Also, Lafayette ain't Texas.
This is a discussion on Man arrested for firing his AK to defend his property within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by OPFOR Where are all the Joe Horn supporters now? Old Joe left a place of safety and fired rounds in a populated ...
Also, Lafayette ain't Texas.
This guy deserves to go to prison, IMHO.
He also deserves to lose his right to own firearms, as he has proven he lacks the fundamental judgment to use one intelligently.
Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.
I do agree that this guy was a bad shot, but I challenge anyone to hit a moving target with a stockless AK (if that was indeed the weapon he used shown in the picture) while moving yourself...
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
Well, I think his big mistake was chasing the guys off of his property. I think if he would have fired a couple of shots while they were on his property then disengaged, he probably would not have been arrested.......
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry
No, it's not the tool. It's the amount of shots fired, and where those shots ended up.
Horn fired 3 shots. This guy fired 30. Horn was standing in his yard. This guy chased people down the street.
The above quote does not contain any reference to number of shots fired or type of weapon, but only based on that, I don't care if he was using a BB gun. Those ACTION's are inexcusable.According to witnesses Pitre chased the two suspects up the street, firing all the way. The suspects somehow managed to escape unhurt. Several of Pitre's stray rounds found their way into some nearby apartments.
I know we all have different opinions but......
I would find it very difficult to fire on someone just trying to steal my property. Now if that peice of property is nesscary for me to feed my family or vital to our safety then that is different.
But unless I am in a war zone or TEOTWAWKI, I will not use searching fire for my defense when there are innocents down range
“You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.”
― Robert A. Heinlein,
Here in Texas 4 am 2 guys on you're property trying to steal you're rims you can legally shoot them,but if you chase them down the street recklessly firing shots that are penetrating other dwellings and property you are going to jail,I don't care if it's an AK47,or a .22,he's a lucky man he didn't kill an innocent person
I know we've had this discussion before about defending property, and I don't want to rehash that here. I am 100% for the idea of (1) taking my shotgun / AK / AR / handgun / etc outside to confront someone trying to take either my own property or my neighbors & (2) using deadly force to protect myself if said BG makes any moves toward me.
However, once the BG(s) are fleeing, with or without the 'stuff' they took, the cause for using deadly force is gone. This guy needs to be thrown in jail for at least a little while for firing at fleeing BGs. If I thought about it long enough, I could probably come up with a scenario where I thought that might be OK, but I have thought about it a bit and haven't come up with anything yet.
"It is only as retaliation that force may be used and only against the man who starts its use. No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had a right to choose: his own." - John Galt, from Atlas Shrugged
A good example of what not to do:
- Come out of the house in the wee hours, unarmed, to confront two or more unknown persons.
- Claim you're "in fear for your life" and then come flying back out of the house with a firearm to confront those who appeared to have pointed a pistol at you.
- Using an "evil black rifle" to chase fleeing suspects all over the neighborhood. Even in a state where you're allowed to use force to defend property, this is hard to justify.
- Shooting bullets in all directions. Never striking one of the intruders, but striking many of your neighbors' homes. Can't see a situation in which this would ever be justified.
I'd say that he needs a competent attorney, right now.
At least he fessed up to his role in the affair. That's something.
Multiple bad and stupid decisions...
* If he was able to go inside upon having a pistol pointed at him, and thus be safe and away from danger, he was stupid to then go _back toward danger_ to re-engage the attackers. Stay inside your home and dial 911. He should have stayed inside his home to start and dialed 911 while arming himself upon the first notice of trouble.
* Firing on threats that are no longer a threat and who are fleeing. Notice the report indicates that there are no shells found but his own.
If the BGs are fleeing and thus not a threat then you no longer have justification to fire on them muchless chase. Mr. Homeowner became the aggressor and unlawful acting person, thus his arrest.
* An AK47 and other high powered rifles is not a home defense option. High powered rifles are for hunting, competition games (sport), and military use.
Unless you are one of the very few people to live in desolate uninhabited wilderness with no humans around for minimum 2 miles in all directions of the horizon then high powered rifles for HD is fubar and places ones community at extreme danger. Urban areas such as this case especially so and this guy showed extremely poor judgment and in the process damaged private property as well as endangered lives, which is a crime. Further discharging a firearm within generally 500 ft. of a residence is most typically a crime everywhere and especially so in urban areas. Exceptions include self defense in general but again he was no longer in a position to require defense of self and had become the predator.
What the hell is wrong with people?!
It's actions and events like by this fool that will get all manner of products re-banned because fools and idiots can't think.
A pistol in general and shotgun in specific with buckshot (no slugs!) are HD applicable weapons. Unless you happen to live in a Tora Bora cave where the neighbors homes are surrounded by many feet/miles of earth and rock to absorb and deflect high power rifle fire.
In Texas we do have a different take on things, I pretty much dissagree with everything in Janq's post.
Most basically, if people are on my property at night, especially to commit a crime, they understand that they might be confronted. It is presumed that they are prepared to react when caught so are presumed to be a deadly threat. We have no obligation to retreat in Texas, in fact we believe it goes against human nature and is unreasonable.
Firing on someone fleeing is not cut and dry, but can be within the law here as well.
Many feel that rifles and shotguns are far better self defense weapons for various reasons. Personally I feel an AR is a very good weapon for self defense in that it is far easier to aim with precision (less chance of missing) and also I do not feel that it is any more dangerous in the event of a miss (slower pistol bullets tend to bounce arround more.
All that said, in Texas we also take gun safety seriously. You are always responsible for downrange bullets. He messed up on this one and you will find little sympathy even in Texas. Spray and pray is not a method of self defense.
Mouse, the only problem with your reasoning is this occured in Lafayette. Not Texas. And even in Texas he would be charged with reckless discharge and destruction of property. Yes, we can shoot to defend our property, we can shoot to recover our property. But we still can't shoot our neighbor's house. By your extreme logic, it would seem that the people who had their apartment's hit, could have opened up from the windows and fired on the guy with the AK.
The entire situation was dumb, he got arrested which he should have, he'll pay a fine, and he gets to keep his AK. Hopefully he learned a lesson.
And an AR or AK is NOT an ideal weapon for an urban self defense situation. And your argument about less chance of missing is pretty much negated by the fact that he was running down the street randomly firing his weapon.
An AR/5.56 is not an AK/7.62x39.
AK 7.62 rounds will cut through homes and non-hardened common neighborhood materials like lasers through air. Resistance toward as much is low.
As well homeowners are responsible for _every_ round fired, hit or miss.
If you miss and hit someone else or your round enters someone elses home by whatever means be it window or wall penetration, the shooter is responsible for that round. It is his bullet that does and did damage.
Rifles inclusive of ARs (5.56 is weaker but still high powered) and AKs (7.62 is stronger/deadlier) toward HD are FTL.
A carbine firing pistol ammo is better for said purposes and even then again every round fired is the responsibility of the shooter regardless of intent.
Normal homes are not bullet resistant nor bullet traps.
Firing a rifle round inside ones own home and missing that same round will zip right through a homes interior and exterior walls, even those made of brick or cinder block. At that point the round is in flight amongst the general population. People very likely will be walking by on the street, folks driving by in their cars, and children asleep in their homes. It is irresponsible and simply not unsafe, as well as uncaring to apply as much.
Don't take my word for it though...
'Weapons Effects And Employment'
Source - FM 90-10 Appendix B Weapons Effects And Employment
'Employment and effects of weapons in built-up areas' (M.O.U.T.)
Figure 2-52. Structural penetration capabilities of the 5.56 round
against typical urban targets (range 25 to 100 meteres)
Figure 2-53. Penetration capabilities of a single 7.62-mm round
Figure 2-55. Structure penetrating capabilities of 7.62-mm round (NATO ball)
against typical urban targets (range 25 meters)
Source - Combat Techniques in Built-Up Areas
Ruler in 1:1 scale (Your display was distinguished as 21'')
Source - iRuler.net - Online ruler
Shotguns loaded with buckshot (not slugs...which effectively is a short range rifle), non-highpowered pistols, along with pistol caliber carbine rifles are the safe and sane way to go for HD.
Reason being most everyday average buildings do not have 25+" of wall depth to them be they residential or business use.
Otherwise persons with AK and ARs for HD if they live amongst other humans be it urban, suburban, or yes even rural too then you had better have excellent insurance, deep pockets, Ironsides as your attorney, and a heart made of dry ice in order to deal with the possible case of being arrested and charged with the destruction of your neighbors property and/or your neighbor too upon deployment of high powered rifles and ammunition toward alledged defense of your own home/property/self.
Just as you have a right to defend your self (and in Texas stuff) your neighbor also has the right and expectation to not be shot or have their own stuff damaged/destroyed by you as you attempt to do whatever with your firearms be it defensive or in this FL guys case offensive.
Fortunately he didn't hit anybody...a aggrivated property destruction charge is far less than a murder charge...I think he is getting off too easy. Should get jail time.
Will, reiterate, and add some detail.
I recognize that this was LA, not TX. The question was asked where were all the Hearn supporters - I was adding that even in TX, you will not find much sympathy for an idiot for spraying down the street - he deserve to get into trouble for it.
I will agree that ball ammo will over penetrate. I don't think ball ammo is a good choice for self defense - regardless of the pistol/rifle caliber it is shot from. I also understand a vast majority of people don't realize that most self defense rounds will all cut through drywall/ply/pine like it did not exist. I did not specify which bullet I would use in an ar, but it would a light Vmax bullet. Interior walls will not stop it, but I suspect it will penitrate no worse than most other common options.
That said, my current houses (new one, and one to be soon sold) have exterior walls (and some interior walls) of stone and brick - which are fairly good about stopping bullets (but I still feel more comfortable with a 223 over a 7.62)