More reason to leave Mass for NH

[CNHT]

The ability to defend oneself and one's property is an essential basic right!


Fighting back or breaking the law?
Eagle-Tribune

A fed-up liquor store owner pulls a gun on a shoplifter. A cab driver shoots the man who just robbed him in the back as he runs away. A decorated U.S. Marine fires a warning shot at a crowd gathered - again - outside his bedroom window.

It smacks of vigilante justice. And it's happening here in the Merrimack Valley.

But why? What is it that takes the average Joe and turns him into the avenger?

Webster's defines a vigilante as a person who takes law enforcement into his own hands. But defining the forces driving vigilantism is more difficult. They vary depending on whom you ask.

Ask crime experts and they say it's a distrust or impatience with police and the court system.

Others say television dramas and their speedy resolution of crime are the driving force.

And those who've personally fought back deny being vigilantes. They say they were just protecting themselves.

Why they fought back

Daniel Cotnoir of Lawrence was acquitted of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and firearm charges after an incident outside his Lawrence home in 2005. Cotnoir had hoped to fire just a warning shot into the crowd, which repeatedly gathered in a parking lot underneath his bedroom window. But bullet fragments ricocheted off the pavement, injuring two people.

Cotnoir strongly refutes that his actions were those of a vigilante, stressing he called police twice before he fired.

"It's self-protection," he says. "You have the right to protect yourself and your loved ones ... your family deserves some peace and quiet."

Vipul Patel says he also has a right to protect his property. He got a gun - and a bullet-proof vest - several years ago after one of his stores in Haverhill was robbed at gunpoint. He now owns Broadway Liquors in Lawrence, where he stands behind the counter wearing both.

Two months ago, he detained a shoplifter only to learn later the man was carrying a knife. So when another shoplifter struck three weeks ago, he felt he had no choice but to pull the gun. He pointed the gun at the shoplifter until police arrived.

"This, I cannot replace," he explained, thumping his chest with his hand. "We have to protect ourself."

John Ragonese doesn't think of himself as a vigilante either. When his Manchester, N.H., supermarket was held up on Jan. 2, the 78-year-old quickly grabbed a metal baseball bat and chased away two robbers.

He said he was protecting his property and his "hunny bunny," his wife of 52 years, Margaret Ragonese, a Lawrence native.

A Navy veteran, Ragonese says he lived through three wars: World War II, Korea and Vietnam. There was no way two thugs with baseball bats were going to get to his wife.

"I was just worried they would hurt her ... I didn't care what they did to me," Ragonese says.

The rationale

Patel realizes police are busy and cannot always respond immediately to a theft report or spend their entire shift chasing down a petty shoplifter. This is why he tries to detain any shoplifters he catches - because he knows police aren't likely to find them once they leave his store.

Even worse, though, is what happens after the shoplifters are caught and arrested, Patel says. Often, little happens when they go to court beyond having to pay a small fine.

"Then they're out and do more crimes," Patel complains.

The liquor store owner isn't the only one frustrated by the prevalence of repeat offenders. When an ordinary citizens decide to retaliate against a criminal, their defense is often, "They didn't want this person to do this to anyone else," says Regina Faticanti, a criminal justice professor at Northern Essex Community College.

She believes those who commit vigilante acts often do so because they feel police are not being responsive to their individual needs.

But part of the problem is simply a lack of communication between police and the victims they are trying to help, according to Faticanti.

For example, if you are a victim of a housebreak, detectives will investigate the crime. But they will likely not give you the details of their work until they make an arrest, fearing they'll jeopardize the case. And they may also be looking into a larger crime at the same time.

"That's the nature of police. They are very close-mouthed," Faticanti says. "Law enforcement is secretive when they investigate a crime, and that's the misunderstood concept between the public and the police. Because the police aren't saying we have a suspect, the public thinks they don't."

For that reason, Faticanti says, the roots of vigilante justice are often found in silence.

"When you see vigilantism, you see a public that's believing the people who are supposed to be protecting them are not doing their job," she says. "But I believe law enforcement wants to solve crime as much as we want it solved."

Television also warps views of the justice system, says Sheriff Frank Cousins, who oversees 577 employees and 2,000 Essex County inmates. He points to the popular crime drama "Law and Order," where on each episode a crime is committed, investigated and a trial is concluded.

"In real life, it doesn't happen that way," Cousins says. "As we both know, the judicial process is slow. But people look for instant relief, and I think that's what drives this kind of behavior."

"My message to people is to take a breath and think about what you're doing," Cousins says.

Advice and consequences

Rachid Succar, owner of Oasis Gas and Mini Mart in Windham, N.H., said his store was broken into Jan. 29. He thinks the robbers had been in the store before, because they knew right where to go.

"This time they were going for it," he said, pointing out the broken locks on the door.

After breaking the camera system, they made off with between $2,500 and $2,700 from the office.

Had he been there, he would have pulled out the big black bat, nicknamed "The Persuader," that he keeps behind his counter.

"Not if they had a gun though," he said. "That wouldn't be worth it."

Lawrence police Chief John Romero says those who commit vigilante acts will likely face criminal charges. For example, late last month, a Lawrence cab driver, after he was robbed at knifepoint, took a gun and shot the robber in the back as he ran away. The cabbie, Bienvenido Rodriguez, was charged with assault with intent to commit murder.

Romero explains it is legal to use a weapon "to fend off an attacker who is using deadly force against you." But you cannot use a weapon after the fact, after the threat of harm has been removed.

"The law is quite clear on this," he says.

Patel, for one, has learned his lesson from the charges filed against the cab driver. He plans on putting away his gun and never using it again. Ironically, he hadn't wanted to use it in the first place.

"I don't even want to carry a gun," he said. "I don't want to hurt nobody. I don't want to be in trouble myself."

Local police say in cases of rape or kidnapping, people should yell and try to fight back.

But they say not to fight back in cases like store robberies or purse snatchings. The chance of getting hurt, or even killed, is too high, police said.

Their advice? Let them handle it.

"We can replace cars and things," Windham, N.H., police Chief Gerald Lewis said. "We can't replace people."

Store owners need to have plans in place for dealing with such crimes, Atkinson, N.H., police Lt. William Baldwin said. Surveillance cameras and panic buttons help police respond faster and catch the criminal, he said.

But on the street, a person who is being robbed should give over his or her wallet, run and call police.

"In no way, shape or form would I recommend people fight the perpetrators," Baldwin said. "One, you could get hurt, and two, the situation could escalate further."

Danielle Byron of Atkinson, N.H., and Jenn Sylvester of Plaistow, N.H., work together on second shift from 4 p.m. to midnight together at Cumberland Farms in Plaistow.

"A life is more valuable. I'd rather have them take the entire store on its foundation," Byron said.

Sylvester agreed, pointing to an incident last week when she saw a teenager steal a 30-pack of beer. Rather than stopping him herself, she let the teen walk out of the store, wrote down his license plate number and called the police.

The glamour of it all

Right or wrong, legal or not, the general public is enamored with vigilantes.

Today, some eight months after his trial, Cotnoir says he is still getting handshakes and "atta boys" from local residents. Whether he's at the local VFW or shopping at the grocery store, "people are always congratulating me. ... People I don't know recognize me and they come over and shake my hand."

"The American public, overall, is fed up with the lawlessness," he says.

Patel also hears from his customers that they think he did the "right thing."

"You done good job," he says they tell him.

For Ragonese, his actions earned him and his wife national acclaim. Late-night talk-show host Jay Leno invited the Ragoneses to be on the show and talk about the incident.

"All the TV stations were calling us. ... And people are still coming in raving about it," Ragonese says.

Staff writers Jessica Benson, Courtney Paquette, Meghan Carey and Cyra Master contributed to this report.

[LiveFree]

Did anyone else notice the general negative attitude towards self defense here?  I got the impression here that the writer thinks that people should just learn to be good little victims.  Screw that!

Self defense is the first human right.  Inherent to your very life is the right to defend and preserve it, no matter what.

[aries]

"Webster's defines a vigilante as a person who takes law enforcement into his own hands. But defining the forces driving vigilantism is more difficult. They vary depending on whom you ask."

Self defense isn't law enforcement.

This article seems to be a roundabout argument against a straw man that the author set up by comparing self defense to law enforcement. If police were required and expected to be - in a Liquor store, in a taxi cab, and in a bedroom, ready to enforce the law, and were not fulfilling that duty, then it would be vigilante justice.

[thewoz]

Everyone should be pack'n a CW (Concealed Weapon) and be willing to use it for self defense.  Take a look at Kennesaw, GA and that city's statistics on violent crime!  There are cities and town that passed mandatory carry laws.  If criminal even think that you are carrying, and that lethal means may be used in self-defense there would be a lot less crime.  Everyone needs to keep in mind that these criminals are looking for an easy mark and are simple bullies.  I do have to admit, gangs have automatic weapons which have been banned from the general public for decades.  Even my Red Hawk is no match for an auto-loader.

                                                               GUN OWNERSHIP MANDATORY IN KENNESAW, GEORGIA

                                                           Crime Rate Plummets - Why Doesn't The Media Visit Kennesaw?

"The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes. The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982. And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998. With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you? The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence. The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don't have a death wish. There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired."


Tom WOZ

[Pat McCotter]

Straight from the town of Kennesaw.


Crime Statistics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Kennesaw 1981 (Year Before Gun Law Passed)
Population: 5,242
Total Part 1 Crimes: (per 100,000 pop): 4,332

City of Kennesaw 2005 
Population: 28,189
Total Part 1 Crimes (per 100,000): 2,027     -7% from 2004

U.S. Average 2005
Total Part 1 Crimes per 100,000: 3,899

Summary: Although the population of the City of Kennesaw and surrounding area has increased dramatically since 1981, on a per capita basis crimes rates were actually lower in 2005 than in 1981.

Note: To control for population differences and make comparisons between jurisdictions more accurate and meaningful, index crimes are reported at the rate per 100,000 persons.

Part 1 crimes consist of: Murder, Non-Negligent Manslaughter, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Larceny, Auto Theft and Arson.



And the actual ordinance falls in the civil emergencies section of their code (unlike New Orleans)
Chapter 34 CIVIL EMERGENCIES

ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL

Sec. 34-1. Heads of households to maintain firearms.
(a)   In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefor.
(b)   Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
(Code 1986, ? 4-3-10)

Sec. 34-2. Use of firearms.
No person shall fire a gun, pistol or other firearm in the city, except in the defense of person or property, and except peace officers or military forces of this state or the United States, in the discharge of official duties.
(Code 1986, ? 11-1-4)