Golf club thief picked the wrong mark - gets held at gunpoint

[Asmanning95]

15 minutes ago, Club Rat said:

With more citizens packing, crime could decrease...

'Murica!!

[CarlSpackler]

12 hours ago, iacas said:

I don't see anyone doing that.

They're saying the "victim" took things too far.

Pretty much. You are allowed to protect yourself and your property, but you have to do so within the confines of the law. If you don't, you are just as guilty as the other person.

[Lihu]

22 hours ago, nevets88 said:

A picture is worth a thousand words:

http://golfweek.com/quick_shot/man-held-at-gunpoint-over-stolen-golf-clubs-thief/

Geeze. . . The fire marshal went nuts. . .

I really prefer to use my weapons for recreational purposes, but CCW on the golf course is not what I would consider recreational.

[mcanadiens]

So ... If you can't beat the crap out the thief with your fists, you're basically hosed.

 

 

[iacas]

11 hours ago, newtogolf said:

How does a 59 year old man detain a criminal half his age and not take it too far? You either use the threat of force or you let him go and he gets away with the crime.  

Uhhhh, I could think of a bunch of ways. If you think that pulling a gun on someone, aggressively yelling at him, telling the guy you were going to kill him, or any of a half dozen other things that guy did was an appropriate response… you're crazy.

I support the rights of gun owners heavily. That was way, way across the line of acceptable and legal behavior.

11 hours ago, Gunther said:

Understand that this event and publishment of the pic is a liberal construct designed to inflame gun grabbers and influence the under-informed. Does it appear the dude is a bit over zealous? Sure, but Jesus, it's a one-off episode by a guy who's lived a law-abiding, perhaps life-saving life.

Stances like this do not help the rights of gun owners and gives merit to how the "gun grabbers" view gun owners. Your position on this is ridiculous.

The guy may have lead a great life, but in this instance he goes well above and beyond what's reasonable. He breaks several laws himself.

11 hours ago, Gunther said:

Let's focus our ire on what truly is a threat and what the media hides from us:  this year there have already been 1491 Islamic attacks in 50 countries, in which 13,277 people were killed and 15,953 injured.

The dude protected his golf clubs, fkn A.  No one was killed or injured.

That has nothing to do with this.

Just because you care about this doesn't mean you don't care about Islamic attacks. That's a stupid argument to make, @Gunther. You'd be better off keeping your mouth shut (figuratively, as we're all typing here) if you're a gun supporter than uttering nonsense like this. Your post makes gun owners/supporters look bad.

[Gunther]

24 minutes ago, iacas said:

Uhhhh, I could think of a bunch of ways. If you think that pulling a gun on someone, aggressively yelling at him, telling the guy you were going to kill him, or any of a half dozen other things that guy did was an appropriate response… you're crazy.

I support the rights of gun owners heavily. That was way, way across the line of acceptable and legal behavior.

Stances like this do not help the rights of gun owners and gives merit to how the "gun grabbers" view gun owners. Your position on this is ridiculous.

The guy may have lead a great life, but in this instance he goes well above and beyond what's reasonable. He breaks several laws himself.

That has nothing to do with this.

Just because you care about this doesn't mean you don't care about Islamic attacks. That's a stupid argument to make, @Gunther. You'd be better off keeping your mouth shut (figuratively, as we're all typing here) if you're a gun supporter than uttering nonsense like this. Your post makes gun owners/supporters look 

This is a non-issue, a local thing, a one-off incident.  The dude over-reacted, I acknowledged that.  

The point is it was publicized to create uproar, tumult and angst, and many are more angry and hateful to this jamoke than they are to people who are actually killing and maiming other humans.  You should see the comments on GMac's Twitter feed after he posted it.  The over-reaction there is what drove my comments, moreso than the reactions here, which have been, by and large, pretty tame.  

There are far more egregious things happening in the world today of which you and most others have no clue.  My plea is to move on from this very minor episode and focus on the big picture.

[GolfLug]

12 hours ago, Gunther said:

Understand that this event and publishment of the pic is a liberal construct designed to inflame gun grabbers and influence the under-informed.  Does it appear the dude is a bit over zealous?   Sure, but Jesus, it's a one-off episode by a guy who's lived a law-abiding, perhaps life-saving life.  And we don't know the facts other than what's represented in this piece.  Who remembers Ferguson?  Yes, a complete fabrication.

Let's focus our ire on what truly is a threat and what the media hides from us:  this year there have already been 1491 Islamic attacks in 50 countries, in which 13,277 people were killed and 15,953 injured.

The dude protected his golf clubs, fkn A.  No one was killed or injured.

 

2 hours ago, Club Rat said:

It probably wasn't the "Thief's" first Rodeo, but maybe now it may deter him from future club stealing knowing Old Man golfers carry guns and he may get his Ass shot next time. I score it "One" for the good guys ..

With more citizens packing, crime could decrease...

Our justice system put him back out on the street to probably steal again... That's total BS.
 

 

That didn't take long. This thread is a gun debate now??

Support gun owner rights VERY MUCH but I am sure both you will agree that concurrent use of brain is necessary, which either this fella didn't demonstrate or maybe he did by very skillfully acting out a complete bluff. Seemed a little too realistic for the later to be the case.

[ghalfaire]

21 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

This seems like a complete abuse of the power that the gunslinger may not ever have had.  A retired fire marshall claiming to be a police officer, threatening the other guy with a gun for what he thinks might be theft, completely over the top.  This is the kind of thing that should lead the local folks who issue firearm permits to re-evaluate this man's fitness to be licensed.  I don't care if he's a retired law-enforcement officer, at this point he displayed extremely poor judgement.  Even Oklahoma doesn't count as the wild west anymore, there's no room for vigilante justice.  Call the police, get a license plate number, but don't endanger the kid and everyone nearby with a firearm.

I wonder if we'll hear the results of whatever happens, both to the young thief, and the not-so-young gunslinger.

yes, even Second Amendment supporters like me believe that some sort of education on the gun laws of your state and use of deadly force should be achieved before you can walk around with a weapon.  Even out here in the wild west you are not allowed to use deadly force unless you or someone else is being attacked or threatened to be attacked.  How that gets interpreted in court might vary some from state to state but I have to believe that you cannot threaten someone with a gun over a set of golf clubs anywhere in the US.  I would suspect the citizen with a gun in this case is in as much trouble with the law as is the thief. 

[Dave2512]

The laws are specific and easy to understand. The reasons to carry aren't to prevent non-violent theft. What that guy did would have been an overreaction if he was a cop and witnessed it happening. That nut went crazy hours after the theft and threatened to kill someone for stealing golf clubs. He committed more crimes than the thief and likely will lose his right own a gun.

[Jeremie Boop]

I have to say, if I had caught the person who stole my golf clubs and I had a gun on me with which to convince him to stay put until the police came I would have done it. That's not to say I would have said "I'll kill you" or the like, but I definitely would have utilized my firearm to detain him so that justice could be served. I'm quite biased against thieves though, considering I've been the victim of theft on multiple occasions so my reaction is most likely going to be stronger than others who may not have had the same misfortunes that I have.

[ghalfaire]

2 hours ago, CarlSpackler said:

Pretty much. You are allowed to protect yourself and your property, but you have to do so within the confines of the law. If you don't, you are just as guilty as the other person.

You are allowed to protect yourself and others with deadly force (when lawful), but not your property unless the theft includes some threat to your person.  Again how "threat" gets interpreted in court may vary some from state to state, but you can't kill someone for stealing your stuff unless he threatens you at the same time.

The other thing one should always consider is the thief or their survivors always have access to the civil courts, even if what you do is lawful. 

[Hardspoon]

3 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

I have to say, if I had caught the person who stole my golf clubs and I had a gun on me with which to convince him to stay put until the police came I would have done it. That's not to say I would have said "I'll kill you" or the like, but I definitely would have utilized my firearm to detain him so that justice could be served. I'm quite biased against thieves though, considering I've been the victim of theft on multiple occasions so my reaction is most likely going to be stronger than others who may not have had the same misfortunes that I have.

Right, I have a feeling that I probably don't have the self-restraint to NOT do the same...that's why I don't carry my gun.  The guy in this video shouldn't either, if he can't keep himself from threatening to kill someone who is clearly not a threat.

[Abu3baid]

15 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

I have to say, if I had caught the person who stole my golf clubs and I had a gun on me with which to convince him to stay put until the police came I would have done it. That's not to say I would have said "I'll kill you" or the like, but I definitely would have utilized my firearm to detain him so that justice could be served. I'm quite biased against thieves though, considering I've been the victim of theft on multiple occasions so my reaction is most likely going to be stronger than others who may not have had the same misfortunes that I have.

And if he just walks away from you?  What do you do then?

From what I understand never pull a gun unless your going to use it, and as others have said this guy might have been crazy enough to do so.  You don't seem like that type, so you still think you would pull the gun and try and hold him at gun point?  

[Jeremie Boop]

4 minutes ago, Abu3baid said:

And if he just walks away from you?  What do you do then?

From what I understand never pull a gun unless your going to use it, and as others have said this guy might have been crazy enough to do so.  You don't seem like that type, so you still think you would pull the gun and try and hold him at gun point?  

If he walks away a warning shot most likely would halt him in his tracks. Again, I've had people steal enough from me that my tolerance for anyone who does it is next to zero. Most thieves are cowards, in my opinion, so I doubt that they'd test my resolve. Especially given the fact that my face would probably be showing quite a bit of anger and malice. It bothers me a bit that anyone would advocate that I, or anyone else, should just let a thief walk away without trying to detain them by whatever means they have available. The argument that "it's just stuff" falls flat for me. Yeah, it's just stuff, but it's stuff that I purchased with money I worked hard for. It's no different than stealing money out of my wallet. No, I'm not going to kill someone over it, but they won't necessarily know that.

[Dave2512]

 

1 minute ago, Jeremie Boop said:

If he walks away a warning shot most likely would halt him in his tracks. Again, I've had people steal enough from me that my tolerance for anyone who does it is next to zero. Most thieves are cowards, in my opinion, so I doubt that they'd test my resolve. Especially given the fact that my face would probably be showing quite a bit of anger and malice. It bothers me a bit that anyone would advocate that I, or anyone else, should just let a thief walk away without trying to detain them by whatever means they have available. The argument that "it's just stuff" falls flat for me. Yeah, it's just stuff, but it's stuff that I purchased with money I worked hard for. It's no different than stealing money out of my wallet. No, I'm not going to kill someone over it, but they won't necessarily know that.

You shouldn't own a gun.

[Jeremie Boop]

1 minute ago, Dave2512 said:

 

You shouldn't own a gun.

You are welcome to your opinion.

[drmevo]

Let's think this through...say you pull your gun on the guy, with no intention of actually shooting.  Well, what happens when he has a gun of his own? I mean, we already know he's a criminal, so who's to say he's not armed? Is it really worth it over golf clubs? Either taking a life or losing your own?

Edited August 18, 2016 by drmevo

[CarlSpackler]

37 minutes ago, ghalfaire said:

You are allowed to protect yourself and others with deadly force (when lawful), but not your property unless the theft includes some threat to your person.  Again how "threat" gets interpreted in court may vary some from state to state, but you can't kill someone for stealing your stuff unless he threatens you at the same time.

The other thing one should always consider is the thief or their survivors always have access to the civil courts, even if what you do is lawful. 

That was not the case in Ohio, and I believe it is not the case here in Florida. A guy I know had his truck stolen. He found it up the street, pulled a gun on the guy and called the police. They showed up, thanked him, and arrested the thief.