    The reason? They are well aware of all the restraints, policies and rediculous requirements placed on police officers when effecting an arrest. Also they will take their chances in court if captured by police.

    When faced by an armed citizen, all bets are off. They know that more than likely, the armed citizen may very well SHOOT THEM!



    Not only have I read what criminial psychologists, reputable law enforcement officers like Massad Ayoob have written about such studies done in prisons regarding that question, but just in the last couple months I saw on TV, something like Dateline or 60 Minutes, I actually saw the prisoners themselves (around a dozen) say those exact words when being interviewed for the feature story being done on concealed carry and armed citizens.

    Not only that, but again, almost exclusively, each one said that on more than one occasion, they broke-off an attack, because at the last moment they weren't quite sure that the victim would fight back or had a gun and chose to pick a different victim instead.
    -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."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

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. Two news stories, same city, of BG's being shot by the homeowners
    By ppkheat in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: August 5th, 2010, 10:05 AM
  2. From the local news station here....
    By TedBeau in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: May 24th, 2010, 04:57 PM
  3. Local TV news does story on CCW
    By TN_Mike in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: November 27th, 2007, 04:51 PM
  4. I just saw on the local news (CCW'r shoots at cop)
    By jiggz01 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: July 1st, 2006, 09:59 PM
  5. Local News
    By 500Mag in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 8th, 2006, 07:57 PM

Search tags for this page

guy sternitzky
,
jonathan sterninzki died shreveport
,

jonathan sternitzky

,
jonathan sternitzky case
,
jonathan sternitzky death
,
jonathan sternitzky died shreveport
,
jonathon sternitzky death
,
shreveport times jonathan sternitzky
,
what r the demotrics views on gun safety
Click on a term to search for related topics.