In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Self Defense/Street Justice in the news
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Charges possible in fatal gunfight
Fallston gun shop worker killed elderly man who police say shot first
By Lane Harvey Brown and Maria Blackburn
Sun Staff
Originally published June 22, 2002
Harford County's top prosecutor said his office will wait until early next week to determine whether to file charges against a Fallston gun shop employee in the fatal shooting Thursday of an armed 83-year-old customer.
"We're going to wait until we get more information from the medical examiner's office and information the state police are still trying to follow up," State's Attorney Joseph I. Cassilly said yesterday after meeting with Detective Sgt. Doug Zeller, lead investigator in the case for Maryland State Police.
Milton Caplan was shot about 5:15 p.m. Thursday at Fallston Gun and Pawn Shop in the 2800 block of Belair Road after he and the employee argued. Caplan fired a gun at the employee, hitting a nearby television set, and was leaving the store when the employee fired back four times, missing twice but hitting Caplan in the upper torso, Zeller said.
The argument was over ammunition, Zeller said, but he declined to elaborate, saying it was a key part of the investigation. The identity of the employee who shot Caplan will not be released until prosecutors decide whether to file charges, he said.
Caplan lived with his daughter and son-in-law, Janet and Edward J. Carey III, in the 800 block of Hayden Way in Bel Air, a neighborhood of neatly landscaped two-story homes.
Family members who gathered at the home yesterday declined to talk about Caplan, but neighbors remembered the 5-foot-7-inch former cabdriver as a man who always wore his favorite dark cabbie's cap and went for drives in his late-model Mercury Grand Marquis. Several weeks ago, he helped his family put on a yard sale.
In 1973, Caplan won $1 million in the Maryland State Lottery.
Steven Sauer, who said the family moved in next door five or six years ago, remembered Caplan as "a pleasant old man" who liked to open the garage door and sit inside, speaking to neighbors as they passed. He also enjoyed playing with Sauer's dog, Ellie, and saved treats for her.
"He was feisty, that's for sure," Sauer said. He recalled stories Caplan told heatedly about trying to get his car repaired properly. "He was rather colorful in telling you. I could see where he could get in an argument, but to get to the point where they were shooting at each other? I don't see that."
He said he had no indication that Caplan owned guns or was interested in them.
Another neighbor, Bill Henciak, said he didn't know Caplan well, but "it's a shock. You see a gentleman like that, an older fellow -- you don't expect this.
"I don't know what happened," he said. "What was on his mind?"
When asked yesterday whether Caplan had been a regular customer at Fallston Gun and Pawn Shop, an employee who would not give his name said, "Never seen him before in my life. Other than that, I have nothing to say."
Robert Scheuerman, who with his wife, Dawn, operated the gun and pawn shop until January, said yesterday that he did not think Caplan had been in the store previously, adding, "I don't think we should talk about anything just yet."
Robert Scheuerman and his two brothers operate a trio of businesses in the 2800 block of Belair Road: Fast Eddie's pit beef stand, A-1 Safe Co. and the gun shop.
Jimmy White, spokesman for the Maryland Lottery, confirmed yesterday that Caplan, who lived in Baltimore at the time, won $1 million in the state lottery Dec. 18, 1973. Caplan was the third $1 million winner in state lottery history.
Born and raised in West Baltimore, Caplan was 55 when he won the lottery. At the time, he was working as an airport bus driver and as a courier for Pur-O-Lator Co. and made $125 a week.
"I'm going to spend it all on the kids," the widower and father of three told The Evening Sun the night he won the lottery. "They can do anything they want."
Caplan described himself as a gambler by nature. He played in a weekly $2 poker game and bet on the horses six times a week, but told the newspaper, "I don't think I'll blow all this there."
He went back to work three to four days a week as a courier after winning and said his life was virtually unchanged.
"No one's hounded me. They don't know where I am," he told reporters.
Sun researcher Jean Packard and staff writer Dennis O'Brien contributed to this article.
http://www.sunspot.net/news/custom/guns/bal-md.shooting22jun22.story?coll=bal-crime-headlines
Copyright c 2002, The Baltimore Sun
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Edited by - Josey1 on 06/25/2002 06:22:36
Fallston gun shop worker killed elderly man who police say shot first
By Lane Harvey Brown and Maria Blackburn
Sun Staff
Originally published June 22, 2002
Harford County's top prosecutor said his office will wait until early next week to determine whether to file charges against a Fallston gun shop employee in the fatal shooting Thursday of an armed 83-year-old customer.
"We're going to wait until we get more information from the medical examiner's office and information the state police are still trying to follow up," State's Attorney Joseph I. Cassilly said yesterday after meeting with Detective Sgt. Doug Zeller, lead investigator in the case for Maryland State Police.
Milton Caplan was shot about 5:15 p.m. Thursday at Fallston Gun and Pawn Shop in the 2800 block of Belair Road after he and the employee argued. Caplan fired a gun at the employee, hitting a nearby television set, and was leaving the store when the employee fired back four times, missing twice but hitting Caplan in the upper torso, Zeller said.
The argument was over ammunition, Zeller said, but he declined to elaborate, saying it was a key part of the investigation. The identity of the employee who shot Caplan will not be released until prosecutors decide whether to file charges, he said.
Caplan lived with his daughter and son-in-law, Janet and Edward J. Carey III, in the 800 block of Hayden Way in Bel Air, a neighborhood of neatly landscaped two-story homes.
Family members who gathered at the home yesterday declined to talk about Caplan, but neighbors remembered the 5-foot-7-inch former cabdriver as a man who always wore his favorite dark cabbie's cap and went for drives in his late-model Mercury Grand Marquis. Several weeks ago, he helped his family put on a yard sale.
In 1973, Caplan won $1 million in the Maryland State Lottery.
Steven Sauer, who said the family moved in next door five or six years ago, remembered Caplan as "a pleasant old man" who liked to open the garage door and sit inside, speaking to neighbors as they passed. He also enjoyed playing with Sauer's dog, Ellie, and saved treats for her.
"He was feisty, that's for sure," Sauer said. He recalled stories Caplan told heatedly about trying to get his car repaired properly. "He was rather colorful in telling you. I could see where he could get in an argument, but to get to the point where they were shooting at each other? I don't see that."
He said he had no indication that Caplan owned guns or was interested in them.
Another neighbor, Bill Henciak, said he didn't know Caplan well, but "it's a shock. You see a gentleman like that, an older fellow -- you don't expect this.
"I don't know what happened," he said. "What was on his mind?"
When asked yesterday whether Caplan had been a regular customer at Fallston Gun and Pawn Shop, an employee who would not give his name said, "Never seen him before in my life. Other than that, I have nothing to say."
Robert Scheuerman, who with his wife, Dawn, operated the gun and pawn shop until January, said yesterday that he did not think Caplan had been in the store previously, adding, "I don't think we should talk about anything just yet."
Robert Scheuerman and his two brothers operate a trio of businesses in the 2800 block of Belair Road: Fast Eddie's pit beef stand, A-1 Safe Co. and the gun shop.
Jimmy White, spokesman for the Maryland Lottery, confirmed yesterday that Caplan, who lived in Baltimore at the time, won $1 million in the state lottery Dec. 18, 1973. Caplan was the third $1 million winner in state lottery history.
Born and raised in West Baltimore, Caplan was 55 when he won the lottery. At the time, he was working as an airport bus driver and as a courier for Pur-O-Lator Co. and made $125 a week.
"I'm going to spend it all on the kids," the widower and father of three told The Evening Sun the night he won the lottery. "They can do anything they want."
Caplan described himself as a gambler by nature. He played in a weekly $2 poker game and bet on the horses six times a week, but told the newspaper, "I don't think I'll blow all this there."
He went back to work three to four days a week as a courier after winning and said his life was virtually unchanged.
"No one's hounded me. They don't know where I am," he told reporters.
Sun researcher Jean Packard and staff writer Dennis O'Brien contributed to this article.
http://www.sunspot.net/news/custom/guns/bal-md.shooting22jun22.story?coll=bal-crime-headlines
Copyright c 2002, The Baltimore Sun
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Edited by - Josey1 on 06/25/2002 06:22:36
Comments
Prison, program don't steer boy from fatal path
By JAMAAL ABDUL-ALIM
of the Journal Sentinel staff
Last Updated: June 23, 2002
Mollie Love thought the maximum length of time in prison would have been enough to make the 14-year-old boy who took her car at gunpoint back in 1999 never pull a gun on anyone else.
"I don't think counseling or probation will help," Love, now 69, wrote in a victim impact statement about the boy, Andre Bates, who took her 1992 Buick Roadmaster and threatened to shoot her outside her garage.
"Without strict discipline," Love wrote, "what's to stop him from doing it again and again?"
But apparently not even the two-plus years that Bates spent at a juvenile prison for the armed robbery of Love was enough to stop Bates from robbing again.
This time, Bates met tragic results: The teenager was shot and killed June 15 while trying to rob the Drop Inn, 3043 N. 35th St., court records say. He died with the loot from the robbery in his pockets: 69 quarters, two $1 bills, four $5 bills and two $20 bills, the records state.
The tavern owner, Jack Moga, 67, told police he shot Bates one "millisecond" before Bates fired his own gun. Prosecutors said Moga will not be charged because they cannot show the shooting was unjustified.
Theodorick Harris, 31, a convicted armed robber, is charged with three counts of armed robbery for his role in the robbery. Harris had been sentenced to 12 years in prison in 1995 for two counts of armed robbery, court records say.
Bates was under supervision at the time of his death through the state's Serious Juvenile Offender program, court records say.
The Department of Corrections on Friday denied the Journal Sentinel's request for Bates' parole file, which contains details of his supervision and efforts to rehabilitate him.
Silvia Jackson, deputy administrator of the state Division of Juvenile Corrections, declined to comment on Bates' case but defended her agency.
"Public protection is the most important part of what we do," Jackson said. "Ultimately, these juveniles have individual choices."
The Serious Juvenile Offender program is a five-year program and the most stringent under state juvenile law, short of waiving an accused child into adult court. Offenders can spend up to three years in prison and are to be monitored for the remainder of the program.
Jackson said the program gives juveniles counseling in the areas of "skill-building" and "decision-making."
So where did Bates - who was ordered into the program until October 2004 - go wrong?
Bates' uncle, Philip Bates, 41, says his nephew's troubles began early on and arose from a continuing lack of nurturing and guidance in his home.
"I think Andre was calling out for help," Philip Bates said. "But nobody listened to him."
A probation officer noted in 1999 that Bates "doesn't seem to have any strong attachments to either of his primary parents." Court records also indicate that Bates had poor academic skills because of "prolonged environmental impoverishment."
In many ways, Andre Bates' childhood mirrors that of Laron Ball, the 20-year-old man who was killed in a Milwaukee County courtroom last month as he struggled for a deputy's gun after being pronounced guilty of felony murder.
Like Ball, Andre Bates said he was "embarrassed" because he could not read.
A psychologist noted in 1999 that for Bates to have a "reasonable chance of succeeding in our conventional socioeconomic society," authorities would have to address his "multiple special needs."
Relatives say Andre Bates had a strained relationship with his parents. Neither parent spoke at length or in detail about Bates' childhood.
Philip Bates, an AT&T Internet sales representative in Modesto, Calif., had been visiting family in Milwaukee when his nephew was killed. Just hours before Bates was killed, Philip Bates said, he advised the teen to set goals and surround himself with positive people.
He said his nephew wanted to "turn his life around" and join the Job Corps with a girlfriend he planned to marry. But the man was at a loss to explain why his nephew failed to follow his advice.
Love, the woman Andre Bates robbed back in 1999, expressed concern over the plight of youngsters such as Andre. A retired teacher's assistant at the McDowell Montessori School, Love also stressed the need to teach children to read early on in life.
"Children have to feel like they are wanted, like they are part of society, and people really care about them," Love said. "But with nobody telling you right from wrong or 'I love you' or 'You did a good job,' somewhere down the line, that child is going to get lost."
http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/jun02/53638.aspAppeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on June 24, 2002.
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By TOM ALEX
Register Staff Writer
06/21/2002
Stanley Morawski pulled the trigger. Boom. There was a scream. The burglars disappeared.
It was 4:20 a.m. Thursday on the south side of Des Moines. A police report shows Morawski called authorities a few hours later.
In the meantime, Larry Hopkins, 16, of Ames, showed up at Iowa Lutheran Hospital with shotgun wounds to the face. Hopkins and a friend told police that two black men blasted Hopkins in a drive-by shooting in the 1600 block of Hull Avenue.
As officers investigated the Hull Avenue report, they learned that Morawski, 76, had fired point-blank at a burglar through his kitchen window.
They started to put the stories together.
Burglars have tried before to break into Morawski's house in the 4300 block of Southeast Fourth Street. He hasn't been getting much sleep, police said. His wife, Helen, told officers she and her husband are embarrassed that they've had to call so often.
Police said that when Morawski saw burglars approach the house again early Thursday morning, he picked up his gun, loaded with birdshot.
"Two suspects stayed under the victim's pickup truck, while two others were attempting to gain entry into the house," a report said.
"One of them apparently tapped on the window with a gun," said police Sgt. Bruce Elrod.
Morawski told police he saw a handgun. Then he fired.
Later, detectives charged five people with attempted burglary and theft, among them Hopkins and Amanda Sparks, 23, of 126 S.E. McKinley Ave.
Police think Sparks was trying to get $8,000 to bail a friend out of jail. The friend, Elrod said, is Cory Frahm, 23, of 1830 Logan Ave., who was arrested last week after a chase on the south side.
Frahm was charged with burglary after allegedly breaking into a house. A homeowner helped police make an arrest. Frahm, who was on the Metro's Most Wanted list, had been wanted on robbery and forgery charges. http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c4788993/18511286.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
2002-06-24
by Noel S. Brady
Journal Reporter
NEWCASTLE -- Dozens of witnesses looked on in horror as a screaming, naked man shot a fallen Newcastle police officer repeatedly in the head and back.
A few got involved.
Tammy Porter was in Newcastle from her home in Richland, visiting friends last weekend. Shortly before Saturday's fatal shooting of officer Richard Herzog in Newcastle, she and Chris Maddocks wrapped up a fun day at Seattle's Fremont Summer Solstice Parade, where it's normal to see naked men on bicycles streaking through crowds.
``I really didn't know what was going on,'' Porter recalled thinking when her friend pulled to the side of Coal Creek Parkway on their way back to his house. ``I just saw this naked man running around. At first I thought it was funny because of where we just came from.''
The naked man shouted obscenities and pounded the hoods of cars and a nearby empty Metro bus, which also had stopped in the traffic.
Porter said the man at times shouted incoherently about white oppression of African Americans. A white, blond-haired woman ran after him, calling him by name, but he ignored her.
``He was definitely under the influence of something,'' Porter said.
Within a few minutes, Deputy Herzog arrived on the scene and confronted the man, which seemed to agitated him more. As the man fought with Herzog, the officer went for his pepper spray, but the man barely flinched after several sprays to his face, Porter said.
The man somehow managed to release Herzog's gun from his holster, and it hit the ground. That's when several bystanders rushed the naked man and tried to overpower him.
``But he just blew them off like water on a duck's tail,'' said Porter.
Knowing the situation had risen to a deadly level, Porter -- a long-time gun owner and wife of a gunsmith -- scrambled to the trunk of her car and pulled out her .40-caliber Browning semiautomatic pistol. She trained it on the naked man, but couldn't get a clear shot.
Seconds later, the naked man started firing, hitting Herzog several times in his back, which was protected by a bullet-proof vest. Herzog lost his footing and fell. The man then fired three times into the back of Herzog's head and then ran toward a nearby apartment building.
Porter rushed to the officer's side. But it was too late. A former volunteer firefighter in the Tri-Cities area, Porter said she could find no signs of life. Herzog had been hit at close range, and blood was pooling around his body. She grabbed the microphone on Herzog's portable radio.
``Officer down!'' she stated clearly, keying the mic. ``Shots fired. Send help.''
``There was no doubt that the officer was deceased,'' she later said. ``I was angry because of what that idiot did. Before he fired, I could see the fear in the officer's face, and I knew what was going to happen.''
Just as Porter bent over Herzog's body, she said, a car carrying a man and a woman pulled up next to her, apparently to shield her and the officer from the fleeing gunman.
His hands firmly gripped around a .38-caliber handgun, the man driving the car jumped out and sprinted after the suspect.
Porter never got the motorist's name.
Police on the scene shortly after the shooting were overcome with grief. Some were amazed by the action taken by regular citizens.
``That is a tremendous statement that people will step forward in a crisis and help us out,'' Bellevue police officer Marcia Harnden said. ``It was a heroic situation.''
Noel Brady can be reached at noel.brady@eastsidejournal.com or 425-453-4252. http://www.eastsidejournal.com/sited/story/html/96636
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By TED SHAFFREY : Associated Press Writer
Jun 24, 2002 : 8:46 am ET
NEW YORK (AP) -- There were no signs of armed patrols a rabbi promised in two heavily Jewish neighborhoods because of an FBI terrorism warning.
Rabbi Yakove Lloyd had said his armed patrols would meet at two Brooklyn street corners, but the only people who arrived Sunday night were reporters, police, community leaders and curious residents.
Early Monday, however, Lloyd told the Associated Press that the patrols had gone ahead as scheduled. He said 25 members of his right-wing Jewish Defense Group patrolled the streets holding shotguns in bags, handguns and bats.
Police had no comment, Det. Robert Price said.
Officer Dominick Scotto said the streets were closely monitored at the time the patrols were to take place.
"They can't be standing out here with a shotgun, that's for sure," said Scotto, while on patrol at midnight. "If they have a baseball bat, they'd better be on their way to a game."
Joining Scotto was the captain of the 70th precinct, John Argezziano, and state senator Carl Kruger, who represents the Brooklyn neighborhood.
"If Rabbi Lloyd would crawl out of his hole and show himself with his phantom troops that don't exist I'd tell him that he's the real terrorist," said Kruger.
Lloyd said in a news conference Sunday that about 50 members of his group would patrol the Flatbush and Borough Park neighborhoods from midnight to 6 a.m. on three random days of the week. He said only those licensed and trained would carry firearms, and the rest would carry bats.
Lloyd announced the patrols after authorities said fugitive Abdul Rahman Yasin had asserted that those responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing had originally targeted heavily Jewish neighborhoods in Brooklyn. Yasin is sought by the FBI in the bombing, which killed six people and injured 1,000 others.
On June 16, Lloyd suspended the plan after meeting with overwhelmingly negative response from Brooklyn residents and lawmakers.
But Lloyd said he renewed his plan after the FBI warning Friday that terrorists could be plotting fuel tanker attacks.
When Lloyd first announced his intentions two weeks ago, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said anyone carrying a gun in the patrol would be arrested.
http://www.heraldsun.com/nationworld/14-240456.html
Copyright 2002 Associated Press.
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
June 23, 2002 06:21 PM ET Email this article Printer friendly version
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A right-wing Jewish group is planning an armed anti-terror patrol of Jewish areas in Brooklyn on Sunday night, even if it means arms bearers will be arrested, the rabbi who heads the group said on Sunday.
Rabbi Yakove Lloyd, who founded the Jewish Defense Group in 1985, said he expected between 25 and 40 people to participate in patrols of the Midwood and Flatbush sections of Brooklyn organized after FBI warnings that fuel tanker trucks could be used in possible attacks on Jewish targets.
The group abandoned a plan last week for an armed patrol of Jewish neighborhoods after a public uproar and warnings from the police that anyone attempting to patrol the streets armed with a weapon would be arrested.
The original patrol plan was conceived after CBS News carried an interview with accused bomber Abdul Rahman Yasin, conducted in Iraq, in which Yasin said the group that planted a bomb in a World Trade Center basement in 1993 had initially planned to attack Jewish neighborhoods in Brooklyn.
Lloyd said the patrol plan was revived after the FBI said gasoline tanker trucks could be used in attacks in the United States or against U.S. interests overseas, with Jewish schools and synagogues as possible targets.
"We're within our legal rights to peacefully assemble and to bear arms," Lloyd said. "Those are our legal rights and we're well within them."
Lloyd said he expected some members of his patrol to be arrested and that his group would have lawyers and bail money on hand in case of arrests.
The rabbi said on Saturday the patrols would begin at 9 p.m., but on Sunday decided to start them three hours later.
"We don't want residents to interfere with us and we figure they'll all be asleep and we could do what we need to do," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml;jsessionid=PZW0JGXDFEFDOCRBAE0CFEYKEEATGIWD?type=topnews&StoryID=1122419
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Vigilante's ambush collars S.F. suspect
North Beach tax accountant turns to stun gun after police shelve his requests for arrest in theft
David Parrish, Chronicle Staff Writer Monday, June 24, 2002
When San Francisco police said they couldn't spare an officer to arrest a man suspected of stealing Tom Van Lokeren's credit cards and checks, the 47-year-old North Beach tax accountant took matters into his own hands.
Van Lokeren bought a large fishing net at Fisherman's Wharf, some pepper spray and a stun gun at a military surplus store and then lured the suspect into a trap on a busy downtown street.
"I made four attempts to get the police to do their job," said Van Lokeren. "I said, 'Well, I'm going to go ahead with this,' and they said, 'Good luck.' "
On May 30, Lokeren and his nephew used the stun gun and pepper spray to ambush and arrest James Timothy Stevens -- but not without a struggle and foot chase down Mission Street.
"I ran up after him, and I stunned him on the shoulder, then I used the pepper spray," Van Lokeren said. "In all the ruckus, I ended up dropping the net. I never used it."
During the struggle, Stevens was knocked into a liquor store's glass door, shattering it, but apparently suffered no injuries. When the police were summoned by a call to 911, the 21-year-old transient was booked on two felony charges related to the thefts.
ALL INVOLVED MYSTIFIED
The incident left both Van Lokeren and San Francisco police officials shaking their heads in disbelief -- for different reasons.
Van Lokeren is upset that police at Central Station merely wrote up a report on the thefts and refused to go out and arrest Stevens. Fraud Detail inspectors wouldn't help either, he said.
"I served this guy up on a silver platter for these guys," Van Lokeren said of the police. "They are just so jaded and desensitized to crime."
A nephew, Paul Van Lokeren, assisted in the arrest and expressed dismay at the lack of police help, saying: "They are basically just report-takers. They are secretaries with guns."
Central Station Capt. James L. Dudley, whose officers took Van Lokeren's report and refused to assist in the arrest, said he understands their frustration.
He was unaware of Van Lokeren's repeated requests for assistance, Dudley said, but his officers are constantly busy responding to calls that often involve emergencies and violent crime. Setting up a stakeout for a suspect in a property crime case is not something the SFPD usually can do.
"It's not a life-threatening situation," the captain said.
Van Lokeren and his nephew made a mistake, turning a property crime into a potentially violent confrontation, he said.
"You don't put yourself in harm's way because you don't like the way the police handled it. What if this guy did have a gun -- and you only have net," Dudley said. "We certainly don't encourage the public to make their own arrest.
That's our job."
Tom Van Lokeren's venture into vigilantism began May 29 when his credit card company called about some unusual recent purchases at a Berkeley DJ shop.
He learned that two credit cards were missing from his home office, along with two checks made out to him, totaling $4,161. Suspicion immediately turned to Stevens, a drifter who had recently befriended his nephew, Paul Van Lokeren, 26.
SUSPECT STAYED IN FLAT
Stevens had stayed for a while in the North Beach flat Van Lokeren and the nephew share. Paul Van Lokeren recalled seeing Stevens use a credit card in the Berkeley DJ shop.
The uncle and nephew found that Stevens had left behind a duffel bag containing a half dozen pieces of identification for various men and women.
They went to Central Station with this evidence at 2:45 a.m. on May 30. Police took a fraud report, and told them Stevens was wanted on a $50,000 grand theft arrest warrant in San Diego County and two warrants in San Bernardino County for receiving stolen property.
Later that morning Paul Van Lokeren got a call from Stevens, asking if he could retrieve his duffel bag. They arranged to meet at 2:30 p.m. at the Metreon at Fourth and Mission streets.
Tom Van Lokeren said he went back to Central Station and told officers of the opportunity to arrest the man.
"They said they can't stake a place out -- what if the guy doesn't show up?" Van Lokeren said.
The officers referred him to SFPD's fraud detail, he said, where an inspector said the police report had not yet arrived and that he should go back to Central Station and try again to get a patrol officer to help.
Van Lokeren decided he'd have to catch the man himself. He bought his weapons, then went back to Central Station and asked again for help.
"I said I've gotten all these things, but I don't want to do this by myself, " Van Lokeren said.
One officer said he would try to make it to the Metreon, but that he couldn't promise. He suggested calling 911 when Stevens was spotted, Van Lokeren said.
The officers wished him "good luck" as he left the station, according to Van Lokeren.
Capt. Dudley said the correct advice was given: "The officer was right saying to call 911 when the guy shows up."
That afternoon, the Van Lokerens and Tom's girlfriend gathered on Mission Street. Their plan was to call Stevens on his cell phone and lure him out of the Metreon. But first they tried again for police help. They called 911. The dispatcher said they would send a car, but none came. They waved down a passing patrol car and asked the officers for help.
"They said they were on another call," Tom Van Lokeren said.
MISSION STREET CONFRONTATION
Finally, they called Stevens out onto Mission Street. Tom Van Lokeren ran up behind him and stun-gunned and pepper-sprayed the man. Paul Van Lokeren used his own pepper spray. Stevens fell, but then got up and ran.
"I was yelling 'Stop him, stop him,' " Tom Van Lokeren said.
"Some homeless guy with one leg in a wheelchair sticks out his leg and almost trips him up," said Paul Van Lokeren, "Another guy bodychecks him into a liquor store door."
A passer-by called 911.
When police arrived, Stevens was placed under citizen's arrest. Tom Van Lokeren's credit cards were found near the liquor store's broken glass door, police reported.
Stevens later told police the whole fraud scheme was the nephew's idea, a charge Paul Van Lokeren denied.
SFPD fraud Inspector Martin Dito said Stevens is being held on charges of possessing fraudulent identification and possessing stolen property.
"I'm definitely getting action now," said Tom Van Lokeren. "But I wouldn't be getting any action without my citizen's arrest."
E-mail David Parrish at dparrish@sfchronicle.com
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/06/24/MN37934.DTL
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Monday, June 24, 2002
By LEWIS KAMB AND GORDY HOLT
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS
The weekend shooting of a King County deputy is likely to renew debate about what level of force should be used against suspects threatening violence.
On Saturday, Deputy Rich Herzog of Puyallup used pepper spray in trying to subdue a naked, agitated man who had been wandering around in traffic in a busy section of Newcastle. The spray did not deter the man, who struggled with Herzog, grabbed the deputy's gun, then killed him in what Sheriff Dave Reichert called "an execution."
Yesterday, Reichert slammed his fellow King County elected leaders for failing to pay for Tasers, which can debilitate people with a powerful electric shock, or other new technologies that stop but don't kill. Reichert said: "If people want us to be less lethal, then give us the funds to buy less-lethal weapons. When I request funds for less-lethal weapons, I am ignored."
There is a question, though, whether a Taser would have been effective Saturday. The suspect arrested in Herzog's death is believed to have been involved in an altercation with Bellevue police last year. In that case, officers tried to subdue him with a Taser but without success.
Yesterday, Elaine Kraft, spokeswoman for King County Executive Ron Sims, said she couldn't comment on past budget requests, but coming requests will be taken seriously. Controversial police shootings in recent years have spurred citizens to call for "less-lethal" alternatives such as pepper spray, Tasers and rubber bullets.
For example, there was a community outcry in 2000 when Seattle police fatally shot David John Walker, a mentally ill man who fired shots in a Queen Anne grocery store, then skipped along a street ringed by officers with guns drawn. The Police Department responded by arming many officers with the M26 Taser.
But officers have long warned of risks they might encounter in relying on "less-lethal" alternatives.
"There's so much pressure on police from activist groups and the community to use 'less lethal' (means) that officers in the street are really stressed to know what to do," said Ken Saucier, president of the Seattle Police Officers Guild and a firearms instructor for Seattle police.
In a confrontation, "there's a whole lot of things that can happen and a whole lot of decisions that need to be made in a very short period of time," Saucier added. "In some situations, less lethal may work, but sometimes it won't. And, if you think about things too much, it's definitely going to put officers' lives at risk."
At least twice in the past year, stun guns have failed during confrontations between Seattle police officers and suspects armed with cutting weapons. Both confrontations ended in the suspect's death.
In November, police shot and killed a man inside a Lake City boarding house after a stun gun failed to subdue him and the man lunged at an officer with a knife. Earlier this year, when Tasers failed to immobilize Shawn Maxwell as he wielded a sword in the yard of a University District home, police also fatally shot him. In both instances, several backup officers stood by, providing cover while a primary officer tried to use the less-lethal devices.
The most controversial shooting this year involved a white off-duty King County deputy, Mel Miller, who shot and killed an African American, Robert Lee Thomas Sr., as he sat in his truck parked in Miller's rural neighborhood east of Renton. The deputy has told investigators Thomas pulled a gun on him, but two others in the truck, Thomas' son and his girlfriend, disputed that and also said Miller never identified himself as a deputy. The incident has sparked racial unrest, protests, rallies and marches, including one in which demonstrators blocked a section of Interstate 5 through Seattle.
Yesterday, Reichert, who was criticized for defending Miller immediately after that shooting, was asked if Herzog may have hesitated to use his gun with an African American suspect because of community pressure.
"I wish I could ask Deputy Herzog that question," Reichert said.
He was quick to say he does not think the Herzog shooting -- or the Thomas one -- was racially motivated. "None of this is about race," he said. "We, as police officers, are sick and tired of being looked at as racists. We are sick and tired of being nitpicked over decisions we make day in and day out."
Saucier said that in order to subdue a suspect with pepper spray, officers have to put themselves "into the danger zone in order for it to work effectively."
"You shouldn't get closer than 3 feet, but you really need to be from 10 to 15 feet in order for it to work effectively," he said.
And that doesn't mean the spray will work.
"You shoot someone straight in the face, and it's like shooting a water pistol at them," Saucier said. "It affects people so differently that you can never really depend on it for every situation."
One of the pitfalls of relying on less-lethal alternatives in volatile confrontations, Saucier added, is that officers might take too much time discerning which weapon is appropriate. By the time a decision is finally made, it could be too late, he said.
"If we're going to use (less lethal), we're going to need a hell of a lot more training," he said.
P-I reporter Lewis Kamb can be reached at 206-615-1246 or lewiskamb@seattlepi.com
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/75858_lethal24.shtml
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Motorists welcome high court's ruling
By RACHEL GRAVES
Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle
The U.S. Supreme Court decided Thursday that Houston and other cities can resurrect safety regulations for tow truck drivers that were barred by a previous federal court ruling.
Houston drivers, including some tow truck operators, said Friday they are happy the city can once again crack down on unsafe behavior.
Wrecker driver Carlos Luna said his colleagues who speed to accidents all the way across town and jack up their prices unfairly create image problems for the whole industry and need to be stopped.
"One wrecker driver does something bad, it makes us all look bad," Luna said as he hooked a vehicle to his wrecker downtown.
Houston will immediately look into re-establishing its laws requiring tow truck drivers to obtain permits, licenses and insurance, go through criminal background checks and work in zoned areas rather than responding to calls citywide.
Another law prohibiting wrecker drivers from carrying guns on the job may also be restored, as can a demerit system that would allow the city to revoke wreckers' licenses for repeated violations of the law, including speeding to accident scenes.
The demerit system never went into effect because it was approved by City Council one week before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year in a San Antonio case that only states, not cities, had the authority to oversee wrecker drivers.
The Supreme Court decision in a Columbus, Ohio, case reinstates cities' rights to govern wreckers. In an opinion written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court ruled Thursday that "a political subdivision may exercise whatever portion of state power the state, under its own constitution and laws, chooses to delegate to the subdivision."
Justices Antonin Scalia and Sandra Day O'Connor dissented, saying in a minority opinion written by Scalia that because Congress did not specifically say in a law regulating tow trucks that the states could delegate their power to cities and counties, the authority cannot be passed down.
The court remanded the case to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to determine which regulations address public safety. Economic regulations are prohibited under the 1994 Federal Aviation Administration Act, which deregulated the motor-carrier industry.
Houston officials reacted immediately to the Supreme Court decision, calling an emergency meeting for Tuesday of the city's Regulatory Affairs Committee to discuss reinstating the wrecker laws.
"I'm elated. We can move forward now," said City Councilman Mark Ellis, who heads the committee. He said the city will probably reinstate a law regarding price gouging and try to cut back on the dozens of tow trucks that show up at accident scenes by re-establishing the city's five-zone system for wreckers.
"Everybody has almost been run off the road or something at one time or another," Ellis said.
Houstonians asked about their experiences with wrecker drivers agreed.
"They cause wrecks the way they're trying to get to them," said a woman who asked to be identified by her initials, D.J. She also complained about price gouging and said wrecker drivers should not be allowed to have guns.
"It could get very ugly if they're armed," she said.
Joseph Swearingen said he has twice needed to have his car towed. Once the drivers were smoking "the magic purple puff things" while doing the job and the other time the driver was "intimidating," he said.
Dave Peck of Sugar Land said he frequently needs to get his 1960 MG towed and generally has good experiences with the wrecker drivers. But he too said he has frequently witnessed "five or six wrecker services fighting over who's going to tow the car" when he passes by accident scenes.
A former wrecker driver said he has mixed feelings about regulations because he thinks the city is "too controlling," but also faults other drivers for being reckless.
"I almost got hit one night by three wreckers, and I was on my Harley," said the driver, who would not give his name. "They came up on my back side like nobody's business."
The driver said the city should regulate price controls at accident scenes, do criminal background checks and go after dangerous drivers. He dislikes the zone system and $500 permits, though.
Jeanette Rash, vice president of Incident Management Services, an umbrella group representing about 30 towing companies, said she is thrilled the city can reinstate its regulations.
"The public does need to be protected in some respects," she said. "It's no different than any other industry, including doctors and lawyers. There's always a bad element there."
Rash did say she hopes the city will make sure its regulations are not vulnerable to future court rulings.
"We're turned upside down every time one of these decisions happens," she said. "That keeps all of us in turmoil."
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/1465619
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Joyce Lee Malcolm
Published: June 21 2002 14:51 | Last Updated: June 21 2002 14:51
For the best part of a century, public safety in England and Wales has been based on the theory that fewer guns would mean less crime, that weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, posed a danger; disarming them would lessen the chance of arming criminals.
The Police Review, an independent magazine for Britain's police, summed up the matter 20 years ago: "There is an easily identifiable police attitude towards the possession of guns by members of the public. Every possible difficulty should be put in their way. No documentation can be too rigid, no security requirement too arbitrary, which prevents guns coming into the hands of criminals."
Advocates of gun control worldwide have praised the resultant model, in which some of the toughest firearms regulations of any democracy have been credited with producing a low rate of violent crime.
But there are two problems with this claim. When guns were easily available, England and Wales had an astonishingly low level of armed crime. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30m. The study noted that the murderer and the victim in the 1890 homicide were foreigners. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world.
A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported online in January that England's firearms restrictions, including its 1997 ban on handguns, "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld". Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old US slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. And what is worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.
'More than half of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 per cent in the US, where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police'
Five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since, and armed crime - with banned handguns the weapon of choice - is now described as "rocketing". In the two years following the ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 per cent. From April to November 2001 the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 per cent.
In the course of a few days last summer, gun-toting men burst into a court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighbourhood of north London. On New Year's Day, 2002, a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief after her mobile phone.
Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against people in inner cities increased 91 per cent. And from 1997 to 2001 the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 per cent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 per cent in the US, where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police.
This sea change in English crime is indicative of government policies that have gone badly wrong. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the premise that people don't need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It will also protect their neighbours. Those who witness a crime are advised to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it. First, government clamped down on private possession of guns; then it forbade people carrying any article that might be used for self-defence; finally, the vigour of that self-defence was to be judged by what, in hindsight, seemed "reasonable in the circumstances" according to the 1967 Criminal Justice Act.
****** The 1920 Firearms Act, the first serious British restriction on guns, required a local chief of police to certify that the potential gun owner had a good reason for owning a weapon and was a fit person to have it. All very sensible. Parliament was assured the intention was to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and other dangerous persons. Yet, from the start, it was far more restrictive, and Home Office instructions to police - classified until 1989 - periodically narrowed the criteria.
At first, police were instructed there would be a good reason for someone to have a revolver if a person "lives in a solitary house, where protection against thieves and burglars is essential, or has been exposed to definite threats to life on account of his performance of some public duty". By 1937 they were to discourage applications to possess firearms for house or personal protection; and in 1969 were informed that "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person".
These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Since 1997, handguns have been banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the Olympic team were rejected.
Even more sweeping was the 1953 Prevention of Crime Act that made it illegal to carry in a public place any article "made, adapted, or intended" for an offensive purpose "without lawful authority or excuse". Carrying something to protect yourself was branded antisocial. Any item carried for possible defence automatically became an offensive weapon. Individuals stopped by the police and found with such items were guilty until proven innocent.
During the debate in the Commons, an MP from Northern Ireland told his colleagues of a woman employed by parliament who had to cross a lonely heath on her route home and had armed herself with a knitting needle. A month earlier, she had driven off a youth who tried to snatch her handbag by jabbing him "on a tender part of his body". Was it to be an offence to carry a knitting needle? The attorney-general assured him that she might be found to have a reasonable excuse, but that the public should be discouraged "from going about with offensive weapons in their pockets; it is the duty of society to protect them".
Another MP pointed out that while "society ought to undertake the defence of its members, nevertheless one has to remember that there are many places where society cannot get, or cannot get there in time. On those occasions a man has to defend himself and those whom he is escorting. It is not much consolation that society will come forward a great deal later, pick up the bits, and punish the violent offender."
In the House of Lords, Lord Saltoun argued: "The object of a weapon was to assist weakness to cope with strength and it is this ability that the bill was framed to destroy.
"I do not think any government has the right, though they may very well have the power, to deprive people for whom they are responsible of the right to defend themselves."
However, he added: "Unless there is not only a right but also a fundamental willingness amongst the people to defend themselves, no police force, however large, can do it."
At government insistence the law passed and became permanent.
A broad revision of criminal law in 1967 altered the common law standard for self-defence. Everything now turns on what appears "reasonable" force against an assailant, considered after the fact. As the author of a legal textbook said, that requirement is "now stated in such mitigated terms as to cast doubt on whether it [self-defence] still forms part of the law".
Although rising crime has left the public increasingly vulnerable, the courts have interpreted the 1953 Act strictly and zealously. In case histories, among the articles found illegally carried with offensive intentions are a sandbag, a pickaxe handle, a stone and a drum of pepper. One legal text conceded: "Any article is capable of being an offensive weapon", but added that if it was unlikely to cause an injury, the onus of proving intent to do so would be "very heavy". Insisting that police stop and search ever greater numbers of people might catch a few would-be muggers, but at a cost of ensuring everyone else remains a hapless and attractive target.
The 1967 Act has not been helpful to those obliged to defend themselves with force either. A legal expert said: "For some reason that is not clear, the courts occasionally seem to regard the scandal of the killing of a robber as of greater moment than the safety of the robber's victim in respect of his person and property."
Four cases illustrate the impact of these measures: In 1973 a young man running on a road at night was stopped by the police and found to be carrying a length of steel, a cycle chain and a metal clock weight. He explained that a gang of youths had been after him. At his hearing it was found he had been threatened and had notified the police. The justices agreed he had a valid reason to carry the weapons. Indeed, 16 days later he was attacked and beaten so badly he was hospitalised. But the prosecutor appealed against the ruling and the appellate judges insisted that carrying a weapon must be related to an imminent and immediate threat. They sent the case back to the lower court with directions to convict. In 1987, two men assaulted Eric Butler, a 56-year-old British Petroleum executive, in a London Underground train carriage by trying to strangle him and smashing his head against the door. No one came to his aid. He later testified: "My air supply was being cut off, my eyes became blurred, and I feared for my life." In desperation he unsheathed an ornamental sword blade in his walking stick and slashed at one of his attackers, stabbing the man in the stomach. The assailants were charged with wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon. In 1994, an English homeowner, armed with a toy gun, managed to detain two burglars who had broken into his house, while he called the police. When the officers arrived they arrested the homeowner for using an imitation gun to threaten or intimidate. Now the police are pressing parliament to make imitation guns illegal. Most familiar is the 1999 case of Tony Martin, a 55-year-old Norfolk farmer, victim of six robberies, who shot two professional thieves when they broke into his home at night to rob him yet again. Like 70 per cent of rural villages his had no police presence. He received a life sentence for killing one burglar, 10 years for wounding the second, and 12 months for having an illegal shotgun. The wounded burglar is already free.
Self-defence, William Blackstone, the 18th century English jurist, wrote, is a natural right that no government can deprive people of, since no government can protect the individual in his moment of need. The English Bill of Rights of 1689 affirmed the right of individuals "to have arms for their defence". It is a dangerous right. But leaving personal protection to the police is also dangerous, and ineffective. Government is perilously close to denying people the ability to protect themselves at all, and the result is a more, not less, dangerous society.
"It is implicit in a genuine right," said Judge Brown-Wilkinson (Wheeler v Leicester City Council 1985) "that its exercise may work against [some facet of] the public interest: a right to speak only where its exercise advanced the public welfare or public policy would be a hollow guarantee against repression."
History shows that public safety is not enhanced by depriving individuals of their right to personal safety.
The author is professor of history, Bentley College, and Senior Adviser, MIT Security Studies Programme
Her book Guns and Violence - the English Experience is published this month by Harvard University Press
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1024578110380&p=1012571727132
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
2001 Rise Follows 9 Years of Decline
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to The Post
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 23, 2002; Page A01
The number of major crimes in the United States increased last year for the first time in a decade, bringing an end to a decline in violence that had resulted in the lowest crime levels in a generation, according to FBI statistics.
The increase included a 3.1 percent rise in murders reported by police departments nationwide, along with significant jumps in the numbers of robberies, burglaries and car thefts, according to the preliminary FBI survey, which was obtained by The Washington Post. Overall, major crimes in 2001 were up by 2 percent from the year before.
One exception to the national trend was the District, which reported a slight drop in crime of 0.4 percent, including lower numbers for homicide, aggravated assault and theft. But the District reported increases in several other serious crime categories, including robberies, burglaries and car thefts, the report says.
The national increase, outlined in an annual report to be released Monday by the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program, reverses nine years of declining crime numbers and is certain to fuel debates on Capitol Hill over proposed cuts in anti-crime measures.
The reversal comes amid budget pressures on many local police departments because of rapid declines in the tax revenues collected by state and local governments. In addition, the FBI -- which has been deeply involved in major narcotics and gang investigations -- is in the midst of a major reorganization that will result in less attention to traditional crimes in favor of efforts aimed at thwarting terrorist attacks.
Many police chiefs and criminologists have warned that surges in the numbers of teenagers and released prisoners, along with recent economic declines, threatened a return to rising crime.
"We're probably done seeing declines in crime rates for some time to come," said Jack Riley, director of the Public Safety and Justice Program at Rand Corp. in Santa Monica, Calif. "The question is how strong and how fast will those rates be, and what kind of tools do we have at our disposal to get ahead of the curve."
The FBI survey does not provide details about specific suburbs, although crime reports in suburban areas overall were up 2.2 percent. Regionally, only the Northeast showed a drop in crime. The largest increase was in western states, followed by the South and Midwest, the FBI said.
The deaths from the Sept. 11 attacks were excluded from the FBI tallies. If those deaths were counted as homicides, the FBI said, the number of murders would have increased by 26 percent from 2000.
Criminologists are divided over what causes crime rates to increase, though most believe that economics and demographics play crucial roles. Riley and other crime experts said last year's resurgence can be explained at least in part by a stagnant economy.
In addition, the number of inmates released from state and federal prisons last year rose to more than 600,000 as many convicted during the crack-cocaine epidemic of the late 1980s returned to the streets, according to federal estimates. Police officials are also concerned about an ongoing increase in the teenage population, which has historically been the age group most likely to commit crimes.
"The great 1990s crime drop ended with the 1990s; the new millennium brings a different picture," said James Alan Fox, a criminal justice professor at Northeastern University in Boston. "This tells us we can't be complacent about crime levels. We have to re-intensify our efforts."
Most of the crime increase in 2001 was driven by jumps in various property crimes -- led by car thefts at 6 percent -- while the overall number of violent crimes rose by less than 1 percent.
But every category except aggravated assault showed an increase, and crime experts said the rises in murders and robberies were particularly alarming because of the severe impact they have on neighborhoods and communities.
Homicides increased sharply in many U.S. cities last year, including a jump of 67 percent in Boston and double-digit percentage spikes in Houston, Atlanta, St. Louis and Phoenix, to name a few. Murders also increased at smaller rates in Chicago and Los Angeles but continued to decline in New York when those slain in the World Trade Center attack are not included.
The uptick in crime documented by the FBI is already being seized upon by some Democrats on Capitol Hill trying to fend off cuts in federal aid to local police departments.
The Bush administration has proposed several reductions in grants and other assistance to state and local law enforcement agencies, including an 80 percent drop in funding for the Community Oriented Policing Services program. The Clinton administration initiative, which aimed to provide funding for 100,000 police officers, has been popular with many local governments but has been criticized by some Republicans as ineffective.
Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), who has sponsored legislation to increase COPS funding from the Bush proposal, said the new crime statistics underscore the need for federal support of local crime-fighting efforts.
"Crime is like cutting grass," said Biden, chairman of the Senate Judiciary crime and drugs subcommittee. "Just because you cut it down doesn't mean it's going to stay there. . . . We have to increase our commitment to local law enforcement."
c 2002 The Washington Post Company
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29717-2002Jun22.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
By JOSE PATINO GIRONA jpatino@tampatrib.com
Published: Jun 23, 2002
TAMPA - A homeowner shot dead an intruder who forced his way into the man's Northwest Tampa home early Saturday morning. Detectives are searching for a second man, an apparent accomplice, who fled the scene.
Ramon Lopez, of 3909 W. Crawford St., shot and killed a man who entered his home just before 1 a.m. Lopez hasn't been charged, and the dead man had not been identified as of Saturday afternoon. The case remains under investigation, said Lt. Harold Winsett, Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office spokesman.
The police related this version of events, based on statements from witnesses.
About 12:50 a.m., Lopez and three or four guests had finished watching a movie at his home, Winsett said. After the guests walked out and began walking toward their vehicles, two masked men entered Lopez's fenced yard.
The guests didn't see where the two men came from.
The men, armed with handguns, advanced toward the house and forced the guests to stand under the carport.
Lopez was inside the house. He heard the commotion, went into a bedroom and grabbed two handguns.
As Lopez walked out of the bedroom, one of the armed intruders entered the house. The intruder saw Lopez and approached him with a gun. Lopez shot the man several times without the intruder returning fire, Winsett said.
The other gunman, who was wearing a pink bandanna over his face, ran from the scene. He had stayed in the yard while the first man entered Lopez's home.
Police said they didn't know whether the second gunman got into a vehicle and drove off or whether he fled on foot. Detectives have no description of the at-large gunman.
Police don't know what the gunmen's motives were, Winsett said. It also isn't clear whether Lopez knew the intruders before this incident, Winsett said.
Police confirmed they recovered a handgun from Lopez's house that apparently belonged to the the dead man.
Lopez and the guests were unharmed.
Lopez, 30, wasn't available for comment Saturday.
Records show Lopez has a concealed weapons permit.
A neighbor in the area, a working-class neighborhood just west of Dale Mabry Highway, said Lopez is a hard worker. Several years ago, Lopez moved into a corner lot in the neighborhood and has improved the home, the neighbor said. Reporter Jose Patino Girona can be reached at (813) 657-4534.
http://tampatrib.com/FloridaMetro/MGAA2RS8S2D.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878