Seven adults forced to strip at gunpoint during robbery
Published Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!Alaska State Troopers are investigating a robbery in which three masked men ordered seven adults to strip at gunpoint.
The three men in ski masks entered a Birch Lane home shortly after 9:15 p.m. when the five men and two women were home. The victims ranged in age from the early 20s to the early 50s, and some of them did not completely undress.
The robbers left the house with clothing, wallets and an undisclosed amount of cash.
Trooper spokeswoman Megan Peters would not say if it was a random crime or if the victims might have known the suspects. Troopers are still investigating the case.
Anyone with information is asked to call troopers at 451-5100.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
if those 7 had hand guns we would have 3 dead masked men. just another good reason to arm your self. there is no way they would have walked out of my house. they would have left feet first on a gurney.
It's amazing what a difference having a gun makes...isn't it?
the anti gun freaks will say if these men didnt have guns this would not have happened. i say if the other 7 had guns they could have ended the 3 masked mens careers in crime. they could have done us all a favor. home invasions are on the rise. we are ready in my home for these type of scum bags. this is what the second amendment was writin for. i hope all the anti gun freaks come to their senses. i know that will never happen though. they will use cases like this to push for more gun control. if they were smart they would buy a gun and learn how to use it.
First-
I say those of us who are armed will not incounter this type of situation because these type of individuals target people who are unarmed and appear weak... If the government who SERVES us were to attempt to outlaw firearms then we would all be unarmed and appear weak. I for one will not fall into that catagory.
Second-
Guns are like any commodity, take illegal drugs for example they are illegal however you can get them with little problem. The same will be true for firearms because the government makes it illegal by no means makes them go away, they will only go away for those who want to remain lawful citizens.
Three-
If the government makes firearms illegal are they going to put all of us in jail, or just tag us as felons and make us criminals.
Fourth and last-
I dont think you are going to find seven guys in this town that would conduct such violent behavior unless they have a history of such acts.
In that I think it was the GOVERNMENT's fault for allowing them out of jail for previous violent criminal behavior. All the more reason to go forth ARMED.
Bikebuilder, do you have a sign on your door that says "Guns inside"? How exactly would the burglars know to avoid your house due to your guns?
I'm not an "anti-gun freak," but I find it sad that people would be so quick to shoot to kill in this situation. So you'd rather have three dead people (people with guns, it appears) than some lost property? Where is the respect for human life here? It's sad when we value jewelry and cash over human life.
I would rather not have to be forced to strip naked by criminal strangers, in my own home. Period.
An additional gun on the other side might mean that these sad, sorry excuses for "human lives" weren't still walking around out there, maybe intent on making your wife or children strip naked next time. An additional gun might have meant the difference between "The Police are Looking for Leads" and "The Police have the Perpetrators in Custody". My comfort level would be so much higher without "human lives" like these out walking free. Wouldn't yours?
Shoot to kill? Maybe not. But, if you don't walk into my house uninvited, this option never becomes necessary.
inchworm,
I'm surprised that you'd find it sad that three CRIMINALS would be killed doing something ILLEGAL. How would any of the 7 LAW ABIDING citizens LEGALLY present in the residence know that the criminals weren't going to kill them? If you and your family were faced with similar circumstances, what would you do? Allow three law breakers to possibly cause grave harm to your family? Please don't tell me you'd spare the lives of the three criminals over the lives of your family.
Admittedly, we don't know all the facts from the little bit of information presented here. There may be, and I'm sure there is, more to the story.
The bottom line is, no one but you is responsible for your self defense.
Inchworm, I respect your opinion but I disagree - If three people with guns break into my house I'm not going to take the time to ask them of their intentions ("Are you going to rape and kill my wife and family or do you just want my wallet?") Quite frankly I think most people would be scared for their lives and the lives of their family if they were put in that situation and be praying to God that the home invaders just want your wallet - personally in situations like these I trust the influence of my handgun over the power of prayer. However, I will be praying that I will never be put in this situation.
Shoot somebody and deal with the legal ramifications thereof, or strip naked inside a house and lose my watch?
I can buy a new watch, and I'm not ashamed of my body.
I always find it interesting that people say they'd shoot and/or kill over a robbery. There's a very good book called "On Killing"
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Psychologi... that examines the human reaction to stress and resultant shoot/not shoot reactions. Those of you that claim that you'd shoot should really read it.
(And, FWIW, I spent a number of years on the North 6th floor of 11250 Waples Mill Road. Every day, all day, so don't tell me that I'm an anti-gunner....)
The respect for human life "inchworm" is that of preserving the life of your family way over that of some crook who may take your jewelry and cash, rape your wife , torture and or kill your family or just walk out of your house peacably with nothing. Do you want to be responsible for making the call of what an intruder may or may not do to your family while they may have you at gun point- I sure dont want to make that call and that is why every crook should asume when he walks into a house to do what crooks do that they have a 90% chance of meeting the business end of some form of firearm. If you do get taken by suprise and the crook takes your stuff and walkes out the door you cant shoot them in the back as they leave. That is murder-
because that is just about your stuff- if someone is breaking and entering that is legitimate defense of life and property - shoot to kill- its a great crime deterant.
I value my life and the lives of my family members more than I value the lives of the other people who bust into houses and make demands at gunpoint.
I think Dana VanDam gets my point -- why is it necessary to shoot to KILL? Is burglary a death penalty-worthy offense? Of course it wouldn't be clear at the outset why the masked men were there, but shoot to injure, to stop them, to get their guns out of their hands before you shoot to KILL. Yes, had one of the victims been armed, the crime may not have been completed and the perpetrators would probably be in custody. Yes, one should protect oneself and family (and friends, I guess, since I don't know too many families where 7 adults all live together). But one of the arguments that fuels the fire of anti-gun folks is this mindset that we have to shoot to kill, no matter the circumstances.
Next time, buy a rottweiller, name it Jesus. Post sign on door that reads Jesus is Watching. The sic command can be Bless you Jesus.
Ummm, so let me get this straight... Many of you are claiming that if a few of the people in the house were armed, that would've stopped the criminals. Don't you think that it would have been far more likely to end in a shoot-out in which not only the 3 criminals, but several of the 7 in the home as well would be shot?
So, on the one hand, the people lost their wallets and material possessions, on the other hand we have a shoot-out in which (mostly likely) multiple people on BOTH sides would have been shot and possibly died. Sorry, but to me it seems that this outcome (with no guns in the house) was actually better than the possible alternative...
I'm surprised that everyone assumes that if the individuals in the house were armed that the situation would have ended better. The fact is that the three perpetrators were armed and if gunfire would have broken out, they most likely would have shot back. So instead of a few people losing their money and possibly some dignity someone could have died, including the people being robbed.
Inchworm I also understand your position, however when you have armed intruders breaking into your home the idea of shoot to wound or shot to kill is something that you dont contemplate at the time. The fact that they came armed means that their position is the possible need to KILL you and your family if necessary. I hope that everyone becomes proficient with firearms and then has the ability and at least the opportunity to make the call about wounding, stopping, or killing someone who puts you in that situation.
Newsreader if you want to leave the outcome of your families safety up to armed intruders so be it. I will not.
(bikebuilder)...if you want to leave the outcome of your families safety up to armed intruders so be it. I will not.
(Curtis)
Well said.
when the 3 were entering the house they should have been shot. if it were my house they would have been. i would never shoot to wound. to answer the question - is burgulary and armed robbery a death sentance ? if you try it at my house when im home? YES IT IS. i will do what ever i have to do to protect my family. i have a wife and several kids. i will kill for them. i will die for them. i will go to prison for them. if that is what it takes ? this is america. i have the right to protect my family and property. you fools that think i dont value life are crazy. i just value mine and my familys more than some scum bags breaking into my house. im not going to take a chance on what they want to do to me and my family. i will shoot and kill their sorry asses. i have an alarm system and cameras. you cant step one foot on my property with out setting off an alarm and being seen on a monitor. i have a great cure for home invasion at my house. i dont suggest any one test it out.
inchworm and sdoownek,
Sorry, the clothes that I and my family are wearing were purchased by me (or my wife) with money I/we earned (ditto the watch on my wrist).
No one has the right to take them away from me without the "due process" of a court of law. NO ONE! Anyone who is willing to enter my home to steal from me may also be willing to do more than steal from me. I've read of numerous home robberies/invasions where the criminals killed everyone in the home but not before gang-raping a teenage daughter and or mother.
And for your information, I would not "shoot to kill" I would be shooting for "center mass" (which is where firearms instructors teach you to aim in the interests of "stopping" a criminal before than can do injury to you). Afterwards I would call the Troopers and inform then that I had shot intruders (so they could arrange for an ambulance to transport the survivors/remains to FMH or the Mortuary).
It's not my fault that they chose to commit a crime of violence against me and my family.
John -
I truly feel sorry for you - to have to live in fear all the time like you apparently do. Security cameras, alarms systems, an assault rifle for everyone in the family, reloading as a family hobby, never leaving the house without being armed with a concealed weapon...
Where exactly do you think you live?
Sounds like either the Wild West or in the middle of a combat zone.
newsreader,
you dont need to feel sorry for me. i dont live in fear. i feel like the safest person in town. i have these safe guards in place so i do feel safe. my family and i love our hobby. it is no diffrent than a family who likes to golf or do wood work. we all love being out doors. we all love to shoot and hunt. reloading just makes our hobby cheaper. my permint to carry a concealed weapon is just another reason i feel safe. dont feel sorry for me. im doing just fine. thanks for your concern. i do appreciate it.
I can guarantee that those who go forth armed are not living in fear. It is quite the opposite in fact. Being armed gives you the peace of mind that NO ONE will have the oppotunity to harm you or your family. The police have no duty to protect us. There responsibilty is to respond after a crime has been comitted. I agree 100% with Doug that the if an intruder enters my home the job of the police will be to remove their remains. It's not that I have no consideration for a human life it is that I have a much higher consideration for my own life and that of my family.
inchworm, newsreader , and all you that would step on the rights of all that died for ower freedom to live safe from harm, youv not had some one brake down your door and rape your love,ed one, if some kicks in your door , your input will not be as it is,if they kick in my door my 8 ga will blow the trash right out the door, if they are willing to kick in your door they are willing to kill you,,grow up,you that would step on the graves of the love,ed ones lost for your rights ,,,,thank you not anty gun nuts, your input dont work, your lack of care to live free,shows , go live in the ussr youd be right at home,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I suppose that I should have said "I am sorry that you feel you need to go to such extremes to be safe in our community."
It just seems misguided to me, considering you are far more likely to suffer an accidental death from motor vehicles, falls, poisonings, drownings, fires, or choking than by a gun.
Personally, I like to assess risks and assign appropriate resources to combat them. In my book, there are many other things that I'm far more likely to die from - those are the things that I will worry about first (e.g. I only allow my family to drive in late-model high-safety rated vehicles with air bags). Home invasion is WAY down on my list of worries. Although, obviously, it does happen and, far be it from me to tell you how to prepare for that extremely unlikely event. I truly hope that our police force catches these guys, but I'm definitely not holding my breath.
And, once again, whatever - to each his own. I'm all for gun rights and all the other rights that we should be seeing that are being infringed.
paradox -
As you can see from my last post and others, I am all for your right to own guns.
BTW - I'm also all for the right of Americans to be properly educated and literate...
It's amazing how shortsighted some people are. Not just about this issue, but in just in general.
So, let's drill everywhere and suck out all the oil we can.
Then what?
Let's shoot the guy that comes into our house.
Then what?
I'll smoke if I want to, it's my right to do that!
Then what?
Bravado allows for courage in the face of the perception of danger, but how many of those that say "I'll shoot them!" have really thought about what it would be like? Six months after you shoot this guy that comes into your house, how will you *really* feel about knowing you took his life?
Some of you are, doubtlessly, totally fine with that. We all have the capability to kill. While situationally dependent, each of us reacts differently upon having done so. Some of you would kill in defense of life and property, but regret it later. Some of you(me included), would kill in defense of life, but not property. Some of you wouldn't kill at all.
I would invite those that think they could kill without remorse to read the book that I talked about in my previous post. It's an interesting trip into not only your own psyche, but also what it's like to kill someone in close quarters.
I don't doubt that some of you honestly believe that a robbery is a "me or them" situation--that's all about perception at the time. But your perception of any situation is skewed by your predisposition.
That's all I've got to say. Educate yourself before you do something you might regret. Otherwise, you're very egocentric and shortsighted.
sdoownek - I think that to assume that we have not educated ourselves because our view happens to be different from yours seems a little egocentric and shortsighted.
I've read through these posts. No one is screaming "Oh please, please, let me shoot someone and kill them!" Very few of us are saying that we wouldn't feel at least some remorse over being responsible for the ending of a life. All that is being said is that having a firearm offers a sometimes needed extra-bit of protection. One of the better quotes (perhaps a paraphrase) that applies here (I'll admit it comes from Alien vs. Predator - forgive me that): "It's better to have the gun and not need it, than to need the gun and not have it." That's all that most of us are saying.
What you say about a robbery perhaps not being a "me or them" situation is true. Perception is important. But how am I supposed to get into the head of the person who broke into my house to know that it's "just" a robbery? Should I ask him nicely? Say he says "No, ma'am. Just a robbery. I promise." I should then take his word? The person who is already in the commission of a crime? Come on now.
You invite us to read a book about what it's like to kill in close quarters; I invite you to talk with people that have lost family members to home intruders, or those that have suffered not death, but rape, for example. See if they would rather feel remorse over the death of the perpetrator than the pain at the loss they experienced because of a crime. Personally, I'll take the therapy necessary to deal with your "then what" over mourning for an unnecessary loss of a loved one, or allowing my children to be orphaned or hurt.
I can't pretend to know how I would react in a nightmare situation where I had to think fast about how best to protect my children, but I know I want ALL of my options open and available to me. I'm sorry that you think this, the placing or my family above the life of someone intent on harming them is somehow "egocentric and shortsighted". I disagree. My family disagrees. The criminals, on the other hand, agree with you completely.
Dana vanDam, I could not have put this topic to bed better then by your rational, hearted response.
Sadoownek,
I agree with you, "It is amazing how shortsighted some people are…"
Regarding, "Let's shoot the guy that comes into our house…" My experience is primarily that of a soldier. I have been places and seen things that lead me to believe that there are bad people in the world. Many of them cannot be rehabilitated - ever! They will not "Play Nice". When they break into someone's home (or nation) they do so with the intent to kill or steal (and they have no right to complain over "two to the chest"). If they want to break into your home and assault, rob or kill you, I will grieve for your family. They are likely to be the ones left hurting because you won’t defend yourself.
Regarding, "how will (I) really feel about knowing (I) took his life?" My Mother died last October - she was 89 years old. What does this have to do with the subject at hand? My Mom shot two burglars during World War II (when she was a young single woman living in a rented house with other young women). She never lost a night's sleep over those pieces of human filth (yes, you're right, I am being judgmental, so what?) and I am her son! I don't think I would lose any sleep either.
Regarding, "Some of you(me included), would kill in defense of life, but not property…" you actually outline three scenarios, kill in defense of life or property without hesitation, kill in defense of life only with some degree of hesitation, or not to kill at all (and the ultimate amount of "hesitation"). I won't judge you in this regard; I ask the same in return. As long as you have no intention of assaulting me or my family, I see no need for us to be hostile toward one another. Oh, I will go back and find the title of the book you're referring to (and I may purchase it - depends on whether the Title, Author, and a sample of his/her writing can seize and hold my attention).
In this, "that my perceptions may be skewed" you are probably correct. That's why I practice drawing and shooting my handgun. I don't wish to be handicapped with fear or hesitation. Still, I suspect that there will always be some degree of hesitation present in the thought processes of any rational person who is not a psychopath. If the person confronting me is willing to "give up their prize" I will forgo the necessity of killing them. The choice is really theirs, "Walk away and you live; keep coming at me and the consequences are on you!"
And no, I don't consider myself "egocentric and shortsighted".
Some of you seem to have missed my point, so I'll lay it out plainly.
You do not know how you will react having shot someone until you do it.
It's a painful thing to deal with after the fact. It's one thing to shoot somebody that's several hundred yards away while they're shooting at you. It's another to mozambique drill someone and -watch- them die on your living room floor.
Doug: I'll lend you my copy if you find you're unwilling to buy it.
As I said before, I spent many years at 11250 Waples Mill Road, both in the basement and the 6th floor.... So don't you *dare* group me with the anti-gunners. I've done more to protect your rights than any of you have.
This is my final post on this subject.
if me being willing to kill or die for my wife and kids makes me egocentric and shortsighted. i guess thats what i am ? if you judge me as a bad person ? i dont care. my wife and kids come before any scum bag wanting to harm them. i will take the chance of living with the guilt of taking some ones life. i dont think there would be any. i would be happy to save my family from scumm. not feel guilty for it.
sdoonek: you do not know what all these people have done to protect this country. how can yo say you have done more ? i have family that served in ww1 , ww2 , korea , vit nam , desert storm and my son has served in afganistan and currently in iraq. so you have no idea what the others have done on this thread.
It would be difficult to shoot somebody who has broken in to your house????????
I don't get that logic, you break into my house and I will shoot first and ask questions later, that is if my dog doesn't get to you first.
Well, I'm impressed at how huffy certain people get when their "point" is "missed" (which, incidentally, it wasn't missed by any of us) - we just disagreed. Somehow, those same people are unwilling (or is it unable?) to see the point of anyone else. Always an impressive display. And so effective in a discussion of differing viewpoints.
sdoownek:
There is a difference between bravery and “bravado.” Bravado implies a type of situational foolishness, like in a bar-fight. Bravery applies to courage, which by definition requires the situation to be inherently dangerous or challenging. Bravado cannot allow for courage. Criminals show bravado, self and family defenders show courage.
That being said, those that elect to allow others who would do harm to anyone they are entrusted to protect are cowardly, the antonym of courageous. If it is lawfully within my means to protect, it is my duty to do so. Dana is right (love ya Babe), we are incapable of knowing a criminal’s intent. As such, his (or her) fate is his choice: A choice he made when he chose to prey.
I have never had to use deadly force, and I pray I never will. I would not lose a minute of sleep or shed a single tear for any creature that chose to harm me or my family. You say, “your perception of any situation is skewed by your predisposition.” The sentence suggests (through the word skewed, negative connotation) that those feeling threatened (“me or them”) are implicitly wrong. You, not having attested to ever encountering such a horror, would have been wiser to avoid bias. How I “really feel”, is empathy for anyone who has faced this situation, chosen bravery, and reads your comment. Your “short-sightedness” negates their valor.
sdoownek,
Just because you've worked for NRA-ILA doesn't make you any better or more knowledgeable than anybody else posting here. You may be more eloquent than some, but that doesn't mean you have to take up such a condescending tone. Some of us are here to share our opinions and thoughts; others are here to learn what others think and how they feel.
You're right - no one knows how they'll feel after the fact if they ever have to take another's life. But I do know that if it comes down to me and mine, I'll gladly and willingly give up my future emotional well being to save my loved ones. I could never live/forgive myself if it happened any other way. I'm not trigger happy and I don't relish the thought of hurting someone else, but I will protect my family. I don't care about property. As a matter of fact, I think most states, Alaska included, prohibit self defense if only the taking of property is involved. Place my family in fear of their lives - that's a different story.
This has been a very good discussion. Everyone's kept it civil and informative and I thank you all for that. Hat's off to the NM staff for letting this discussion go where its gone.
Photodude
Everyone until me. My apologies.
Well said, Photodude705. Doesn't get much more eloquent than that.
Wow. Well I would like to add a comment to this article that is not focused on gun control because I don't think that is the issue here.
What I want to know is the rest of the story. One of the robbers most likely knew one of the adults in the house. I also find it kinda odd that seven adults were living together in a single house. Is this "Real World: Fairbanks"?
I applaud the majority of you for turning this story into something which it absolutely is not, btw.
I was in a bar there one time in the '80's when a guy walked in with drawn gun to rob it. When he announced his intentions to the bartender, he heard about 30 drawn-hammer clicks behind him coming from the arsenal the customers were carrying with them. He calmly (and rationally) put his gun on the bar and actually walked out! I believe he was arrested later, been awhile so I've forgotten that part but the sound of all those handguns being cocked and the sight of his eyes getting getting that "Oh, S#%&!" look brings out a chuckle to this day.
One more thing: for the seven of you that just endured this, my apologies. I in no way think you did anything wrong or could/should have prevented this. This discussion is a follow-up mostly from one yesterday regarding gun control in DC. I wish the best for all of you.
Seems pretty on topic, Freezee - guns, break-ins, human responses...Gun control is a logical step, whereas WMDs, Bush or global warming wouldn't be...but I can hypothesize about the seven adults and information the police weren't willing to provide for us in this story. Maybe they were playing Monopoly? A little game of bridge? Or, perhaps there was something nefarious going on - seven adults in one house seems odd to me (are we sure that they were living in the same house and not just visiting?). It's always a possibility. This however, seems more off-topic to me.
OK.
You're all right. I must have totally missed the point.
And ILA is on the 3rd floor.
But whatever, really. I've come to realize that I shouldn't partake in these discussions, so I'm no longer going to.
The article states "when the five men and two women were home", implying that they live there. So theoretically if all seven of these people owned guns (and nothing in the story suggests that they did or did not) are we suggesting that looser gun laws would have provided them with the opportunity to request that the masked men standby while the residents of the house grabbed their guns and armed themselves in an attempt of self preservation? I don't see where the issue of gun control relates to this story at all.
Just recently there was a story in the police report about a young girl being run off the road and attacked by a man and woman in NP. What wasn't reported was the fact that the girl had spent the previous evening driving around with her friends egging cars and homes in the Shannon Park/Hamilton Acres neighborhood. Don't get me wrong, I am not condemning the attackers response, but merely suggesting that there is often much more to the story than is reported.
Rule #1 Decide to be aggressive enough, SOON enough.
Dont come to my house brandishing a firearm and threaten my family. Period.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.