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

[iacas]

3 hours ago, newtogolf said:

Again, I haven't seen anyone suggest how a 59 year old man detains a 24 year old without some threat of force.

You lack imagination. Also, it's not like the guy was in a wheelchair, nor was the 24-year-old a WWE wrestler.

3 hours ago, newtogolf said:

If he smashed his knee with a bat or golf club would that have been more acceptable? How about if he pulled a knife instead of a gun?

How about if he did none of those things?

3 hours ago, newtogolf said:

The criminal is a dirt bag that deserves to be locked up in jail.  If the hero didn't pull his gun there's zero chance the criminal waits around for the cops to show up.

You don't know that. And if that's the case, so what? The guy gets away, you get his license plate number, video of his face, etc. and you are made whole again and he may or may not go to jail? Instead, you think it's justified to break laws of your own?

They tell kids "two wrongs do not make a right."

That applies here.

3 hours ago, newtogolf said:

No one got hurt, the guy will go to jail and the hero will get his clubs back, I'd say it's a happy ending.  

No one got hurt, but more laws were broken, and the guy definitely endangered people and escalated the situation unnecessarily.

2 hours ago, newtogolf said:

He never fired the gun, for all we know, he never took the safety off the gun, so you can't with certainty say he endangered anyone.  He used the gun as a threat to detain the criminal to avoid a physical confrontation.

He still endangered people. That much is really not up for debate.

I don't care if the gun was solid plastic and incapable of firing anything: if it looked like a gun, it escalated the situation and thus endangered people more than not pulling the gun and threatening to kill someone.

2 hours ago, newtogolf said:

Again, would he have been justified smashing his knee with a bat or choking him unconscious?    

Why are those your only other options? They're not. You're presenting a false choice.

2 hours ago, mcanadiens said:

Do something or be a victim. Your choice.

Another false dichotomy.

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

While the fire marshals reaction may have been a bit over the top, the alternative was allowing the criminal to get away with a crime.

You don't know that.

And if the guy runs away, again, two wrongs don't make a right, and the guy was not justified in escalating the situation, threatening to kill the thief, etc.

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

Police do not pursue robberies of that size, they write reports and allow you to fight with your insurance company to get reimbursed.  

Bullshit.

I know people have said this a few times, but in my life I've had the police investigate a window smashing of my wife's car where the wife got away with < $400 in stuff (and $100 in damage). The thief was arrested.

My neighbor had a bike stolen and the police found it, returned it, and the criminal - a 14-year-old - was sentenced to public service.

I know of a kid who was arrested for shoplifting a candy bar. Theft of under $1. My brother-in-law works at Wal-Mart and they'll detain and have people arrested for stealing under $200 stuff.

[DrvFrShow]

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I think the difference in this case is that he wasn't protecting anything, his clubs had already been stolen, a day earlier if I remember right.  He was trying to recover what he thought was his property.  Based on my reading, this type of law would have protected a passing gun-carrying stranger who decided to come to the aid of a young man lying on the ground, while another man screamed and pointed a gun at him.

You're right, he wasn't protecting anything. The devil is in the details. And listening to the exchange again he was out of control. He threatened to kill Montgomery. Even if you are drawing your weapon in self-defense you NEVER threaten to kill. NEVER. Even in self-defense your intent is to STOP the threat. If the firearm discharged and killed Montgomery even accidentally, they would have had a 1st degree murder charge right there - even if he was bluffing which I totally believe he was. That section of the video "I'm gonna kill you" would be repeated over and over to the jury. Not even a cop can verbally threaten to kill an unarmed civilian. 

A fire marshal is considered a peace officer under Oklahoma law. He was a retired fire marshal and under OK law he retains the status as a peace officer. This changes the situation from that of a normal citizen with a CPL. As a retired peace officer, he had the right to draw his firearm to assist in making an arrest. It was clear that Montgomery was not cooperating. After watching the video a few times, he did kick Montgomery, which was over the line. He will get into trouble for that. But as it was they had Montgomery on tape stealing the clubs, and that was how he recognized him in the first place. However, he did not have the right to threaten to kill Montgomery or kick him. That is known as excessive force.

 

1 hour ago, ghalfaire said:

Well I thought I was finished.  AZ is also a stand your ground state.  But here that means that you don't have to run away or back up if someone threatens you.  But it doesn't give you the right to shoot someone you catch stealing from you unless they threaten you.  What threaten means is not always as clear as it might be sometimes.  But if you shoot someone in the back as they run away with your golf clubs you're probably going to be facing a manslaughter charge.   At least here.

In Washington, if the person sees you and starts to flee, you cannot shoot them. If they are in your house and if they flee when you arrive on the scene, you cannot shoot them because they are no longer considered a threat at that time. If they have your golf clubs and are running away I doubt that you'd fare well in court if you shot them in the back. If they were in your house and in the act of vandalizing say your $60,000 piano, you could shoot them.

I hope to God I never have to use a gun other than for sport shooting.

31 minutes ago, Joe92385 said:

Out of curiosity, let's set aside both the law and the specifics of the video for a minute. Reduce it to this hypothetical: you are at a golf course, armed, and notice that someone else has your stolen property (and you are certain it's yours).  You can't detain the thief hand-to-hand.  Do you draw your gun to detain him?

Of those who would answer (or already have answered) yes, how many actually carry a firearm?

I'm not trying to make a point here, I'm genuinely curious how people think they would react.

Edit after reading @Dave2512's post: I'm curious about answers disregarding the rationale evaluation of consequences that we can do from behind a keyboard - try to put yourself in that situation mentally, and consider what your real-world reaction would be.

Here's what happens in real life. I've lived in areas where there are low lives. I'm not talking about the fine upstanding people who steal golf clubs. I'm talking about real low lives. The kind of people who used to break into cars and cut out the console with a cutting torch in your vehicle just to take the stereo because you strapped it in with flat iron so it wouldn't get stolen.... again.

Someone has someone else's shit. Drawing a weapon is never the first response. It's the last response. Suppose you confront the guy and he responds, "yeah, so what if it is? You can't prove a f***in' thing." And he goes about his business like you aren't even there. My response? Leave this guy alone. It isn't worth it. I carry.

[stealthhwk]

30 minutes ago, Joe92385 said:

Out of curiosity, let's set aside both the law and the specifics of the video for a minute. Reduce it to this hypothetical: you are at a golf course, armed, and notice that someone else has your stolen property (and you are certain it's yours).  You can't detain the thief hand-to-hand.  Do you draw your gun to detain him?

Of those who would answer (or already have answered) yes, how many actually carry a firearm?

I'm not trying to make a point here, I'm genuinely curious how people think they would react.

Edit after reading @Dave2512's post: I'm curious about answers disregarding the rationale evaluation of consequences that we can do from behind a keyboard - try to put yourself in that situation mentally, and consider what your real-world reaction would be.

Thats very much what I do in all these situations. WWID? I am licensed to carry in my state. If the guy grabbed out of my truck while I was grabbing a soda in the clubhouse Id probably have gone for a plate and called the cops. My state would indeed allow me to use deadly force to stop this guy BUT I wouldve resisted the urge as much as possible. If I draw my weapon, theres a very good chance Im going to use it. Id rather lose my clubs then spend every day the rest of my life living with the fact I killed a human being. NOW, say the guy steals them from behind my truck as Im putting my hat in the backseat. The theifs close proximity suggests I could be in physical danger, in this situation bad guy is gonna be looking at the wrong end of my firearm until police arrive. If he further suggests endangering me then he is likely to be shot. If he complies he will not be shot. Like I said earlier, for me what the state allows and what i allow are slightly different. When it comes to justifiable force I hold myself to a very high standard. Sometimes that standard is higher than what the state allows. And on another note, anyone who has been in a situation similar to this should understand how intense it really is. Its ez to armchair quarterback but if we were in that situation wed likely be very emotional as well. But you have to try your best not to let ur emotions get the best of u cus as I said, thats very dangerous esp while cartying a firearm.

[Jeremie Boop]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Bullshit.

I know people have said this a few times, but in my life I've had the police investigate a window smashing of my wife's car where the wife got away with < $400 in stuff (and $100 in damage). The thief was arrested.

My neighbor had a bike stolen and the police found it, returned it, and the criminal - a 14-year-old - was sentenced to public service.

I know of a kid who was arrested for shoplifting a candy bar. Theft of under $1. My brother-in-law works at Wal-Mart and they'll detain and have people arrested for stealing under $200 stuff.

Those are great results, unfortunately I've filed 3 different police reports for separate instances over the years where I've had my stuff stolen. Not one of those resulted in anything. All three were for significantly higher values than anything you've listed. 

Now, I have taken the time to look into what is legal since I started posting and have thus found out that yes, I was quite wrong in my response about a warning shot and know now that it's never a good idea. That said, I would still probably attempt to detain a thief I caught in the act and if they ran off then I would just deal with the fact that I couldn't stop him. The best I could hope for if they ran is that they would drop whatever they were attempting to take in their haste to get away. I couldn't just not try to stop them, given the history I've had with getting no results by calling the Police to report the theft after the fact. 

All that said, I wouldn't do what the person in the story did and hold someone at gunpoint if I didn't catch them in the act. I would have to know 100% that they were responsible for the theft/attempted theft.

[newtogolf]

36 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Those are great results, unfortunately I've filed 3 different police reports for separate instances over the years where I've had my stuff stolen. Not one of those resulted in anything. All three were for significantly higher values than anything you've listed. 

Now, I have taken the time to look into what is legal since I started posting and have thus found out that yes, I was quite wrong in my response about a warning shot and know now that it's never a good idea. That said, I would still probably attempt to detain a thief I caught in the act and if they ran off then I would just deal with the fact that I couldn't stop him. The best I could hope for if they ran is that they would drop whatever they were attempting to take in their haste to get away. I couldn't just not try to stop them, given the history I've had with getting no results by calling the Police to report the theft after the fact. 

All that said, I wouldn't do what the person in the story did and hold someone at gunpoint if I didn't catch them in the act. I would have to know 100% that they were responsible for the theft/attempted theft.

There is a difference between living in the boonies and living in a major city where the police couldn't care less about stolen property.  

1 hour ago, iacas said:

You lack imagination. Also, it's not like the guy was in a wheelchair, nor was the 24-year-old a WWE wrestler.

How about if he did none of those things?

You don't know that. And if that's the case, so what? The guy gets away, you get his license plate number, video of his face, etc. and you are made whole again and he may or may not go to jail? Instead, you think it's justified to break laws of your own?

They tell kids "two wrongs do not make a right."

That applies here.

No one got hurt, but more laws were broken, and the guy definitely endangered people and escalated the situation unnecessarily.

He still endangered people. That much is really not up for debate.

I don't care if the gun was solid plastic and incapable of firing anything: if it looked like a gun, it escalated the situation and thus endangered people more than not pulling the gun and threatening to kill someone.

Why are those your only other options? They're not. You're presenting a false choice.

Another false dichotomy.

You don't know that.

And if the guy runs away, again, two wrongs don't make a right, and the guy was not justified in escalating the situation, threatening to kill the thief, etc.

Bullshit.

I know people have said this a few times, but in my life I've had the police investigate a window smashing of my wife's car where the wife got away with < $400 in stuff (and $100 in damage). The thief was arrested.

My neighbor had a bike stolen and the police found it, returned it, and the criminal - a 14-year-old - was sentenced to public service.

I know of a kid who was arrested for shoplifting a candy bar. Theft of under $1. My brother-in-law works at Wal-Mart and they'll detain and have people arrested for stealing under $200 stuff.

We are all speculating as to what could have happened.  Fact is no one got shot, no one got hurt and the bad guy got arrested.  

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

We are all speculating as to what could have happened.  Fact is no one got shot, no one got hurt and the bad guy got arrested.  

And the "good guy" needlessly escalated a situation well beyond what is reasonable OR legal.

[newtogolf]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

And the "good guy" needlessly escalated a situation well beyond what is reasonable OR legal.

Says you, I haven't seen anything official that he's been charged with a crime or lost his gun permit.  

Quote

Reports from TulsaWorld show that Acree has a certification from the Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training and has the status of a retired peace officer. It also reports court records do not show any charges have been filed against Acree.

 

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Says you, I haven't seen anything official that he's been charged with a crime or lost his gun permit.  

"Charges not filed" != "did not break the law."

[Rainmaker]

http://www.1170kfaq.com/news/man-accused-of-golf-club-theft-files-complaint-against-retired-fire-marshal-who-held-him-at-gunpoint_

It seems like the thief guy is looking to press charges - I set up a google alert so hopefully they'll publish again if/when something happens. 

I also read, but can't find now, that the thief guy is charged with grand larceny. 

I'm thinking . . nothing much happens to the retired fire marshal.  I'm sure he'll get a talking to but, lucky for him, nothing really bad came out of it.  

BTW - my cousin is a cop in Georgia - he says no way would he arrest somebody in plain clothes unless it was a life or limb situation - too much paperwork and liability - no disability or workers comp if he gets hurt - no compensation for anything of his that might get damaged in the fray.   

[Phil McGleno]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

And the "good guy" needlessly escalated a situation well beyond what is reasonable OR legal.

@newtogolf I like how you just ignore things you do not like.

[Joe92385]

I was typing almost the exact thing (Edit because you guys are too fast - I mean the same thing as iacas, that the lack of charges does not mean it was legal).  In addition, it wouldn't be unusual for charges not to be filed immediately (DA's are busy people).  In addition to the addition, I would give favorable odds to a civil suit being filed (if not for the gun, for the kick to the head).

Edited August 19, 2016 by Joe92385

[newtogolf]

5 minutes ago, Phil McGleno said:

@newtogolf I like how you just ignore things you do not like.

As you seem to ignore what I bolded in my response.  I don't debate what is reasonable, it's a matter of opinion.  

[Phil McGleno]

14 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Says you, I haven't seen anything official that he's been charged with a crime or lost his gun permit.

2 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

As you seem to ignore what I bolded in my response.  I don't debate what is reasonable, it's a matter of opinion.  

Okay.-So

Quote

When it first happened, Tulsa police said no charges would be brought against Acree, who claimed he was a police officer during the incident to get Montgomery to comply.

Now, Montgomery wants police to investigate, claiming the retired fire marshal violated the Oklahoma Firearms Act, and it's all caught on tape and posted to YouTube.

In the video, Montgomery is ordered to the ground at gunpoint. He said he felt his life was at risk. Acree was not charged with anything at the time, and Tulsa Police said a victim needed to file a complaint for them to investigate.

Montgomery said he just wanted to do the right thing, so he filed a complaint Saturday, asking police to investigate Acree's "reckless and completely unjustified" behavior.

It just happened.-Wait to see if he is charged before you try to be all superior-like?

[Joe92385]

2 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

As you seem to ignore what I bolded in my response.  I don't debate what is reasonable, it's a matter of opinion.  

Well, I'm not familiar with OK law specifically, but what is reasonable is usually going to be a question when considering "reasonable force."

[JonMA1]

I briefly looked at the video and have only browsed through the responses, but it sounds like the 24 y/o man did steal something. Putting the law, the gun debate, what I would do, and all the social issues aside, when you steal from someone, anything can happen. If the issue of right or wrong doesn't click, maybe there should be some fear that the owner might be some crazy bastard.  

We're not talking about some teenager who was trying to impress his friends, or one in the "wrong" neighborhood at the wrong time. This is a grown man. Chances are, he didn't steal the clubs to feed his family. So unless the guy has some mental disorder, there's no sympathy for whatever happens to him.

Despite some of the anecdotes of theft crimes being solved, I agree with those who say stolen items are usually not recovered - at least not in my small world.

People are tired of being f'ed with and despite their best efforts, the police can only do so much. If anyone wants to defend a thief, good for you. That makes you a better person than I am.

But if you want to find fault with someone for detaining that piece of shit for the police, consider this... in many situations the thief wouldn't have been so lucky. Not saying that kind of punishment fits the crime, just saying it's a reality.

See how well this guy does stealing anything from another inmate at the penitentiary. 

[Hardspoon]

Someone in this thread actually said that "crime is rising greatly" in the US, and nobody even bothered to argue.  

I'm out.

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

Someone in this thread actually said that "crime is rising greatly" in the US, and nobody even bothered to argue.  

Others pointed out stats that say the opposite.

[drmevo]

15 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

Someone in this thread actually said that "crime is rising greatly" in the US, and nobody even bothered to argue.  

I'm out.