Another American exercising their rights

Navigation

User login

Online users

Berd
rolandovich
FRESH
Rick
emmettoconnell
The Original Yoda
Logarithm
Guglielmo
Anamaria
jusbytheclown

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

Sara Ballard
GooseKaler
LongRider
non illegitimi ...
acreatureapart

Another American exercising their rights

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 7:53am.

CNN: Woman in wheelchair on way to gun practice shoots mugger:

Margaret Johnson might have looked like an easy target.
But when a mugger tried to grab a chain off her neck Friday, the wheelchair-bound 56-year-old pulled out her licensed .357 pistol and shot him, police said.

The Fire Inside's blog
Login or register to post comments

Obviously you are wrong TFI,

Submitted by Norm on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 9:27am.

Obviously you are wrong TFI, and CNN also, guns are only used by police officers legally, this must have been illegal. Obviously this wheelchair-bound woman was a closet gangster and this man was from a rival gang. Guns can't be used to defend yourself legally. pshahhh

Seriously,

Submitted by Rob Richards on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 5:03pm.

Not knowing the laws in NY I'm not going to argue whether she should be charged with anything, but trying to kill somebody for taking a chain, it's a little overboard. Not a very good shot either. The elbow? I imagine he was running away and his elbow was in the wrong place at the right time and got hit. I hope she sticks with the practicing, she needs it.

All kidding aside, I'm not sure I agree with using deadly force in this instance. If she didn't have a gun, she'd be missing a chain, that's it. Had she been a better shot, or unlucky, she would have killed someone. I never have, but I'm sure it's not a great feeling to have on your conscience.

Ahhh, a life for a chain, I

Submitted by Norm on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 5:20pm.

Ahhh, a life for a chain, I suppose the mugger should have thought that through in the first place? What's next, breaking someones nose is a little too much for just a chain? Eventually we'll work ourselves to the point where stealing is just ok because standing up for yourself just isn't right for personal property.

The guy got what he deserved, maybe she did enough damage to that elbow that he can't snatch old ladies jewelery anymore.

Mugger's Got It Hard Enough Already

Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 5:43pm.

I feel compassion for this poor soul who has been reduced to swiping necklaces off of old, wheel chair bound ladies.

This guy had it hard enough, without having to deal with a gunshot wound on top of it.

Acts like this are a symptom of a disease we face as a society. Poverty and ignorance are our enemies.

Let us learn from events like this. Let us combat poverty and ignorance in our societies.

Wow you have an interesting

Submitted by Norm on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 6:36pm.

Wow you have an interesting view of things.

although I am surprised that

Submitted by Norm on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 5:26pm.

although I am surprised that she wasn't charged with anything...being NY and all.

yeah, I wasn't trying to

Submitted by Rob Richards on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 10:18pm.

yeah, I wasn't trying to cast any sort of judgment on her for doing what she did. While I personally think shooting people isn't right, I definitely think people should be allowed to defend themselves. I'm not sure this was really a case of self defense, more like, you took my chain and I'm going to shoot you to get it back. Mostly, like you I thought in NY she might have been charged with something, but really, I can't see a middle aged woman in a wheel chair being convicted for this no matter where it happens.

Hmm, the article that's

Submitted by Norm on Sat, 09/09/2006 - 11:24pm.

Hmm, the article that's linked doesn't mention him ever getting the chain, and her going to the hospital for small minor injuries. I wonder if there was a struggle for her necklace and she shot him during the struggle? It could be considered self defense in that case, who's to know what he would have done once he obtained the necklace, if that's what she was thinking he wanted at the time. Shooting someone who's running away after stealing something from you normally doesn't go over well with local authorities, although the wheelchair is makes a pretty difficult conviction lol

Excellent, this is exactly

Submitted by The Fire Inside on Sun, 09/10/2006 - 12:39am.

Excellent, this is exactly where I wanted the discussion to go.

Is protecting property by using life-taking force justified?

In my own opinion I think it is dependent on the circumstance. If a person were to simply steal a piece of property (in this instance, a necklace), I don't think that should be an offense in which another person is justified in taking another life.

In a situation where the offender threatens the owner with Give me your or If you don't (and anything else along a threatening nature, including physical actions), the owner is more than justified in defending the property as they see as being necessary.

This man clearly violated this woman's "bubble," and she had no way of knowing his intention beyond using force to take her property.

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."

Good for her

Submitted by OlyCop on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 9:06am.

"This man clearly violated this woman's "bubble," and she had no way of knowing his intention beyond using force to take her property."

I think this is key. We don't know what was said or implied by the suspect. Perhaps he said, "I'm gonna beat you to death and take your necklace." Maybe his stance, body language, etc. increased the perceived threat. I'm guessing he didn't say "dear sweet lady, would you mind contributing your necklace to my weekly income, please?"

Self-defense is based on the perceived threat by the would be victim, not the actual intent of the suspect.

"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.

By that logic...

Submitted by Meta Hogan on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 12:39pm.

...anyone who is naturally very paranoid is more justified in killing an attacker than somebody who is more mellow. Actually, by that logic, a paranoid schizophrenic would be justified in shooting someone they thought worked for the CIA. I agree that you can't know the intent of the suspect, especially with very short notice, but "perceived threat by the would-be victim" is a shaky and problematic designation. Anyone remember the story of the woman who used her gun to scare off some guys who were stealing her car, only to find out that her key didn't fit and it was in fact their car (which looked similar to hers)? Perception is wonky.

Just call me Willy Wonky, LOL

Submitted by OlyCop on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 2:16pm.

You still have to be able to articulate why you believe you were justified in the use of force option you choose at the time. And its also based on the reasonable person standard. Would a reasonable person have believed the same thing in the same set of circumstances.

Perception is wonky maybe, but looking through the eyes of the victim is what needs to be done when looking at a justifed self-defense claim.

If you approach me very aggressively. Facial expression is angry, fists are clenched, walk is deliberate, you got the 1000 mile stare, or your focused on some part of me, maybe you're making threatening comments, etc. Get the picture? I don't have to wait for you to take a swing at me to be justified in punching you first. Because based on what I'm seeing, you are about to assault me. Same kind of thing. But let's go a bit further. You weren't mad at me you were just going to ask me for directions and you saw I had a hand held GPS with me. You had just got 86'd from your favorite bar, and that's why you had all the body language you did. Now am I guilty of assaulting you?

The wonkyness even goes to the level of crime one might be committing. If you rob a bank with your finger in your pocket to simulate a gun, you still go down for armed robbery. Because again the victim teller doesn't really know it's only a finger, and because of the implied threat you still get the big wack.

As far as deadly force to protect just property, it depends for me. What's being taken, where is it being taken from, who is in danger from bodily harm from the theft, etc. In some cases I believe deadly force is and should be allowed for taking of property.

"The strongest reason to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.

"I don't have to wait for

Submitted by OperaGirl on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 3:02pm.

"I don't have to wait for you to take a swing at me to be justified in punching you first. Because based on what I'm seeing, you are about to assault me."

That's not what Judge Judy says!

Having grown up in a

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 2:30pm.

Having grown up in a neighborhood pretty familiar with petty crime, I'm all but sure this guy just wanted her chain. He probably spotted her chain, walked up calmy behind her or past her, snatched it, and ran. This was done in broad daylight on a street in NYC, he wasn't going to stick around to talk or do anything else. I'm sure she was shooting at his back as he was taking off. You may say this is just speculation and I don't know for sure, and you're right about that. But I'd put money down that I'm right about how it all went down.

The article never says he

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 3:35pm.

The article never says he got ahold of the chain. Based on what the article says I'm placing my money on a struggle for the chain, and she shot during the struggle.

Do you know how easy it is

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 4:20pm.

Do you know how easy it is to yank a chain off of someone? I'm just saying, kids that do this kind of stuff know what they're doing and try not to make a scene. It's possible, I suppose, that she saw him coming and was ready, but not likely I don't think. You've got be quick because, of course, you don't want to get caught. How much of a struggle could a little old lady in a wheel chair put up against a full grown man anyway? I guess one could be surprised, adrenaline can be quite empowering.

My only reason for bringing

Submitted by Norm on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 4:37pm.

My only reason for bringing it up is what the article says. Phrases like, "when a mugger TRIED to grab a chain off her neck" and "came up from behind and went for the chain" and "Somebody TRIED to mug me...." it seems like if the chain were ripped off she was mugged and the chain was damaged. That wouldn't be much of a try.

Good point about the use of

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 09/11/2006 - 6:26pm.

Good point about the use of the word "tried". I'm still not sure, though. I just can't imagine someone really struggling on a busy street to steal a chain. I didn't read much in the article about the attacker, perhaps was trying to yank the chain so he could cop a fix. People can be out of their minds when they start getting sick from withdrawls.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at: