...of the only truly effective crime preventative.
Santa Monica robber killed by intended victimsNow for the downside:
Associated PressSANTA MONICA, Calif. - A man who tried to rob two people at gunpoint in a fast-food restaurant drive-thru was shot and killed by one of his intended victims early Thursday, police said.
[...]
The victims, two men, were in the Santa Monica drive-thru shortly before 5 a.m. "when a masked suspect approached their vehicle and displayed a knife and handgun," said police Lt. Frank Fabrega.
A struggle ensued, and the suspect stabbed the passenger in the hand. The driver then pulled out a handgun and shot the suspect, who fled on foot and collapsed a short distance away, Fabrega said.
Police said the gun used to shoot the suspect belonged to the intended victim, but it was unclear whether he had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.[My emphasis] I hope to hell he had a CCW permit. Santa Monica is one of those lefty enclaves that consider armed victims a greater threat to society than armed robbers. Posted by Ken S at July 22, 2005 06:14 AM | TrackBack (0) |
I'm shocked, shocked that there are people with guns in the People's Republic of Santa Monica! ;-)
Posted by: Dave J at July 22, 2005 07:33 AMWhat are the laws about transporting the gun in your car in CA? "You see, officer: I was on my way to the range when..."
Posted by: Bill McCabe at July 22, 2005 07:35 AMSadly, Bill, the law in California pretty much guarantees a violation in the absence of a CCW permit. Handguns in cars must be locked in the trunk or in a locked box (glove box, locked or not, doesn't count). Unless the robbers are exceptionally accomodating ("would you please give me a moment while I unlock this box?") it's impossible not to have broken the law in some way.
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 07:45 AMThat's the same as it is here. Must be in the trunk, unloaded.
Posted by: Bill McCabe at July 22, 2005 08:25 AM...which is another reason why I have long term "move to Virginia" plans.
Posted by: Bill McCabe at July 22, 2005 08:28 AMSo the next question is, does the DA have discretion? Can he choose not to pursue the matter based on the evidence or on the unlikelihood of securing a conviction? What leeway does he have allowing the victim to plea bargain way down?
(Geez, the very phrase "allowing the victim to plea bargin" is wrong on every level. What the hell is wrong with some people?)
Posted by: Nightfly at July 22, 2005 08:48 AMI'm sure the DA has such disgression. Whether it happens...?
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 08:54 AMHoly shit. Did I just type "disgression"? Jeebus, I think I need some more coffee.
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 08:55 AMNightfly, I can't possibly see Steve Cooley (LA County's Republican DA) charging this guy with a felony even if the statutes theoretically allow for. Therefore, however, I most certainly could see the Santa Monica City Attorney pressing misdemeanor charges. Fortunately, the Westside jury pool area extends well beyond Santa Monica itself.
Posted by: Dave J at July 22, 2005 09:03 AMMore coffee! Buy more coffee!
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at July 22, 2005 09:11 AMBingley, I bet you have a life-sized graven image of Juan Valdez in your living room.
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 09:18 AMDon't be ridiculous Ken. What he actually has is a life-sized garden statue with a wishing fountain.
Posted by: Emily at July 22, 2005 09:38 AMJuan Valdez AND his trusty burro...oh wait, that's for Bingley's trip to Washington State...or was that you, Ken?
Posted by: Dave J at July 22, 2005 09:44 AMNo, that was Bingley. He brings a whole new meaning to the term "muleskinner".
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 09:53 AM1) I have pictures of me and Juan. I've watched a movie with Juan. Me and Juan are buds: DON'T FUCK WITH JUAN!!!!!!!
2) "His Burro" is actually named "Conchita", which rules out the type of injury that one now associates with trips to Enumclaw.
3) Emily...you promised not to tell!
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at July 22, 2005 10:03 AMSo you and "Conchita" are on a first-name basis, I see?
Posted by: Dave J at July 22, 2005 10:05 AMNo, but Conchita and my sister-in-law are; I'll leave the rest to your imagination.
Posted by: Mr. Bingley at July 22, 2005 10:07 AMTerrific, someone had to bring up the mule and shoot the thread all to hell. Predictable. =)
Posted by: Nightfly at July 22, 2005 12:00 PMHit a little close to home, Fly?
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 12:06 PMIs it mere coincidence that earlier today I messed up my coworker's Rubik's Cube transform with the phrase "donkey semen"?
I don't think it is. I really don't.
Posted by: Sigivald at July 22, 2005 01:22 PMHit a little close to home, Fly?
Yeah, poor Bessie's huddled up in the corner of the paddock. I hope y'all are happy now.
Posted by: Nightfly at July 22, 2005 02:03 PMWell, stop taking her for granted. Buy her some flowers, take her out for dinner and a show, maybe some dancing. Show her you care and that it's not all about your needs.
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 02:09 PMAnd quit renting those PushMe-PullYou videos.
Posted by: Ken Summers at July 22, 2005 02:11 PMSugar cubes 'Fly. Chicks dig sugar cubes.
Posted by: Mr Bingley at July 22, 2005 03:06 PM
