The potentially horrific consequences of a car jacking

[mctowalot]

Amen!

[TexasGal]

[LSUTiger]

A friend of mine (white guy) was the victim of a car jacking. He told me his story personally and was pretty shaken up for a long time afterward.

See below for links to his story as it initially appeared in the press:

http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20040 ... /405120328" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20040 ... /405100307" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.claytoncramer.com/popular/Ho ... unUses.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://gundefenseblog.wordpress.com/cat ... ng/page/6/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://importgundefense.wordpress.com/c ... a/page/11/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He should be dead but thankfully he and his girlfriend got away but in the end had to take anothers life to stop the threat. He was fortunate that the human excrement he terminated (happened to be a black guy in this case) was caught on tape at a convienience store carjacking them exactly as he said they did. Also, it doesnt hurt that the now deceased was already wanted for murder, car jacking and was a well known drug dealer.

He was never charged, ruled as a justifiable homocide and no civil lawsuit to my knowledge ( I could be wrong about the civil suit.)

His was the text book example of justifiable homocide on every level and to catch part of it on tape was also a lucky break. He was also interrogated for untold hours, the investigators new he was justified almost immediately after seeing the tape but the investigators wanted to make sure that he was not a part of this scum bags other criminal activity.

In-car camera systems are a good idea in my opinion to record any such incidents (emergency) or even encounters with LEO's of questionable integrity (yes, they do exist). Although they could also prove your guilt so dont do anything stupid or make sure your camera is off.

In the end justice prevailed, but it makes me wonder what would have happened to him afterward if, there was no video tape from the convenience store and dead scumbag wasnt already known and wanted by police?

[ELB]

...
I agree, but that's not exactly what I was alluding to. Maybe I can't explain myself very well because I'm just asking a dumb question, but I'm operating under the assumption that drawing and shooting and getting shot right there is the only choice if the alternative is abduction; however we can't know in advance that abduction is the alternative we're facing --might be if you just surrender the car you can get out and walk away. You've got a gun or two pointed at you. You can't know how events will play out so do you assume the worst and act accordingly from the outset, or do you let events unfold under the assumption that the worst case is an unlikely conclusion that you may be able to avoid?

Not a dumb question at all, it is a very relevent one. And I think that unfortunately there is no good way to sort this out, no good rule of thumb. I train with some other guys on a weekly basis, and we go over this very question quite often. Some think that if you can get out of a sticky situation by giving up your wallet/car/whatever, then that's the right solution -- you live, you call the cops, replace the car or the wallet. I tend to lean towards the side of the issue that says if deadly force is being threatened against me, I am not going to wait to see how it comes out, I'm getting my vote in early. But there is no way to tell in advance. Most robberies are "just" robberies, but there are enough that proceed to abduction/rape/murder that I do not feel too comfy waiting very long to see what is going to happen next. I might wait a bit for tactical advantage, but not just 'cause I'm hoping that things will turn out OK.

We all pretty much agree, tho, that if we do identify an abduction attempt, fight's on. Being taken from the initial scene of a crime is a very bad sign. Also, in the definition of abduction, I would include being forced to the back room of a convenience store, being blindfolded or forced to the floor, or pretty much anything else other than taking the money and running...

The prosecution of this horrific crime is another example of why so called "hate crime" penalty enhancements make no sense whatsoever.

The people who committed these heinous acts clearly didn't do so out of love.

The only state of mind that should be relevant to a prosecution is the degree of intent - intentionally, recklessly, with criminal negligence, etc, and penalties should be set in accordance to the crime.

Motivation behind the intent is speculative and irrelevant. Attempting to separate crimes with certain motivations from others is only useful for currying favor with some groups and denying equal protection to others.

+1 to all that.

[ELB]

A friend of mine (white guy) was the victim of a car jacking. He told me his story personally and was pretty shaken up for a long time afterward.

See below for links to his story as it initially appeared in the press:

http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20040 ... /405120328" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20040 ... /405100307" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
...

Wow. What a change in details between the two news stories. Best wishes to your friend.

[philip964]

Most people don't know about this either

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wichita_Massacre" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;