Homeowners armed with rifles and body armor patrol their neighborhood

[HCM]

Homeowners armed with rifles, body armor and marked vehicles patrol their neighborhoods


SAN ANTONIO – As they patrol their Northwest Bexar County neighborhoods, a group of armed homeowners is putting criminals on notice.
A former army infantryman who lives in the Cobblestone neighborhood off Culebra Road started the Crime Deterrence Unit there in September. A number of car break-ins and a shooting near his home led to the group’s formation. He asked to go by only his first name, Bryan.
“You gotta be nuts to come to Cobblestone and think you’re going to steal stuff, honestly,” Bryan said.
Since September, he’s recruited 20-plus volunteers and expanded to 10 more neighborhoods and six businesses in the area.

http://news4sanantonio.com/news/local/homeowners-armed-with-rifles-body-armor-and-marked-vehicles-patrol-their-neighborhoods


This area this group is operating in is unincorporated Bexar county. The Bexar County Sheriffs Office, which patrols this area is competent but a bit thin on the ground and understaffed given how development has increased population density in these areas the past few years. The primary issues being day time burglaries and other property crime.

[Gray222]

Good for them.

[StraitR]

Not being from a high crime area, I can only support the idea and initiative of those looking to make their neighborhood safer. That said, I hope Bryan and the CDU have the correct mindset and motivation. They will "run into" someone eventually, and that interaction along with every statement and action leading up to it will be highly scrutinized. Quotes like the one below give me pause.

"Lord help you if we run into you," Bryan said. "Hopefully, if you’re lucky, the cops will run into you before we will."

[TGS]

"Lord help you if we run into you," Bryan said. "Hopefully, if you’re lucky, the cops will run into you before we will."

....and that's the kind of shit that's on record and will bite you in the ass one day.....

[Gray222]

"Lord help you if we run into you," Bryan said. "Hopefully, if you’re lucky, the cops will run into you before we will."

....and that's the kind of shit that's on record and will bite you in the ass one day.....

Clearly not one of those persons is a lawyer or consulted a lawyer.

https://pics.me.me/idontlike-making-plans-for-the-day-because-then-the-word-3529843.png

[RevolverRob]

Crime Deterrence Unit

I'll pass on living in that neighborhood.

Last winter, I was home visiting my folks and did some suspension work on the car. Got done, took the car down a local twisty road to check for clunks, bumps, etc. I was driving fairly aggressively in an effort to try to rattle something loose. In the process, I passed the marked neighborhood watch patrol car, complete with flashing yellow light, and an over-eager volunteer at the wheel. To my surprise this car started following me while I was driving. I slowed, turned off the main road and went over some potholes and speed-bumps to check the suspension and was still being followed. At this point, confused, I decided to simply drive back to my parents' house.

The vehicle followed me all the way there. And that was when I confronted the eager beaver behind the wheel, after parking and exiting my car.

"Can I help you?"

"You were speeding! I'm waiting for the cops to show up to write you a ticket."

Me, staring confused at the woman behind the wheel of this vehicle, "Ma'am that isn't how it works."

"Well, if the cops don't come, I'm going to write you a summons."

"Uhh...a summons for what and on whose authority?"

"Neighborhood Watch's authority! You can't go speeding around our neighborhood! That's hoodlumism and we don't have it here. Now you get back in your car and wait for the police!"

Me staring, still confused, "Have a nice night ma'am."

I turned around and started for the house. Then she got out of the patrol vehicle and started to chase after me. But I turned back and glared at her and she thought better of it.

___

Why the fuck would someone do these things? After 20 minutes of the cops not showing up, idling in front of the house, she finally left. I did, however, get a hastily written chastising note under my windshield wiper (my "summons", maybe?). I filed that one away in the pile of useless passive-aggressive shit stupid people do, when they don't have better things to do. I look back on it and laugh now, but if that eager-beaver had been a bit more eager, I might have been staring down the barrel of someone's gun. Or worse...had them staring down the barrel of mine.

FWIW, after this incident my parents went to the local Neighborhood Watch meeting and instituted a vote. The watch is now disbanded. That's how you lose your nosy neighboring privileges folks...

[Duces Tecum]

Trayvon? Oh, haven't we seen this movie before, Honey?

[Gray222]

Trayvon? Oh, haven't we seen this movie before, Honey?

I mean, sure Zimmerman's life was ruined but he's alive and free, other guy is dead in a box.

[HCM]

I'll pass on living in that neighborhood.

Last winter, I was home visiting my folks and did some suspension work on the car. Got done, took the car down a local twisty road to check for clunks, bumps, etc. I was driving fairly aggressively in an effort to try to rattle something loose. In the process, I passed the marked neighborhood watch patrol car, complete with flashing yellow light, and an over-eager volunteer at the wheel. To my surprise this car started following me while I was driving. I slowed, turned off the main road and went over some potholes and speed-bumps to check the suspension and was still being followed. At this point, confused, I decided to simply drive back to my parents' house.

The vehicle followed me all the way there. And that was when I confronted the eager beaver behind the wheel, after parking and exiting my car.

"Can I help you?"

"You were speeding! I'm waiting for the cops to show up to write you a ticket."

Me, staring confused at the woman behind the wheel of this vehicle, "Ma'am that isn't how it works."

"Well, if the cops don't come, I'm going to write you a summons."

"Uhh...a summons for what and on whose authority?"

"Neighborhood Watch's authority! You can't go speeding around our neighborhood! That's hoodlumism and we don't have it here. Now you get back in your car and wait for the police!"

Me staring, still confused, "Have a nice night ma'am."

I turned around and started for the house. Then she got out of the patrol vehicle and started to chase after me. But I turned back and glared at her and she thought better of it.

___

Why the fuck would someone do these things? After 20 minutes of the cops not showing up, idling in front of the house, she finally left. I did, however, get a hastily written chastising note under my windshield wiper (my "summons", maybe?). I filed that one away in the pile of useless passive-aggressive shit stupid people do, when they don't have better things to do. I look back on it and laugh now, but if that eager-beaver had been a bit more eager, I might have been staring down the barrel of someone's gun. Or worse...had them staring down the barrel of mine.

FWIW, after this incident my parents went to the local Neighborhood Watch meeting and instituted a vote. The watch is now disbanded. That's how you lose your nosy neighboring privileges folks...

I would have called the real cops just to squash that shit ASAP.

As for the guys in the article I think they mean well but I don't see it ending well or being effective.

They are homeowners and thus likely only patrolling when most people are off work. The main issues in their area are daytime burglaries and midnight to dawn vehicle thefts and break ins, times when these guys are likely at work or asleep.

These guys can only citizens arrest for felonies. It is rare to catch burglars etc in the act. Many who do get caught, are snagged for traffic offenses and misdemeanors which then lead to evidence of their other activities.

[modrecoil]

"Lord help you if we run into you," Bryan said. "Hopefully, if you’re lucky, the cops will run into you before we will."

....and that's the kind of shit that's on record and will bite you in the ass one day.....
Then there's their web site with the Punisher logo background.

They proudly cite their training that "...includes training in various areas, to include weapons training, i.e. marksmanship, transitioning and live fire drills, as well as tactical handcuffing, felony arrest techniques and classes on Title I Article 14 and Title II, Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code."

How about first aid, law, conflict resolution, communication, etc.? I know, boooring.

Maybe the reason nothing has gone sideways yet - like some dummy putting holes in a teenager stealing an iPhone from an unlocked car - is because they're playing dress-up in very upscale gated communities. Not impressed. I don't know if anyone remembers the Guardian Angels but I wonder how many of these operators would disarm, put on a red beret and jackets and ride the NYC subway in the 80s. Not many, I bet.

Edit: My response to a non-LE guy in body armor walking down my street with a rifle in low ready would not be positive. Code Orange all the way.

[Ed L]

I mean, sure Zimmerman's life was ruined but he's alive and free, other guy is dead in a box.

I don't know if you meant that in jest, but I think many of us agree that Zimmerman's life would have been better if he remained in the vehicle.

To quote Tom Givens: "'In just about every single instance I know of where a permit holder or other lawfully armed citizen was charged after a shooting, he went outside his home or vehicle to confront someone "suspicious" or involved in some petty behavior like vandalism. You will get all the heartache you need in this world without going out of your way to get more."

It is one thing to defend your own home. But if you go out looking for criminals--unless you do so as a reserve police officer--the end result may be a legal mess.

[Lester Polfus]

If I lived in that neighborhood and one of those guys cranked off a rifle round that smoked one of my family members, I'd get a bit red about that.

[blues]

The Guardian Angels. I haven't thought about those clowns in many a year. Lotta wannabes looking for a reason to engage but I suppose they probably made a little old lady or two feel safer on the subway coming home at night. It was like a giant PR campaign for Curtis Sliwa and his wife at the time.

[modrecoil]

Sliwa's sleaziness and self-promotion nonsense aside, it takes balls to ride the 1 Line from midtown to Van Cortland all night without body armor, rifle or badge. At least when I was growing up there. Probably still does.

[hufnagel]

I think these guys are somewhere between the Guardian Angels and Berhard Geotz. I guess we'll have to wait and see which way that pendulum swings.

[Gray222]

I don't know if you meant that in jest, but I think many of us agree that Zimmerman's life would have been better if he remained in the vehicle.

To quote Tom Givens: "'In just about every single instance I know of where a permit holder or other lawfully armed citizen was charged after a shooting, he went outside his home or vehicle to confront someone "suspicious" or involved in some petty behavior like vandalism. You will get all the heartache you need in this world without going out of your way to get more."

It is one thing to defend your own home. But if you go out looking for criminals--unless you do so as a reserve police officer--the end result may be a legal mess.

We can agree that Zimmerman went too far, he didn't see a felony occur. Until then yeah stay in your car.

But whose dead and whose free after everything was said and done? It doesn't pay to be a criminal in any way here.

[blues]

Sliwa's sleaziness and self-promotion nonsense aside, it takes balls to ride the 1 Line from midtown to Van Cortland all night without body armor, rifle or badge. At least when I was growing up there. Probably still does.

What can go wrong on the subway? I met my future wife on the J train at the Centre St. station by the courts and Federal Plaza.

You make a point...but to digress a moment, the bravest person I ever met in regard to the subway was a blind admin assistant in our LE office who rode the subway solo every day from Brooklyn to Federal Plaza without a dog or companion of any sort. She was a great inspiration and had more guts than the lot of us combined imho.

[HCM]

FYI what they are doing is illegal in TX. Basically, under section 1702 of the TX occupations code you must meet the training and license requirements under section 1702 to provide security service REGARDLESS of whether you are a volunteer or you are paid. ( being a licensed peace officer in TX also meets the requirements).

In fact there have been bills in the TX legislature specifically seeking to carve out an exemption to section 1702 requirements to allow for volunteer security at churches to be armed based solely on a CHL/LTC.

A good explanation can be found here: http://www.lapinlawtx.com/firearms-blog/armed-volunteer-security-officers-in-places-of-worship



The legislative history of the Act strongly suggests that the term “employ,” is to be given broad meaning; that is, the term is to be understood expansively, to encompass voluntary associations of unpaid persons in places of worship, and is not to be read narrowly to mean only an employer who engages the services of an employee for compensation.

[Stephanie B]

"Lord help you if we run into you," Bryan said. "Hopefully, if you’re lucky, the cops will run into you before we will."

....and that's the kind of shit that's on record and will bite you in the ass one day.....

Criminal defense (and bankruptcy) lawyers gotta eat, too. :D

[RevolverRob]

We can agree that Zimmerman went too far, he didn't see a felony occur. Until then yeah stay in your car.

But whose dead and whose free after everything was said and done? It doesn't pay to be a criminal in any way here.

Sometimes I'm very confused by your overall logic. This is one of those times.

Both people would likely be alive and (presumably) free if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle that night. TM wasn't a choir boy, but he hadn't done anything wrong.

As someone who has been followed (not just the scenario above) to the point of harassment by overzealous neighborhood watch volunteers (as a teenager no less). I can commiserate with a desire to punch someone following you in the dark. Hell, as far as we know, TM never was a criminal, even when he punched GZ. He may have felt his life was in danger being followed by a strange dude in the dark and was acting in self defense. We'll never know, because as you so eloquently pointed out one of them is alive and the other is dead.

So, I'm having a hard time following the logic of your implications here. That somehow "bad guys" who die are getting their just desserts? Who is to know if they are "bad guys" or not in the absence of due process? That's problem with Neighborhood Watches...they frequently try to stand in for due process and assume that they are the good guys. In most instances they are at best a nuisance and at worst criminal. It's also the problem with labeling someone a criminal and it's why we, ostensibly, have a Constitution. No one is a criminal in this country until they are convicted. They may be a suspected criminal, hell they may have committed the very crimes you believe they did, but until they are convicted, they are not a criminal. Treating every person as a criminal is a genuine sign of the decline of our constitutional process.

[Gray222]

Sometimes I'm very confused by your overall logic. This is one of those times.

Both people would likely be alive and (presumably) free if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle that night. TM wasn't a choir boy, but he hadn't done anything wrong.

As someone who has been followed (not just the scenario above) to the point of harassment by overzealous neighborhood watch volunteers (as a teenager no less). I can commiserate with a desire to punch someone following you in the dark. Hell, as far as we know, TM never was a criminal, even when he punched GZ. He may have felt his life was in danger being followed by a strange dude in the dark and was acting in self defense. We'll never know, because as you so eloquently pointed out one of them is alive and the other is dead.

So, I'm having a hard time following the logic of your implications here. That somehow "bad guys" who die are getting their just desserts? Who is to know if they are "bad guys" or not in the absence of due process? That's problem with Neighborhood Watches...they frequently try to stand in for due process and assume that they are the good guys. In most instances they are at best a nuisance and at worst criminal. It's also the problem with labeling someone a criminal and it's why we, ostensibly, have a Constitution. No one is a criminal in this country until they are convicted. They may be a suspected criminal, hell they may have committed the very crimes you believe they did, but until they are convicted, they are not a criminal. Treating every person as a criminal is a genuine sign of the decline of our constitutional process.

I think you extrapolated what you wanted out of my statements and regardless of what I post your judgement of me isn't going to change.

TM wasn't a saint and he didn't have to feloniously attack a man who wasn't doing him any harm. Just like Zimmerman didnt have to get out of his car.

But both of those things happened so less playing the what if game and more accepting the fact that one is dead and one is free due to both of their actions.

[Kukuforguns]

FYI what they are doing is illegal in TX. Basically, under section 1702 of the TX occupations code you must meet the training and license requirements under section 1702 to provide security service REGARDLESS of whether you are a volunteer or you are paid. ( being a licensed peace officer in TX also meets the requirements).

In fact there have been bills in the TX legislature specifically seeking to carve out an exemption to section 1702 requirements to allow for volunteer security at churches to be armed based solely on a CHL/LTC.

A good explanation can be found here: http://www.lapinlawtx.com/firearms-blog/armed-volunteer-security-officers-in-places-of-worship
I'm not convinced that what the participants are doing is illegal. Section 1702 defines a personal protection offer and a security officer as follows:

Sec. 1702.202. PERSONAL PROTECTION OFFICER. An individual acts as a personal protection officer if the individual, while carrying a firearm, provides to another individual personal protection from bodily harm.
Sec. 1702.222. SECURITY OFFICER. An individual acts as a security officer for purposes of this chapter if the individual is:
(1) employed by a security services contractor or the security department of a private business; and
(2) employed to perform the duties of an alarm systems response runner who responds to the first signal of entry, a security guard, security watchman, security patrolman, armored car guard, or courier guard.
Based on my review of the comments made in the article linked by the OP, it does not appear the participants are providing another individual personal protection from harm. Nor are the participants employed by a security services contractor, etc. Rather, I concluded that the participants are attempting to: (1) discourage crime; and (2) be present in order to effectuate a citizen's arrest if a participant sees a felony being committed. Moreover, the participants are patrolling their own neighborhoods, and not foreign neighborhoods.

I'm not saying an aggressive prosecutor would never argue in favor of the interpretation HCM suggests. Nor am I saying I support the participants' actions.

[Kukuforguns]

I think you extrapolated what you wanted out of my statements and regardless of what I post your judgement of me isn't going to change.

TM wasn't a saint and he didn't have to feloniously attack a man who wasn't doing him any harm. Just like Zimmerman didnt have to get out of his car.

But both of those things happened so less playing the what if game and more accepting the fact that one is dead and one is free due to both of their actions.

I'm going to have to say that I did not take VM's statement to mean that TM deserved to die. He expressly stated it would have been better if GZ had stayed in his car. He didn't, stay in the car and his decision to follow TM was not a criminal act. The only evidence we have is that TM's attack on GZ was not reasonable and that GZ's use of lethal force was reasonable. TM died because of his actions and decisions. GZ's life is circling a toilet bowl because of his decisions.

[Gray222]

I'm going to have to say that I did not take VM's statement to mean that TM deserved to die. He expressly stated it would have been better if GZ had stayed in his car. He didn't, stay in the car and his decision to follow TM was not a criminal act. The only evidence we have is that TM's attack on GZ was not reasonable and that GZ's use of lethal force was reasonable. TM died because of his actions and decisions. GZ's life is circling a toilet bowl because of his decisions.

All of which are facts as determined in court.

[Cypher]

This is not going to end well except for the person who sues them for unlawful detainment.

[RevolverRob]

I think you extrapolated what you wanted out of my statements and regardless of what I post your judgement of me isn't going to change.

Contrary to what you've written here. I'm very flexible when it comes to changing my mind and judgement. I still don't have an understanding of your logic.



But both of those things happened so less playing the what if game and more accepting the fact that one is dead and one is free due to both of their actions.

So what's the relevance of this fact acceptance to this thread? See that's where I am disconnected from what you're saying. Someone brought up GZ in the context of an overzealous Neighborhood Watch and the consequences of this. And your response is, "One is alive and one is dead." - That doesn't compute, both would likely be alive and no one's life would be ruined if Mr. Neighborhood Watch had stayed home and watched Netflix that night. It's not even really a "what if" scenario; it's a logical conclusion given the situation and facts of the case. - So I return back to my question, what is the logic of pointing out one is alive and one is dead, in the context of Neighborhood Watches?

I really do not understand your point here, honestly. I'm trying to interpret it from your posts here, but it still doesn't make any sense.

The only thing that I know, for sure, given your posts in this thread is we fundamentally disagree on "Good for them.". Nothing about it is positive, in my opinion. Up to an including the arming of themselves for the stated purpose. I can give just a bit on the sense that they are taking personal responsibility for their safety, but they are doing so under the guise of justice and with a sense of purpose that is extremely misguided. Personal responsibility not only includes taking care of your own safety, but doing so responsibly. Nothing about what they are doing screams, "Responsible!" to me. Could be they never have an issue...great. But it's not a precedent now or in the past that I have agreed with and I won't support things of this nature. - So we disagree there.

But that aside, I'm still not sure how your comment re: GZ alive/TM dead relates to a Neighborhood Watch.

[Duces Tecum]

I mean, sure Zimmerman's life was ruined but he's alive and free, other guy is dead in a box.

You, sir, have a honed sense of dark humor. :)

[HCM]

I'm not convinced that what the participants are doing is illegal. Section 1702 defines a personal protection offer and a security officer as follows:

Based on my review of the comments made in the article linked by the OP, it does not appear the participants are providing another individual personal protection from harm. Nor are the participants employed by a security services contractor, etc. Rather, I concluded that the participants are attempting to: (1) discourage crime; and (2) be present in order to effectuate a citizen's arrest if a participant sees a felony being committed. Moreover, the participants are patrolling their own neighborhoods, and not foreign neighborhoods.

I'm not saying an aggressive prosecutor would never argue in favor of the interpretation HCM suggests. Nor am I saying I support the participants' actions.

In the original article it states they are having individual homeowners sign " guardianship" agreements so they are, in effect "contracting" with this group.

I had looked into this previously on behalf of a local church which wanted to have CHL holders as plainclothes armed security during services. There is an exception for religious groups but only for unarmed volunteer security.

In practice any plainclothes security in TX is considered a "personal protection officer" under 1702 not just bodyguards etc. under 1702 private security is either uniformed or "PPO" if not uniformed there is no other option.
For example most retail loss prevention are licensed as PPO's even when not armed. Regardless, in this instance the "volunteers" are driving marked vehicles and wearing clothing and body armor marked "CDU". That sounds an awful lot like uniforms to me.


My suspicion has always been the strict interpretation of 1702 has two basis: 1) historical issues with ranchers and. Political bosses etc maintaining groups of thugs and 2) ensuring off duty work for TX Pearce officers. Side jobs in uniform are a big thing here.

[Joe in PNG]

In the case of GZ and TM, it's best to learn from the mistakes of others.
GZ alive and TM in a box was not the best possible outcome for either of them.
Something went wrong in that interaction. We can, and should learn from that, then go and not do likewise.

Those lessons do apply in this situation of a neighborhood watch with the appearance of being a bit overzealous.

[Coyotesfan97]

Hers a summary of what happened from Stately McDaniel Manor.

"The first three updates In the Martin case have focused on background information relating to the criminal justice system. That information may be found in the SMM Trayvon Martin Case Archive. I’ll begin this article with a map of the area where events occurred, and explain the issues relating to self defense, including how the police tend to view it. I’ll refer back to the map as the article progresses."

https://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/2012/04/25/the-trayvon-martin-case-update-4-geography-and-narrative-analysis/


His archive of posts on the case.
https://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/category/courts-and-cops/the-trayvon-martin-case/

[Gray222]

Contrary to what you've written here. I'm very flexible when it comes to changing my mind and judgement. I still don't have an understanding of your logic.

So what's the relevance of this fact acceptance to this thread? See that's where I am disconnected from what you're saying. Someone brought up GZ in the context of an overzealous Neighborhood Watch and the consequences of this. And your response is, "One is alive and one is dead." - That doesn't compute, both would likely be alive and no one's life would be ruined if Mr. Neighborhood Watch had stayed home and watched Netflix that night. It's not even really a "what if" scenario; it's a logical conclusion given the situation and facts of the case. - So I return back to my question, what is the logic of pointing out one is alive and one is dead, in the context of Neighborhood Watches?

I really do not understand your point here, honestly. I'm trying to interpret it from your posts here, but it still doesn't make any sense.

The only thing that I know, for sure, given your posts in this thread is we fundamentally disagree on "Good for them.". Nothing about it is positive, in my opinion. Up to an including the arming of themselves for the stated purpose. I can give just a bit on the sense that they are taking personal responsibility for their safety, but they are doing so under the guise of justice and with a sense of purpose that is extremely misguided. Personal responsibility not only includes taking care of your own safety, but doing so responsibly. Nothing about what they are doing screams, "Responsible!" to me. Could be they never have an issue...great. But it's not a precedent now or in the past that I have agreed with and I won't support things of this nature. - So we disagree there.

But that aside, I'm still not sure how your comment re: GZ alive/TM dead relates to a Neighborhood Watch.

Let's give this a go...

"One is alive and one is dead." That is pretty self explanatory, is it not? Both men's actions resulted in the consequences that were televised. Both have culpability. One did not have to get out of his car, the other did not have to attack a random "crazy cracker" for absolutely no reason, pounding his head against the concrete. That is over and done with, settled history.

If Mr. Neighborhood Watch stayed home and watched netflix, not being out and about attempting to deter criminal activity, then maybe their neighbor would not have a television the next day to stay home and watch netflix on. This is America after all, right? We are allowed to watch out for our respective communities and take action if we see criminal activity, that is one of the self-reliance aspects of American life, which many have forgotten for some reason. Complacency maybe?

In your opinion having a neighborhood watch is not positive, ok, that is fine. You want to rely on the police to be proactive and stop criminals before they commit the crimes? I'll give you a little snippet into police work - that's not how it generally works. The crimes are usually committed, especially crimes like burglaries, numerous times, before the police are able to put together a pattern or just get lucky by being in a particular area in a particular time of the day. Deterrence of criminal activity is extremely better at stopping crime. What is deterrence? Being visible and being visible often. Criminals will not touch an area, street, or block with a ten foot pole if they see an officer sitting there, or an armed guard, or anyone who looks like they are going to take action against them if they decide to commit crimes.

A person who cares about their neighborhood and/or their community is going to be proactive in its defense. Specifically when there are known crimes occurring in a particular area. For all we know there were dozens of burglaries, robberies, assaults, theft from autos or whatnot in that area and that particular police department is not going to go out of their way and assign special patrols to that area. That person decides that they are going to go around in a neighborhood watch capacity, which has been an acceptable format since colonial times (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neighborhood_watch). Entities like the NCPC (http://www.ncpc.org/topics/home-and-neighborhood-safety/neighborhood-watch) and the NNW (https://www.nnw.org/our-history) have been around since the 70's and are widely utilized in many areas throughout the neighborhoods of America, hell, your particular area might even have one. So in terms of "precedent now or in the past" there is plenty of it, and it stems from the core fundamentals of the American way of life.

Furthermore, this is news because? There is a guy walking around in some sort of kit with a rifle and a radio and he isn't a LEO, and he's allowed to do it. That has to be news right!! That is a guy, or group of neighbors, that decided to do more for their community than other people would do for their communities. That should not be a point of ridicule, but a point of praise. Make my job easier, please, but make your community safer through your own involvement. LEO's can only do so much and a person who gives a damn about their own community or neighborhood, while being willing to take action accordingly is worth a dozen LEO's in that same area. They have a vested interested beyond that which a LEO has.

Especially now that this actually did make news and criminals read/listen to the news, guess where they won't be going now? Criminals are mostly lazy and they won't bother with a publicized area, especially if there are guys walking around legally with rifles patrolling their neighborhood.

I have no way of knowing if you are legitimately ignorant of keeping your community safe or if you are just arguing to argue because I decided to post something and it has been an enjoyable pass-time on PF to attack me each time I post something. I'll have to see what yours, and others, responses are to this.

[TGS]

Lots of good points being made in this thread.

At least in this region, the organized, uniformed, security-police style neighborhood watches and village public safety officers are usually viewed in a very unfavorable light by LE. The public safety guys are pretty much on the payroll for whichever organized crime element is in their neighborhood.

Back to the group in question.....no matter how righteous, legal, or well trained their group is, I would consider affiliation with the same to be completely untenable simply because of the public comments made by it's leadership thus far. Doing what they're doing is already hairy enough given the nature of their existence and the fact the individuals involved have zero top-cover whatsoever....I bet any legal CCW insurance would have an easy time justifying a denial of services, too.

[peterb]

Back to the group in question.....no matter how righteous, legal, or well trained their group is, I would consider affiliation with the same to be completely untenable simply because of the public comments made by it's leadership thus far.

They should have used the Crash Davis interview cliche technique: "We're just here to help keep our neighborhood safe and to look out for one another." Repeat with an earnest smile until the reporter gets bored and walks away.

[idahojess]

Along with the other disturbing "Lord help you" quote mentioned above, what the heck does this mean?:

"The other vehicle stopped by certain homes that have filled out paperwork with the group allowing volunteers to act as the homeowner, Bryan said."

Sounds like they are thinking that will allow them to utilize the castle doctrine. Great... that's going to work out well.

Does that mean they also get to go into other people's houses and sell their stuff for them?

[Joe in PNG]

Along with the other disturbing "Lord help you" quote mentioned above, what the heck does this mean?:
"The other vehicle stopped by certain homes that have filled out paperwork with the group allowing volunteers to act as the homeowner, Bryan said."
Sounds like they are thinking that will allow them to utilize the castle doctrine. Great... that's going to work out well.
Does that mean they also get to go into other people's houses and sell their stuff for them?

There's a whole lotta bad things right here. Anyone who signs this sort of thing is an idiot.

[Vinnie Bagadonuts]

"Lord help you if we run into you," Bryan said. "Hopefully, if you’re lucky, the cops will run into you before we will."

....and that's the kind of shit that's on record and will bite you in the ass one day.....

Bingo. In todays politically correct society thats the kind of statement that screams SUE ME!

[secondstoryguy]

I know the maps show the Rio Grande river as the border in Texas but it's actually right around San Antonio...it's not surprising that people are getting frustrated with property crime.

[Zincwarrior]

Then there's their web site with the Punisher logo background.

They proudly cite their training that "...includes training in various areas, to include weapons training, i.e. marksmanship, transitioning and live fire drills, as well as tactical handcuffing, felony arrest techniques and classes on Title I Article 14 and Title II, Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code."

How about first aid, law, conflict resolution, communication, etc.? I know, boooring.

Maybe the reason nothing has gone sideways yet - like some dummy putting holes in a teenager stealing an iPhone from an unlocked car - is because they're playing dress-up in very upscale gated communities. Not impressed. I don't know if anyone remembers the Guardian Angels but I wonder how many of these operators would disarm, put on a red beret and jackets and ride the NYC subway in the 80s. Not many, I bet.

Edit: My response to a non-LE guy in body armor walking down my street with a rifle in low ready would not be positive. Code Orange all the way.
You're being generous. I'll be frank and people will freak. Depending on the circumstances, there is a very good chance I would view such an individual as an immediate threat to my family and act accordingly (and no I won't argue about this on the internet).

[Zincwarrior]

FYI what they are doing is illegal in TX. Basically, under section 1702 of the TX occupations code you must meet the training and license requirements under section 1702 to provide security service REGARDLESS of whether you are a volunteer or you are paid. ( being a licensed peace officer in TX also meets the requirements).

In fact there have been bills in the TX legislature specifically seeking to carve out an exemption to section 1702 requirements to allow for volunteer security at churches to be armed based solely on a CHL/LTC.

A good explanation can be found here: http://www.lapinlawtx.com/firearms-blog/armed-volunteer-security-officers-in-places-of-worship

Excellent point. I forgot about that. I remember it as church's have to be very careful and not have "security teams" because it opens them up to this.

[LittleLebowski]

Whole lotta fail with this group and that guy's words.

[RoyGBiv]

FYI what they are doing is illegal in TX. Basically, under section 1702 of the TX occupations code you must meet the training and license requirements under section 1702 to provide security service REGARDLESS of whether you are a volunteer or you are paid. ( being a licensed peace officer in TX also meets the requirements).

In fact there have been bills in the TX legislature specifically seeking to carve out an exemption to section 1702 requirements to allow for volunteer security at churches to be armed based solely on a CHL/LTC.

A good explanation can be found here: http://www.lapinlawtx.com/firearms-blog/armed-volunteer-security-officers-in-places-of-worship

HB 421 is currently stuck in Calendars.
http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=85R&Bill=HB421

[blues]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bBuH2ImoOGk/T-ZZ9NxwViI/AAAAAAAAgRo/aZR9vy87v3k/s1600/PDVD_052.BMP

"Son, we're the law in these here parts and right now your ass is in a heap o' trouble."

[Stephanie B]

"The other vehicle stopped by certain homes that have filled out paperwork with the group allowing volunteers to act as the homeowner, Bryan said."

Sounds like they are thinking that will allow them to utilize the castle doctrine. Great... that's going to work out well.

For the homeowner, it may create some flavor of an employer-employee relationship, which means that everybody who signed those "agreements" could be on the hook for that group's actions.

[Zincwarrior]

Also sounds like a shakedown. "Gun with scary assault rifle" here sign this.

[Stephanie B]

Also sounds like a shakedown. "Gun with scary assault rifle" here sign this.

This is an interesting situation which present some intriguing points of law, which is lawyer-speak for: "This is going to cost you a shit-load of money in attorney's fees."

[BobLoblaw]

Neighborhood watch is susceptible to gung ho "sheepdog" influence. That's the hangup for a lot of people. For instance, here's an actual* photo of their fearless leader:


http://thefirearmsforum.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/05/124164_0e43a836b07f6e0396ca4bed055313ab.jpg


*This post is not factual. I did it for the lulz.

[BobLoblaw]

Has anyone seen "Observe and Report?" The way this watchman speaks reminds me of Seth Rogen in that movie.

Spoiler Alert: he shot a guy for flashing his genitals in the mall.

[Hambo]

Captain Obvious says this will not end well.

[Zincwarrior]

Neighborhood watch is susceptible to gung ho "sheepdog" influence. That's the hangup for a lot of people. For instance, here's an actual* photo of their fearless leader:


http://thefirearmsforum.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/05/124164_0e43a836b07f6e0396ca4bed055313ab.jpg


*This post is not factual. I did it for the lulz.

ALL YOUR CHEESEBURGERS ARE BELONG TO ME!

[11B10]

Neighborhood watch is susceptible to gung ho "sheepdog" influence. That's the hangup for a lot of people. For instance, here's an actual* photo of their fearless leader:


http://thefirearmsforum.s3.amazonaws.com/2011/05/124164_0e43a836b07f6e0396ca4bed055313ab.jpg


*This post is not factual. I did it for the lulz.




Anyone else get the supreme irony of Billyjoejimbob posing in front of the "FITTING ROOM" door - which is too small for him?

[Sherman A. House DDS]

These guys sound like they take, "The Walking Dead," a bit too seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jwperry]

Vigilantes protecting their turf? Cool, I think I've seen movies about this before.

[Kyle Reese]

These guys sound like they take, "The Walking Dead," a bit too seriously.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Who gets to play Shane, the Governor and Negan?

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[45dotACP]

This is an interesting situation which present some intriguing points of law, which is lawyer-speak for: "This is going to cost you a shit-load of money in attorney's fees."
Start of a protection racket you think?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Joe in PNG]

Vigilantes protecting their turf? Cool, I think I've seen movies about this before.

Isn't that also pretty much the plot of pretty much every "Knightrider" and "A-Team" episode?

[Rex G]

When stopping to fuel one's vehicle, at night, in some parts of the Houston* area, donning hard exterior armor and slinging a rifle is probably a reasonable idea.

Better idea: Monitor fuel levels, and plan fuel stops for daylight hours, in better parts of town. I am never going to tell someone not to be armored, so, wear low-profile armor as deemed necessary. Carry weapons with discretion, and, of course, be quiet about it.

*I am not picking on Houston; quite a few metropolitan areas have their Little Mogadishus.

[StrikerFire]

Sometimes I'm very confused by your overall logic. This is one of those times.

Both people would likely be alive and (presumably) free if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle that night. TM wasn't a choir boy, but he hadn't done anything wrong.

As someone who has been followed (not just the scenario above) to the point of harassment by overzealous neighborhood watch volunteers (as a teenager no less). I can commiserate with a desire to punch someone following you in the dark. Hell, as far as we know, TM never was a criminal, even when he punched GZ. He may have felt his life was in danger being followed by a strange dude in the dark and was acting in self defense. We'll never know, because as you so eloquently pointed out one of them is alive and the other is dead.

You forgot to mention our favorite choir boy - after punching Zimmerman to the ground - fully mounted Zimmerman and bashed the back of his head into concrete giving him an "educational beatdown." That bashing of the head into concrete was the illegal use of deadly force. Travon didnt stand his ground, walk away etc while Zimmerman was on the ground. He became the aggressor and used illegal deadly force. Zimmerman shot him legally fearing for his life.

[Cypher]

You're being generous. I'll be frank and people will freak. Depending on the circumstances, there is a very good chance I would view such an individual as an immediate threat to my family and act accordingly (and no I won't argue about this on the internet).

That's kind of where I'm at with it. At some point they're either going to try to "detain" the wrong person. I want to know how the police or any first responders are going to respond when they arrive on scene and there's a group of armed men on site.

[Zincwarrior]

That's kind of where I'm at with it. At some point they're either going to try to "detain" the wrong person. I want to know how the police or any first responders are going to respond when they arrive on scene and there's a group of armed men on site.When I lived in the bad part of the LA basin I can guarantee if PoPo rolled up on a bunch of armed guys it would have been a bunch of very dead armed guys in seconds. They did not mess around.

[hufnagel]

I would consider a "herd immunity" mentality to be a safer operating method: I'll visibly show signs of protecting/patrolling my property, while others do the same, and everyone does so at random times. By doing that even those who don't partake would benefit due to presence of armed/active resistance in the area. I wouldn't draw down or shoot an active criminal on someone else's property, but I can certainly play the role of Good Witness and dial my phone. That overall may (or may not) have the desired deterring effect.

[UNK]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HAZbrJ2_J8

[NEPAKevin]

Isn't that also pretty much the plot of pretty much every "Knightrider" and "A-Team" episode?

I have heard a similar assessment of the general theme of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

[cclaxton]

Fairfax County provides a program to help citizens understand how to work with police, how to patrol their neighborhoods, and how they can help.
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police/services/citizens-police-academy.htm