Pasadena double murder...

[stevie_d_64]

http://www.khou.com/topstories/stories/ ... a3f87.html

There is something about this tragedy that bothers me somewhat...

The location...

The similarity to other burglaries in our area...Suspects descriptions, items stolen, method of entry, etc etc...

All of which that have been reported by the media is certainly unsubstanciated, and we'll probably not get the whole story anyway, unless they catch the murderers and you get lucky to get on that jury...

But something deep down keeps smacking me upside my head about this...

Dispite the utterly stupid things Joe Horn said to the dispatcher that day...I really think he might have got it right...

Is what some may think "Enough is Enough", is that a message needing to be nurtured by the citizenry in general...Not just some of us, either publically or privately?

I don't want to encourage a whole re-hashing of the Joe Horn incident, but there seems to be a larger issue, that might need to be kicked around here...And we do that very well in this forum...

I think the issue of, "does the knowledge (by the criminal community) of an armed citizenry in this country, state, city and suburb, really deter or cause hesitation on their part to commit criminal acts like this anymore???"

I know other parts of the country are more condusive and attractive to criminals, but our area seems to have strings of criminal incidents that defy the ratios and other evidence of a very knowledgable, trained and law-abiding community to stand up to these types of people and make our area less attractive to criminal activity...

Thoughts???

[seamusTX]

If the story is correct (big if), the criminals stole multiple firearms. That means the homeowners were capable of defending themselves, but didn't. Two logical explanations of this are that the criminals knew the victims or gained entry by deceit. Both scenarios are pretty common.

I think the knowledge that potential victims may be armed is a deterrent in the statistical sense, but there are still plenty of brain-damaged and drug-addled criminals who can't think beyond the next ten seconds.

- Jim

[Venus Pax]

I think the knowledge that potential victims may be armed is a deterrent in the statistical sense, but there are still plenty of brain-damaged and drug-addled criminals who can't think beyond the next ten seconds.

- Jim

Criminals commit crimes for various reasons. I had a student one year that "had some friends" that he reported would break into the homes of armed people for the challenge. Some people enjoy the criminal lifestyle, and there really isn't much you can do, other than protect yourself and your home.

I do think that armed households are a deterrent to some. I think crime would be much more frequent and brutal in our region if it weren't for armed citizens willing to resist.

[stevie_d_64]

I'll take it a bit further...

I think you two illustrated some very good points...

I also believe (as Jim said) that criminals are generally still afraid of coming into contact with folks like us...But I believe there is a growing faction of thought processes out there in the criminal community that look to do a little more research into potential victims, and how to best exploit any weaknesses and to balance their own abilities and courage to commit more serious crimes like this one here in Pasadena...

Based simply on the potential of the score...

I am seeing that an armed populace is balancing itself out against the tenacity, and resourcefullness of the criminal community as a whole...

Meaning that I believe the fear factor, and detterent effect of law abiding citizens who carry firearms and or possess guns in the home is being pushed back more and more...

Just my opinion...

[yerasimos]

Maybe the criminal element is learning more efficient victim selection methods. They may be developing more effective heuristics for filtering for gun-ignorant, unarmed and hoplophobic people (easy sources of plunder), as well as casual gun owners (easy sources of weapons), while avoiding direct or intentional engagements with those (such as CHLers, off-duty LE or military, MMA types, other hardened criminals) who are more likely to be aware and possess tactical acumen, skills, and weapons, and mount an effective defense/counterattack. This could be due to more effective behavior observation and evaluation, and to a lesser extent, observing people's mode of dress.

Possibly some portions of the criminal element are learning greater patience to surveil their victims more effectively and attacking when the victims are least likely to mount an effective defense (armed or not).

Surely the criminals have figured out that just because someone has a safe full of guns does not mean that individual has the ability, willingness and opportunity to use them.

Stevie, I am not sure whether these ideas fit your ideas, but they may be worth considering.

[HerbM]

Shall issue CHL, for instance, typically drops violent crime a couple of points in a state that adopts it (and practically eliminates rampage murders outside of gun free zones, something like in proportion to the number of CHL.

But 2-3% off violent crime isn't much, especially IF you, or someone you know, become the target victim.

It helps overall but there is still crime out there of course -- most of it in fact.

One thing to consider: What about criminals who can Google and who are smart enough to track people down? Probably not many but there are bound to be a few. Likely a criminal could find a forum on any hobby you can imagine, e.g., photography or something else with expensive toys.

Who would want to be the guy who admits to not doing everything he can to protect himself and his family? Or who describes too carefully those measure?

[seamusTX]

What about criminals who can Google and who are smart enough to track people down? Probably not many but there are bound to be a few.

Stalkers use that kind of information.

Other criminals who are smart enough are more likely to engage in scams and identity theft. Armed robbery is a dangerous and not very rewarding career choice.

I have read about quite a few robberies that were based on plain old gossip. One took place a few blocks from my house and always stuck in my mind.

- Jim

[Venus Pax]

What about criminals who can Google and who are smart enough to track people down? Probably not many but there are bound to be a few.

Stalkers use that kind of information.

Other criminals who are smart enough are more likely to engage in scams and identity theft. Armed robbery is a dangerous and not very rewarding career choice.

I have read about quite a few robberies that were based on plain old gossip. One took place a few blocks from my house and always stuck in my mind.

- Jim

My mother worked for a police dept in a neighboring town when I was growing up. It wasn't uncommon for people's homes to be burglarized simply b/c word got around that they were going out of town on a given weekend. I've learned to be selective in who I reveal my plans to.

[seamusTX]

When we lived in Illinois, we had a garage burglary while we were on vacation. We had arranged for a neighbor kid to shovel the snow, take in the mail, etc. I always suspected that word got around.

It's fairly common for word to get around that someone, usually an elderly person, has a stash of cash, leading to a home invasion.

- Jim

[OverEasy]

My .02,
I think many crimes are by people known to the victim. I would like to know if any records are available with this info (perp and victim NOT strangers). I have heard of several thefts that were pulled off by "blacksheep" relatives, coworkers, ex boyfriends etc.
In my area we recently had a store robbed by some local guys who had been customers.

Beyond that is the 'friend of a friend' thing that was mentioned. The perp doesn't know the victim, but he knows the neighbor of the victim who has mentioned, "Oh I'm feeding Joe's dog and picking up his mail while he's out of town".

From what I've heard on TV, inmates say thier worst fear is an armed homeowner. I think they are learning to be more careful. Out here where I live, they don't break in at night when people are home asleep, they break in during the day while everyone is gone to work/school/shopping.

Regards, OE

[seamusTX]

There is no authoritative database of crime perpetrator and victim information, but the FBI has many reports that show that perpetrators frequently know their victims. For homicide, it is certain that more than half of homicides involve people who know each other, whether they are spouses, family members, feuding neighbors, gang rivals, drug dealers and their customers, etc.

It's always fun to poke around here in your spare time: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

- Jim

[HerbM]

There is no authoritative database of crime perpetrator and victim information, but the FBI has many reports that show that perpetrators frequently know their victims. For homicide, it is certain that more than half of homicides involve people who know each other, whether they are spouses, family members, feuding neighbors, gang rivals, drug dealers and their customers, etc.

It's always fun to poke around here in your spare time: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

- Jim

And remember when you hear some gun ban statistic about how you are supposedly more likely to be shot or killed by someone you know that Acquaintance in several (bogus) studies and typical stats includes things like:

drug dealer and customer
working 'girl/boy' and customer (or pimp)
taxi driver and FIRST TIME fair
customer in a store then robbing it
rival gang members

Yes, all acquaintances, even if they aren't part of your 'inner circle'.

[stevie_d_64]

Maybe the criminal element is learning more efficient victim selection methods. They may be developing more effective heuristics for filtering for gun-ignorant, unarmed and hoplophobic people (easy sources of plunder), as well as casual gun owners (easy sources of weapons), while avoiding direct or intentional engagements with those (such as CHLers, off-duty LE or military, MMA types, other hardened criminals) who are more likely to be aware and possess tactical acumen, skills, and weapons, and mount an effective defense/counterattack. This could be due to more effective behavior observation and evaluation, and to a lesser extent, observing people's mode of dress.

Possibly some portions of the criminal element are learning greater patience to surveil their victims more effectively and attacking when the victims are least likely to mount an effective defense (armed or not).

Surely the criminals have figured out that just because someone has a safe full of guns does not mean that individual has the ability, willingness and opportunity to use them.

Stevie, I am not sure whether these ideas fit your ideas, but they may be worth considering.

You and I are on the same page!

The only issue that is left, is there anything more we can do about it, other than do our best to be good ambassadors to the issue of effective self-defense methodology and grow the ranks to unbalance the scales and tip it back into our favor...

I know this is generally a horrible discussion to have, but I believe it is necessary to see what we all think about this...

For the most part we are doing fine, but like I said, I am all in favor of tipping the scale in our favor again...

[yerasimos]

The only issue that is left, is there anything more we can do about it, other than do our best to be good ambassadors to the issue of effective self-defense methodology and grow the ranks to unbalance the scales and tip it back into our favor...

I know this is generally a horrible discussion to have, but I believe it is necessary to see what we all think about this...

For the most part we are doing fine, but like I said, I am all in favor of tipping the scale in our favor again...

Agreed in principle. In general, among pro-gun or anti-gun people, emphasizing awareness and tactics---recognizing and avoiding danger---can be politically neutral, and is required whether or not one chooses to move on to weapons and related skills.

Modifying Taco Bell’s “Think outside the bun� advertising jingle, we must continue to “Think beyond the gun.�

Readdressing the idea of "higher quality" criminals, here are a few factors to keep in mind:

Incarceration: Separating convicted criminals from the rest of society may help in the short run, but this has a side effect of concentrating criminals together where they can exchange ideas, train, acquire fighting experience, form alliances/gangs and otherwise evolve to become more dangerous. As the prisons are nearly overflowing with violent offenders as well as those imprisoned for snarls such as child support non-compliance and non-violent drug offenses, eventually some violent offenders get released---frequently hardened and peer-educated, but unrehabilitated---to make room for various new arrivals.

Mixed martial arts (MMA): Televised MMA competitions such as the UFC and IFL, as well as shows such as The Ultimate Fighter and videos on sites such as YouTube, demonstrate some of the most effective, peer-reviewed unarmed fighting techniques to anyone who has access to a television or the Internet. Furthermore, instruction in MMA and its ancestor combat sports is readily available in major cities as well as outlying areas. While criminals generally prefer to use some type of weapon and/or numerical superiority to obtain compliance from their victims, a criminal with rudimentary training in MMA or combat striking or grappling systems can pose a serious close-range problem for someone armed with a handgun.

GWOT: The USA’s military is spread thin by the continuing military engagements in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere. To bolster staffing and backfill casualties, recruiters have become more aggressive, even to the point of getting people with non-trivial criminal records signed up to serve in the military, where they train with and have access to weapons, and may acquire combat experience overseas. This is in addition to the gang elements which have been present in the military since at least the early 1990s, if not earlier, and have been active overseas. Eventually these criminals and gang members serving in uniform will return---hardened by training and warfare---from their overseas service, and some will resume their criminal behavior here. In addition, we can expect a fraction of the able-bodied, combat-experienced personnel returning from overseas to have difficulty readjusting to post-military life, and a subset of these people may also resort to criminal or violent behavior.

All combined, we may encounter a more cunning, better trained brand of criminal than in years past.

There may not be much a single individual can do to directly improve other people's readiness and preparation and skew large scale statistics one way or another---but there is usually plenty than an individual can do to improve his/her own readiness and preparation.