"I'm glad the officer is OK" says man who thought he was shooting hookers

JosephDredd

Gold Belt
@Gold
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
21,005
Reaction score
2
http://www.bakersfield.com/news/rep...cle_90fb0c52-8ab4-11e8-abee-cf3da4b04497.html


Reports: Man admits firing rounds near urinating plain-clothed deputy he believed was about to engage in sex act

Michael Beilby has seen gangsters, prostitutes and thieves around his southeast Bakersfield home.

The 66-year-old has grown frustrated with the amount of crime taking place both near and on his property.

He said that's why he took action, according to court documents, when he saw a man get out of a Jeep parked roughly 500 feet from his home and unzip his pants by the passenger door.

Believing a prostitute was in the vehicle and the man was about to engage in a sex act, Beilby told police he aimed a rifle at an area several feet away from the man and fired three rounds to "get him out of the mood to have sex."


Beilby said he didn't realize the man was a plain-clothed sheriff's deputy working undercover, according the documents. Nor did he realize the deputy had left the vehicle to urinate, and opened the passenger door so he wasn't exposed while relieving himself.

Calling his actions "felony stupid," Beilby said he should have known better than to fire the gun.

"I don't blame the officer for being really angry with me," the documents say he told investigators. "But most people that are doing illegal things, that's enough that they don't come back. If I yell at them, they don't care."


Beilby is charged with assault with a semi-automatic firearm on a person and recklessly discharging a firearm. He's out of custody after posting bail and is next due in court July 25.

The deputy was unharmed.

The events leading to Beilby's arrest unfolded the afternoon of July 11 when the deputy, listed in documents as D. Manriquez, parked his vehicle on the north side of the 1500 block of Watts Drive.

Working an undercover operation in the area, the deputy parked there because he needed to urinate, according to the statement he gave to Bakersfield police detectives investigating the incident.

Since he was undercover, Manriquez wasn't wearing anything identifying himself as law enforcement. He wore a brown "Volcom" short-sleeve shirt, blue jeans and a black and gray "DC" baseball cap, according to the documents.

Not seeing any traffic or pedestrians in the area, Manriquez said he got out of the vehicle, walked to the passenger side and opened the door to cover himself while he urinated. Then he heard two gunshots.

Manriquez looked around and saw a man — whom he later identified as Beilby — standing by a gate and holding a rifle. He zipped his pants and walked toward the driver's side of the Jeep as Beilby pointed the rifle at him, according to the documents. He said he heard another shot and a buzzing sound as the projectile passed near him.

The deputy said he jumped in the Jeep and drove about 100 yards away as he reported the shooting to his supervisor. Shortly afterward, he saw a white sedan approaching from the area where the shots had come and recognized the shooter as the man behind the wheel.

As Beilby parked, Manriquez got out of the Jeep and showed his badge then pointed his duty firearm — a .44-caliber Glock handgun — at Beilby.

He said Beilby immediately raised his hands and said, "I didn't know you were a cop. I didn't know who you were."

More law enforcement arrived and Beilby was taken into custody. A loaded Ruger .22-caliber rifle was in plain view in his car and had a round in the chamber, according to the documents.

Investigators found numerous .22-caliber bullet casings on Beilby's property. His wife told police he uses the rifle to scare off animals including wild dogs and coyotes.

During his interview with police, Beilby said earlier that day he chased off someone he caught driving down the road with a prostitute. Later he saw another person dumping trash.


Beilby said he figured the man parked in the Jeep also had a prostitute with him, according to the documents. He said he fired to scare off the man, not harm him.

Beilby told police he's an excellent shot and could have hit the man if he'd wanted.

"With my .22 at 50 yards I can hit a quarter," he said.


I'm curious how the 2A people feel about this. Does this good guy with a gun have the right to fire warning shots at people near his property?
 
http://www.bakersfield.com/news/rep...cle_90fb0c52-8ab4-11e8-abee-cf3da4b04497.html





I'm curious how the 2A people feel about this. Does this good guy with a gun have the right to fire warning shots at people near his property?

What is your point and 2A people here exactly? Not sure what one has to do with the other. Do you have to get the 2A people to weigh in every time some motherfucker fires a gun?

Hey, what do you think the 2A people thought about when the Nazis confiscated the guns of Jewish people? You know, like right before sending them on a train to Auschwitz?
 
I'm curious about why a cop would piss in front of the man's house, pretty dumb at a minimum. That said, he probably did not need to discharge his weapon, but then again, it's a bad crime area and he has to live there. Different culture, tough to judge.

Hey, what do you think the 2A people thought about when the Nazis confiscated the guns of Jewish people?
Or when the British took the guns from the Palestinians?
 
What is your point and 2A people here exactly? Not sure what one has to do with the other. Do you have to get the 2A people to weigh in every time some motherfucker fires a gun?

Because I know what the gun control people think: they think it was wrong of him to fire warning shots at people not even on his property. I want to know if the 2A people will say it was a legitimate step in defending his property. Who should I instead ask to get the opinion of 2A people?

Hey, what do you think the 2A people thought about when the Nazis confiscated the guns of Jewish people? You know, like right before sending them on a train to Auschwitz?

They never shut up about their opinions on that topic. Not sure why you would use that as an example.
 
They never shut up about their opinions on that topic. Not sure why you would use that as an example.
I think he was illustrating how poorly things end when you take away peoples' guns. Have you noticed, in any of the pictures we see of Jews being marched off to trains, Jews with guns?
 
I think he was illustrating how poorly things end when you take away peoples' guns. Have you noticed, in any of the pictures we see of Jews being marched off to trains, Jews with guns?

I see. Well, he certainly wasn't answering my question in the OP.
 
Guessing the cop didn't get a public urination charge?
 
@JosephDredd are you literally asking me to say “He should not have fired warning shots at a man not even on his property. That was the wrong thing to do”

Cause there. I said it. Should have called 911 the moment the cop whipped his dick out and insisted on public indecency charges filed
 
If they weren't on his property, I don't think he is in the right. One step onto private property though and I'd say I agree with being able to fire a warning shot or two.
 
Firing a weapon is justified when you are in fear of great bodily harm or death.

In a very cases you can fire at some escaping from a crime (Texas I think has a law like that).

Castle doctrine has a slightly extended justification of deadly force.

So no he had no legal right. You can not fire warning shots in any case.
 
http://www.bakersfield.com/news/rep...cle_90fb0c52-8ab4-11e8-abee-cf3da4b04497.html





I'm curious how the 2A people feel about this. Does this good guy with a gun have the right to fire warning shots at people near his property?
Jesus, Joe, I didn't have to read further than this to realize it wasn't a 2nd Amendment thread:

He said that's why he took action, according to court documents, when he saw a man get out of a Jeep parked roughly 500 feet from his home and unzip his pants by the passenger door.

Believing a prostitute was in the vehicle and the man was about to engage in a sex act, Beilby told police he aimed a rifle at an area several feet away from the man and fired three rounds to "get him out of the mood to have sex."

No, the 2nd Amendment doesn't give you the right to start letting off rounds at hookers 500 feet from your property because you think they're hookers, and you don't like them.
 
So is the cop going to be put on the sex offender registry for exposing himself in public? Because that’s what they do to civilians
 
Firing a weapon is justified when you are in fear of great bodily harm or death.

In a very cases you can fire at some escaping from a crime (Texas I think has a law like that).

Castle doctrine has a slightly extended justification of deadly force.

So no he had no legal right. You can not fire warning shots in any case.

Jesus, Joe, I didn't have to read further than this to realize it wasn't a 2nd Amendment thread:

He said that's why he took action, according to court documents, when he saw a man get out of a Jeep parked roughly 500 feet from his home and unzip his pants by the passenger door.

Believing a prostitute was in the vehicle and the man was about to engage in a sex act, Beilby told police he aimed a rifle at an area several feet away from the man and fired three rounds to "get him out of the mood to have sex."

No, the 2nd Amendment doesn't give you the right to start letting off rounds at hookers 500 feet from your property because you think they're hookers, and you don't like them.

When I posed the question to 2A people I was specifically thinking of an old thread where many people felt a woman with a gun did the right thing by trying to shoot a shoplifter in a hardware store.

After that thread, I frequently see articles and think, "I wonder if 2A people in the WR will defend this?"

Lately I've been seeing a greater willingness for 2A people here to denounce gun owners who are clearly reckless and harming their cause. I don't know if individual Sherdog posters changed their views or if we have different posters weighing in, but it's got me interested in hearing more of their views. Not in a demagoguery way, either.
 
Because I know what the gun control people think: they think it was wrong of him to fire warning shots at people not even on his property. I want to know if the 2A people will say it was a legitimate step in defending his property. Who should I instead ask to get the opinion of 2A people?



They never shut up about their opinions on that topic. Not sure why you would use that as an example.

I’m a “2A person” and what you hat guy didbwas wrong and he shouldn’t have done it.

Seriously though, you don’t get to fire your gun off any time you get angry, what if he had of killed somebody. Somebody pissing who’s not even on your property.....call the cops. Somebody breaking into your house in the middle of the night....gun time.

If I lived in an area where the behavior off my property was so abhorrent that it was driving me towards violence, I’d probably move. Or at least take a long vacation.
 
Aging people with guns are starting to become a problem in America.

As their mental state worsens these things will become more and more common.
 
Last edited:
Firing a weapon is justified when you are in fear of great bodily harm or death.

In a very cases you can fire at some escaping from a crime (Texas I think has a law like that).

Castle doctrine has a slightly extended justification of deadly force.

So no he had no legal right. You can not fire warning shots in any case.

In NM if there’s any chance of you being “safe” you can’t shoot, like you can’t shoot at a moving vehicle ever because if the vehicle is moving, you are basically out of danger (and shooting the driver as he’s coming right at you is movie shit). I don’t remember all the laws since I haven’t lived there for a decade and I don’t need a license to cc where I live now.
 
Aging people with guns are starting to become a problem in America.

As their mental states worsens these things will become more and more common.

hannitycrimesmain.jpg


Hannity getting the blue rinse set all riled up.
 
Back
Top