O.T. This'll chap your gluteus

[ihmsa70]

AP Feb. 3, 2007 Cambridge, Minn.
A farmer who chased down a thief and held him at gunpoint until authorities arrived now faces a more serious charge than the thief himself.
Kenneth Englund, 74, was charged with second-degree assault, a felony. The thief, who the sheriff said admitted stealing about 5$ worth of gasoline from Englund's neighbor, was charged with misdemeanor theft.
Sheriff Mike Ammend said people can't take the law into their own hands, and that Englund's actions were "an invitation to a shootout. There's so many things that could have gone wrong here."

[9.3X62AL]

Oh, delightful. I love it when admin pogues and their media sycophants couch references to citizens who protect the safety and property of self and others as "having taken the law into their own hands". HELLO--it's their law in the first place, you arrogant smarmy jerks!

I could expand this rant in directions that might seem controversial--so I'll contain myself to this--there seems to be a shift in focus on the part of law agencies toward the protection and nurturing of thieving predators from taxpaying citizens, rather than the intended reverse situation we all believe should be the case. It is a sick, sad, and twisted society whose gatekeepers feel motivated to shelter the predators from righteous wrath of victimized productive citizens. When the protectors have to cultivate the avaricious to assure their job security--the wheels have truly come off.

[Edward429451]

Isn't that the truth. But if the judicial administration really punished the criminals, and gave kudos to citizens doing the right thing, crime would drop and they'd have no reason to seek increased power over the masses, and that my friends, just don't fit into their agenda. So this is actually kind of expected and predictable.

[44man]

I think it is called job security, get rid of the criminals and the police would be out of work.
It really stinks, they should have given the guy a medal but the liberals want to protect those creeps that break the law. I have always said that when they take everyones guns away, I am going into a life of crime because there is nothing else to live for.

[Explorer1]

Just liek the Border Agents who are setting in jail cause they stopped someone with tons of weed trying to get across the border.
The inmates are running the assilume!

[1Shirt]

I recall the old yankee saying "ain't nothing more rightous than a reformed prostitute!". Have also noted over the years that most sheriffs are elected, and that makes them politicians rather than lawmen with common sense. Granted there are a few with common sense, but remember the politician factor. Yep, there are many inmates running!
1Shirt!:coffee: :coffee:

[Buckshot]

.................You know, that just ain't right. The guy done good and you notice he DID NOT shoot the schmuck for stealing gas. He just had the threat of getting shot to hold the bad guy. Now I admit that stealing a few gallons of gas isn't a big deal, but what if there had been the opportunity for something else?

Without the facts, the neighbor could have just seen a flashight aorund his neighbors or heard noises and what did he do? WHat would I do? What have I done twice in the past? You bet, I armed myself as I wasn'tborn yesterday.

I need to write a letter to that sheriff and tell him he needs to organize a parade for that guy. As I mentioned before 1) He did not shoot, 2) The perp was apprehended.

So far as taking the law into ones own hands, if you think about it where does the law come from? It originates with THE PEOPLE.

I better stop as I'm really getting pissed.

................Buckshot

[bravokilo]

CAMBRIDGE, Minn. (AP) - A 74-year-old man who chased down a thief and held him at gunpoint until authorities arrived now faces a charge more serious than the thief himself.

Kenneth Englund, an Isanti County farmer and Township Board member for 37 years, is charged with second-degree assault, a felony. The thief, who the sheriff said admitted to stealing about $5 worth of gasoline from Englund's neighbor, was charged with misdemeanor theft.

Sheriff Mike Ammend said people can't take the law into their own hands, and that Englund's actions were "an invitation to a shootout. There's so many things that could have gone wrong here."

On Oct. 15, Englund pointed a gun at Christian Harris Smith, 28, and a woman at the vacant farm next to Englund's place. He then chased their vehicle at speeds of 70 mph, according to the criminal complaint. A 3-year-old child was in the vehicle.

During the chase, Englund used a cell phone to call the sheriff's office and asked if he should "blow them away," according to the complaint. His shotgun turned out to be unloaded.

Englund pleaded not guilty, was released without bail and is scheduled to return to court Feb. 22.

Smith was charged with another theft and was held in the county jail on a felony warrant from another state.

More than 350 people attended a fundraising dinner for Englund last month and a petition has circulated supporting his case.

Still, Ammend said, there was danger, especially since a woman and child were in the vehicle: "What happens if there was a crash?"

Chief Deputy County Attorney Dan Conlin said no one is looking to put Englund in jail, calling that idea "silly." He also said while the charge fits the facts of the case, it doesn't need to be resolved as a felony.

People who use force to protect property haven't always fared well in court.

In a 1983 case, a jury ruled that a Holloway man should pay $77,000 to a burglar he chased down and shot in the foot. The case was settled for half that or less; the burglar got probation.

In 1999, a Red Wing man received six months in jail after he booby-trapped his Wisconsin cabin and injured a burglar. According to media reports, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld $30,000 in damages against the owner of a booby-trapped abandoned farmhouse in 1978, and a California homeowner was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon when his spring gun shot a teenage burglar in 74.

In Englund's case, some of his neighbors who are concerned about rising crime have been his supporters.

Richard Hansen, chairman of the Bradford Township Board, said crime has risen so much that board meetings have drawn crowds of about 50 people, and a committee was formed to meet with the sheriff and county attorney. The township, about 45 miles north of Minneapolis, does not have a police force.

Barbara Ford, of Ham Lake, who owns the land where the theft took place, said she's had attempted break-ins.

"I'll do anything I can to support Mr. Englund," she said.

Englund said criminals can escape by the time a deputy arrives from Cambridge, the county seat, about 14 miles away.

The sheriff said his department is understaffed _ with 14 deputies to patrol 440 miles of roads.

"We want people's help, we need their help (calling with information), but we don't want people taking the law into their own hands," he said.
___




Information from: Star Tribune, http://www.startribune.com (Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.




http://www.startribune.com/462/story/973089.html



BK

[dale clawson]

In another forum I read a statement from the DA stating that Englund "put the three year old child in danger by giving persuit", excuse me the persons who put the child in danger were the criminals who took her along in the comission of a crime, and then chose to run at high speeds to escape prosecution. Their stinking thinking is totally backward. The citizen should be commended for taking a career criminal off the streets, he might need to be reprimanded for not loading the gun. Stupidity of this nature gets my blood boiling! I hope the citizens remember this come election time. Dale

[9.3X62AL]

More "sheeple thinking"--that the pursuer endangers the child's (and society's) safety, and not the fleeing suspect of a crime. I'm surely glad to be retired, lots less of this mindset to deal with.

BK's text from the newspaper is a little unclear--was there 1 or 2 incidents? Rather than trying to provide disincentives to people defending self and others, perhaps a little more patrol might be indicated. With only 14 sword personnel, a real shooting might mean having to do a real investigation--paying overtime--and who knows what all kinds of awful things. HOW EXPENSIVE!

I agree with the idea of not defending property--the SOLE reason to arm one's self should be to defend against great bodily harm attempted by the contacted suspect. In my many inteviews of crooks over the years, some pretty nasty people have done things like siphon gas. One of these I recall made a regular habit of shoplifting food when armed robbery seemed an unwise move (crowded store). So--do what ya gotta do, and use caution whatever your decision is about contacting these people.

[dale clawson]

Back in the 80's a mom and pop store owner defended his property against a robber, shooting the perp in the knee. The perp sued from prison for use of excessive force and was awarded $500,000 by a jury. This occurred in Tallequah , Ok. Go figure. Dale :confused:

[rigmarol]

Saw this same line of thinking on another board. I'm sure you are all correct and I'm missing the point. Shooting a running man assumes guilt not innocence and a dead man's word is meaningless in a report.

Maybe I should start shooting people that pick my flowers too.

I don't mean to stir up a redneck bee's nest just contributing my perspective.

[TDB9901]

Yes, with all due respect sir, I think you ARE missing the point.

A. Nobody was shot, he was held for police.
B. No shots were fired.
C. It should be a citizens right or more correctly DUTY to intervene in preventing, or stopping a crime in progress, and he should have the right to defend himself IF NECESSARY, using any force that a reasonable person would deem NECESSARY, to protect his LIFE AND LIMB.

NOBODY in this thread that I have seen has advocated firing shots at a fleeing suspect, nor I suspect will they.

As an officer (over 30 years) in a very rural area,(over 10 square miles per person) I have probably arrested more perpetrators being held for me by citizens, than I have caught in the actual commission of a crime, due to the distances involved. People like this should be commended, not crucified.

Edit:
After some thought the only thing I could criticize would be if he in fact drove recklessly, endangering others while following the perp. We don't need citizens involved in high speed chases for misdemeanors, or anything for that matter. Other than that the man needs a medal.

I guess if this attitude means I'm a redneck, I'll wear the title proudly...

End of rant.............

[Bret4207]

I'm with youse guys!

On the 2 Border Patrol Agents- The sticky point with them, as I understand it, is that they shot the guy, didn't report it and then tried to cover it up. Not erzactly kosher. Do they deserve prison? No way. But cops are supposed to pay a higher price it seems. I'll stop there....

[leftiye]

Rigamarol...... Your point?

[leftiye]

So why do the police get to choose which laws they like? How about citizen's arrest? They really don't like self defence either, I've had them tell me there ain't no such thing ( didn't correct me either and say that it is called justifiable homicide- which IS in the code).

If the law doesn't allow you to defend yourself, or your property, then they have de facto taken your right to life, and property away. Makes one wonder how committed our government is to the basic idea that we have rights (who am I kidding?).

[NVWalt]

I just have to say it is a truely sad state of afairs when good citizens doing the right thing have to pay a price for it. I agree with all of you except rigmarol, but he is intitled to his opinion also, and especially agree with you LEO's and former LEO's on the sad state we are arriving at in this country of sheep and not real men anymore. Makes me a little perturbed and hot under the collar....walt

[waksupi]

Here, it is only legal to detain a person, if they are commiting a felony. Misdeameanors, no.
In the case stated, the best would have been to get a description and a license number.
As far as shooting someone in self defense, that is pretty much a no-brainer for the court around here, and you will walk away. There is an old saying, that in Montana, everyone gets one free murder. They look a bit harder at the second, I guess.
Shooting someone for stealing or destroying property? Probably a very good, and commendable, idea. But, illegal, and will generally end you up in jail.

[wills]

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/PE/content/htm/pe.002.00.000009.00.htm#9.32.00

[9.3X62AL]

Rigamarole.........no, never mind. Leftiye--we DON'T get to choose, and that's part of the problem--discretion is dying apace.

[1Shirt]

Guess the moral of the story is if he is outside of the house, you can't do squat except to call the cops. Of course there is the issue of response time. If he is inside of your house, and you have a gun, you are better off making it a good clean kill. At least that way, he can't sue you.
1Shirt!:coffee:

[Buckshot]

Fiction.................. a joke but realistic:

A guy hears something in the back yard so he looks out the back window and sees 2 guys breaking into his tool shed. He calls the police and the dispatcher says it's be about 15 minutes before they can get someone out there. So 20 minutes later he calls the police back and says to nevermind. He tells'em he's shot both of'em dead so they can take their time. Two minutes later 3 cop cars screech up in front of his house.

A factual story ..................I don't recall all the details:

In Arizona an armed citizen sees a guy shoot a cop who'd apparently pulled him over. The citizen gives chase in his car. Somewhere somehow some shots are exchanged between the citizen and the bad guy. It ends up the police apprehend the bad guy. Since the citizen had fired his handgun it has been admitted as evidence, so it was taken away from him and would be held for an indeterminate length of time.

The police officers organization or union (whatever) takes it upon themselves to buy the citizen a new handgun of the same make and present it to him, since he is now without one.

...................Buckshot

[leftiye]

Deputy Al, I've said the same thing about wishing for police with some discretional lattitude (AND- more importantly- hopefully some judgement when using same). My question was concerning the trend (at the supervisory levels of government) to ignore any and all laws which allow citizens to be more than the next victim waiting in line. I was a peace officer myself for twenty years.

[floodgate]

Once we get everyone in the country either under indictment, in jail, on probation or on parole, then we'll have CONTROL!!!

floodgate

[wills]

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20070206/D8N3UCO00.html

[9.3X62AL]

Once we get everyone in the country either under indictment, in jail, on probation or on parole, then we'll have CONTROL!!!

floodgate

No, what you'd have is a close appoximation to Alameda or Los Angeles Counties.

[hivoltfl]

I have a story to tell about intruders in the house, this happened to me and my wife.

on Christmas eve about 10 years ago I was at home with the flu, about 2 in the afternoon there was a knock on the door that I answered, it was a man about 35 dressed in work clothes and it was obvious that he had been working cement, he apologized for bothering me and explained that he had run out of gas, said he had just got paid and produced the check on a Tallahassee bank but could not get it cashed in our little town and would I loan him 5 bucks for some gas of course he said he would drop back by and repay me, I could see his pickup on the highway so in the Christmas spirit or all the meds I was on I gave him the 5 spot and told him Merry Christmas.

Fast forward to new years eve, My wife and I have celebrated the day as we always do, now its about 1am and she is laying on the couch in a spectacular state(nekkkid as a jaybird) and I am leaned back in my recliner in my skivvies, I hear the screen door creak and someone rattles the door nob tring to open the door and then they put a shoulder to it but its didnt open, my wife is up and running down the hall and I grab my 44 bulldog from the end table drawer and got to the door just as he hits it with his shoulder again and into the room he steps off balance and smelling of hoooch, same fella I had loaned the 5 spot too. I stuck the bulldogs barrel in his mouth and he started in again with his story about being out of gas, I told him to shut the F--k up and git some gone if he didnt want to die on the spot. Needless to say he split very quickly, about an hour later I am still awake and hear a muffled gunshot, then I hear sirens about 5 minutes later, three houses down the street my neighbor has shot and killed this guy in his bedroom, 12 gauged his ass with 00 buck, no charges were ever filed but I did appologize to my neighbor for not doing it when I should have.



Rick

[rigmarol]

In the story reported, the "hero" actually called police on a cell phone and asked should he "blow them away". sorry, I assumed everyone read that part.

My "point" is nobody, even police should chase a thief down with shooting him on his mind.

Chasing him to subdue and capture him for authorities is a whole other matter and I agree that's fine.

If you are chasing someone and you have a gun, YOU are now a criminal. A fleeing thief is no threat to you unless you are hot on his heels.

If both of you have guns and you are chasing him, then you have a running gun battle over a can of gas.

[9.3X62AL]

I doubt that many agencies would authorize a vehicle pursuit for any sort of petty theft--foot pursuit, maybe.

Rigamarol--any officer or deputy LACKING the thought in the back of his/her mind that ANY pursuit could lapse into the exchange of finality is naive in the extreme. We train for the worst--hope for the best--and try to respond appropriately to whatever scenario is foisted upon us between those extremes.

[rigmarol]

Al, rightly stated. But our hero wasn't a train LEO.
I'm referring to a man angry enough to chase a thief with a gun he forgot to load! That is not thinking again or thinking clearly.

[ron brooks]

Okay, if I accept that a running gun battle over a can of gas is not acceptable, how much has to be involved to be acceptable. Remember this, everytime someone steals something, they are stealing your time. That is, for ease of math say that you make, after taxes, $20.00 an hour. Now someone steals something of yours that you paid $160.00 for they are stealing, at a minimum, a day of your life. On that basis wouldn't that be kidnapping, at least for a day?

Just something to think about,

Ron

[rigmarol]

Here is the post elsewhere as I read it.

Posting credit goes to MontanaWolf at Handloads.com

Thu Feb 1, 7:33 PM ET

CAMBRIDGE, Minn. - A 74-year-old man who chased down a thief and held him at gunpoint until authorities arrived now faces a charge more serious than the thief himself.
Kenneth Englund, an Isanti County farmer and Township Board member for 37 years, is charged with second-degree assault, a felony. The thief, who the sheriff said admitted to stealing about $5 worth of gasoline from Englund's neighbor, was charged with misdemeanor theft.
Sheriff Mike Ammend said people can't take the law into their own hands, and that Englund's actions were "an invitation to a shootout. There's so many things that could have gone wrong here."
On Oct. 15, Englund pointed a gun at Christian Harris Smith, 28, and a woman at the vacant farm next to Englund's place. He then chased their vehicle at speeds of 70 mph, according to the criminal complaint. A 3-year-old child was in the vehicle.
During the chase, Englund used a cell phone to call the sheriff's office and asked if he should "blow them away," according to the complaint. His shotgun turned out to be unloaded.
Englund pleaded not guilty, was released without bail and is scheduled to return to court Feb. 22.
Smith was charged with another theft and was held in the county jail on a felony warrant from another state.
More than 350 people attended a fundraising dinner for Englund last month and a petition has circulated supporting his case.
Still, Ammend said, there was danger, especially since a woman and child were in the vehicle: "What happens if there was a crash?"
Chief Deputy County Attorney Dan Conlin said no one is looking to put Englund in jail, calling that idea "silly." He also said while the charge fits the facts of the case, it doesn't need to be resolved as a felony.
People who use force to protect property haven't always fared well in court.
In a 1983 case, a jury ruled that a Holloway man should pay $77,000 to a burglar he chased down and shot in the foot. The case was settled for half that or less; the burglar got probation.
In 1999, a Red Wing man received six months in jail after he booby-trapped his Wisconsin cabin and injured a burglar. According to media reports, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld $30,000 in damages against the owner of a booby-trapped abandoned farmhouse in 1978, and a California homeowner was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon when his spring gun shot a teenage burglar in 1974.
In Englund's case, some of his neighbors who are concerned about rising crime have been his supporters.
Richard Hansen, chairman of the Bradford Township Board, said crime has risen so much that board meetings have drawn crowds of about 50 people, and a committee was formed to meet with the sheriff and county attorney. The township, about 45 miles north of Minneapolis, does not have a police force.

Barbara Ford, of Ham Lake, who owns the land where the theft took place, said she's had attempted break-ins.
"I'll do anything I can to support Mr. Englund," she said.
Englund said criminals can escape by the time a deputy arrives from Cambridge, the county seat, about 14 miles away.
The sheriff said his department is understaffed — with 14 deputies to patrol 440 miles of roads.
"We want people's help, we need their help (calling with information), but we don't want people taking the law into their own hands," he said.
Information from: Star Tribune, http://www.startribune.com

Couple of other links for more info:

http://www.startribune.com/462/story/973089.html

http://www.northstarmedia.net/star/STARHome/3EE03415-964F-43 2F-B19D-776ABA5D6B3A.html

[Chargar]

Press reports, be they print, radio or TV are all very condensed, edited, versions of an even with selected facts often colored by the opinions of the reporter. They are not designed to convey a balanced and complete factual account of the event, but are designed to get readers/listeners attention so they become involved in the story. The whole notion is to sell space/time to advertizers by keeping the readership/listenership high.

I think it was Mark Twain who said he didn't believe anything he read in the paper.

These threads get folks all spun up, indignant and waxing eloquent based on incomplete facts.

When these things get to the court room, most often the facts bear little resemblence to the press reports.

[9.3X62AL]

I don't think anyone should shoot anyone over property--period. I do believe that everyone has a RIGHT to intervene to prevent property from being stolen, and a RIGHT to arm themselves for self-protection in order to more safely make such contacts--but I would advise extreme caution in making any such contact. I damn sure would not have attempted contact with someone siphoning gas or screwing around with my cars in the driveway.

Why? BECAUSE NO PIECE OF PROPERTY IS WORTH GETTING MY ASS SHOT OFF OVER. Been there/done that. The cretins who steal and loot have lawyers lined up to defend them criminally (you pay for that already) and more of same licking their chops waiting for litigation--regardless of circumstances. GET THIS, PEOPLE--these predators are the revenue stream for a bunch of people in government and private industries--and if you take one out, even in defense of life--you're going to get sued. If you take one out over property.......oh, mercy--you are meat for the lawyers for the rest of your life. Pardon my fervent cynicism here--but all the legal sob-sisterism over the death penalty may be nothing more than the legal system's frustration and angst over the loss of a lucrative revenue source. Criminals feed the beast--victims cost the beast money--so whose interests are at the forefront in the mind of the legal system?. Simple as that.

[ron brooks]

Deputy Al,

I understand exactly where you are coming from. You cany be too cynical when it comes to the legal system anymore. Very, very sad and very, very true.

Ron

[Chargar]

Press reports, be they print, radio or TV are all very condensed, edited, versions of an even with selected facts often colored by the opinions of the reporter. They are not designed to convey a balanced and complete factual account of the event, but are designed to get readers/listeners attention so they become involved in the story. The whole notion is to sell space/time to advertizers by keeping the readership/listenership high.

I think it was Mark Twain who said he didn't believe anything he read in the paper.

These threads get folks all spun up, indignant and waxing eloquent based on incomplete facts.

When these things get to the court room, most often the facts bear little resemblence to the press reports.

[9.3X62AL]

No doubt about it, Chargar. Just about everyone involved seems to spin things to their benefit or profit--so avoidance as much as possible is my rubric in matters of this sort. For damn sure--nothing material that I own is worth killing or dying for.

[TDB9901]

Some good points, Chargar and Al.

"Quote"............ "These threads get folks all spun up, indignant and waxing eloquent based on incomplete facts."..............If this was meant for me maybe I am "Guilty as Charged"........ but the tone I thought I detected in the post I responded to kinda set me off and I still don't see anyone anywhere on these posts condoning the shooting of anyone for petty crime as alluded to in said post. Just the opposite....which was what I was attempting to defend.


OK, I'm done, had my say, don't need to make any bigger fool of myself in front of new aquaintances.....

Tom

[PatMarlin]

I found myself in a very similar situation. Had to black hole a nut from out of state on my property that made a threatening move towards my wife. Then the SOB runs to law enforcement and files a case against me, and they believe him, even after we called 911 and they never showed.

I had to explain in great detail to the D.A. why I wasn't the SUSPECT.. :roll:

Dept. AL knows the details and gave me some valuable council regarding the matter at the time.

Who knows what can happen when something like this goes down.. :roll:

[Lee]

Lurk a lot, speak a little.
Don't want to. Don't like to. Hate to have to do it, seems just downright unprincipled. BUT, I have to agree with Deputy Al completely. He is right, that portion of the system is wrong, it stinks. But until it gets changed, don't risk yer kiester for $2 worth of gas. You can always get another $2 of gas. Finding a replacement kiester is gonna be a real pain.......

Chargar....Mark Twain was a reporter, worked for a newspaper!....Oh wait! Never mind, I get it! (One of the reasons I have read and re-read all of his works.) And he managed to write so well w/o resorting to the potty-mouth language reserved for "todays writers!".................................................. ....Lee:)

[Chargar]

Having once been involved in both the criminal justice and the civil litigation side of these issues, I can say that Dep. Al is 100% correct. You drop the hammer on someone, no matter what the issue, no matter how technicaly legal, you have not solved your problem, your problems have just begun.

While I am not a fan of Massad Ayoub, I think the title of his book sums up when to use a firearm in a social way... "In Gravest Extreme".

[floodgate]

Lee:

Twain could do "potty-mouth", too. He did a story called (I think) "1601" about an - ummm - flatulence contest in the English Royal court. But he did know when and where it was appropriate.

floodgate

[dale clawson]

The perp pled in court and was given 90 days. He stated that besides restitution he wanted to do anything he could for the citizen who caught him. He felt the citizen was doing what he thought was right to resolve the situation. The charges against Mr. Englund were reduced to pointing a gun at a person ( lawyer says he didn't point the gun at anyone) and disorderly conduct. Does anyone sense political backlash?
Dale

[9.3X62AL]

SOMETHING sure happened to steer things toward reality, huh? Maybe that perp has more than a shred of decency to him, after all. Thanks for the update, Dale.

[leftiye]

Not reduced enough.

[georgeld]

Hell of a post going here fellows.

OK, I'm about to hog hunting in south Texas about ten miles N of the line.
There's been a bunch of problems with wetbacks, or should I say illegal aliens?

Facing the reality that we may very well happen upon several of these individuals within the next ten days.

What do you LEO's, or others recommend we do if n when the time comes?

There is almost no cell phone coverage in this area, and I expect little LE either.

Thank you, (have at it)

[dale clawson]

If you were to come in contact with illeagles, ignore them and they will quickly pass you by. Not much else you can do but report them when you do get phone service. Remember you are a guest of the land owner and you can only assume that they are illeagle, therfore you are limited in what you can do.

[dale clawson]

In 1983 My son and I found and aided in the capture of burgulars breaking into our neighbors house. These scumbags with their red and white ford were known to be strong suspects in more than 250 burglaries in a three county area. One was found to be armed with a pistol stolen from his father. A number of people who had been burglarized by them told me I should have shot them while I had the drop on them. At the time I thought they were too harsh. Before they came to trial, several attempts were made to harm my son, then despite 17 arrest with no convictions, the principal perp, who had ditched the stolen pistol and whose father denied that it was the stolen gun, was given 30 days in jail. Then he was released after 3 days due to jail overcrowding. The pistol in question, which was recovered on my property, was given to the perps father by the arresting deputy since he knew it belonged to him. Made me rexamine my thoughts on lethal force. Didn't change my mind, just nailed down the perameters and firmed up my convictions. I know where I stand in my convictions and I know what I can live with myself afterward. Material posessions are not cheap. The cost in change of quality of life to the victem and family can only be rightly acessed by the victem. Whats valuable to me may not be to you. I am the only one who can truly know what I am willing to pay to protect it. I don't have much sympathy for someone so selfish as to take from another without regard to that persons life needs. Rant over..Dale:-D