Robery Stopped BUT Homeowner charged

[FisherRd]

No secondary victom = no recklessness. So in my opinion Cherry shouldnt be charged with anything, and he should sue for false arrest.

If I drive down the 33 at 125mph while drunk it's reckless whether I hit somebody or not. The threshhold for the crime isn't whether or not somebdy was hurt, it's whether their actions were reckless or not.

Again, I don't have a problem with somebody discharging weaponry, it's the manner in which they do it. If (IF) he has neighbors with-in a close proximity (especially across the street), he was being reckless in firing off that many shots. Anyone that fires a weapon or has fired one on a regular basis knows that 15 shots in a short time frame will most likely result in a number of them being off the mark.

Besides the obvious risk in shooting 15 times at a car outside of your home, this guys judgement was impaired in the fact that everyone knows NYS doesn't fool around when it comes to self defense and weaponry.
A guy in Amherst was slammed by the law for shooting a couple of guard dogs that were ripping his hunting dog apart.
Everyone with a gun knows that if you aren't extremely careful with them you'll be in hot water in New York. This guy let his emotions and the heat of the moment cloud his judgement.

[FisherRd]

LOL!!!

I have shot tracers, and a trace is nowhere near a full ball round.

And the difference is more than neglible. 5.56mm is a lightly longer and thicker case, the weight of the bullet the military uses is now heavier than when it first came out. And the chamber pressure is about 10,000cup higher than the .223 Remington.

Plus, I've seen .223 shot out of a Thomson Contender Pistol blow through a angled steel back stop that stopped full house .44mags. Also .223 and 5.56 have a tendency to tumble, I don't think theres much on a modern car that they're not going to bite into no matter what the angle.

You're making my point for me. We've all seen odd things or things that defy certain "ammo" logic. That's why anyone with a shred of common sense that shoots knows anything can and most likely will happen.

As for what the "military uses", you're again proving my point. Unless they just started using this last year, I've shot it, and I've watched/heard them riccochet just like any other round I've had the pleasure of shooting. 50 cal, 7.62, 5.56, etc...every single one of them.

Saying bullets riccochet isn't exactly controversial, it's common sense. Just like not firing 15 rounds at a car in your neighborhood should be common sense.
I don't know if you're attempting to be difficult or not, but rounds riccochet. There are also other obvious reasons citizens shouldn't be shooting at cars, especially ones that aren't occupied by somebody shooting at you.

[Sylvan]

If I drive down the 33 at 125mph while drunk it's reckless whether I hit somebody or not. The threshhold for the crime isn't whether or not somebdy was hurt, it's whether their actions were reckless or not.

Again, I don't have a problem with somebody discharging weaponry, it's the manner in which they do it. If (IF) he has neighbors with-in a close proximity (especially across the street), he was being reckless in firing off that many shots. Anyone that fires a weapon or has fired one on a regular basis knows that 15 shots in a short time frame will most likely result in a number of them being off the mark.

Besides the obvious risk in shooting 15 times at a car outside of your home, this guys judgement was impaired in the fact that everyone knows NYS doesn't fool around when it comes to self defense and weaponry.
A guy in Amherst was slammed by the law for shooting a couple of guard dogs that were ripping his hunting dog apart.
Everyone with a gun knows that if you aren't extremely careful with them you'll be in hot water in New York. This guy let his emotions and the heat of the moment cloud his judgement.

I get your point, but the law doesnt necessary have to apply to everyone. For example, yes, YOU might be reckless driving drunk [.08 according to the law] on the 33 at 125mph. Hypothetically lets say you were driving a 1955 chevy stepside with a blown 427cu.

Now I'll bet you I wouldnt be reckless at 1.4 on the 33 at 125mph in a new corvette or mercedes. In fact Id race you around the entire 90/290/190 loop then figure 8 it through the 33/198 and back while sippin crown royal right out of the bottle.

Now that would be thought to be reckless but only by people who couldnt handle it and wouldnt try. Some people simply have more tolorance, coordination, and skill than others, so why should they be suppressed and persecuted?

[FisherRd]

Now that would be thought to be reckless but only by people who couldnt handle it and wouldnt try. Some people simply have more tolorance, coordination, and skill than others, so why should they be suppressed and persecuted?

I completely understand where you're coming from, and it's not that I disagree. My POV is that your average person is an idiot, and when reading these stories, chances are that the people involved are either your average idiot, or worse.
If I knew the guy my opinion very well may be different, but for now I'm leaning towards ""idiot", or at the very least "impaired judgement" via the fact he fired 15 shots in what I'm assuming is a neighborhood. If it's nothing close to a neighborhood then I'll retract (I googled it and it appears the sat image hasn't been updated because there aren't any homes, including Cherry's).

In that case, nobody fired at him or put his life in immediate danger, so it could have easily been attempted murder. The penalty for a burglary shouldn't be death, but I also believe in unintended consequences...

[sharky]

The difference is basically neglible for the topic at hand, but the point remains the same. Riccohets are commonplace. If you don't agree, I suggest you shoot some tracer ammo, day-time or night-time, watch the ammo fly. The tracer doesn't lie.

I heard that about tracers and also heard that it is simply the burning part in the back that is flying off

[sharky]

not saying I would do the same as the homeowner in this case, but the law might allow it

http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article35.htm

35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and
in defense of a person in the course of burglary.
3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.

35.30 Justification; use of physical force in making an arrest or in
preventing an escape.
4. A private person acting on his own account may use physical force,
other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to the
extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to effect an
arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person whom he
reasonably believes to have committed an offense and who in fact has
committed such offense; and he may use deadly physical force for such
purpose when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
(a) Defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes
to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force; or
(b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder,
manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible
sodomy and who is in immediate flight therefrom.

Seems to me if they consider what the perps were doing as robbery deadly force is justified in order to prevent them from fleeing the crime scene

[Chant]

You're making my point for me.

Okay, if you say so. But I don't see where comparing what a tracer round which is lighter and basically hollow would do, should follow the same for a ball round, which already has unstable flight characteristics as a solid round?



We've all seen odd things or things that defy certain "ammo" logic. That's why anyone with a shred of common sense that shoots knows anything can and most likely will happen.

I would say this is true for most bullets, depending on design.

As for what the "military uses", you're again proving my point. Unless they just started using this last year, I've shot it, and I've watched/heard them riccochet just like any other round I've had the pleasure of shooting. 50 cal, 7.62, 5.56, etc...every single one of them.

In what way? And I'd have no doubt the .223/5.56 would ricochet if you were shooting at a armored vehicle or a boulder... but I don't think the body of a car would stop it, the engine block might cause it to deflect, but not much else.
And have you ever looked up what the .233/5.56 round is designed to do? It tumbles or keyholes. As I said, I've seen this round out off a pistol blow through a steel back stop that was angled to drop lead into the sandpit. The same back stop that .44mags didn't bother. Oddly, I've also seen the 5.56 out of a rifle tear up a steel plate that a 30-06 only dented. Making huge keyhole rips in it.
Its an odd round. I do believe I read somewhere this tumbling is why the military increased the bullet weight, trying to tame it. In my opinion, they should have left it alone.

Saying bullets riccochet isn't exactly controversial, it's common sense. Just like not firing 15 rounds at a car in your neighborhood should be common sense.

By the pics I seen... it looks to be more of a rural area.

I don't know if you're attempting to be difficult or not, but rounds riccochet.

Ah no, Fishy... I like these discussions. They're fun.


There are also other obvious reasons citizens shouldn't be shooting at cars, especially ones that aren't occupied by somebody shooting at you.

Well, ya know... I can't feel sorry for scumbags like this... especially when they target the elderly.
If Cherry hadn't stopped them, they probably would have kept going and esculating until they eventually killed an older person or cause one to die of a heart attack from the shock. If they are praying on the helpless, then they need to be stopped, even at a calculated risk.

And besides... what's to say the first thing going through Cherry's mind was that the guy in the car was only backing up to give himself more room to mow him down with it? Too late to stop the car once it's in motion toward you.

Also, at his age, what's to say what physical disablities Cherry has. Maybe he can't walk or run? Maybe he gets out of breath very easily. He was already in a dangerous situation having one burgler close at gun point... he may not be in any condition to fight even that one off, even if it was a young girl.

You can armchair Quarterback it all you want. But you don't know what you'd be thinking, fearing the other could do to you, or making that snap decision until its happening to you.

[therising]

Let's reenact what happened there -- the kids walked in his open garage door.
He was standing there, gun in hand, waiting for them.
They took off, and he fired 15 shots at their car.
How the **** can anyone defend this guy? If he shot them once in the leg (even running away,) I'd say fine. But, this guy is hardly a responsible gun-owner.

For those of you who are responsible gun owners, you only hurt your cause when you defend a knuckle head like this.

[WNYresident]

15 shots seems like a lot.. Did they mention how many hit the car?

[FMD]

those of you with AR15's. if you hold the trigger, does it continue to fire?

[Chant]

those of you with AR15's. if you hold the trigger, does it continue to fire?

No. Not unless its been illegally altered.

[Chant]

15 shots seems like a lot.. Did they mention how many hit the car?

My guess... all of them. Because apparently the car was disabled if the male ended up taking off on foot. And they would have made a bigger deal out of it if stray rounds went anywhere else.

[Chant]

Let's reenact what happened there -- the kids walked in his open garage door.
He was standing there, gun in hand, waiting for them.
They took off, and he fired 15 shots at their car.
How the **** can anyone defend this guy? If he shot them once in the leg (even running away,) I'd say fine. But, this guy is hardly a responsible gun-owner.

For those of you who are responsible gun owners, you only hurt your cause when you defend a knuckle head like this.

Reread the article linked in post one...

Only the female tried to break-in... not the male. He heroically sat in the car.

They drove to his house, apparently his house specifically to break-in.

For whatever reason, he was able to grab his rifle.

The homeowner held the female at gun point. The male decided for whatever reason, to move the car. Whether it was to flee or run the homeowner down... I don't know and the article doesn't say.

The homeowner fires 15 rounds. No reports of stray rounds striking anywhere but the vehicle. Vehicle possibly stops working and the male burgler takes off on foot. (Otherwise... why get out of a working car to run?)
My take...homeowner puts 15 rounds into engine compartment and disables a potential 2-ton weapon under a criminal's control - without harming said criminal or innocent bystander. That is my defination of "gun control".
You'll notice of course... homeowner didn't shoot fleeing burgler in the back when he probably could have.
If he had only used up 15 rounds out of a 20, 30, or 40 round magazine, I'd also call that restraint.
But that's just me.

And some of you people seem to have no problem with two young thugs picking out an elderly man who they probably thought was helpess as a target. WTF is up with that?

[Concerned Resident]

What part of "From the little I've read here" escapes you? I don't know the layout of the scene, and neither do you. Whomever charged him does though.

Layout of the scene.

Home approximately 600 feet back from road.
Homes next to it are well over 1000 feet away.
Nothing behind but woods for miles.

This is the country. I know, I live out here. I know Dennis, but due to charges pending, I am holding any other information.

He is a responsible, law abiding citizen.

[Save Us]

those of you with AR15's. if you hold the trigger, does it continue to fire?

only if you have a class III or a modified trigger group/selector