Sunday, September 05, 2010

A Philly story.


I can't comment on the following story for professional reasons. But I would love to hear your take on it. It says a a lot about certain human interactions such as fear and prejudice. It is also an interesting look at how complex it can be living in urban A-merry-ca in 2010; as well as the role of law enforcement in our everyday lives.

"After her son was killed in 2008, Sherderian Sutton got a Philadelphia license to carry a concealed weapon and a small Ruger pistol to protect herself and her surviving children.

"On Monday, when police knocked on her door, Sutton hoped that they were bringing the news she's waited two years to hear.

'I thought they were coming to my door to tell me they had my son's murderer," she said. "But they were coming to take me and my gun, and now I'm defenseless.'

Sutton, 38, of North Philadelphia, said that her troubles began last week, when workers from Wilco Cable came to her back door to ask for permission to work in her yard.

She's never had cable, but told them that they could work through her back yard to connect her neighbors' cable. Sutton said that she also asked the workers to never use the back door again.

On Monday, Sutton said, she was awakened by incessant pounding on her back door about 8 a.m. She looked out of the window and saw two men and a woman at her back door, peering in her window.

Scared, Sutton said she grabbed her gun and held it at her side as she answered the door.

She said that she never left her house and never raised the gun. Although they had no identification tags, Sutton said that the three identified themselves as Wilco workers and again asked permission to work on her property. She granted it, but asked why they continued to knock on her back door, despite her previous requests to use the front door.

Sutton said that the workers went about their business but three hours later, about 11:25 a.m., police came to her door. She said she let them in and they went through her house - with guns drawn - even pointing them at her 14- and 16-year-old children.

She said that she was taken into custody, held for 12 hours - from 2 p.m. to 2 a.m. - and that her gun and her license to carry it were taken away from her.

According to court records, Sutton, who has no record, was charged with simple assault and possessing instruments of a crime, both misdemeanors.

Lt. Frank Vanore, police spokesman, said that according to the police report, the cable workers alleged that Sutton was pointing a gun at them when she opened the back door.

What neither side seems to dispute is that Sutton never left her house. Even though a citizen is not required to have a license to carry a firearm in his or her own house, Sutton did, and had both the license and her gun taken away as a result of the incident.

Vanore said that no matter if Sutton was in her home or not, pointing a gun at somebody 'unless you are protecting yourself' is considered simple assault.

Sutton insists she never pointed the gun and wonders why, if the workers were scared, they continued to work on her property after she answered the door. Wilco representatives did not return a request for comment.

Now, Sutton feels that the police, who are supposed to keep her safe, have taken her safety away.

Even if she's found not guilty or the charges are dropped, Sutton will still have to petition the court to get her weapon back.

'They didn't find my son's murderer but they got me,' she said. 'Now I don't have a gun to protect myself.'"
[Story]
What do you think? Is Sutton wrong? Were the Cable Workers out of line? And should the po po have handled this in a different way? Inquiring minds want to know.

53 comments:

Majella77 said...

This shit is obviously ridiculous. If these utility workers felt threatened and that threat was communicated to the police, why did it take the cops 3 hours to respond? And why would they continue to work on this woman's property if they felt under threat?

Bklyn said...

No good deed goes unpunished. I would not let anyone in my back yard, especially 3 workers purporting to be cable/IT hacks aka workers.

sacredly breathing said...

The system does not protect people of
african descent. And the don't want us to have the ability to protect ourselves. Forget separate and unequal. How about separated and unprotected.

Moni De Lynch said...

This is some grade "A" bullshit. @Sacredly-the system tends not to protect minorties of all shades.

Kizzie said...

She is too quick on the draw. Eventually she was going to kill somebody. Great move on the police officers' part.

Anonymous said...

"She is too quick on the draw. Eventually she was going to kill somebody. Great move on the police officers' part."

I agree. But I understand her fears after what happened to her son. Next time if she must carry the gun to the door, she would do better to talk through the door.

Seeing someone with a gun at the door can be frightening and threatening to some people.

chicago dyke said...

an interesting story. i assume the point here is that she's wearing a garb that makes many americans uncomfortable, right about now. and brown, of course. without that she'd have been patted on the head and told not to miss weekly target practice down at the shooting range. white women with guns are a fetish in our modern media, i've noted.

i don't worship guns. i served in the military and i learned that stupid people with guns get themselves into far more trouble than they are "protected" from by them, most of the time. there's nothing wrong with owning a gun, if you know how to use it. but i can't quite understand the foolishness that goes with ownership, a lot in this country. people make up the most fabulous (as in: not real) possible scenarios to justify having a gun in the home, while ignoring report after report of children who shoot each other with them, or drunken fights that turn deadly violent when someone remembers there is a gun in the house, or as in this case, cops deciding that an armed citizen is a criminal. her gun protected her, how again?

guns kill. that's their purpose. killing can accomplish things, but not in most cases and not for most people. i've been kidnapped, raped and beaten and i can honestly say that in each of those situations, having had a gun would not have "helped" me at all, and may have likely just contributed to my death.

Anonymous said...

On the other hand, it seemed improper and illegal for the police to take away her license and gun since she was in her own house. This should prove to be an interesting case for a black person, esp. if she gets her license and gun back...but I doubt that she will. She is Black and lives in Philly, a city where Blacks are basically powerless. It is one of the most racist cities in the country.

R.J. said...

It doesn't sound like the cable company didn't have a problem with working on her property after the incident, so I fail to understand why the po po pulled her license and gun under these circumstances. No harm, no foul. Right?

equa yona(Big Bear) said...

If she was so nervous about the people at her back door, it was foolish to open the door. As someone else noted she should have spoken to them through a closed door. That being said, the police response is dogshit, pure and simple. If she had been white, they never would have charged her.

Anonymous said...

" I fail to understand why the po po pulled her license and gun under these circumstances. No harm, no foul. Right?"

There must be an unwritten blue law in Philly that gives them the right to take away weapons and license based on suspicion that gun holder might kill someone because she is Black. In Philly, they do things like this to Blacks because there is no justice for Blacks in that city anyway.

There is nothing but wholesale killing of Blacks by Blacks in that city anyway, so maybe the Whites are trying to prevent more killing of Blacks by preemptive measures? They are helping Blacks by saving them from themselves.

Shady_Grady said...

Sounds ridiculous if all the information is as reported.

Anonymous said...

Wadaya 'spect from pigs...they don't get paid to think; pigs only get paid to poke their snouts into law abiding people's bizness. By all means, sistuh Sutton was correct in arming herself. Her only mistake was in allowing her weapon to be seen. Isn't a cardinal rule that one never displays their weapon unless in the course of shooting to maim or kill? I defend and support all women arming themselves; want them to mentally arm themselves as well - we still live in the belly of a patriarchal monster.

Anonymous said...

This woman had every right to defend her home. This is an outrage. Who runs things in Philly?

M. Rigmaiden said...

I totally support gun ownership, but feel as though she should have never let those workers on her property, she should have never let them SEE her gun drawn and she should have gotten some counseling after the death of her son because she does seem a bit skiddish and probably is filled with anxiety. And as others have pointed out, if you are too tripped out, you might unnecessarily harm someone with a gun. Did the police act right? Of course not. Police officers are merely enforcers of terror in our society; they neither protect nor serve. All they do is take rights away from people when they feel like it. I feel for that woman and perhaps she won't let ANY STRANGERS on her property again. Can she prevail in court? I dunno...curious to see what happens.

Lola Gets said...

I think the woman was within her rights. It sounds to me like the cable workers made up one crucial fact (the gun being aimed at them) to get back at this old woman who was giving them crap. And she was giving them crap, cause she was trying to dictate how they could communicate with her, and they didnt want to comply (ie they were too lazy to walk their asses around to her front door).

I would have been freaked out if if I saw a bunch of people on my front steps banging on my door at 8 am. I wouldnt have come to the door with my gun, drawn or undrawn, but I definitely would have had an attitude. She should get her permit and gun back, but she should also get some therapy, as Mandisa said.

L

La♥audiobooks said...

Lola said...'It sounds to me like the cable workers made up one crucial fact (the gun being aimed at them) to get back at this old woman who was giving them crap. And she was giving them crap, cause she was trying to dictate how they could communicate with her, "

Lola, you hit the nail on the head. That was the only "crime" this black woman dared to commit.

I can't stand guns and I see more cons than pros, yet I don't think for a minute she pointed that gun at them. I too feel if she had, they would have hauled ass out of dodge and called it a day. But instead with her permission, they continued to stay on her property to "work" while they chuckled and planned out their mischief for the "crazy black woman".

And I doubt she would have opened that door without asking who was on the other side. At some point its obvious she became aware and therefore kept her gun at her side even if annoyed. And yes I can see the "attitude", and by seeing and hearing about what unprotected black women in her vulnerable situation go through, she had a DAMN RIGHT to let it be known to anyone that she had a gun at the reach of her command to protect herself and her family at will.

Now I'll ask some questions, what race were these workers? Were they all men? Were they all white, black, non-black or maybe a mixture? I hope we don't be surprised. We all know if this was a white woman living in a home with children and without a "male" protector, we would not be having this conversation. (And to whom it may concern, YOU may want to doubt if all information is given, but I or whomever have a right to give this black woman the benefit and I also have a right to list my racial suppositions! The end.)


Furthermore, where I live, these type company workers and people of all race in general also take for granted or abuse black people's authority and property, especially when its in a "black" neighborhood. Yet these same people don't go up in the hills to the rich white neighborhoods to perform the fool, because they EXPECT there will be white people who will show you their guns at whim!

This woman needs to sue the police department for trauma, negligence and whatever other legal jargon that needs to be thrown at them. She also needs to sue the cable company on behalf of their employees for reckless defamation and malicious conspiracy to cause harm to her and her family. Unbelievable.

Anonymous said...

laa but what if the cable workers were black? how does ur analysis make sense then? or was she a little quick on the draw and kinda crazy like?

Smashed The Tiny Black Box said...

Based on the story I would guess that either the workers really saw the gun and were threatened or frightened, and thus called the cops... OR... Sutton was understandably annoyed with and frightened by the alleged cable workers and was less than courteous when talking with them. In order to get back at her, they called the cops and said she had a weapon and assaulted them. Maybe she's telling the truth and they didn't see the gun nor was it pointed at them.

Either way, something doesn't add up. Cable and utilities workers are almost always trained to knock on the front door unless the customer states otherwise in their profile...unless things have changed over the years. It's kind of common sense, especially in Philly. They're supposed to have identification and cable co. shirts. I know that the utilities workers, when not reading meters, are supposed to ask for permission to enter a property, but often don't.

I'm not familiar with PA gun laws, so I will assume the story's account of local firearm rules are correct. If so, and things went down as she said, then she should get her weapon back....eventually....maybe.

Some talk about a conspiracy to disarm the population. I feel she has a right to defend her property, whether she is in Philly or elsewhere. She obviously feels a need to have that gun.

I would like to think that the NRA can or would help her. I mean, these type of cases are the ones they appear or claim to be interested in. We'll se.

Hathor said...

Doesn't any company that needs access to your property, supposed to send you written notification and have proper authority for access? More than just asking the owner? They could possibly destroy a gas or water line or inadvertently disconnect the electric or telephone. Aren't the workers suppose to have visible ID?
It appears to me that the "cable" company was trying to get over on this lady.

There have been many home invasions in Philly and residents are constantly being warned about people coming to your house posing as utility workers.

Duchessdee said...

What i see is another black woman with a mug shot and her fingerprints on the book. before long we will all be categorized. sad on many levels, her dead son, killer on the loose, cops to serve and protect = WHO, not her or her family. i feel scared all the time, but my fear will not stop me from living!

no_slappz said...

Cable TV/internet/phone companies are utility companies. Just like the electric company, the gas company and water.

They need permission to enter your house. But not your yard.

After installing service, utility companies have something that amounts to an easement into every yard through which their equipment passes.

In the interest of maintaining friendly relations with customers and the overall community, a company worker will knock on your door to let you know work must be done.

As for why they came to Sutton's back door, well, probably because that's where the cable wires were strung. In neighborhoods of houses on small lots with abutting backyards, cable is often run over those rear property lines. That puts twice as many houses on a single stretch of cable. Saves the cable company money.

Thus, to do their repairs, the workers are often moving from one backyard to the next. To announce themselves, they simply bang on the nearest door, which is the back door.

Obviously either the cable company discovered something that needed repair or replacement, OR another customer or customers were complaining about a problem. The company was responding to customers and working to maintain quality service.

Some people get upset when utility companies do what's needed to keep customers happy.

Utility company workers have had plenty of experience with nutty homeowners. I am certain the Employee Handbook demands a report of any dangerous or potentially dangerous situation.

When a homeowner opens the door and is holding a gun, even with the barrel pointed at the ground, the line has been crossed.

Sutton was wrong.

no_slappz said...

field,

The story was organized and presented to compromise the cable company workers and the cops.

By opening the tale with the anecdote that Sutton's son was murdered, the reader is pushed to feel some sympathy for her. We, the readers, are encouraged to believe she needed to feel the security of having a gun in her hand to overcome her fear of violence that might come her way.

Sorry. No good. The cable workers knew nothing of her past. They only knew they were on the job and needed to work in her yard. When one knocked, she opened the door and the workers saw a woman with a gun in her hand.

Let's stipulate it was pointed at the floor. Still, a woman with a gun in her hand? Not standard morning fare. Trouble ahead? Maybe. Employee Handbook regulations instruct workers to report all unsafe working situations. Thus, the workers probably reported the gun episode to a supervisor who called the cops.

As for her son's murder? Where did it happen? At the house? Why was he murdered? Drug related? Gang related? Or just bad luck?

Then there's the issue of her appearance in the photo. What the heck is this woman? A crazed ninja? A member of the NOI? Is this her Halloween costume? First she flashes a gun. Then, for the media, she dresses like a psycho.

Oh, and even though the article states SHE never had cable, that means nothing. Obviously the neighborhood was wired, which means a lot of cable work involves connecting, disconnecting and reconnecting service to houses as occupants come and go.

In the initial wiring of the neighborhood, the company included a junction box to wire her house. Most likely a previous occupant of the house had cable.

Anyway, if this nut had never opened her door, thereby keeping the presence of the gun unknown, the workers would have had nothing to report. Or she could have held it behind her back.

Instead, she chose to show it, which is absolutely, positively an act of intimidation.

Inasmuch as Sutton is paranoid, had a son who was murdered and lives with two teenagers, it seems clear to me that if a gun were to remain in that house, as a result, another member of that family would die.

She showed insanely bad judgment. The cops were right to take her weapon.

Hathor said...

no_slappz,

You would not have any idea how an easement would effect that ladies property. Not all cable is strung from house to house and in cases of detached homes the easements may only be only along the street or the alley in the back. What ever the case might be, they should notify you when they are going to work on your property without your request. They also have to get records and drawings of all the utilities and mark them out if their repair could damage other facilities. You can't assume as a property owner that the people on your property are from the utilities, they may be other contractors which have no permit or permission to work on your property. That happens when the property lines are not understood or it makes the contractors job easier.

no_slappz said...

hathor, you wrote:

You would not have any idea how an easement would effect that ladies property.

A utility company has a right to access its property and equipment, even when the company's stuff is in your yard. You can object, but if you do, the company will do what it has to do to -- legally -- enter your yard.

You can be sure if the cable service went out in your neighborhood because of damaged or broken equipment in your yard, all the neighbors would scream at the company till the problem was repaired. That means over-riding your objections to the presence of workers in your yard.

Not all cable is strung from house to house and in cases of detached homes the easements may only be only along the street or the alley in the back.

I once worked for Cablevision and had lots of memorable experiences with people and cable, including my own run-in with gun-toting customers.

What ever the case might be, they should notify you when they are going to work on your property without your request.

The knock on the door was the start of the notification process.

Do utility meter-readers ask to come in your yard to read meters? Only if the meters are inside your house.

They also have to get records and drawings of all the utilities and mark them out if their repair could damage other facilities.

That's got nothing to do with speaking to the occupant of the house. By the way, I'll bet this woman is a renter, which makes a difference in the big picture.

You can't assume as a property owner that the people on your property are from the utilities...

That's why they carry IDs.

...they may be other contractors which have no permit or permission to work on your property.

Being a sub-contractor blurs the line, but the direct employer of the workers is irrelevant to the issue of Sutton and the intentional display of her handgun.

Meanwhile, cable companies generally have their own crews doing routine maintenance and repir. In the earlier days of extensive initial wiring, sub-contractors were part of the picture.

field negro said...

n_s, did you read where the cable company workers did not have proper ID? Also, I am pretty sure that the cable workers were black. And, FYI, in Philly, it is tougher to get a conceal permit to carry a fire arm than damn near anywhere else in the country. Even if you pass a criminal background check the police can prevent you from getting conceal permit based on your character or reputation alone.

Kathy said...

It's been my experience as a woman, that male contractors do not have any respect at all for the wishes, requests or direction of a female. Even privately contracted male workers have absolutely no respect, they think nothing of lying, cheating, and disrespecting woman.
Try buying a car, see the lousy deal you'll probably get from a man, or hire somebody to paint your house, see what kind of skrew job you'll probably get if you are a woman. Not just lousy, sloppy overpriced work, but not even decency about when to come, when not to come.
I highly doubt she pointed her gun at them, they would have run away scared and called the police, because we all know, except no-slappz, that these men are chicken shit assholes.

Hathor said...

no_slappz,
Since you don't work for a cable company in Philly or even lived here, you should stop trying to speak in certainties.

Ensayn1 said...

I wonder why she exposed her weapon the the workers? They never should have seen or known of her weapon. Did the babylon have a warrent to enter her house? I didn't see that in the story. If not, she should never have opened her door to them as well. To open you door to the beast is an unspoken invitation to enter.

La♥audiobooks said...

"laa but what if the cable workers were black? how does ur analysis make sense then? "

Read my entire post again. My viewpoint stands for whatever race the cable workers were.

In fact I suspected they were black based on the racial predominance in the state area and the type of work being done, but if I had jump to that conclusion, I would be the evil black male hater. Read again and pick up on my clues.

And again, regardless of race, especially black, they were not going to perform the fool in a rich lilly white area as I stated above. And if they had complained on a white woman, the cops would have scrutinized the complaint, or questioned what these "black" workers did to provoke the rightfully "alarmed" white woman. The cops would have instead rang her door bell of and ask her questions first.

Those men clearly had a problem with a BLACK WOMAN setting demands/guidelines and even daring to show that she is willing to protect herself and family. (And don't think these men didn't notice early one that an adult male wasn't living in the home, thats how the usual violence against unprotected black women starts). And they wasn't going to make that shit up on a white woman and cause trouble for themselves - they know better. Yet we all know anything goes and will float when it comes to black women being under fire and not given the benefit.

I hope she gets a good attorney, and good therapeutic counseling, the woman has been through enough!

Anonymous said...

LAA, "Yet we all know anything goes and will float when it comes to black women being under fire and not given the benefit.

I hope she gets a good attorney, and good therapeutic counseling, the woman has been through enough!"

Anything goes and will float when it comes to Black people, period...regardless of gender. So I agree 100%.

I hope she will get an attorney with long fangs dripping with blood, a smart mind, and a big heart. One who enjoys fighting crushing heads of those who abuse Black people, and knows how to kick ass in the so-called Justice system of fairness and equality.

Unfortunately, it IS Philadelphia. Again, as I mentioned before, Blacks are a powerless hapless lot in that town. The justice system seems to punish them even when they are innocent.

In Philly, if you are Black, you are guilty. Needless to say, it's not a good place to live if you Black and have a heart.

That woman has been through hell and certainly needs therapy and a supportive group who knows what it is like to lose a child by violence. I hope this event will be a "door" for her to get help.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like she isn't protected by the police, and she can't protect herself. Bad situation all the way around.

Shady_Grady said...


field negro said...
in Philly, it is tougher to get a conceal permit to carry a fire arm than damn near anywhere else in the country. Even if you pass a criminal background check the police can prevent you from getting conceal permit based on your character or reputation alone.


We do things differently in Michigan.
=)
Field, is that a Philadelphia restriction or a state restriction?

Whitey said...

Shot and sweet? I think that when this unwinds we'll learn that it was caused by one or more levels of what my Dad calls the "zero tolerance mindset.

Whitey said...

Oh yeah, probably more than a pinch of white privilege /race/socioeconstatus differential enforcement. I can't see this happening to a mainline matron in identical circumstances.

field negro said...

"Field, is that a Philadelphia restriction or a state restriction?"

Philadelphia only.

Anonymous said...

"Field, is that a Philadelphia restriction or a state restriction?"

Philadelphia only.


My reply:
Probably has something to do with the VERY high murder rate in Philly. You think.

Anonymous said...

"Field, is that a Philadelphia restriction or a state restriction?"

Philadelphia only.


My reply:
Probably has something to do with the VERY high murder rate in Philly. You think.

ac said...

Utility workers are required to have the homeowner, or the resident's, consent to enter enclosed yards or homes. Yes the meter person can walk up to the meter and take a reading but note the meter is usually required to be along the front or on the side near the front of the house.
Cable is NOT a utility on par with gas, sewer, water or electric. The Cable companies behavior is dictated by the franchise agreement (contract) they have with the local government. It's pretty standard that they too have to seek the homeowner/
occupier's permission to enter the residence or yard.
I can see where the police had to respond because the statements the cable co employees made give probable cause for assault. I don't see where they needed to go in guns blazing. Yes there is a gun in the house but that doesn't require pointing guns at her children.
I see the cable company as the problem here. Does anyone on this post really believe that the cable co people were in fear as a result of the homeowner's actions when they stayed in the yard for another three hours working? Because in order to charge assault and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt someone has to be in reasonably fear for their life. So where is that element? Without it the charge falls. Their remaining in her yard also challenges their credibility when they then stayed to work for another three hours. What will the jury make of that I wonder?

field negro said...

@ac *clapping*

California Girl said...

On the surface, she sounds violated. I would go bat shit if someone came to my back door repeatedly or after I'd told them not to. If my yard were fenced I sure as hell want to know what the fuck they were doing in my back yard. I would feel very threatened.

I have no love for the police and I am a white middle class person who's never really had to go rounds w/ the cops. They shoot first and ask questions later but I also think they operate on a basis of fear and I can understand that too.

I don't like guns. I fear them. They are meant for one thing only. I am in favor of outlawing all guns the way the Brits do. Perhaps we'd all have to think a bit more before reacting.

Thrasher said...

Sutton WAS out of order and I refused to buy the I am living in a jungle excuse...She should be charged and fined

Phil4Real said...

Do I really have to say why this happened to her? Can you guess? It's a color. It's not considered transparent. Same hue as a shadow. Hmmm let me think. Oh she's black, right?

Anonymous said...

This happened in Gladwyne a few years ago - a reporter went to someone's house involved in a local dispute (OMG/Gladwyne Lunch) and the homeowner opened the door carrying. Only difference is pointing - reporter never said gun was pointed at him. Po-Po came, interviewed both parties, and, no harm, no foul. Incidently, the reporter got the quote for the paper "no comment" and called police after returning to his office.

Outside of Philadelphia, carry permits are much easier to get (though not quite as shall-issue as the law reads). About 5% of the male population of the state has a carry permit. In the suburbs, this sort of thing happens 1-2 times a year - car accident, parking dispute, whatever, where someone draws and the cops have to sort it out. I generally subscribe to the belief that you shouldn't draw unless you are within your rights to use it. In this case, she should have called the police first and told the "workers" that she'd come out when the police came.

Too late for that now - she'll know next time and hopefully the cable workers will be a little more aware - some houses in Pennsylvania would have shot first and not asked questions. She won't be convicted, and she'll have a hard time to get her carry permit back, but given the circumstances, that is a good thing. She can still have a gun at home, just not on the streets...

no_slappz said...

field, you wrote:

n_s, did you read where the cable company workers did not have proper ID?

No. I read the cable guys identified themselves as employees of Wilco Cable.

Also, I am pretty sure that the cable workers were black. And, FYI, in Philly, it is tougher to get a conceal permit to carry a fire arm than damn near anywhere else in the country.

There is roughly zero chance this woman had concealed-carry permit.

If anything, she had a permit to own a gun for home protection, which means the gun stays in the house. No carrying it around.

By flashing the gun as she did, she proved she was unfit to handle a weapon.

Even if you pass a criminal background check the police can prevent you from getting conceal permit based on your character or reputation alone.

To get a hand-gun permit of any kind in NY City, you have to jump through many hoops. A Manhattan relative of mine inherited a pistol and applied for a permit to keep the weapon in his apartment. Not a carry permit.

He had to submit lots of information and the police undertook a background check that covered his entire life. In the course of the background check they found he had been arrested and briefly jailed for drunk driving -- 40 years ago.

That arrest caused him to stop drinking entirely. Hasn't had a drop since then. Anyway, he got the permit to keep the pistol in his apartment, but he cannot carry it.

If he wants to take the weapon out, to a shooting range, for example, there are a set of rules he must follow. The main rule involves carrying it in a special hand-gun transportation container, which is a the size and shape of a small briefcase. Of course it must be unloaded. Violating the rules can get a person a year in jail.

no_slappz said...

field, you posted:

Even though a citizen is not required to have a license to carry a firearm in his or her own house, Sutton did...

Generally, a person does NOT lead a license to own a rifle or shotgun. But hand-guns are usually treated much more stringently.

If Philadelphia allows ANYONE to BUY a handgun and keep it at home, or allows ANYONE to BRING a handgun into the city and keep it at home, then madness reigns.

If those are the rules, then criminals can legally arm themselves.

no_slappz said...

ac, you wrote:

Cable is NOT a utility on par with gas, sewer, water or electric.

Says you. In cities, water and sewer systems are generally built and maintained by the cities themselves. Gas and electric are usually stockholder-owned business with exclusive city contracts.

Cable service is also one of those. A utility.

Your list of utility services omitted "telephone" service. Are you going to argue that phone service is also NOT a utility?

Inasmuch as every cable company now offers cable TV, internet AND phone service, the "cable" companies are now utilities in two categories. With the federal push to put high-speed internet service in every home, the cable companies may soon perform a utility hat-trick.

The Cable companies behavior is dictated by the franchise agreement (contract) they have with the local government.

Oh. Are you now claiming the gas and electric companies serve municipalities free from any binding contracts? Doing whatever they please? Or are gas and electric companies legally bound to operate according to conditions established by government overseers?

It's pretty standard that they too have to seek the homeowner/
occupier's permission to enter the residence or yard.


It's pretty standard that homeowners have no choice about utility workers entering their yards. Yes, they can tell workers to get lost. But if work has to be done, the company will take the necessary legal steps to enter the yard.

It's not as though utility workers drop by and decide to invade your backyard because it's bursting with flowers and they want to sit there while they eat lunch.

I don't see where they needed to go in guns blazing.

Guns blazing? That means the cops were firing their weapons. Did not happen.

Yes there is a gun in the house but that doesn't require pointing guns at her children.

Really? Care to guess how many 16-year-olds shoot at others?

Only someone with no gun experience and no gun sense would believe what you wrote.

I see the cable company as the problem here. Does anyone on this post really believe that the cable co people were in fear as a result of the homeowner's actions when they stayed in the yard for another three hours working?

As employees of the cable company the workers had a responsibility to report that an occupant of a house at a job-site was carrying a handgun. It is NOT up the employees to decide if she is a psycho nut or not. That's for the cops.

But if I worked for the cable company and a co-worker had seen a home occupant holding a gun, I would want the cable company to take steps to ensure my safety before I was sent to work at the same location. Is she a psycho nut who might shoot a cable worker? Based on her appearance in the photo, she is a psycho nut.

If she had been dressed in black ninja robes and holding a gun when the cable crew arrived, the crew would have had more than enough reason to think she was a kook.

Because in order to charge assault and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt someone has to be in reasonably fear for their life.

You have no idea what you're jabbering about. Assault has nothing to do with "fearing for one's life."

So where is that element? Without it the charge falls.

She committed an act of intimidation by showing the weapon in an unlawful circumstance. She wears ninja costumes and teenagers live in her house. One of her sons was murdered. She never mentioned taking a firearms safety course. Or knowing anything about handling oneself under fire. Or knowing what happens in one's head when fear is taking over. In short, she's unstable.

What does it add up to? A decision to take away her gun. The right decision.

Anonymous said...

The first thing that comes to mind is I have a hard time believing these were legitimate cable workers. Having said that, the woman seemed to break no law. I think if it were me, I'd have called the cable company and spoken with a supervisor to (a) confirm the work request, and (b) to reiterate that if it's legit, the workers need to come to the front door. If the aforementioned things were found suspicious, then AND ONLY THEN, I'd have called the police myself and reported the incident. All in all, this seems like backward justice. All workers should have verifiable ID displayed prominently.
--Seattle Slew

Anonymous said...

Even though we have a black mayor and black police commissioner this shows what little rights black people have in Philadelphia. This would never have happened to anyone white in Philadelphia let alone the suburbs. Also the NRA would have been over over this story if this woman had been white but obviously the right to bare arms is whites only.

Anonymous said...

If someone, who I didn't know, came to my backdoor I'd be strapped to. See I'm a twisted dude, who thinks twistedly, she ought to appeal to the NRA for legal assistance.

AbuAmirah

Anonymous said...

Good thing these workers from Wilco Cable do not work in texas!

Anonymous said...

I can't blame police for drawing their weapons. Gun-toting crazed women have no business making threats to utility workers who are courteously asking for permission for YARD access. If she's the "ninja" in the picture, I'd point a gun at her, too! :-)

Sherderian Sutton said...

This us Sherderian Sutton im not a ninja far from crazy I recieved therapy for my sons death also im a law abiding citizen and no my son murder was drug or gang related to slappz your out right disrespectful by the way I won in court and got my gun and license back lol im only 130 pound and 5'5 they were big and I did explain to them use the front because my son was murdered and use the front door nicely they broke the seal around my door kicking so hard no im not dangerous or crazy or a ninja and only god can judge you loose a child then tlk to me until then go bake some cookies and continue to judge a situtation you had nothing to do with much love and peace