Right or Wrong?
 

I came across this article today, and just wanted to know people's thoughts on the matter.

I'm kinda half-and-half with this one. I think that the cops were right to detain him, but I acknowledge his intentions for good. He was reckless and could have killed/injured some people for two petty thieves, what he should have done was to call the cops and give them all the information like the car's license plate, a description of the criminals and where they were headed. Still, it was brave of him to go after them since...people are crazy nowadays and anyone can just turn around and blast your head off.

this is true and it seems the majority of people feel this way... btw, where'd you get those fangs? D:

I'm all for gun rights and people taking care of their own problems without the police, but I don't see why you would shoot at anyone for stealing. (especially something so small) Unless they were clearly out to hurt people, I don't see why that was necessary. I understand his intentions, but he overreacted. I don't really think they should have the right to seize his gun though. He didn't hurt anyone and should still be punished. I think that will teach him not to use his gun in such situations again.

His actions were overly emotional, impulsive, and irrational. I understand that his intentions were good, but his methods were reckless. The best thing for him to have done would be to get a good description of the vehicle, and ideally a license plate number, even partial - not try to take the law into his own hands. Having a concealed weapons permit does not mean that you have the authority to use potentially deadly force on anyone for the sake of anything other than self defense.

I believe revoking his permit was the best thing to do in this situation. I am on the fence on whether or not they should have taken his gun, however - it is his right to own a weapon, but I do believe he needs to be retrained on when to use it.

I agree with Phantom, I don't think he should have shot at the criminals, even if he was aiming at the car wheels. It's too easy to miss. I don't know much about gun laws though. I live in New Zealand, the police don't even have guns.

I would have to agree with what a few of the people have said. He didn't have "good intentions". He was trying to kill people over iPhones. When someone kills an innocent person to steal their iPhone, we call it petty, but when someone kills a non-innocent person to keep an iPhone from being stolen, we call it good? No, it's petty and awful regardless. No material good is worth a person's life, regardless of who that person is. And that's ignoring the entirely innocent people who could have been killed (and whose deaths, in all likelihood, would have been pinned on the suspects and not the gun-wielding maniac).

Anyone who has his priorities this screwed up should not be allowed around deadly weapons, period.

The article fails to mention if his handgun was registered, if he had a license for the weapon and if he'd gone through the proper classes for carrying concealed firearms. (I'm guessing not, since his reaction was to go running out of the building and try to put out tires Lethal Weapon-style.) He was more of a danger to the public than these two thieves and his actions were clearly irresponsible, so yes, the police actually were correct in detaining him. Nobody needs to lose a limb or a life over a couple of iPhones.

According to most jurisdictions, I read that it's illegal to use deadly force on another individual unless your life is in danger. AND in even some states, you're not allowed to use a gun on anyone whose attacking you with a simpler weapon, like a bat or something. I don't know, i wish I had links or my book to provide more accurate details, but many states are pretty strict when it comes to citizens using guns.
Although his intentions were good, there were other SAFER methods to help stop the criminals. What he partook in may be seen as vigilantism, which I remember, is something that law enforcement are not fond of. He could have called the police and given them the proper descriptions of the thieves, car, etc.
But no, he attempted to be a hero, and he could have potentially wounded (or even killed) an innocent bystander.

So did he do anything wrong? Yes, in terms of the other possible options he had, but I feel that he didn't mean to put anyone's life on the line. He acted on impulse and I hope the police understand that all he wanted to do was help out (and maybe give him a lighter sentence like misconduct).

AldreaOrcinae, right at the very end it says they confiscated his gun and license, so the article did state he had a license.

I think people shouldn't be allowed to carry weapons with them like that at all, so a situation like this shouldn't even arise.

Guns should only be used if your life is in danger. He should have just got the license to the car and called the police and let them take care of it. I'm glad he got the gun and license taken away. There's a huge difference between trying to save your own life and endangering other people's lives over phones.

I've personally always thought anything that I could term vigilanteism was a bad thing. I mean, as far as I can tell, most of our lives are not like the movies, and the police really are handling things properly.

If he wants to protect his city like that, he needs to become a cop first. That's all there is to it. ;\

right. we can't have people running around shooting at others in a vigilante style. it's too risky. and you don't shoot at people who are in the process of fleeing, even if they're stealing phones or merchandise. he had no right to open fire on them