New Hampshire Police arrest man for protecting own property

[MikeK]

That state needs a new motto.

Like this:

New New Hampshire motto- "Grovel, or we lock you up!" Except, this guy already did that; didn't help.

My thoughts about this situation are moving in the same direction.

For some cops the handgun is (as much as if not more than the badge) an important element of their superimposed authority. It is a menacingly manifest symbol of power. Such individuals unhappily tolerate lawful civilian ownership of handguns and will take advantage of any opportunity to emphasize the limitations imposed on such ownership. In this example they arrested a law-abiding citizen for what in fact is a rather benign (malum prohibitum) technical violation which occurred during a perfectly reasonable, justifiable display of and expedient threat with a lawfully owned firearm.

The law which prohibits discharge of a firearm within residential areas exists mainly to prevent irresponsible recreational shooting. This situation is an obvious exception.

One thing this man could do if he wishes to minimize the potential punishment for his "offense" is to claim accidental discharge because he was nervous. That will cost him his right to own guns but it will prevent his being charged with a deliberate violation of the law. But as it is I strongly doubt anything serious will come of this rather stupid exercise of police authority.

If the gun laws of most states were strictly observed just about every cop in those states is guilty of a violation when they routinely draw and aim their handguns at suspects with no substantive expectation of need to defend themselves or others with deadly force.

While I do not generally subscribe to the tired Freudian cliche which holds that firearms are a psychological extension of the penis, there are situations that seem to support that notion.

 

[del]

That state needs a new motto.

Like this:

New New Hampshire motto- "Grovel, or we lock you up!" Except, this guy already did that; didn't help.

My thoughts about this situation are moving in the same direction.

For some cops the handgun is, as much as if not more than the badge, an important element of their superimposed authority. It is a menacingly manifest symbol of power. Such individuals unhappily tolerate civilian ownership of handguns and will take advantage of any opportunity to emphasize the limitations imposed on civilian handgun ownership. In this example they arrested a law-abiding citizen for what in fact is a rather benign (malum prohibitum) technical violation which occurred during a perfectly reasonable and justifiable display of and threat with a lawfully owned firearm.

The law which prohibits discharge of a firearm within residential areas exists mainly to prevent irresponsible recreational shooting. This situation is an obvious exception.

One thing this man could do if he wishes to minimize the potential punishment for his "offense" is to claim accidental discharge because he was nervous. That will cost him his right to own guns but it will prevent his being charged with a deliberate violation of the law. But as it is I strongly doubt that anything serious will come of this rather stupid exercise of police authority.

If the gun laws of most states were strictly observed just about every cop in those states is guilty of a violation when they routinely draw and aim their handguns at suspects with no substantive expectation of need to defend themselves or others with deadly force.

While I do not generally subscribe to the tired Freudian cliche which holds that firearms are a psychological extension of the penis, there are situations that seem to support that notion.

everyone has you on ignore, you know.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Like this:

New New Hampshire motto- "Grovel, or we lock you up!" Except, this guy already did that; didn't help.

My thoughts about this situation are moving in the same direction.

For some cops the handgun is, as much as if not more than the badge, an important element of their superimposed authority. It is a menacingly manifest symbol of power. Such individuals unhappily tolerate civilian ownership of handguns and will take advantage of any opportunity to emphasize the limitations imposed on civilian handgun ownership. In this example they arrested a law-abiding citizen for what in fact is a rather benign (malum prohibitum) technical violation which occurred during a perfectly reasonable and justifiable display of and threat with a lawfully owned firearm.

The law which prohibits discharge of a firearm within residential areas exists mainly to prevent irresponsible recreational shooting. This situation is an obvious exception.

One thing this man could do if he wishes to minimize the potential punishment for his "offense" is to claim accidental discharge because he was nervous. That will cost him his right to own guns but it will prevent his being charged with a deliberate violation of the law. But as it is I strongly doubt that anything serious will come of this rather stupid exercise of police authority.

If the gun laws of most states were strictly observed just about every cop in those states is guilty of a violation when they routinely draw and aim their handguns at suspects with no substantive expectation of need to defend themselves or others with deadly force.

While I do not generally subscribe to the tired Freudian cliche which holds that firearms are a psychological extension of the penis, there are situations that seem to support that notion.

everyone has you on ignore, you know.

You obviously don't.

Just saying.

 

[editec]

New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News

No one was injured in the incident, but when the police arrived, they made two arrests. Hebert was charged with two counts of burglary and drug possession. He faces up to seven years in prison if convicted. Fleming, meanwhile, is scheduled to be arraigned March 20 on a charge of reckless conduct, which could potentially land him a sentence similar to the one Hebert faces.

Just pathetic! Great job, Farmington, New Hampshire.

That does not sound AT ALL like the New Hamspire I know. LIVE FREE OR DIE (including seocnd amendment rights) is taken pretty seriously in the granite state

I wonder if the arresting cops had a grudge against this guy?

What?

You think that kind of thing biased policing doesn't happen?

Think again.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Like this:

New New Hampshire motto- "Grovel, or we lock you up!" Except, this guy already did that; didn't help.

My thoughts about this situation are moving in the same direction.

For some cops the handgun is, as much as if not more than the badge, an important element of their superimposed authority. It is a menacingly manifest symbol of power. Such individuals unhappily tolerate civilian ownership of handguns and will take advantage of any opportunity to emphasize the limitations imposed on civilian handgun ownership. In this example they arrested a law-abiding citizen for what in fact is a rather benign (malum prohibitum) technical violation which occurred during a perfectly reasonable and justifiable display of and threat with a lawfully owned firearm.

The law which prohibits discharge of a firearm within residential areas exists mainly to prevent irresponsible recreational shooting. This situation is an obvious exception.

One thing this man could do if he wishes to minimize the potential punishment for his "offense" is to claim accidental discharge because he was nervous. That will cost him his right to own guns but it will prevent his being charged with a deliberate violation of the law. But as it is I strongly doubt that anything serious will come of this rather stupid exercise of police authority.

If the gun laws of most states were strictly observed just about every cop in those states is guilty of a violation when they routinely draw and aim their handguns at suspects with no substantive expectation of need to defend themselves or others with deadly force.

While I do not generally subscribe to the tired Freudian cliche which holds that firearms are a psychological extension of the penis, there are situations that seem to support that notion.

everyone has you on ignore, you know.

is it not the other way around,he has half the place on Ignore?......

 

[blastoff]

Nothing's gonna happen to the guy. It's clear he broke a law he knew nothing about which doesn't excuse him in any way, but no judge is going to send the guy to jail or put him on probation given the circumstances of this case. He'll get a lecture and walk, as he should IMO.

 

[The Gadfly]

he admitted he was wrong to discharge a weapon in a residential neighborhood. he said he used poor judgement and apologized.

too bad the asshats in this thread are too busy wadding up their panties to understand that.

Did you even read the report, Del? The man fired INTO THE GROUND, and the cops called it "reckless endangerment"? You have to be kidding me; here in SC I could have (and personally, I WOULD HAVE!) shot the subject as soon as he failed to obey a command to halt. I fail to understand why that would be unlawful in ANY jurisdiction; it's certainly lawful here, and we like it that way. One more reason I don't even care to visit up North, much less live with people with so little common sense; the cops involved obviously have absolutely NONE; I suppose they would have rather had the burglar take his gun and kill him, for daring to be armed; why, how DARE he usurp the function of the cops and actually try to help them do their job? Can't have that! Hell, the poor bastard even apologized and sucked up to those SOBs. I hope they get well-known in that community; and perhaps their future interactions with the public they serve will be less kind to them (seems to me they aren't worthy of courtesy! Typical New England assholes! Typical authoritarian Yankees! Lord, how I despise the species!

thanks for sharing

we have things called laws up here; you probably are better off staying away

you'll be missed

adjust your meds

We have laws here too, thank you very much. The relevant statute in SC is to be found under "Powers of arrest", and reads as follows:
"During the hours of darkness, any citizen of this state may arrest, by such efficient means as the darkness and the probability of escape may render necessary, any person, even if the life of such person be thereby taken, if such person (a)has broken or is breaking into a dwelling place with evil intent, (b) has broken or is breaking into any outbuilding with a view to plunder (c) has committed or is committing a felony (d) has in his possession stolen property, or, (d) being under just suspicion of a design to commit some felony, flees when he is hailed."
I have bolded the relevant provision in a case such as this one. That statute has been repeatedly held by judicial precedent to be precisely equivalent to the power of arrest granted to commissioned law enforcement officers when on or more of the prescribed circumstances exist(s). It has also been held to override the misdemeanor prohibitions against "pointing and presenting a firearm", or "discharging a firearm in a residential area" in cases where a firearm is used to effect the arrest. I sincerely doubt that any court here, would allow a charge of "unlawful discharge" to proceed in a case of self-defense by a concealed carry permit holder (for example) either, on the common sense ground that an ordinance enacted as a public safety measure cannot reasonably be held as intended to abridge either the right of self defense or the power of arrest as defined by statute.I haven't known a prosecutor here who even tried that, but my best guess is that any who did, would get an earful from one of our judges (as would the arresting officer)-they have little patience with those who waste their time with cases that fly in the face of common sense.

I don't dislike cops, Del, quite a few are friends of mine; but I don't appreciate those who get on a personal ego trip and do stupid things. Most of the cops I know don't like the ones who do that either. It seems to be common in some more liberal jurisdictions, for some reason, where there's a "write up anything and let the court sort it out" mentality.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Just goes to show what strange folks Yankees are.
Enforcing the law is a crime. Cute. Would a police officer have also been charged?
I'm pretty sure my neighbors would send someone to check on me if not for the occasional gunshot.
Besides, how would my next door neighbor know when his parties have gotten too loud??

NOW I know who you are, Gadfly! Good to run into ya!

 

[freedombecki]

That state needs a new motto.

"Live free or die."

Things change, don't they.

 

[Rozman]

New Hampshire Man Arrested For Firing Gun Into Ground While Catching Suspected Burglar | Fox News

No one was injured in the incident, but when the police arrived, they made two arrests. Hebert was charged with two counts of burglary and drug possession. He faces up to seven years in prison if convicted. Fleming, meanwhile, is scheduled to be arraigned March 20 on a charge of reckless conduct, which could potentially land him a sentence similar to the one Hebert faces.

Just pathetic! Great job, Farmington, New Hampshire.

True liberal justice would be for the judge when sentencing Hebert
makes him apologize to the perp for violating the guys civil rights and liberties.
I bet the ACLU is watching this case closely to make sure justice is done.
That the full weight of the law lands on the head of the homeowner.
After all the alleged perp is just a victim of society and the homeowner is the one
who made this guy what he is today...

 

[MikeK]

That does not sound AT ALL like the New Hamspire I know. LIVE FREE OR DIE (including seocnd amendment rights) is taken pretty seriously in the granite state.

That same thought crossed my mind, too. But I dismissed it thinking I might have had the wrong impression about New Hampshire. I know people in Vermont so I know the gun laws there are extremely relaxed. But I know nothing about New Hampshire -- except that I greatly admire the motto on its license plate.

I wonder if the arresting cops had a grudge against this guy?

A very real possibility. That thought occurred, too. But the report I (we) read didn't mention or suggest any conflict between the police and the armed citizen.

But you seem to know more about New Hampshire's gun disposition than I do, so I'm now thinking more in line with what you've suggested.

 

[Toome]

This is one of the many reasons I love living in Texas. Not so sure about the shooting rounds into the ground thing. That's why you aim for the intruder's center of mass: minimizes the unpredictability of a bullet's ricochet!

 

[editec]

Live FREE or DIE

 

[gallantwarrior]

There were some guys who set up a target near enough to my cabin that I could hear those little .22s zinging past through the trees. I dragged the .357 H&H out and cranked one off skywards. Mine was definitely bigger. They found another target range.
Alaska has sensible firearms laws.

 

[uscitizen]

In Lexington, KY you will get ticketed for parking you car on your own lawn.
True story.

 

[uscitizen]

"I think I did right" means he admits he was wrong. Good to know.

i saw him on tv- he said he was wrong

thanks for playing

Does he have a lawyer now? Typically lawyers advise their clients to express contrition when charged with a crime, it makes it easier for the DA to drop charges to something that is not a felony.

It is the way the game is played.

Kudos to the guy he took personal responsibility for his actions. But somehow some on here seem to think he should have tried to weasel out of it thru lawyers?

I once shot a few times in the general direction of some kids on 4 wheelers on my fenced and posted property who were chasing my cattle and such.
They complained to the sherrif who showed up with them in tow. he asked me if I had shot at them and I truthfully said no, if I had been shooting at them they would be dead.
He knows me and agreed and wrote them up for tresspassing. And impounded their 4 wheelers till the court date.