What do you think of this guy?

[Huck Finn]

Just found this story on the net.
Woman Shot While Stealing Gas From Cars, Police Say

POSTED: 11:35 am PDT June 5, 2006

SPARKS, Nev. -- Police said woman was shot in the leg with a shotgun by a man who saw her and two others siphoning gasoline from vehicles in Sparks, Nev.

Sarina Ellis, 22, was taken to a hospital with nonlife-threatening injuries.

Police said the alleged shooter, Alden Noring, turned himself in shortly after the predawn incident Monday. Noring now stands accused of battery with a deadly weapon and discharging a firearm into a vehicle.

According to police, Ellis, along with 25-yera-old Allen Dixon and 43-year-old Katrina Myrick-Davidson, were siphoning gas when Noring awoke and went outside with a shotgun to confront them.

Police said Noring was involved in a similar shooting in 1995

Personally, I think this guy should go to jail for a very long time and be sued for everything he has. The idea of taking a shotgun to someone over $30 worth of gas is unimaginable! He was in no danger and he's done something similar on the past. I hate to see the gas thief profit from her crime (she should be under arrest as well), but this guy went over board. It doesn't even say that they were stealing his gas.
If he was mad about gas theft, he should have done what I did after somebody siphoned gas out of my pickup. I went and bought a brand new, small gas can...filled it with 2 gallons of gas and 3 cups of sugar & just left it in the bed of my truck. It took a week, but finally someone stole that too. I wonder how THAT worked out for them!

[LIKTOSHOOT]

Only problem I see, is he didn`t double tap her. You always shoot twice---ALWAYS!!!!



LTS

[satellite66]

The article seems to lean towards the anti gun side. Maybe he was threatened when he confronted them? It was 3 against 1. My biggest problem is that it will just give the anti gunners a martyr and ammo.

[berto64]

Aw shucks, Huck.

How they gonna learn the difference between right & wrong (see, there's a principle involved here!) if someone isn't willing to teach them?

Betcha the li'l bitch'll think twice before suckin' on THAT hose again!

[polishshooter]

Hey, the antis are always saying 'Couldn't he just shoot him in the arm or leg?


On second thought, maybe he should just claim a quail went up low in that direction...



And I hear you LTS, "center of mass, center of mass..."

[Pistolenschutze]

One might argue that deadly force is a bit extreme for a few bucks worth of gas, but it seems to me that a man has the right to protect his property. I seem to remember reading that someplace, like in the Constitution perhaps. Once again we'll see the criminal getting the gold mine and the armed citizen getting the shaft.

[Huck Finn]

The problems I see with some of the above arguments are that he wasn't out numbered 3 to 1 while he was still in his house, near a phone that he could have used to call the police, and the article never stated that he was protecting his own property. But whoever said that he was giving ammo to the anti's was right. Someone said that the article had an anti-gun slant to it. I don't think there is a way to cover this story and make the shooter look good. Every month in "The American Rifleman" they publish stories in a section called (I believe) "The Armed Citizen", where they recount stories of people who have used firearms to protect themselves from criminals. I really don't think the NRA will cover this story, because there is no good way to spin it. Especially when you consider that the gas thief will probably set for life with the proceeds from the law suit. This guy would have done himself a BIG favor if he had picked up his phone instead of his shotgun. Realistically, would anyone here actually do what this guy did? I know I wouldn't. Especially considering it looks like it wasn't even HIS gas getting stolen. I just think this guy makes the rest of us look pretty bad.

[satellite66]

I guess it comes down to whether you believe that a person has a fundamental right to defend themsleves and their property or you think that property is fair game for criminals.
Where in the constitution does it say that you have to cower in your home and await the arrival of someone else to protect you? Isn't that what the castle doctrine laws are trying to reverse? The liberal strategy of cut and run to protect the criminal.
He armed himself and went outside to investigate what woke him up . He found 3 people stealing gas. He shoots one of them for reasons not stated in the article. The article makes it sound like he saw them siphoning gas went outside and just shot one.
He turned himself in so it suggests that the cops did not make any arrests at the scene except for perhaps the criminals.

I am not willing to throw him to the wolves without more information.

[Marlin T]

This is interesting, I’ll have to agree that the said article doesn’t have enough information in it to even come close to making judgment except that people were stealing. So to start with, I have to give the person that was doing the shooting the benefit of doubt.



The one and only time, outside of the military that is, I pulled a weapon on someone was when I found some people in our garage stealing gasoline. But fortunately for me, all I had to do was rack a round into the chamber of the 12 Ga. and told the people to open the garage door and run. They did and all was OK, they didn’t ever come back either. So I can relate to this guys circumstance. Even if it wasn’t his gas that was getting stolen!



Huck said this, “””Every month in "The American Rifleman" they publish stories in a section called (I believe) "The Armed Citizen", where they recount stories of people who have used firearms to protect themselves from criminals.”””



Huck, if you go over to www.keepandbeararms.com you can find that kind of story almost every day, if not a couple times a day. It is NOT an uncommon event, like even the NRA portrays.


This is from today
•AK: Homeowner kills intruder: a black bear
• FL: Prowlers flee homeowner's bullets
• ID: Family mourns loss of Prescott
• PA: Grand jury says shooter acted in self-defense
• New Zealand: Colleague of slain dairy worker wants staff armed

[LIKTOSHOOT]

First, I doubt the gas stealer will be set for life.....or even close. Where would the money come from???? Some pie in the sky home-owners policy worth millions in pay out???? HARDLEY!

Now when you set limits on when and when you cannot defend/SHOOT someone, you enter a slippery slope. Much like the old school liberal......he had a knife and you shot him....you could have winged him OR taken it away. I wonder how many people are taking the dirt nap, because of this logic??? Of course a knife isn`t lethal, it will only cut you-no need to shoot them.

You wanna take the chance of stealing or robbing someone, you need to be prepared to suffer the rath.

Here in Texas, we can shoot them even if they are trying to escape------READ; SHOOT THEM IN THE BACK

Everyone always wants to value the criminal and give them more rights than someone who works for what they have, then must suffer to defend and ruin their life.


Like I said, shoot twice----and learn to do it good.


LTS

[southernshooter]

If they we're crazy enough to steal his gas they we're carzy enough to have a gun so I would be in fear for my life as was the guy

[ibtrukn]

Yooze eva hera CASTLE DOCTRINE????It should be the LAW OF THE LAND not just a few states. dummie swampangel gottit rite............

[M95]

i wouldnt limit it to 2 shots, w/e it takes to kill em really
i was brought up that thievery (specifically) should result in death!
i would of shot all three of em in the face/chest area



... given the chance

[southernshooter]

IB thnk god wegot it hur n mssippi

[ibtrukn]

Yar S/S I herd dat. an useit !!!!!!!!

[rosierita]

ITA w/ the majority on this thread & i'm an "emotional" female.

THANKS for the link marlin t!

[Bernie109]

Personally, I think this guy should go to jail for a very long time and be sued for everything he has. The idea of taking a shotgun to someone over $30 worth of gas is unimaginable! He was in no danger and he's done something similar on the past. I hate to see the gas thief profit from her crime (she should be under arrest as well), but this guy went over board. It doesn't even say that they were stealing his gas.
If he was mad about gas theft, he should have done what I did after somebody siphoned gas out of my pickup. I went and bought a brand new, small gas can...filled it with 2 gallons of gas and 3 cups of sugar & just left it in the bed of my truck. It took a week, but finally someone stole that too. I wonder how THAT worked out for them!

What part of "Thou shalt not steal" do you fail to understand? While there could be cause to discipline the guy for excessive use of force, he still shot a thief.

[Marlin T]

Bernie, your liberal side is showing through again. You said that he was not in danger, how do you know that??????????????????????????????????????? Do you have a follow up article or a copy of the police report? If so, post it, if not your are making an assumption based on a story that came from the main stream media, which has proven it's self to take the anti Bill of Rights side of the story.

What about what happened to me???? What if one of those guys that I caught in my garge stealing had a gun?????? What, should I have just let them steal my gas AND not shot him/them???

Come on, pull your head out and quit taking the emotional/liberal side of everything.


Rosierita, your welcome. That is a very important site on the internet, as it ISN'T the main stream media, one of the only places where you can read a story about a good shooting and a lot more every day. You sure won't hear about this kind of story everyday even on the "right wing" Fox news networks.

As a matter of fact it's worth posting again.
www.keepandbeararms.com

[Light Coat]

Takes about an hour for the police to respond to things like that. Now a doughnut shop arson; that's serious. Seriously, that is about the lowest thing on a cops list of things to do; scramble out there to find some gas thieves who are already hitting to pavement to get the heck out of there. I think you should be able to defend your property; although I would not shoot someone who has no intention of hurting life.

[Bernie109]

Huh? The top dection was the quote from the original post. My response is the two lines on the bottom.

[Marlin T]

Originally Posted by Bernie109

Huh? The top dection was the quote from the original post. My response is the two lines on the bottom.

.

OHHHH well you have my Apolagies then. Maybe you might want to use the quote thing next time. ooops

[Bernie109]

"If he was mad about gas theft, he should have done what I did after somebody siphoned gas out of my pickup. I went and bought a brand new, small gas can...filled it with 2 gallons of gas and 3 cups of sugar & just left it in the bed of my truck. It took a week, but finally someone stole that too. I wonder how THAT worked out for them!" (qoute)

By todays liberal laws, you would be liable for any damage to the thiefs vehicle. Additionally, if his engine seizes up and causes an accident, you would be liable for any injuries. If there is a death from the accident this caused, you would be charged with manslaughter. So, what you pulled is hardly "Better" than shooting the thief.

[Huck Finn]

Originally Posted by Bernie109

"If he was mad about gas theft, he should have done what I did after somebody siphoned gas out of my pickup. I went and bought a brand new, small gas can...filled it with 2 gallons of gas and 3 cups of sugar & just left it in the bed of my truck. It took a week, but finally someone stole that too. I wonder how THAT worked out for them!" (qoute)

By todays liberal laws, you would be liable for any damage to the thiefs vehicle. Additionally, if his engine seizes up and causes an accident, you would be liable for any injuries. If there is a death from the accident this caused, you would be charged with manslaughter. So, what you pulled is hardly "Better" than shooting the thief.

Sure it is! When that tainted gas was in my possession, it was incapable of hurting anyone or anything. It only caused a problem after it was stolen. If someone stole a 2x4 from your yard and used it to beat someone to death, not even "todays liberal laws" would hold you responsible. Big difference!

[Bernie109]

Not true, since you "Set a trap", you would be liable for any damage that tainted gas caused. Been there. My Sister had a wayward stepdaughter. While on vacation, she and her boyfriend broke into the house and trashed the place stealinh jewlery and a pistol. Because she was present, the judge ruled that what they took was legal. Even though the punk had a record and would not bale to buy a firearm, the judge declared the weapon legally transfered and forced the victim to pay the transfer fees.
I then gave him some booby trapped ammo. (A bullet with no powder, only primer)
The bullet lodged in the barrel, When he chambere another round, he ruined the barrel. Believing I took a punks gun off the street, I was surprised to learn that I had to pay for all repairs. Trust me, if you "Booby trap" the gas and it causes an accident, YOU can be held liable. The thief CAN force you to pay for the repair of his car. Been there, done that.

[gunfreakboy]

Originally Posted by Bernie109

"If he was mad about gas theft, he should have done what I did after somebody siphoned gas out of my pickup. I went and bought a brand new, small gas can...filled it with 2 gallons of gas and 3 cups of sugar & just left it in the bed of my truck. It took a week, but finally someone stole that too. I wonder how THAT worked out for them!" (qoute)

By todays liberal laws, you would be liable for any damage to the thiefs vehicle. Additionally, if his engine seizes up and causes an accident, you would be liable for any injuries. If there is a death from the accident this caused, you would be charged with manslaughter. So, what you pulled is hardly "Better" than shooting the thief.

Even if you could be held responsible, they would still have to prove that the gas came from the back of your truck. My argument would be - who is stupid enuff to keep sugar tainted gas in their truck- not me. It didn't come from my truck...